Drone stans get in here
- Thread starter dadamaja
- Start date
i'm not a fan of mavics and the smaller drones, i like the big ones
You copped a Mavic as well as a Phantom, right?
I still use my Phantom 3 Pro and I love it!
I took a close up video of statue of liberty a few weeks ago with it!!
Damn. Guess I’ll be broke again. That Mavic 2 zoom....mannn
i gave my mavic to my son and bought another inspire 2
What's the difference? I have a Phantom but I fly my Mavic most of the time
they come off as a toy to me as they get smaller.
heavy winds there's a significant difference in how they handle. before you say there isn't, i live right on open water where blasts come in that will carry the mavic away to it's doom
That's s fair point but I've never really seen a difference even over water.
the wind here knocks over sailboats on a whim lol. i'll be back i'm about to upload a vid of an occasion.
Congress Directs the FAA to Modify Drone Rules
By Laura A. Stefani and Jonathan R. Markman of Mintz
October 8, 2018
New legislation signed by the President will not only provide funding for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for the upcoming fiscal year, it also will lead to a number of substantive changes to the rules governing small unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”). These UAS –frequently referred to as drones – are used for commercial activities such as aerial newsgathering and photography and inspections of critical infrastructure, and are expected to be used for a broader array of operations, including package deliveries. Many hope that the new law will push the FAA to move more quickly towards integrating UAS into national airspace, something that industry has sought for nearly a decade.
Among the important new directives to the FAA are:
UAS Traffic Management: The FAA will be required to test new traffic management systems and to deploy these capabilities as they come online, rather than waiting for a complete system to be ready. This will speed the process of integration of UAS into the airspace, and will allow for a gradual increase in the range of permitted operations (and the decrease in logistical hassles involved in those operations) over time, rather than retaining the status quo, which limits the areas and distances in which UAS may fly.
Remote ID: Congress directed the FAA to create a pilot program to test remote identification technologies for UAS. Remote ID will allow the FAA, law enforcement, etc., to identify the pilot or operator of a UAS that is not flying in accordance with regulations. Access to this information is cited as extremely important for national security, and it a major hurdle to complete integration of UAS into airspace. (Presently, UAS may only be flown in certain airspace, generally away from airports and other protected facilities or areas.)
Additional Waiver Authority: Congress provided the FAA with authority to issue blanket waivers (as opposed to case-by-case waivers) outside the rulemaking context insofar as the FAA determines that certain operations can be conducted safely. This provision should greatly aid industry in speeding up the process of getting permission for operations presently prohibited, or functionally prohibited because of the expense and logistical difficulty involved in the FAA’s individualized waiver process.
Spectrum: The legislation also required the FAA to prepare a report on spectrum issues related to UAS operations, including the potential use of protected aeronautical mobile spectrum to control the UAS.
Support for Existing Programs: The legislation codified a number of existing FAA programs that provide for UAS test ranges, the UAS Integration Pilot Program, and Arctic operations zones, into statute.
Equipment Certification and Standards: The FAA was directed to begin creating and adopting safety standards for UAS, using risk- and performance-based analyses, and including a self-certification process for equipment much like that employed by the Federal Communications Commission for certain types of devices.
Tethered UAS: Congress made a distinction between free-flying UAS and tethered UAS, allowing the FAA to craft more permissive rules for some tethered operations. This will assist commercial users seeking to operate in situations where they are currently barred, such as flights over people or in no-fly zones, as the existence of the tether will provide the FAA with more assurance that such flights will not pose a safety threat.
Drone Deliveries: The FAA was directed to make new rules governing the carriage of property using UAS, opening the door for much-anticipated “drone deliveries” sought by industry for many years.
Authority over “Hobbyist” UAS: Congress repealed previous restrictions on the FAA’s authority to regulate ‘hobbyist’ operations. “Hobbyist,” or recreational flights, essentially are conducted purely for recreational purposes, rather than for commercial purposes, by law enforcement, etc. The FAA may now impose regulations on all small UAS, whether flown for recreational or other purposes. Recreational pilots will be required to obtain an FAA license, though the legislation contemplates that this can be accomplished via an online-only system. This is a change that the UAS industry has sought for some time, as it will allow the FAA to impose more comprehensive rules for all UAS in U.S. airspace, which many hope will lead to complete UAS integration.
