BAN ALL DRONES! - Eric Zorn, Chicago Tribune

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Himat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
2,865
Location
Norway
I suspect they will push the registration compliance to the retail level, mandating that any retail source that sells a quad get the requisite info and fees at the time of sale (much like the sale of guns is done in some states).
A very probable step, but this does not address a few other shortcomings of the scheme. Without some serious work to maintain the database it will be full of faults and corrupted data in a few years. People make faults entering data when they registrate, people move, they forget to remove the registration number when passing on a drone or parts to someone else and so on. Someone said that to go searching for a needle in a haystack, you first have to pull together the haystack, and this register is one large haystack.

Perhaps RC model fields can be designated as a zone in which unregistered craft can fly freely (still following the typical AMA restrictions), or perhaps the FAA will simply chose to ignore (turn a blind eye) RC models that fly under the traditional AMA limitations.
This could as well be part of the motivation from the FAA. To get flying RC vehicles into designated operation zones. The pdf I linked previous could be interpreted that way. I did not see it as clear cut that an RC model operated from a designated model flying site have to be registrated as an UAS.

The Civil Aviation Authority, Norway, is as the European Civil Aviation Authority pushing new regulations on unmanned aerial vehicles. In Norway it do not look to bad, in practice if look like the regulations will be an tool to whack those that fly in the wrong places.
 

nerobro

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
1,111
Location
Northern Illinois
The government employees cost is already covered by the congress budget issued the fee is icing on the cake, how many 'drones' in the field? a few million?
It's per pilot, not per UAV. I've got seven UAVs under that ruling. They'd only get $5 from me.
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
8,979
Location
CT, USA
Then there's this...


The kid lives in my home town. Last year he had a 9mm Glock on a quadcopter and the FAA decided they didn't have any regulations prohibiting it... yet...

Dana
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
10,525
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Then there's this...

[video=youtube;lmD3rXUR1Tw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmD3rXUR1Tw[/video]

The kid lives in my home town. Last year he had a 9mm Glock on a quadcopter and the FAA decided they didn't have any regulations prohibiting it... yet...

Dana
Young Dr. Strangelove burned the turkey.


BJC
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MaverickSawyer

Active Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
38
Location
Kent, WA
Then there's this...

[video=youtube;lmD3rXUR1Tw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmD3rXUR1Tw[/video]

The kid lives in my home town. Last year he had a 9mm Glock on a quadcopter and the FAA decided they didn't have any regulations prohibiting it... yet...

Dana
WHAT.

I don't know whether to laugh, applaud, cry, or run screaming for the hills.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,013
Location
Orange County, California
WHAT.

I don't know whether to laugh, applaud, cry, or run screaming for the hills.
I do. Applaud. With enough POV range, this could be useful by the forest service in starting back-fires, etc. We should be applauding kids like this for their ingenuity, and getting them on the fast-track to jobs where this kind of creativity can be harnessed for useful purposes. Instead, our culture just seems to say, "OMG!!! Drone + fire + kid!!! Lock him up!!!"

Too many teens just sit around playing video games or whining about how life is so "unfair". This guy is actually building things he dreams up. He needs an internship with a stipend, not jail time.
 

RPM314

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
724
Location
NY, USA
I do. Applaud. With enough POV range, this could be useful by the forest service in starting back-fires, etc. We should be applauding kids like this for their ingenuity, and getting them on the fast-track to jobs where this kind of creativity can be harnessed for useful purposes. Instead, our culture just seems to say, "OMG!!! Drone + fire + kid!!! Lock him up!!!"

Too many teens just sit around playing video games or whining about how life is so "unfair". This guy is actually building things he dreams up. He needs an internship with a stipend, not jail time.

On the other end of the spectrum:
[video=youtube;glmBvkQhKk4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glmBvkQhKk4[/video]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,893
Location
Evansville, Indiana
This guy is actually building things he dreams up.
Unfortunately, the line between that sort of practical knowledge and Klebold and Harris level depravity isn't too wide. I agree that his technical ability should be lauded but it might be a good idea to keep a close eye on him just in case.
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,013
Location
Orange County, California
Unfortunately, the line between that sort of practical knowledge and Klebold and Harris level depravity isn't too wide. I agree that his technical ability should be lauded but it might be a good idea to keep a close eye on him just in case.
Can you think of a better way to "keep an eye on him" and channel his energies creatively than getting him into an internship program?
 

