Meesowant!

[Seeker]

The FAA wants you to have a pilot's license to fly commercial drones.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/24/faa-drone-rules-would-require-license/

If you're planning to shoot your next movie using a drone, beware: you may need to meet some stringent conditions to stay in the Federal Aviation Administration's good books. Sources tell the Wall Street Journal that the agency will propose commercial drone rules that require a conventional pilot's license. Yes, you may need to have flown manned aircraft for dozens of hours to even think of controlling a UAV for cash. You'd also have to fly only during daylight, stay under 400 feet and remain within sight of your craft, so any hopes of high-altitude night shots would go out the window. And these rules would apply to any drone weighing 55 pounds or less; small, easy-to-fly vehicles like 3D Robotics' Iris+ and DJI's Inspire 1 would be subject to the same demands as larger, more complex models.

Whatever you think of these requirements, you'll have a chance to offer some feedback. The FAA is expected to make its proposal before the end of the year, and there will be a public comment phase where your input (hopefully) influences the final rule set. It may take up to two years to hash things out, so these terms definitely aren't set in stone. Wall Street Journal.

That's an excellent idea! Just one small error - it takes more than "dozens of hours" to become a commercially rated pilot (minimum of 250 hours in Canada) and, yes, I do realize the article is referring to the USA.

[acsidestick]

AAS, I agree. In fact, I think that even privately, some level of training or regulation knowledge testing should be required

I don't even like there being birds in the air, but at least they are smart enough, most of the time, to get out of the way.

[boestar]

Technically there ARE regulations around drones but not Autonomous drones. Flying a Drone is like flying any other RC Plane. There re height restrictions as well as insurance requirements for those aircraft. The problem comes in where the Drone is operating Autonomously. If no one is in control then there is no one to see and avoid a potential conflict.

I see the potential in the Autonomous drone area just like in the video above. The American FAA is hard at work trying to prevent it. Canada is lagging in that regard (good thing) and the EU seems to be embracing it.

[boestar]

I am not sure why this has become a huge issue. I have been flying RC aircraft for many years and some 3 times the size of one of these drones. An RC helicopter is just like a drone. The big different is that a drone in the contemporary sense is far more stable a platform than an RC helicopter.

[Seeker]

The difference is that the enjoyment of RC aircraft comes from the building and/or flying of it while the enjoyment of a drone such as the phantom comes from the video and/or pictures. If the drones didn't have a way of producing video the fun would vanish in a hurry. Of course once you have the thing you want your video to be something interesting - going out in an open area such as a field, like you would do with an RC aircraft, isn't going to cut it. You need to fly over your neighbourhood or around the clock tower or over the concert in the park, etc. This is where the conflict comes in. If someone wants to buy a drone and take it to the local RC park and fly it like an RC aircraft - fine, fill your boots. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that except perhaps the RC crowd. Conversely, if someone was to bring their RC aircraft and start flying it around the houses in my neighbourhood I would have a problem with that. The issue I have is with the location - when it interferes with the peaceful enjoyment of my home, violates my privacy in some way or presents a safety hazard due to loss of control or collision.

[Lakelad]

.

Get a degree in drones: earn $100,000 a year

Monday Nov 24, 2014 - MarketWatch
By QuentinFottrell - Personal Finance Reporter

Young Americans used to want to be pilots — or astronauts. But considering the number of courses popping up in universities to train students for the next generation of unmanned planes, many now want to fly drones.

Drones have gotten a bad rap in recent times in the wake of criticism of President Obama’s counterterrorism program and images of Amazon.com’s spooky firefly-like drones delivering books and cuddly toys to your door. And the government is clamping down on them, at least for domestic, commercial use. New federal rules on drones are expected to require operators to have a license, fly only during daylight hours below 400 feet and within site of the operator, The Wall Street Journal reported.

But there will be more than 100,000 new jobs created nationally by 2025 with an economic impact of $82 billion over that period, according to a 2013 report by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, a coalition of 7,000 individuals and 600 corporations. “States that create favorable regulatory and business environments for the industry and the technology will likely siphon jobs away from states that do not,” the report found.

