The pilot of the Phantom that crashed on a Manhattan street earlier this month has been arrested, ABC reports:
David Zablidowsky of Brooklyn has been charged with "Reckless Endangerment" for allegedly losing control of a helicopter drone at "an unreasonable height creating a substantial risk of serious physical injury".
Comments
I want to know what they did with the Phantom... interesting that the Business Man immediately took the SD Card... or did he take the whole thing and brought that to the police? Its details like this that I am more interested in. ;-)
I am sure if it was the Phantom Vision 2 that it wouldn't have flown very far with all the 5.8GHz interference in NYC.
Don't get me wrong, I still think the PV2 looks amazing...
From the article
From article:
Tristani says the FAA has to get a handle on this because drones will grow in popularity and even the small ones pose a threat to aircraft.
"Can it affect the engines of an aircraft, most certainly. Can it penetrate the metal fuselage, most certainly," he said.
A quad/rc model penetrating the metal fuselage of a real airplane? really??
Is what they mean that a rc model could go through the body of a real airplane?
Lots of wringing of hands from folks all over the web, the definition of an unmanned system has been around since 2007. Everything that can sustain flight, be controlled in three axis and does not have a pilot onboard is a UA. Regardless of size.
Some operate under model aircraft provisions HR 658 has lots to do with that
Some operate under a COA or other agreement with the FAA.
I am not sure about that one BluSky1. I would imagine, as you suggested, UAS would fall under model aircraft, There is no other definition I can see, unless otherwise authorized as a research system, a public service system, or a military system. If not, then my thought is it HAS TO fall under the hobby status.
Anyway, we will see how this case plays out in the NY judicial system. Perhaps this will go no further, and not cause a big stink. So far, I have heard very little about the incident outside the hobby community. Maybe we have all the DC shenanigans to thank for that! But, that is WAY off topic, and for another forum altogether,
BluSky1...as far as the weight, I was continuing your thought of a 4 pound system. I was not suggesting a sub-pound system would be okay to fly over a congested area.
BluSky1...how about a system that is less than a pound? I have been hit on the head by walnuts heavier than some of the things I fly around. Honest. I used to stand under a walnut tree waiting for the bus as a kid!
I think the idea of what is manned and unmanned is pretty self-explanatory. The word drone may imply some level of autonomy, but unless there is someone sitting in the tiny little cockpit of a Phantom, then it is unmanned. AND, at that point, it is a hobby aircraft, as you suggested. There is no other definition here in the United States, unless you are the government, in which case your drones become...well...good question! How does the FAA classify military drones?
"Because every moment in New York could be your last. Oh yeah, yeah.
You could be walking down the street tomorrow, feeling good about yourself, drink free, drug free, looking forward to the future. And somebody accidentally nudges their poodle off of a 75th floor ledge.
Doink! And he's headed for the ground at a hundred and seventy five thousand miles per hour and curchunk he's imbedded in your head! You're dead on contact. The headline in the post the next day reads, "Man killed by best friend!"
People cut the article out and they laugh about it at the office. And you're forever remembered as the poodle man! "I knew the poodle man and he hated f'ing poodles"
This is the way this should be handled. Law should be applied against the behavior, not the tool.
So the only charge is because he crashed, otherwise it was a legal flight...hmm setting a precedence?
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next