Another Stupid Response from the FAA
- Thread starter cdrking
- Start date
So far their enforcement has come down to:
#1 We sued someone and lost... then we appealed and lost that too...
#2 We are lying to the general public and now face multiple lawsuits...
#3 We sent letters/e-mails to sUAV business owners stating to STOP, but now we state that those were sent without proper clearance (ie ignore those)...
But now license pilots (ie of helicopter/airplanes) are held at a different standard than regular pilot. What does that mean? If a pilot flies a drone, which is legal, charges money for it, which is also legal, the FAA will take away his license? Isn't that... illegal? I smell another lawsuit coming...
Meanwhile i'm filing my COA... but talk about confusing...
#1 We sued someone and lost... then we appealed and lost that too...
#2 We are lying to the general public and now face multiple lawsuits...
#3 We sent letters/e-mails to sUAV business owners stating to STOP, but now we state that those were sent without proper clearance (ie ignore those)...
But now license pilots (ie of helicopter/airplanes) are held at a different standard than regular pilot. What does that mean? If a pilot flies a drone, which is legal, charges money for it, which is also legal, the FAA will take away his license? Isn't that... illegal? I smell another lawsuit coming...
Meanwhile i'm filing my COA... but talk about confusing...
Last edited by a moderator:
Av8Chuck
Member
It will be interesting if AOPA chimes in on this. Whether the FAA intended to or not they just fired a shot across the box of AOPA. For me the things that is getting annoying is that the FAA is treating lawful citizens as though they're criminals and in the case of licensed pilots AOPA should step in before this becomes much more serious.
I was in MY front yard hovering, adjusting gains, out of the corner of my eye I saw a Sheriff's car pull up. I heard the door close and notice the Sheriff was standing behind me. I continued for about another minute, then landed. He asked me what I was doing and I asked him what he was doing? I guess police officers don't like it when you answer a question with a question, he rather rudely asked if I was being paid to fly. I said no but asked why he thought I was being paid to fly. He told me because my MR didn't look like a toy.
To be fair to the officer I was being an a$$hole and he was actually being polite considering and it turned out that he had never seen such a large Y6, or more importantly heard one and was curious and my insensitivity took the conversation in the wrong direction. However my point is this, the FAA has put everyone in a position to say no and no one is in a position to say yes, which was the point of the Forbes article about the confusion. Is that intentional, I don't know but it's hard to imagine that it isn't. But as a result this whole situation extends way beyond the issue of whether we're paid or not. In California if I'm pulled over for a traffic violation the officer can not ask me whether I'm here legally or not, that's considered profiling, but what is it when an officer looks at my MR and asks me if I'm flying commercially? I know that's a stupid example but this is how out of control this is getting.
How the hell can they enforce this?
I was in MY front yard hovering, adjusting gains, out of the corner of my eye I saw a Sheriff's car pull up. I heard the door close and notice the Sheriff was standing behind me. I continued for about another minute, then landed. He asked me what I was doing and I asked him what he was doing? I guess police officers don't like it when you answer a question with a question, he rather rudely asked if I was being paid to fly. I said no but asked why he thought I was being paid to fly. He told me because my MR didn't look like a toy.
To be fair to the officer I was being an a$$hole and he was actually being polite considering and it turned out that he had never seen such a large Y6, or more importantly heard one and was curious and my insensitivity took the conversation in the wrong direction. However my point is this, the FAA has put everyone in a position to say no and no one is in a position to say yes, which was the point of the Forbes article about the confusion. Is that intentional, I don't know but it's hard to imagine that it isn't. But as a result this whole situation extends way beyond the issue of whether we're paid or not. In California if I'm pulled over for a traffic violation the officer can not ask me whether I'm here legally or not, that's considered profiling, but what is it when an officer looks at my MR and asks me if I'm flying commercially? I know that's a stupid example but this is how out of control this is getting.
How the hell can they enforce this?
Yupp, now police think drone = bad news, paid drone = illegal. We all know where this is going. Heck the police have already MADE people stop flying. Next up is a ticket/jail.
I know it's coming, one day the cops will show up and question me, a lawful citizen, doing nothing illegal. It will be even more annoying when i am working and being bothered by this.
Old Man
Active Member
It;s called total control. All they have to do is convince you they have it, even if they do not. That's where the confusing FAA edicts come into play. Most cops don't have a clue but if someone told them it was illegal they will arrest and confiscate first to worry about anything else later. BTW, you have to violate a legitimate civil or criminal law for a cop to have authority, and aviation infractions are not generally in their balliwick. They MUST be able to state the specific statute you are being charged under, although they can hold you for 72 hours in California before filing any charge at all. Never, ever sign their no department penalty, sorry we made a mistake form if they arrest, hold, and release without a charge. Attorneys get real friendly if you refuse to sign that.