Responding to Terrorism Threats: In response to a long-held national security concern regarding the proliferation of UAS in U.S. airspace, the legislation provided authority to the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice to take action in real-time to stop threats of terrorism. It additionally required that the agencies make clear public disclosures of “no fly” areas. While granting federal authority to take down UAS believed to be security threats may be a concern to commercial pilots operating near protected facilities, the public disclosure requirement may make it easier for pilots to avoid such a situation.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.na...ongress-directs-faa-to-modify-drone-rules?amp
WILL DRONES AND PLANES BE TREATED AS EQUALS BY FAA?
76 Comments
by:Tom Nardi
October 8, 2018
Soon, perhaps even by the time you read this, the rules for flying remote-controlled aircraft in the United States will be very different. The Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) is pushing hard to repeal Section 336, which states that small remote-controlled aircraft as used for hobby and educational purposes aren’t under FAA jurisdiction. Despite assurances that the FAA will work towards implementing waivers for hobbyists, critics worry that in the worst case the repeal of Section 336 might mean that remote control pilots and their craft may be held to the same standards as their human-carrying counterparts.
Section 336 has already been used to shoot down the FAA’s ill-conceived attempt to get RC pilots to register themselves and their craft, so it’s little surprise they’re eager to get rid of it. But they aren’t alone. The Commercial Drone Alliance, a non-profit association dedicated to supporting enterprise use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), expressed their support for repealing Section 336 in a June press release:
Basic ‘rules of the road’ are needed to manage all this new air traffic. That is why the Commercial Drone Alliance is today calling on Congress to repeal Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, and include new language in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act to enable the FAA to regulate UAS and the National Airspace in a common sense way.
With both the industry and the FAA both pushing lawmakers to revamp the rules governing small remote-controlled aircraft, things aren’t looking good for the hobbyists who operate them. It seems likely those among us with a penchant for airborne hacking will be forced to fall in line. But what happens then?
PLAY TIME IS OVER
The 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act does not simply repeal Section 336, it also details the new rules the agency would impose on unmanned aircraft and their operators. Under these proposed rules, all unmanned aircraft would be limited to an altitude of 400 feet unless they have specific authorization to exceed that ceiling. They must also be operated within line of sight at all times, effectively ending long-range First Person View (FPV) flying. There’s also language in the Reauthorization Act about studying the effects of flying unmanned aircraft at night, or over groups of people.
It also states that drones, just like traditional aircraft, must be registered and marked. It even authorizes the FAA to investigate methods of remote identification for drones and their operators, meaning it’s not unreasonable to conclude that RC aircraft may be required to carry transponders at some point in the future. To many in the hobby this seems like an unreasonable burden, especially in the absence of clear limits on what type of small aircraft would be excluded (if any).
In a video posted to their YouTube channel, Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) Interim Executive Director Chad Budreau wonders if even rubber band powered balsa planes will someday need their own registration and identification devices:
To be fair, not everything in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act is negative. It also talks about the need for better manufacturer safety standards and certifications for unmanned aircraft sold in the United States, including a mechanism by which the FAA could revoke a safety certification should standards not be met. Though critics could argue this language is simply a mechanism by which the FAA will force compliance with future remote identification standards.
YOU MUST BE THIS TALL TO FLY
While there’s no shortage of new rules and regulations for the drones themselves, the humans operating them will also be under greater scrutiny. Under the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, anyone flying a remote-controlled aircraft will not only have to pass an “aeronautical knowledge and safety test”, but show proof of their passing to any law enforcement if questioned. It isn’t clear what the consequences of not having your “Drone License” on you if police ask for it will be, but fines or even confiscation of your equipment doesn’t seem unlikely.
Perhaps most troubling of all is that with the repeal of Section 336, young people might actually be excluded from flying remote-controlled aircraft. While many RC planes and quadcopters are marketed as children’s toys, in the absence of Section 336, it’s not clear that a child could legally operate one. The FAA requires a person to be 16 years of age to obtain a pilot’s license, and if unmanned aircraft are truly expected to obey the same “rules of the road”, it’s not unreasonable to assume that age requirement will remain in effect.
“The bill will have a chilling effect on youth involvement in the hobby and stifle the benefits of employing model aviation in STEM education,” says Budreau, “ultimately hindering the efforts to attract youth into the aviation industry.”
