
It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Responsibly Fly a Drone - gilad
https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/drones/it-shouldnt-be-this-hard-to-responsibly-fly-a-drone
======
FabHK
I don't know. As a pilot of a small plane, I'd say you need to spend at least
an hour to plan a flight, if not more. Familiarise yourself with departure and
arrival airport and alternates, the route, weather and airspace along the
route (you do not want to wander into Class B or or restricted airspace by
accident), TFRs (temporary flight restrictions), NOTAMs (notices to airmen),
and more. If you're very familiar with a route, it might be less, and if it's
a totally new area/route for you, it might be more.

If you pilot a plane, and you make a mistake, your own life is on the line.

When you fly a drone, you still constitute a danger to other aircraft and the
people in it, or people on the ground. Why should you be subject to fewer
rules, just because _you_ are not aboard the aircraft, and thus not at risk?

Imagine remote controlled cars on the road. Should we allow some drunk kids
without license on their computer at home to control cars on the road (and
endanger everyone else), just because _they_ are not in danger? Of course not.

So, my sympathy for people clamouring for less restricted drone flights is
limited. Having said that, there are tools that facilitate planning a flight
(in a safe and lawful manner), and having something similar for drones would
obviously be great.

~~~
chronial
> When you fly a drone, you still constitute a danger to other aircraft and
> the people in it, or people on the ground. Why should you be subject to
> fewer rules, just because you are not aboard the aircraft, and thus not at
> risk?

Because a drone is a lot smaller and thus constitutes a heavily reduced risk.

> Imagine remote controlled cars on the road. Should we allow some drunk kids
> without license on their computer at home to control cars on the road (and
> endanger everyone else), just because they are not in danger? Of course not.

So, to borrow your imagery here: A bicycle is a lot less risky to traffic and
people than a car is and thus you are allow to drive it without a license and
punishments for violations are in general lower than for cars.

~~~
mbrameld
You can ride a bike without a license but you still have to follow the rules
of the road. Same for a drone. You don't need a license but you have to follow
the rules of the air.

~~~
bmurphy1976
Yup, and there are reasonable rules for drones (such as an FAA regulated
flight ceiling of 400ft and you can't fly within 5 miles of an airport* ).
Following those rules is fairly simple, and at least DJI's app makes an
attempt to let you know when something is amiss.

Follow those rules and you're riding the bike path, not mixing in with major
air traffic. Hence why flying a drone is nothing like flying an airplane.

* for certain definitions of airport

------
mabbo
I decided today to look into what I need to do to legally fly my drone in
Canada. I've owned it over a year, but since new regulations came in I've been
afraid to use it in case it was done incorrectly. What I've learned so far is
that in order to legally fly my drone, I must:

1\. Register the drone online for $5 (done, took 2 minutes).

2\. Take an exam. They won't tell me what's going to be on the exam, but
instead recommend I go to one of a long list of "drone schools" who have 'self
declared' that they can teach what will be on the exam. The exam is $10, but
who knows what these schools will charge or if they're even reputable.

3\. Not be within 5 miles of most airports, or 1-3 miles from most helipads.
(Didn't we convert to metric before I was born?). At least they've made a
helpful tool with that [https://nrc.canada.ca/en/drone-
tool/](https://nrc.canada.ca/en/drone-tool/). The tool also helpfully shows
that oh right, most lakes are used for sea-planes to take off and land so
avoid those too.

4\. Never fly within 100 ft (30m) horizontally of any 'bystander', ie: they
aren't with me flying the drone.

What this all boils down to is that there's no reason to own a drone anymore
unless you own a very large property far from any populated areas. There is no
place less than a 20-30 minute drive away from my home that I can even legally
fly it. Even then, any park or place I might legally go to without trespassing
will have too many people to be more than 30m from anyone else. Even the less-
populated parks and recreation areas- how do I even tell if there's someone
29m away from me through a forest or behind something?

All the while: for what benefit? Who has been seriously injured in Canada by
drone accidents?

~~~
losteric
1/2: ensure drone operators are familiar with the other rules. imo licensing
should be required to purchase a drone with much stronger punishments against
unlicensed operators, otherwise idiot operators will result in further
regulations on use.

