Gary at sUAS News reports:
"sUAS News recently asked FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety, Peggy Gilligan about the First Person View flight undertaken in New York by Austrian Raphael Pirker.
As Associate Administrator, Ms. Gilligan leads the organization responsible for setting, overseeing, and enforcing safety standards for all parts of the aviation industry – airlines, manufacturers, repair stations, pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers, and any person or product that operates in aviation. These programs have a direct impact on every facet of domestic and international civil aviation safety.
We are very grateful that Ms Gilligan took the time to answer, heres what she said.
“This event remains under investigation by FAA as well as by some law enforcement organizations in the NYC area. We do intend to notify the operator of the investigation — although I understand he is not a US citizen and we believe he is not in the US”
It will be interesting to see which particular rules may or may not have been broken during Trappys flight."
Comments
It actually proves how safe we are. Why regulate something that has never hurt anyone, as opposed to the AMA members who have aprox.60 physical injury and property insurance claims per year, mutilated a little girl in Fla. and crashed into a real airplane.
Yup, regulate the safe ones and kiss the backside of the dangerous ones.
AC 91-57 has the wording of "guidance", "should" and of course "voluntary compliance" and "self regulation".Nothing enforceable or prosecutorial in it.
If the FAA wants to go after Trappy then why are they working with the biggest violators of AC 91-57 in the entire USA (the AMA) to be excluded from the upcoming regulations?
It's like giving a pothead the death penalty while granting immunity to the kingpins of the cocaine and heroin drug cartels.
new and exciting changes to modern model aricraft hobby industry. The affordability and availability of parts coupled with broad experience and expertise from educational programs in the robotics field and forums such as this one, have created a pleasurable new pastime. The AMA' mission was primarily focused on reduced liability and protection of its members. Safety? sure a safety component exist with the rules, however, in my opinion, the focus and attention remained on liability. The miniaturizing of flight systems, has taken away any so called control from such a (self) governing body and placed it squarely in the hands of the individual operator. That in itself can be a very scary proposition to most people.
It is wide open now and ripe for politicization.[sic] The genie is out of the bottle. Will FPV and Autonomous flight be forced underground? Will millions of peaceful law abiding hobbyist become lawbreakers because of their passion for the sport/hobby? I think not, however, what may happen is an attempt to bring strict policies controlling the availability and affordability of the systems. In the end this too will fail. All one need do is look back to the 1970's when CB radios were the rage due to the 55 mph national speed limit. The citizens band was controlled by the FCC and licensing was required. This went out the window when millions of purchasers ignored the sanctioning body and used the radios anyway. So, what will happen? I sure do not know. I suspect it will all play out someday when a near catastrophe or worse occurs.
Well he might end up being banned from the US. Just like that brit kid who got drunk and called the white house to give the POTUS a piece of his mind. Although that might not suck too bad for Trappy.
This is why I like places way out in the middle of nowhere.
LOL at all the old folk that run countries who have no idea what to do when new stuff arises.
Also MAAAJOR lolz at some random foreigner stirring up the hornets nest in someone else's country xD
However it would be a real shame if they were to clamp down too hard, since it will affect genuinely passionate and intellegent people. I hope they realise the positive impact and potential of civilian UAV's !
It's funny FAA discussing about the safety of the flight over NYC, while the next post announces the first flight of the X-47B (aka the killer drone).
Someone missing the point here?
Ok, ok; I know that the latter one is supposed to be designed to kill the bad guys and so on.
I don't want to start any war-pacifist nor any kind of politics discussion here (that's not my intention and this is not the place), but I cannot avoid feeling weird about that.
The flight was not done under the auspices of AC 91-57 and could therefore be subject to FAR's. If so it was in violation of Newark Liberty International Airport Class B airspace and the Hudson River /East River Exclusion Special Flight Rules Area. Additional the city park that was used for launch prohibits aircraft of any type.
Perfect timing while the FAA is finalizing the new small UAV regulations.
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
of 13 Next