The Uniform Law Commission And Their Taking Of The NAS
- Thread starter Jagerbomb52
- Start date
Busdriver
Well-Known Member
Under the heading of "FYI".
At a recent FAA/UAS symposium, a number of solutions being considered to address UAS/aircraft incursion were presented. Some of them were met with a collective "WTF?" and became instant bar topics of conversation later that night. Having conversations with regulators and lawmakers alike, the collective opinion is that passive (laws and rules) are not enough and that active measures are on the horizon. My suspicion is that the above article is but one piece of "things to come."
While I have been informed by Airmap that they have "no current plans" to adopt a subscription-based business model, the operative word in that comment is "current". They have a new CEO with, undoubtedly, new ideas.
DJI and Yuneec seem to involved in discussions while AUTEL is quietly hiding in the corner. I'm sure legislation, positive ID, geofencing, and LAANC (being rolled out to 500 airports over 6 months) will be combined as a solution. Timing is the 900 lb gorilla in the room.
While a near-miss recently occurred in New Zealand, the incursion nonetheless "fuels the fire of time" globally.
Drone near miss: 'Height of stupidity'
At a recent FAA/UAS symposium, a number of solutions being considered to address UAS/aircraft incursion were presented. Some of them were met with a collective "WTF?" and became instant bar topics of conversation later that night. Having conversations with regulators and lawmakers alike, the collective opinion is that passive (laws and rules) are not enough and that active measures are on the horizon. My suspicion is that the above article is but one piece of "things to come."
While I have been informed by Airmap that they have "no current plans" to adopt a subscription-based business model, the operative word in that comment is "current". They have a new CEO with, undoubtedly, new ideas.
DJI and Yuneec seem to involved in discussions while AUTEL is quietly hiding in the corner. I'm sure legislation, positive ID, geofencing, and LAANC (being rolled out to 500 airports over 6 months) will be combined as a solution. Timing is the 900 lb gorilla in the room.
While a near-miss recently occurred in New Zealand, the incursion nonetheless "fuels the fire of time" globally.
Drone near miss: 'Height of stupidity'
So where will this leave us "hobbyist" flyers? The closest I've ever been to any sort of airport was 7-miles or thereabout. I always check the no fly zone maps for the areas I go, and that's pretty much always out in the country somewhere. I have never encountered a manned aircraft near or low enough for me to be a hazard. I don't and never will fly for work or profit... it's just another hobby pastime for me, and I follow the guidelines set by the FAA and the AMA.
Busdriver
Well-Known Member
Purely speculation, but my sense is that with all the pending legislation, both recreational and commercial UAS operations are going to be subject to 1 set of regulations with fewer "grey areas". But I don't have a crystal ball. While you seem to be aware of, and abide by, the "rules of the road", so many simply don't and lives will be lost as a result.
One of the primary problems is identifying and catching the guilty. If an aircraft breaks the rules, they are easy to identify and follow. Not so much the case with a drone. Hence the proposed legislation (H.R. 5366) by Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler of Missouri. The Bill is essentially 2-pronged :
Hartzler Introduces Bill to Safeguard America’s Skies
A further analysis of the Bill can be found at:
Safeguarding America’s Skies Act of 2018 (H.R.5366)
Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of this Bill. The list of questions that arise from the Bill are significant and extend beyond UAS operations. Not the least of which is the fact that it will impact all categories of operators; (1) the law abiding, (2) the clueless, (3) and the illegal (85% of her clients fall into #2 and #3.) Registration didn't result in the desired result so on to the next step.
Tip - you want to be in the first category on this issue, regardless of whatever legislation flows down the pipe. If you think your safe because the FAA has enforced fewer than 50 cases in the past couple of years, guess again. Those are the cases whereby the FAA has taken the lead position from an enforcement perspective. The FAA tends to pile on once a case seems to have legs. The don't have the manpower to enforce everything but they will come in and "add on" to an existing case. We call it the "vulture" approach. They wait for the roadkill to settle down, then swoop in for the scraps.
On a personal note, business is booming to the point that my attorney is considering a "bigger/faster" private aircraft so she can support an increasing business travel demands. I get to fly it, she gets to pick the color. So, for all you #2 and #3 type operators, THANKS!
Here's what we have our eyes on currently
Lecture over - Driver out
One of the primary problems is identifying and catching the guilty. If an aircraft breaks the rules, they are easy to identify and follow. Not so much the case with a drone. Hence the proposed legislation (H.R. 5366) by Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler of Missouri. The Bill is essentially 2-pronged :
- Amend Title 18 to allow the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to detect, track, redirect, confiscate, or destroy a drone if it poses a security threat to a covered facility or asset.
- Require the Secretary of Transportation to issue a final regulation requiring remote identification and tracking of drones within one year.
Hartzler Introduces Bill to Safeguard America’s Skies
A further analysis of the Bill can be found at:
Safeguarding America’s Skies Act of 2018 (H.R.5366)
Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of this Bill. The list of questions that arise from the Bill are significant and extend beyond UAS operations. Not the least of which is the fact that it will impact all categories of operators; (1) the law abiding, (2) the clueless, (3) and the illegal (85% of her clients fall into #2 and #3.) Registration didn't result in the desired result so on to the next step.
Tip - you want to be in the first category on this issue, regardless of whatever legislation flows down the pipe. If you think your safe because the FAA has enforced fewer than 50 cases in the past couple of years, guess again. Those are the cases whereby the FAA has taken the lead position from an enforcement perspective. The FAA tends to pile on once a case seems to have legs. The don't have the manpower to enforce everything but they will come in and "add on" to an existing case. We call it the "vulture" approach. They wait for the roadkill to settle down, then swoop in for the scraps.
On a personal note, business is booming to the point that my attorney is considering a "bigger/faster" private aircraft so she can support an increasing business travel demands. I get to fly it, she gets to pick the color. So, for all you #2 and #3 type operators, THANKS!
Here's what we have our eyes on currently
Lecture over - Driver out
Similar threads
Latest threads
-
-
what are PPKRAW.bin,Rinex.obs及Timestamp.mrk?
- Started by crazydog10002001
- Replies: 0
-
-
-