3\. obviously necessary

4\. Drones are a public nuisance. The sound, having a dot just floating in
view, zipping around - it's annoying and even scary to bystanders.

I own and fly several drones, but I was relieved when America started banning
drones from wilderness areas, national parks, and many state/city parks. The
serenity of those parks is far more valuable than private drone photography /
selfies.

~~~
derefr
> 3\. obviously necessary

One could argue that drones should be allowed to get right up next to
helipads, lat/lon-wise, as long as they stay a safe distance away from the
helipad _altitude-wise_.

There are helipads on top of buildings. If the helipad is at ~1500ft, and my
drone never exceeds 300ft, then it's not endangering the helicopters, even if
it's right next to the building with the helipad on it.

But instead, because of the way the law is phrased, if there's a helipad on
top of a building in downtown, now I'm not able to film anywhere in downtown.

(This same argument _could_ apply to airfields, but airfields "above"
neighbouring geography are pretty rare. I guess you could be filming against
the cliff adjoining Lukla Airport in Nepal?)

~~~
koboll
I'm not sure it's feasible for police to enforce no-fly zones in 3D space. No
way is someone from the ground going to be able to tell the difference between
275 feet and 325 feet.

~~~
Retric
The US already uses 3D airspace:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class_(United_State...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class_\(United_States\))

The issue is the distance reserved is conservative so people slightly
encroaching don’t instantly cause problems.

------
SkyPuncher
I have a very hard time taking most of the drone pilot complaining seriously.
RC aircraft have been around for ages and subject to nearly all of the same
regulations as modern drones.

The problem I see is drone manufactures marketed their products such that
"they're just another toy". It's led to drone operators acting like they're
entitled to fly wherever they want. Combine that with pressure to capture an
incredible shot for Insta/Pinterest/etc, and you get people that have
completely disregarded for long standing rules designed to keep people safe.

The reality is drones are able to operate in vastly more areas than RC
aircraft have in the past. Clearance from bystanders/structures, height
restrictions, airport proximity, etc have all been things RC operators have
dealt with for ages. Problem is people don't just want to fly a drone, they
want to operate them in dangerous manners and in places they really shouldn't.

~~~
macintux
The marketing point reminds me of my disdain for Rugged Radios, who flagrantly
markets their radios without any hint that licensing is required. They won’t
even indicate which bands are used by their radios, much less warn people that
licenses are necessary.

Yes, people should be aware of their obligations, but the companies selling
the products bear some of the responsibility for educating the customers, and
absolutely should not be free to actively hide that information.

------
yardie
I fly recreationally with a Spark. There is a class B airport and a few
helipads in my vicinity (urban city) and a large national park not far away.
As long as there isn’t a TFR, rescue, or police operation not going in the
immediate vicinity it’s not too difficult to let the ATC know you are flying.
And if you use KittyHawk or AirMap you can submit a flightplan within the app.

Launching is a different matter and the author is right. You can certainly fly
in a lot of places but touching the ground can be tough. Public parks can be
difficult and depends on the whim of whoever is on duty. One park I flew out
for months then one day a ranger tells me there is no flying there. Nothing is
posted and when I go to challenge this imaginary rule it only made the ranger
angry. Now I fly from public easements: sidewalks, river fronts, jetties, high
tide lines. There appears to be no central authority. And the people who would
try and chase you off don’t think they have authority there (lots of
waterfront is Corp of engineering)

------
Sinergy2
Summary: The FAA's B4UFLY app only tells you whether you can _fly_ a drone
somewhere. It doesn't tell you whether you can _take off, operate, and land_
from there because that is up to the property owner (whether private or
government owned).

~~~
gpm
Extended summary: Except over national parks. Over national parks you are
allowed to fly, but not take off, operate, or land, and the FAA's app chooses
to say you can't fly.

~~~
paulcole
What’s the difference between flying and operating? If the drone is over a
national park, isn’t it “operating” over it?

If you’re saying it’s permissible to stand outside the park and fly the drone
in that sounds like the worst kind of hairsplitting to me and totally goes
against the spirit of the rule.

As the purpose of the regulation is due to “this new use has the potential to
cause unacceptable impacts such as harming visitors, interfering with rescue
operations, causing excessive noise, impacting viewsheds, and disturbing
wildlife.”