Dozens of universities are offering — or planning to offer — drone programs. “We don’t call them drones, we call them unmanned aircraft systems integration,” says Marty Rogers, director of the Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration at the Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks. Rogers is starting a drone program this fall as part of the engineering department. The course will focus on the technology that makes drones fly. The university already flies nine drones for research into climate change, volcanoes, large animals and marine life. And, last week, the University of South Florida’s library announced that students will be allowed to borrow “quadcopters” — mini drones — for aerial photography.

There is even a university specializing in drones. “We keep inventing courses that have never been taught before,” says Jerry Lemieux, president of the Unmanned Vehicle University in Phoenix. Lemieux — a former Top Gun pilot in the U.S. Air Force and Delta 767 pilot — founded the school in 2012. It offers a certificate (4-credit course), Masters (9-credit course) and Ph.D. (12-credit course) for $1,600 per credit. The online courses range from the law surrounding drones to pilot training, which also involves two days at one of the university’s 10 flight schools. One recent graduate, he says, snagged a job as a UAV (unmanned aviation vehicle) analyst at an aviation manufacturing company in Florida earning $100,000 a year.

'Washington Post report found that over 400 large U.S. military drones have crashed since 2001'

.

[CD]

NTSB Rules Drones Are Aircraft, Subject to FAA Rules

Board Reverses Earlier Ruling That Found Drones Aren't Legally Aircraft

By Jack Nicas

Updated Nov. 18, 2014 1:36 p.m. ET

The National Transportation Safety Board has ruled that drones are aircraft and subject to existing aviation laws, affirming the Federal Aviation Administration's regulatory power over the fast-emerging industry, amid challenges to the agency's authority.

The four board members of the NTSB on Tuesday overturned an earlier ruling that had dismissed a $10,000 FAA fine against an Austrian drone pilot, Raphael Pirker, for allegedly operating a drone recklessly to film the University of Virginia in 2011.

Mr. Pirker is a well-known pilot in the industry and has traveled the world shooting aerial footage with his devices. The NTSB hears appeals of FAA enforcement actions regarding pilots.

An NTSB administrative law judge ruled in March that Mr. Pirker's drone was a model aircraft and thus not subject to FAA rules for manned aircraft. That decision raised questions over the FAA's authority to regulate unmanned aircraft, at least until it completes rules for the devices in the next several years.

The FAA appealed to the NTSB's board members, who ruled on Tuesday that existing laws' definitions of aircraft include drones. "The plain language of the statutory and regulatory definitions is clear: an 'aircraft' is any device used for flight in the air," the NTSB wrote. "We acknowledge the definitions are as broad as they are clear, but they are clear nonetheless."

The NTSB ruling is a victory for the FAA, an agency that has struggled to regulate the rapidly increasing use of drones in U.S. skies. Technology has made nonmilitary drones smaller, cheaper, more powerful and easier to fly in recent years.

The FAA allows recreational use of the devices but virtually bans their use for commercial purposes. Many commercial users have ignored that policy, and some were emboldened by the March ruling that dismissed the FAA's first fine for drone use.

The FAA is expected to propose rules for drones by the end of this year, which would likely take another year or two to become final.

Mr. Pirker's attorney, Brendan Schulman, said in an email that Tuesday's ruling "is narrowly limited to whether [drones] are subject to a single aviation safety regulation concerning reckless operation." Mr. Schulman is representing three other clients in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in separate challenges to the FAA's effective ban on commercial drones.

The FAA said the decision affirms its authority to "take enforcement action against anyone who operates a [drone] or model aircraft in a careless or reckless manner."

The NTSB on Tuesday sent the case back to its administrative law judge to decide whether Mr. Pirker operated the aircraft carelessly or recklessly.

[st27]

Without getting too pervy... how many of these things are used to spy into peoples windows in high rise condos?? I'm sure the bad guys and sickos have an endless list of uses... kinda like the internet..how do you regulate??

Mind you, in the states, it won't be long before somebody claims their first shoot down.

[DEFCON]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-c1-colorado-drones-20140116-dto-htmlstory.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/colorado-town-rejects-proposed-drone-hunting-licenses/

[Innuendo]

12 gauge or a Laser pointer. Choose your weapon.

Unfortunately I suspect that it may be illegal to discharge a firearm within City limits

So the 12 gauge may be a problem. Too bad.

