We talked to 4 individuals involved in the RC hobby to ask them about drones, drone law, and how this all affects RC as a whole.
If you don't know Josh Bixler then welcome to your first Flite Test article! Josh has over 25 years experience in the RC hobby and one of the wonderful hosts of this show!
Raphael "Trappy" Pirker is one of the members of Team BlackSheep, aka the FPV Daredevils!
Brendan Schulman is a Special Counsel Attorney at Kramen Levin. He successfully defended Trappy above in the first case of an FAA enforcement action.
Josh Scott is another host of this show and doesn't really know what's going on most of the time. We keep him around anyway.
What are your opinions on drones and drone law? Chat it up in the forums!
Log In to reply
Reply I if you agree
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
As a side note I dont think it is good to on one hand reach out and try and educate people while on the other hand make fun of them for not understanding something they most likely have never looked into.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
The term "drone" is an old code word used in WW2 small pilotless planes used to target practice and long range bombing (think of modern rocket artillery). We did away with the terms UAS and UAV around 2011 because calling it "unmanned" was a disservice to the hundreds of men and women needed for each mission, so we now call them RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft).
As for privacy, military RPA use inside the USA has very strict regulation and oversight, only able to fly in military airspace/ranges.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Josh Scott nailed it, unfortunately someone not familiar with Flite Test might not get the sarcasm/humor of it.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Why not give some different scenarios of safe and unsafe flying? The pilot that knows his craft, maybe even scratch-built it, and is flying over fields and forests, is not any serious threat. That's the classic RC-guy, which had been around for many many years. On the other hand, we have the average Joe that buys a ready-to-fly multirotor and tries to get a "cool shot" i.e. close to people or property. He is the real problem, and a quite new one. You completely fail to discuss this, which is unfortunate, considering it really is the core issue, where a niche hobby has gone mainstream.
Also, the sarcasm from Josh Scott, although funny and quite obvious, is probably more of a disservice. It's only funny to those of us that already know the "answers", and might be considered offensive. Just saying.
Finally, even though Trappy and Team Blacksheep might be nice guys and amazing pilots, they are definitely pushing the envelope of what is OK. Even though they might have clearance for some of their city flying, the fact of the matter is that they fly close to people and traffic, which can hardly be considered completely safe, and even if they are skilled enough to be "safe", they are encouraging the previously mentioned average Joe to take his brand new RTF "drone" for a spin in all the wrong locations. I think that Flitetest should be more concerned about the risk of being associated with the bad press around Trappy, or at the very least be much more clear that they do not condone everything he does.
I do applaud that you try to educate people, though, but I feel that you are not there yet.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
I have a huge amount of time and respect for Flite Test and your friends, but I am afraid I do not agree with your perspective on this subject. I also own a TBS Discovery platform and a Kraken large 20kg Octocopter.
The term drone is over-simplistic. If you are going to be objective about this subject then I think you should use the terms UAV/UAS. TBS has not done any of us, be we hobbyists or professionals, any favours and I love my TBS Discovery. What TBS did in NY, London and at the site of the Costa Concordia was, in my opinion, totally and utterly irresponsible. It has caused a huge amount of damage and yet Trappy cannot seem to understand that, or be prepared to accept any form of responsibility.
At the time of the Costa Concordia stunt, it was an on going salvage and accident investigation site where 52 people, like you and me, lost their lives. If nothing else, the TBS stunt showed a total lack of respect for those killed or their families.
The only reason the Met Police in London did not arrest the TBS team at Big Ben was because they could not positively identify the pilot. The fallout we, as operators in the UK, have faced since that little "fun" flight has been significant. Thankfully there we have a resonably understanding CAA, who proactively work with hobby groups and professional alike. Google CAP722 and have a look at the UK's regulations. hobbyists and professionals operate within these guidelines and to the Air Navigation Order, CAP 393, articles 166 and 167.
In the UK and EU the authorities could have gone down the same route as the FAA. We were extremely fortunate that they decided not to, but those who use their platforms irresponsibly damage the sport, hobby, profession and industry as a whole. Please, think, then act. Trappy and TBS, you owe us all an apology. Try showing some level of responsibility and credibility. As a leading high profile entity, you should be setting the standards that other follow. Please do not go for short term gains, because the only people that will suffer in the long terms, are the rest of us. After all, the public will still buy you platforms.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply