I'm concerned with a growing trend in the community that seems to disregard or disrespect the restrictions the FAA currently has on where/how to operate your drone.
I do understand for recreational users, many of these are 'guidelines', but even as such we should respect abide by them - they aren't random or overly cautious. I would say they are as generous as can be permitted.
Firstly, the safety of manned aviation is paramount. These little flying robots of ours are nothing more special than a potential hazard, and we need to accept our place in the skies. Accidents in aviation will still happen; either by weather, mechanical failure, pilot or controller error, or a combination of these. Some things just can't be prevented, but most accidents are prevented on a daily bases as a result of the highly regulated nature of aviation. Weather minimums, strict maintenance schedules, equipment and redundancy requirements, pilot and crew training and experience standards, all are designed to prevent loss of life before they happen. Civil aviation, and to a greater degree commercial civil aviation is incredibly safe because of these standards and regulations.
A flock of birds can't really be regulated away, but a drone operated by a human absolutely can be. That risk can be virtually eliminated from manned aviation if the humans (on all sides) simply agree to the same terms.
For example, let's discuss the 400ft limit. The very simple explanation is that over sparsely populated areas aircraft can operate down to 500ft above the ground, or away from persons, vehicle, or structures. Climbing into this altitude is recklessly adding unnecessary risk to manned flight for what - a picture? As a commercial (airplane) pilot, I can have a pretty good understanding of how aircraft will be operating where ever I am, and I still wouldn't go there. I would bet the other experienced pilots on this board would agree.
Unlike some other industries I have noticed, in aviation we welcome the regulations and don't mess around violating them. The respect comes from an understanding that most have been written using far too much blood.
The FAA and other aviation authorities around the world are trying something new here; addressing a potential serious risk before metal has been bent. Let's not screw that up for a pretty picture.
/rant
I do understand for recreational users, many of these are 'guidelines', but even as such we should respect abide by them - they aren't random or overly cautious. I would say they are as generous as can be permitted.
Firstly, the safety of manned aviation is paramount. These little flying robots of ours are nothing more special than a potential hazard, and we need to accept our place in the skies. Accidents in aviation will still happen; either by weather, mechanical failure, pilot or controller error, or a combination of these. Some things just can't be prevented, but most accidents are prevented on a daily bases as a result of the highly regulated nature of aviation. Weather minimums, strict maintenance schedules, equipment and redundancy requirements, pilot and crew training and experience standards, all are designed to prevent loss of life before they happen. Civil aviation, and to a greater degree commercial civil aviation is incredibly safe because of these standards and regulations.
A flock of birds can't really be regulated away, but a drone operated by a human absolutely can be. That risk can be virtually eliminated from manned aviation if the humans (on all sides) simply agree to the same terms.
For example, let's discuss the 400ft limit. The very simple explanation is that over sparsely populated areas aircraft can operate down to 500ft above the ground, or away from persons, vehicle, or structures. Climbing into this altitude is recklessly adding unnecessary risk to manned flight for what - a picture? As a commercial (airplane) pilot, I can have a pretty good understanding of how aircraft will be operating where ever I am, and I still wouldn't go there. I would bet the other experienced pilots on this board would agree.
Unlike some other industries I have noticed, in aviation we welcome the regulations and don't mess around violating them. The respect comes from an understanding that most have been written using far too much blood.
The FAA and other aviation authorities around the world are trying something new here; addressing a potential serious risk before metal has been bent. Let's not screw that up for a pretty picture.
/rant