The Laser may be a defence against snooping cameras if it can cause grief with digital

Sensors as may be the case.

Time to defend your privacy from the spy in the sky.

[st27]

Choose your weapon.

If it is in range, a well aimed rock or bucket /stream of water should bring one down.

[acsidestick]

I'd be careful whose Drone you decide to shoot at.

[boestar]

Add one computer virus and you have Skynet

[Seeker]

Great, something else to worry about.

[Innuendo]

I guess something like that makes being concerned about firing a shotgun inside municipal limits a bit inconsequential.

[Pivot]

That video is just CGI animation. Well done though.

[Innuendo]

I must say that I was wondering how it remained stable considering the recoil that must result from a machine gun of that apparent calibre. Unless of course the results of the fire were faked.

I would have thought that the accuracy after the first couple of rounds would be thrown off by recoil bouncing the drone around even if the weapon is balanced as best it can be.

[jump seat]

Toronto Skyline Porn......

http://vimeo.com/112944154

[Kip Powick]

Nice video, and just my opinion, but the music is not in my wheel house.

Hey, there you go seeker...check the "artist" out and see if all the photo/video shots with the Phantom were flight planned and legal.

[Seeker]

Hey, there you go seeker...check the "artist" out and see if all the photo/video shots with the Phantom were flight planned and legal.

If you look back you will see that I object to drones when they: interfere with the quiet enjoyment of my home, invade my privacy or endanger me in some collision/loss of control way. These videos flying around office buildings don't bother me too much. I guess there's a chance they could fall to the streets below but I can't complain on the first two issues. As for them being legal - unlikely, but I'm not motivated enough to try to find out.

[Kip Powick]

FWIW

This morning on TV news they showed 6? or 8? prop helo drones in Brazil. They were flying over the major shopping area and each drone had a cardboard cut-out of a person attached to them . Each cut out was dressed in clothes from a certain store, complete with price-tags....

One would certainly hope there were no motor failures !!!!

[CD]

New rules for small unmanned aircraft

Transport Canada makes it easier to fly small UAVs for work and research

November 27, 2014 – Ottawa, Ontario – Transport Canada

Transport Canada today introduced two new exemptions that make it easier for businesses to fly small unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) safely and legally.

Under the new exemptions, a Special Flight Operations Certificate will no longer be required for certain operations involving very small (under 2 kg) and small (between 2 kg and 25 kg) UAVs. The new approach will apply to commercial operations and contribute to a strong safety regime.

To qualify under the new rules, operators must check Transport Canada’s website to confirm if the exemptions apply to them. If they do, operators must respect strict safety conditions at all times, including height restrictions, minimum distances from aerodromes and other hazards, as well as flight within specific airspace and visual line‑of‑sight. Anyone operating outside of these conditions will be required to apply for a Special Flight Operations Certificate.

These exemptions were previously announced to stakeholders at the Unmanned Systems Canada conference on November 5th. In October, Minister Raitt launched the Government of Canada’s national safety awareness campaign, which aims to help Canadians better understand the risks and responsibilities of flying UAVs. For more information, please visit www.tc.gc.ca/SafetyFirst.

Quick Facts

* Canada has had safety regulations in place that govern the use of UAVs since 1996.

* Operators that use UAVs over 25 kg for work or research must apply for a Special Flight Operations Certificate.

* If an operator flies a UAV without a Special Flight Operations Certificate and should have one, Transport Canada can issue fines of up to $5,000 for an individual and $25,000 for a company.

* If an operator does not follow the requirements of their Special Flight Operations Certificate, Transport Canada can issue fines of up to $3,000 for an individual and $15,000 for a business.

* Recreational operators continue to be responsible to fly safely and should refer to Transport Canada’s website for information on any operating requirements.

Press release link...

[Guest]

rememberwhenweallranaroundtheneighourhoodthrowingthebalsagliderwegotoutofaboxofcereal. timeshavemondernized

[AAS]

TGI Fridays resturant in New York had a drone flying mistletoe over patrons. It didn't work out as planned.

http://www.brooklyndaily.com/stories/2014/50/bn-drone-disaster-at-tgifridays-2014-12-12-bk_2014_50.html

[DEFCON]

The photographer will soon be retiring with millions in compensation for injury, pain and suffering.