END OF AN ERA
Holding small unmanned aircraft to a higher standard than they are currently is not inherently a bad thing, as even the most fanatical RC fliers certainly don’t want to endanger human life while pursuing their hobby. So few would be against reasonable changes to how the FAA handles unmanned aircraft if it meant they could more safely operate in the same airspace. It’s hard to argue that drone pilots shouldn’t have some basic knowledge on how to safely navigate the increasingly congested skies. But ultimately the reaction of the RC community will depend on how these new changes are implemented and what the consequences for not being in compliance are.
At the time of this writing the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Bill has passed both the House and Senate, and now needs only the President’s signature to become official. For better or for worse, anyone looking to explore the skies in the US is going to have to do so under much closer scrutiny than ever before. How well, or how poorly, the community responds to this increased oversight is likely going to determine the trajectory of the hobby for decades.
Update: On October 5th, 2018 President Trump signed the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act. Section 336, the “Special Rule for Model Aircraft”, is officially no more.
76 Comments
by:Tom Nardi
October 8, 2018
Soon, perhaps even by the time you read this, the rules for flying remote-controlled aircraft in the United States will be very different. The Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) is pushing hard to repeal Section 336, which states that small remote-controlled aircraft as used for hobby and educational purposes aren’t under FAA jurisdiction. Despite assurances that the FAA will work towards implementing waivers for hobbyists, critics worry that in the worst case the repeal of Section 336 might mean that remote control pilots and their craft may be held to the same standards as their human-carrying counterparts.
Section 336 has already been used to shoot down the FAA’s ill-conceived attempt to get RC pilots to register themselves and their craft, so it’s little surprise they’re eager to get rid of it. But they aren’t alone. The Commercial Drone Alliance, a non-profit association dedicated to supporting enterprise use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), expressed their support for repealing Section 336 in a June press release:
Basic ‘rules of the road’ are needed to manage all this new air traffic. That is why the Commercial Drone Alliance is today calling on Congress to repeal Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, and include new language in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act to enable the FAA to regulate UAS and the National Airspace in a common sense way.
With both the industry and the FAA both pushing lawmakers to revamp the rules governing small remote-controlled aircraft, things aren’t looking good for the hobbyists who operate them. It seems likely those among us with a penchant for airborne hacking will be forced to fall in line. But what happens then?
PLAY TIME IS OVER
The 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act does not simply repeal Section 336, it also details the new rules the agency would impose on unmanned aircraft and their operators. Under these proposed rules, all unmanned aircraft would be limited to an altitude of 400 feet unless they have specific authorization to exceed that ceiling. They must also be operated within line of sight at all times, effectively ending long-range First Person View (FPV) flying. There’s also language in the Reauthorization Act about studying the effects of flying unmanned aircraft at night, or over groups of people.
It also states that drones, just like traditional aircraft, must be registered and marked. It even authorizes the FAA to investigate methods of remote identification for drones and their operators, meaning it’s not unreasonable to conclude that RC aircraft may be required to carry transponders at some point in the future. To many in the hobby this seems like an unreasonable burden, especially in the absence of clear limits on what type of small aircraft would be excluded (if any).
In a video posted to their YouTube channel, Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) Interim Executive Director Chad Budreau wonders if even rubber band powered balsa planes will someday need their own registration and identification devices:
To be fair, not everything in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act is negative. It also talks about the need for better manufacturer safety standards and certifications for unmanned aircraft sold in the United States, including a mechanism by which the FAA could revoke a safety certification should standards not be met. Though critics could argue this language is simply a mechanism by which the FAA will force compliance with future remote identification standards.
YOU MUST BE THIS TALL TO FLY
While there’s no shortage of new rules and regulations for the drones themselves, the humans operating them will also be under greater scrutiny. Under the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, anyone flying a remote-controlled aircraft will not only have to pass an “aeronautical knowledge and safety test”, but show proof of their passing to any law enforcement if questioned. It isn’t clear what the consequences of not having your “Drone License” on you if police ask for it will be, but fines or even confiscation of your equipment doesn’t seem unlikely.
Perhaps most troubling of all is that with the repeal of Section 336, young people might actually be excluded from flying remote-controlled aircraft. While many RC planes and quadcopters are marketed as children’s toys, in the absence of Section 336, it’s not clear that a child could legally operate one. The FAA requires a person to be 16 years of age to obtain a pilot’s license, and if unmanned aircraft are truly expected to obey the same “rules of the road”, it’s not unreasonable to assume that age requirement will remain in effect.
“The bill will have a chilling effect on youth involvement in the hobby and stifle the benefits of employing model aviation in STEM education,” says Budreau, “ultimately hindering the efforts to attract youth into the aviation industry.”
END OF AN ERA
Holding small unmanned aircraft to a higher standard than they are currently is not inherently a bad thing, as even the most fanatical RC fliers certainly don’t want to endanger human life while pursuing their hobby. So few would be against reasonable changes to how the FAA handles unmanned aircraft if it meant they could more safely operate in the same airspace. It’s hard to argue that drone pilots shouldn’t have some basic knowledge on how to safely navigate the increasingly congested skies. But ultimately the reaction of the RC community will depend on how these new changes are implemented and what the consequences for not being in compliance are.
At the time of this writing the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Bill has passed both the House and Senate, and now needs only the President’s signature to become official. For better or for worse, anyone looking to explore the skies in the US is going to have to do so under much closer scrutiny than ever before. How well, or how poorly, the community responds to this increased oversight is likely going to determine the trajectory of the hobby for decades.
Update: On October 5th, 2018 President Trump signed the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act. Section 336, the “Special Rule for Model Aircraft”, is officially no more.
FAA Reauthorization Bill Establishes New Conditions for Recreational Use of Drones
On October 5, 2018, the President signed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (PDF). The Act establishes new conditions for recreational use of drones and immediately repeals the Special Rule for Model Aircraft.
Updated direction and guidance will be provided as the FAA implements this new legislation.
https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=91844
On October 5, 2018, the President signed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (PDF). The Act establishes new conditions for recreational use of drones and immediately repeals the Special Rule for Model Aircraft.
- Fly for hobby or recreation only
- Register your model aircraft
- Fly within visual line-of-sight
- Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization
- Fly a drone under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization
- Never fly near other aircraft
- Never fly near emergency response efforts
Updated direction and guidance will be provided as the FAA implements this new legislation.
https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=91844
At first I was like wtf.
...but now it appears to be a stimulation of a jet wing at speed hitting a drone in the air.
Flying a drone into the body, windshield or engine on a plane would be devastating.
The US government is about to put a dog tag on your drone
Get ready to stick some ID on the outside of yourdrone— starting February 23rd, a new FAA rule will require all small unmanned aircraft to have their registration markings visible on the outside of their body, so law enforcement can easily find their owners.
Ina preview documentpublished at theFederal Register(spotted byBloomberg), the FAA says the move is in response to terrorism fears, specifically “the risk a concealed explosive device poses to first responders who must open a compartment to find the small unmanned aircraft’s registration number.”
Currently, US law requires that you register certain classes of drones with the FAA and mark them with your ID number — yes, even though drone registration was successfully challenged in court,Trump later signed it into law— but the FAA has always let you stick that sticker somewhere hidden, like inside your drone’s battery compartment. Not anymore.
Technically, the rule is currently just in preview at theFederal Register, won’t be published until tomorrow, and citizens will have a 30-day comment period to respond. But the FAA argues the need is urgent enough that it’s firing off the rule just 10 days after publication.
That’s not the only drone-related news in preview at theFederal Registertoday, by the way. Though the FAA is still poised tomajorly relax its rules about flying your drone at night and over crowds of people, the agency now says it won’t be doing that until it can figure out a system to let it remotely track and identify drones at a distance, something the industry is also working on itself (here’s what we learned about DJI’s Aeroscope), and it’sasking the public to commenton what sorts of performance and legal restrictions it should place on drones before they’re allowed to do those things.
For nighttime, where the FAA says it’s never had a reported accident, the agency is considering that operators might merely need to complete some extra training and have a drone with a light that’s visible three miles away. But for flying over crowds, the FAA thinks it might create three new categories of drones, with ones weighing 0.55 pounds or less being freely able to fly over people, while heavier drones might need to have speed, altitude, location, and injury “severity threshold” requirements so they’re safe enough to use.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18222186/faa-drone-rule-external-marking-fly-at-night-over-people
Bookmarkedwhats yall experience with these joints , maybe in the market soon, lookin at 1 of those 4k joints
They do but if you want quality
and an easy to fly machine, I
wouldn't go less than the Mavic.
Ok cool! I never had one so when I do get one it will be the first. They have some on Ebay for about $800.
Similar threads
- Poll