Richard6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
696
Location
Plymouth, MN USA
Midairs, drones and bird strikes: Why I learned to spend as little time at low altitude as a I possibly can. LOL
Interesting thought. I understand that the jet engine builders have to go thru some serious testing of their engines before they can be used on aircraft.

I'm not saying that the commercial pilots are making things up and I can understand their concern for the safety of the aircraft and the passengers on board. But the thought that a small drone could bring down a airliner seems far fetched.

The FAA talks about how the drone could wreak a jet engine, but has anybody tested it? If they have, I haven't heard about it.

Richard
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,893
Location
Evansville, Indiana
The FAA talks about how the drone could wreak a jet engine, but has anybody tested it? If they have, I haven't heard about it.
It's not the airliners I am so concerned about (which is why I didn't mention them) especially since they are nearly all multi-engine so unless you hit a "flock of drones". It's general aviation and helicopters that are at greatest risk. A bird the size of a quail or small hawk can bring down a helicopter or piston single. A drone that ways several times what a bird does? You do the math.

That said, I would not doubt that metal and plastic going through an engine with tight tolerances would seriously damage it. It's one of those "just because the plane doesn't crash doesn't mean it's not a cause for concern". Knowing how people are...this attempt at regulation is going to be a lot nicer than what would happen when the news spreads a video of an airliner coughing fire out the back of the engine after ingesting a drone following by a few passengers talking about how scary it was and how they thought they were going to die.

The impetus is on the drone operators to not give the government any more rope to hang them than they already have. They seem to be doing a poor job of it and honestly, I wouldn't be sad to see the FAA shut the whole private owner mess down except for clearly designated "drone parks" that aircraft can avoid. What's sad is that the actions of the "I bought a drone!" crowd are ruining the good safety record of the model aircraft community (of which I was part for many years) .
 

mcrae0104

Armchair Mafia Conspirator
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
3,149
Location
BDU, BJC
Then there's this...

[video=youtube;lmD3rXUR1Tw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmD3rXUR1Tw[/video]

The kid lives in my home town. Last year he had a 9mm Glock on a quadcopter and the FAA decided they didn't have any regulations prohibiting it... yet...

Dana
Philosophically, I want to be on the side of liberty for the drone "pilots." Then somebody posts something like this on the Internet. Not quite the absolute height of irresponsibility, but darn close, and not good PR. Good luck, drone guys, your days are numbered once the public sees this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MaverickSawyer

Active Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
38
Location
Kent, WA
It's not the airliners I am so concerned about (which is why I didn't mention them) especially since they are nearly all multi-engine so unless you hit a "flock of drones". It's general aviation and helicopters that are at greatest risk. A bird the size of a quail or small hawk can bring down a helicopter or piston single. A drone that ways several times what a bird does? You do the math.
Lemme see if I can't find that news article from that drone/Robinson R22 collision last month...

Aha: Possible drone collides with helicopter in Los Angeles | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry
Most other search results are from UAS forums claiming that the whole incident is being hyped up and that it was a birdstrike. Having seen a birdstrike's aftermath, yeah, it's a drone. There's not a drop of blood to be seen in the cockpit. Even at 70 knots, a bird would have left a hell of a splash downrange of the impact.

That said, I would not doubt that metal and plastic going through an engine with tight tolerances would seriously damage it. It's one of those "just because the plane doesn't crash doesn't mean it's not a cause for concern". Knowing how people are...this attempt at regulation is going to be a lot nicer than what would happen when the news spreads a video of an airliner coughing fire out the back of the engine after ingesting a drone following by a few passengers talking about how scary it was and how they thought they were going to die.
Having had a little time looking at the innards of a small gas turbine in A&P school, I cringe at the amount of damage that a drone could cause. I mean, bird strikes alone can cripple something like a CF-34, and that's a tough engine based off the ones used by the A-10s. Most drones have metal in them somewhere. That'll do more than cause a flameout or bend a few stators and rotors. If a typical hobby motor were to be ingested into the gas generator core of a typical turbofan (let's say a CFM-56, since those are very common), that's going to shred the first set of rotor/stator blades it strikes, which turns into a rapidly cascading case of DOD (Domestic Object Damage), and it'll shell the engine. If you're having a bad day, that'll turn into an uncontained failure of the engine, and turbine blades will come flying out of the engine sideways. Best case, you just lose an engine and have to perform an emergency landing, and then replace a multi-million dollar engine.
 
2
Group Builder
Top