Yeah i heard of that. But i also heard if you refuse to sign it, then they won't release you until the maximum amount of time they can legally hold you.
janoots2
Member
AV8 - what state you in? At the beginning of this week, PA state police sent out an 'alert' PDF. It was basically a summary of the state of affairs that we are (should already be) aware of. Only thing that rubbed me wrong is that they communicated the FAA policies as law, ie: "illegal". They also stated the court cases and fines imposed, yet failed to state they were never actually enforced. A very informative, yet skewed document regarding commercial use. Whoever wrote it did a very nice job, but left the 'other' side of the story out of the document - which is concerning.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bartman
Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
the whole approach to regulation had reached bizarre proportions at this point. there are no regulations, we all know the FAA is responsible for crafting them but has failed to thus far, and now they're using every gestapo tactic they can come up with to intimidate people that are ready and willing to follow the regulations they never completed. if this isn't a case study in failed governance then I don't know what is.
This really is getting out of control. The worse is that for all we know, this is coming out of a small office at the FAA, with what, a dozen people, some of which not even agreeing? Sure, there has to be some consensus at the top, but I doubt its unanimous or even well organized. Surely, many FAA lawyers and officials must've had mixed thoughts when they very well knew they were not going to win the Pirker lawsuit ...
Sure feels like some small town rogue PD deciding to re-write a few laws and apply them. Usually the Feds come in and clean up. Except in this case ...
With the FAA apparently doubling down, maybe some incident blows up big, it gets really nasty and some PD and the FAA lose again, but this time with much more noise and it makes front page news ... and things get better after that. Yeah, dream on ...
Sure feels like some small town rogue PD deciding to re-write a few laws and apply them. Usually the Feds come in and clean up. Except in this case ...
With the FAA apparently doubling down, maybe some incident blows up big, it gets really nasty and some PD and the FAA lose again, but this time with much more noise and it makes front page news ... and things get better after that. Yeah, dream on ...
We need to write a good article about commercial sUAV businesses and mass e-mail it to every news agency in the US, to local PD's, government representatives, etc.
Get a few hundred e-mails out, then pay a group to send it to thousands of people or something...
Technology, technology. I know I'm an old fart (65), but I remember when the only meaning for the word "DRONE" was either a towed, or remotely flown craft, used for target practice, ONLY! No cameras etc. etc. This whole mess reminds me of when the automobile was first introduced to the public. Scared the chit out of the horses, caused accidents, fights, and of course was followed by many, many new laws, regulations, permits, licenses and taxes. On and on. Progress ??? Miss-information is the biggest problem. I still run into people that when I'm trying to explain my "multirotor" hobby, stop me and say, "you mean you have a DRONE" !!! And while on the subject, "Flite Test" fubared their latest video, adding black powder to their flying toy. I thought those Boys had more sense. I think I'll unsubscribe from their you tube channel.:upset:
I'm a big fan of Flite Test. The video is a bit controversy but they did it away from everyone, on their private land and they were pretty clear telling people not to do it.
Great idea. I agree. Anyone else?
Old Man
Active Member
What would be great would be a group of U.S. "hobbyists" putting together a string of short clips using cinema, agriculture, sports events, perhaps some aerial survey with semi expansive dialog descriptive of the video segments. Then discuss the multitude of possible benefits to society and an overwhelmingly economical price point compared to full scale aviation or uber aerospace. Toss in the technological advancements and how the hobbyists of today are out aero, electrical, mechanical engineers of tomorrow. The children in their homes today developing an interest in future careers because of a hobby or low altitude business group that all can benefit from. Add to that a letter explaining the actual current legal situation to blunt the efforts of government to deceive the public into thinking what we do is or was illegal. Send it to the major media outlets but also capture talk radio and local news agencies. Then again, if we had an organization we could all pull together to help them make something like this happen. We are all partners in the future, yes?
Oh, and stick the thing up on YouTube to start gathering "likes". Eventually someone might be able to generate a little revenue from it to help fund other public relations activities.
Oh, and stick the thing up on YouTube to start gathering "likes". Eventually someone might be able to generate a little revenue from it to help fund other public relations activities.
The thing is we already know, and so does clients, about the possibilities. I don't think anyone ever denied them.
FAA just wants its $$$ from it.
I got a video call tomorrow morning with my big potential client about their answer after i sent the legal documents/etc... Not expecting a good conversation, seems people are scared of the FAA. Also court findings seem to be irrelevant now a day... Spread a lie enough time and it becomes the truth...