It seems like _flying_ is what’s discouraged.

[https://www.nps.gov/policy/PolMemos/PM_14-05.htm](https://www.nps.gov/policy/PolMemos/PM_14-05.htm)

~~~
gpm
> If you’re saying it’s permissible to stand outside the park and fly the
> drone in ...

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. They _want_ to ban flying over the park,
but they don't have the legal power to do so. So instead they banned a bunch
of other things (launching, landing, operating) to make flying over the park
as inconvenient as possible.

The hairsplitting that goes totally against the spirit of the rule, in my
opinion, is not the hair splitting that lets you continue to fly over the
park, but the hairsplitting that let them pass this regulation in the first
place.

~~~
paulcole
I’d imagine the NPS has a better understanding of the parks than people who
like drones. I’m glad they’re making it as inconvenient as possible and hope
they become empowered to ban drones completely from the parks.

~~~
gpm
I have no opinion of whether or not drones should be banned over national
parks, and am happy to defer to them on the topic.

We live in a democracy governed by the rule of law though. I'm strongly
against attempts to work around the rule of law by government agencies even if
I think the outcome is somewhat positive.

In this case that means in order to ban drones flying over national parks they
either need to convince the legislative branch to grant them the power to do
so, or if the FAA has already been granted such power they need to convince
the FAA to pass such regulations. What they shouldn't be doing (in my opinion)
is work arounds like this trying to seize authority that the legislature has
not granted them. (I acknowledge but disagree with an argument that this is
not a workaround/splitting hairs but instead a legitimate use of their granted
power)

------
koboll
Here's a solution:

Congress should pass a law that says state and local jurisdictions must
register their anti-drone laws with the FAA in a formal way by January 1, 20XX
otherwise they are legally unenforceable.

Then there's a guarantee that what the app gives is valid information, and
it's incumbent on local governments to make sure of that, and drone users
aren't liable if they don't.

~~~
ryeights
Does Congress have the power to do this? Genuine question. What enumerated
power would this fall under?

~~~
macintux
Congress gets away with a lot in the name of interstate commerce and the
general welfare, but I think the best they could do in this instance is
threaten to withhold federal funds in the absence of such registration.

------
dariusj18
I have first hand experience with this as well. Trying to figure out where to
fly a drone is nearly impossible and just makes you want to fly anyway.

~~~
jhart99
If you are having trouble with Airspace issues, like here in San Diego, you
can get automated LAANC approval for temporary operations using Kittyhawk.
This now works for recreational operators as well. If it is confusing local
rules, then I totally understand....

~~~
sverhagen
LAANC gets you approval (or not) from the local Air Traffic Control of the
Airspace you're trying to fly in (through the FAA). It does not do anything
for all the non FAA-regulated areas, which is essentially what the article
centered around.

(I work for Skyward, who were the first USS that implemented LAANC.)

------
300bps
The article uses three different apps to determine if it's OK to fly a drone
in a particular area. When all three said he was good he then did extensive
google searches to find things as random as press releases where someone is
quoted as saying no drones allowed.

If you used this level of due diligence on whether it's permissible to do
anything, you'd find you're allowed to do nothing.

------
henvic
It's a shame you can't land or take off from a national park.

Rules and advises about using it would be better than the current prohibition.

I understand no one wants ten jerks flying their loud drones during summer
time at Yosemite's most crowded areas... but this ignores the fact that you
can drive 1h inside the park and find a place no one will be bothered.

Regarding dealing with wild life, etc. the best thing would be advises on how
to deal with such an encounter. You can fly a small plane near a whale, and no
one will complain... but try to fly a small drone 100m away, and suddenly,
you'll be shamed for scaring the huge mammal.

~~~
nradov
NOAA prohibits low altitude flights over marine sanctuaries in order to
protect whales and other animals.

