> “As a pilot, my eye is always on safety first,” FAA Administrator Steve Dickson said in a statement Thursday announcing the rule. “Safety is a joint responsibility between government, pilots, the drone community, the general public and many others who make our nation so creative and innovative.”
How does this make it any more safe? People are still going to fly where they aren't supposed to and in ways that aren't safe, and this rule won't change a thing in those regards.
If you're currently using a drone to fly over downtown LA illegally and take shots, why in the world would you put identifying information on it?
I would also like to know what private companies are getting all this money to implement a new system? Could they have any ties to individuals within the FAA? The Commercial Drone Alliance has also been pushing hard, presumably since it is trying to keep its commercial partners the only operators that can fly.
To me, the fact they are saying this is for safety, is a very VERY thin argument.
It's pretty simple... registration systems like this don't actually make anyone safer, they just make people feel safer because they get to exert some minuscule amount of control.
99% of the people flying drones in unsafe or harrassing ways have an off-the-shelf camera quad. The DIY operators are far more likely to understand the ramifications of what they're doing, maybe because you have to have just a bit of common sense to build one in the first place.
Credentials: raced 250 class quads (poorly), have chewed Phantom operators out for doing stupid shit
Yeah if you drive in a busy city. But if you build a car on your farmland and want to have fun, do whatever you want. And in most states, if its private property, that is perfectly legal.
Likewise, if I am flying a drone in middle-of-nowhere Michigan on my own property, why should the FAA care what I am doing?
The problem with the FAA rules is that it is a poorly thought out blanket statement. If you are flying around downtown LA, yes, you should have a license because you are putting people's lives at danger with a "vehicle".
They don't make sense to me on private property, and I think that they should be different depending on city limits.
If we get into some of the autonomous aspects that both cars and drones have, I think we run into some other gray areas where a blanket policy doesn't fit.
Building drones is stupid easy. It doesn't even need to be a quadcopter, you can make a glider that will stay aloft on thermals using nothing more than two servos, some foam core, some AA batteries and a receiver.
It's for safety the same way a license plate is for safety. If you're using an illegal drone without ID, that automatically makes you suspicious.
If you can't follow that simple rule, what other rules are you not following?
It allows enforcement to be target at those who are so obviously not following the rules, while at the same time encouraging everyone else to follow the rules since their drone will be easy to identify.
License plates don't stop drunk drivers, speeding, or other reckless behavior. It doesn't make you wear a seatbelt, either.
License plates aren't for safety. They're so we can more easily charge road tolls, parking fines, and increasingly: keep tabs on people's whereabouts.
Effectively, drone registration is much the same -- except it would be a better analogy to say the DMV wants everyone to get license plates on bicycles and scooters. (Small vehicle, readily built from parts off the internet, people who enjoy them are generally seen as a nuisance, and this legislation simply gives them an additional burden as a middle finger.)
How does this make it any more safe? People are still going to fly where they aren't supposed to and in ways that aren't safe, and this rule won't change a thing in those regards.
If you're currently using a drone to fly over downtown LA illegally and take shots, why in the world would you put identifying information on it?
I would also like to know what private companies are getting all this money to implement a new system? Could they have any ties to individuals within the FAA? The Commercial Drone Alliance has also been pushing hard, presumably since it is trying to keep its commercial partners the only operators that can fly.
To me, the fact they are saying this is for safety, is a very VERY thin argument.