Link:
Excerpt from above article:
Some very bad news for drone pilots this morning: An appeals board has ruled that the Federal Aviation Administration has wide latitude to make all drone flights illegal in the United States.
The decision, by the National Transportation Safety Board, determined that the FAA's existing "aircraft" regulations can apply to model aircraft, drones, and remote controlled aircraft, which is perhaps the most restrictive possible outcome for drone pilots in a legal saga that has dragged on for more than a year.
Comments
It is going to be an interesting next year.
This Christmas, tens or hundreds of thousands of "toy" quadcopters, many with cameras are going to teens and pre teens.
And many thousands more of Phantoms and other mid range ones are going to adults and young people who have no idea at all what they are doing so they can take pictures and try out this new hobby.
My prediction for 2015.
In the US at least, a genuine debacle, with the Media and Politicians fomenting as much dissent as possible while the hobbyists, would be commercial drone pilots, and the general public suffer from stupid and counter-productive edicts and actions by the FAA.
As the curse goes - "May you live in interesting times."
Is the FAA fustrating to deal with? Sure! This is nothing more than a minor setback to commercial use of UAVs. While the public word is that they will have new regulations by the end of the year, don't bet on it. I have inside contacts that feel it will be another year before those are available. I have worked with that agency and they are not quick to do anything.
On the bright side, Hollywood is now getting permits and that IS commercial work! If you have a regular pilots license (for aircraft), you should be able to go through the same permit process too. They certainly have restrictions for UAV operations and when an official license is available, we will too. You can do that today if you meet the requirements.
Fighting the system is not going to help. Flying your UAV in an unsafe manner will only put a black mark on your chances to actually do commercial work too. The case that caused all of this ruckus is still going through the court system. If you want to chance getting a big fine, or possibly get sued if there is an accident with your UAV, push the boundries and make it hard for anyone else to get a commercial UAV license in the future. I know I certainly don't want to be hit with my 5 pound quad falling from the sky and I don't want to do that to anyone else. When that license is available, we will have to follow the rules along with the current pilots out there.
Fly safe!
I'm not an aviation lawyer but it seems to me this puts all drone pilots squarely within the FAA's discretion. Discretion to regulate, discretion to prosecute. The new reality is 'stay off their radar'. I think the 'hobby' will be fine if we are 1) not paid and 2) follow some simple safety guidelines.
The commercial folks are probably going to need a private pilot's certificate for now unless the FAA allows for a 'drone' certification process. But certified pilots could use the work... I bet the FAA will protect them.
Meanwhile the rest of the world gets on with commercial drone flying .......
The CFR says:
§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.
You can't take the sky from me.
@jg, no, wrong. Let's say the FAA comes up to you at the field and cites you for violating 91.203 (your aircraft doesn't have an airworthiness certificate). Prior to this decision, your defense would be "obviously the regulations for manned aircraft don't apply to model aircraft". But because this decision ruled that model aircraft are "aircraft" under the definition of the FARs, your model is now subject to all aircraft regulations including 91.203 and 91.119. In fact, this decision made no ruling and does not apply to the "careless and reckless" question -- this question was remanded back to the lower court. This decision ONLY establishes that model aircraft are indeed "aircraft" subject to the FARs, of which 91.13 which Pirker is alleged to have violated, is one. This is the opposite opinion from the one found by the lower court in March.
The ruling strictly applies to "careless and reckless" and has nothing to do with any other issues with the FAA and uav aircraft. Its pretty easy to see that flying near people, over people, in populated areas, too far to comply with see and avoid practices from other aircraft etc will be deemed "careless and reckless." At least the ruling starts clearing the muddy areas. If you look at the AMA rules and follow them, they don't allow you to fly near people, over populated areas etc. None of this is new. The only new issue is people have decided to push the issue and the new technology to see how far they can go before running into problems. Both the operators and the regulators think they are right. So it goes to into the court system to make a ruling. The same process will happen many times, over and over until there is clear or mostly clear legal interpretation of the rules. The FAA will hand pick violations to force a ruling on an issue they want clarified. The accused will of course feel the law is on their side, the government is overeaching, stifling innovation and freedoms etc. Despite all the doom and gloom the system is working just as it has in this country for 200+ years.
@Chim Xotox spot on. The US is in an innovation crisis and now, more than ever, is the time to keep innovating. Fly on indeed. Gone flying. Cheers!
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
of 7 Next