[https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/permits/aircraft.htm...](https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/permits/aircraft.html)

~~~
imglorp
Well that's silly. A 1kg drone does nothing compared to Navy active sonar.

edit - Not sure about the downvoters here, it's an established fact.
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-military-
son...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-military-sonar-kill/)

~~~
jsjohnst
Whataboutism is rarely if ever a valid response.

~~~
leetcrew
when you compare two activities with roughly equal harm, whataboutism is
unproductive. when you compare against an activity that causes orders of
magnitude greater harm, it starts to be a valid point.

------
esotericn
I don't think that 'responsibly' is the correct term to use here. Legally,
perhaps.

The distinction is huge. Consider 'responsible drug use'. Is a 20 year old in
a bar being irresponsible because they're in the US and not the UK?

(ok, they probably are, but in a different way entirely...)

------
lachlan-sneff
No wonder people break the rules when they're almost impossible to actually
find.

~~~
mark-r
Sounds like an opportunity for someone.

~~~
walkerbrown
[https://www.foreflight.com/](https://www.foreflight.com/)

An early iOS success story, founded in 2007, and recently acquired by Boeing.
They are the dominant software company in this niche, and are well positioned
to add a “UAS tier” subscription in the future.

~~~
sverhagen
Companies focused on traditional aviation _could_ have jumped into the drone
market, but somehow they haven't as much, so that it's now growing its own,
specialized players, such as Kittyhawk, Skyward (which happens to be my
employer) and many others.

By the way, "UAS" is an unnecessarily gendered, self-important term that often
doesn't even cover the subject. "Drone" has none of these problems, and it's
what people "get".

------
evancox100
Wherein the author discovers we have a federal system of government with
diffuse responsibilities such that no one group has any clue what the other
groups are doing.

------
crankylinuxuser
So, long story short, run the app and then blame the FAA for a myriad bullshit
rules 5 levels deep?

In reality perhaps what we really need is a queryable API for state and local
laws? I know DC has their primary legal codex as a GitHub repo. Surely they
could provide links where a state law or fed law is modified ?

With this many laws, and bureaucracy creating laws within laws with no
oversight, how can we mere humans be expected to follow said laws?

------
jaclaz
I don't know, maybe the app is different, but if you go to:

[https://kittyhawk.io/b4ufly/](https://kittyhawk.io/b4ufly/)

with a browser this is pretty clear:

>State and Local Drone Rules

>B4UFLY shows airspace rules provided by FAA data sources.

>B4UFLY does not include local rules which may affect your planned operation –
including your ability to land and take off your aircraft from certain areas.
>While the FAA is the sole regulator of the National Airspace System and
governs aircraft operations once airborne, entities such as cities, states,
parks, and private landowners may regulate your ability to land and take off
your aircraft from certain locations. Please make yourself aware of any local
rules prior to your planned operation.

So, I understand the frustration in not having a definite, single,
authoritative source, but the critique about the tool being deceiving appears
excessive.

------
ajross
This is for sure going to be unpopular, but folks here need to hear it:

The reason for the byzantine complexity about drone regulation isn't that some
Big Government is injecting its ham-fisted regulatory appendages into a
problem that it doesn't understand.

It's that, for the most part, _no one wants your drones in the air at all_.
People don't like these things. They're noisy. They're scary. Their operators
tend to be pushy jerks more often than not. They just aren't what a median
voter wants to see on a nice sunny afternoon in the park or trail or whatever.
And those voters governments, at all levels, are responding to that desire.

Basically: drone operators are the mid-life-nerd-crisis version of skate
punks. No one wants them hanging around either, and skateboarding regulation
is at least as complicated as drone rules.

~~~
LocalH
So basically, NIMBY.

~~~
sangerSCB
Yes, exactly. Even people that like drones don't want a drone hanging out over
their back yard.

~~~
rhacker
I'm also guessing a large population of drone owners first reaction to seeing
someone else flying one was: They're going to lose that thing and it's going
to junk up the forest.

After buying the done: Let's go fly this in the forest!

------
velox_io
This is a tricky one; maintaining people's safety/ privacy while giving drone
pilots 'freedom' is quite a balance. For instance, in the UK you must maintain
a physical line of sight with the drone at all times, this makes flying winged
craft virtually pointless.

Right now the geo-fencing of where you can fly is very rigid, with no
provisions for altitude and distance, this could be improved to include glide-
paths near airports for instance. It could also be tiered depending on the
pilot's qualifications (similar to scuba diving) and if the drone is fitted
with a transponder, or if they have submitted a flight plan. With these,
there's no reason a drone pilot can't have similar freedom as a helicopter
pilot.

I think most of these problems stem from technology being ahead of
legislation, as always.

~~~
liability
> _in the UK you must maintain a physical line of sight with the drone at all
> times, this makes flying winged craft virtually pointless._

Why do you say that? I've flown line-of-sight fixed wing RC airplanes before
and it was loads of fun.

------
tomohawk
It would be a lot easier if the law clearly spelled out who owns the air, and
if there was some way to push back on the FAA's unilateral decision making
processes. Below this altitude, you own it. Above this altitude, government
owns it. Is it OK for Amazon to make a drone superhighway 10 feet above my
house?

In our state, even the governor has tried to get the FAA to stop routing jumbo
jets so that they're causing noise problems several miles from the airport to
no avail. Jets regularly pass by at 2000 feet or so even though the airport is
several miles away. They didn't used to do this.

When a plane or drone flies over my house at low altitude, can I charge them a
toll? How high up do I own? The FAA seems to assume I own nothing at all an
inch above my land.

------
superqd
Yeah, it all depends. I certainly don't want people buzzing me with their
drone when I'm out enjoying nature with my kids. As a result, when I take my
drone out, I am very certain to be far from others, and not to bug them. By
default, in our state, drones are not permitted in any state park, however I
have flown in a state park in our state by getting permission two times (one
told me no the first time, then said ok when I asked if they could make an
exception since I'm FAA certified, fly very responsibly, etc).

There seems to be a need for an I'm-not-a-douche-bag certification that can be
used to make exceptions for folks like myself. I try hard not just to be
responsible, but also not be a douche bag with my drone.

------
rblatz
It seems like the only solution will be for the FAA to flex it’s regulatory
muscle on this, and become the sole authority on where you can fly a drone.
Much like the FCC did with small satellite dish prohibitions.
[https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/installing-consumer-
own...](https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/installing-consumer-owned-
antennas-and-satellite-dishes)

~~~
wolfgke
> It seems like the only solution will be for the FAA to flex it’s regulatory
> muscle on this, and become the sole authority on where you can fly a drone.

Or prohibit the FAA to make such many confusing rules, i.e. flex the
regulatory muscle on what the FAA is allowed to do.

~~~
rblatz
The FAA provides an app that tells you if the airspace above you is legal to
fly in, and they even help you file flight plans with ATC if it’s required.

It’s all the other parts of the government that tack on confusing rules, in an
inconsistent and confusing manner.

------
ridaj
> At the absolute minimum, the B4UFLY app should not tell users that they’re
> “good to go” unless they are flying from an area where drone use is
> explicitly permitted, like national forests.

Even then... I thought I saw a sign asking people not to do that during
wildfires so as not to interfere with firefighting operations. Do these things
make it into some kind of temporary no-fly zone for drones?

------
oxplot
Airmap app has been mentioned here and I use it for every flight. For my area,
Sydney, it covers many local regulations as well as the usual air restricted
areas such as airports. It also let's you submit flight plans which before
available to authorities.

It would be great if the no fly zones could be uploaded to the drone itself so
it would simply refuse to take off in those areas for instance.

~~~
markdown
> It would be great if the no fly zones could be uploaded to the drone itself
> so it would simply refuse to take off in those areas for instance.

DJI drones won't fly in no-fly zones.

------
lota-putty
OT: Why don't most quad-copters/toy-drones come with blade protection that
also duct* air flow for better thrust?

* tighter clearances

[https://img.eachine.com/eachine/products/original/201707/149...](https://img.eachine.com/eachine/products/original/201707/1499137982_24.jpg)

~~~
snovv_crash
Because during forward flight the inlet of the duct leads to turbulence on and
shadowing of the blades, drastically reducing their efficiency.

------
cozzyd
Yeah, it'd be fun to have a drone, but not sure there's anywhere in Chicago I
can legally fly it. Probably need a "drone park" like we have skate parks...

------
xondono
Try Spain, the rules here are so ambiguous and bad written that no one knows
if there is indeed any place in the country where you can fly drones

~~~
ptsneves
Unless somehow you are part of the state.

------
foobarbecue
In sum: FAA's B4UFLY app database of prohibited sites is incomplete.

------
emilfihlman
All this fight against drones is purely TSA level fearmongering and security
theatre.

