New Drone Rules

Dave Pitman · Feb 13, 2019

Hey guys, the proposed new rules have been posted to the Federal Register and are open for public comments until April 15th.

Federal Register :: Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Over People

Phaedrus · Feb 13, 2019

This was an interesting take

Was There an Oops in the Proposed Ops Over People Rules? - Inside Unmanned Systems

R Martin · Feb 14, 2019

Dave Pitman said:
Hey guys, the proposed new rules have been posted to the Federal Register and are open for public comments until April 15th.

Federal Register :: Operation of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Over People

Thanks for pointing this out Dave. I sent it to the printer and will review it over the next few days.

Kristina Fowler · Feb 16, 2019

In evaluating the waiver requests, the FAA considered the most critical factors to ensuring safety during night operations to be anti-collision lighting and operator knowledge. Accordingly, the FAA proposes to allow routine, small UAS operations at night under two conditions. First, the operator would complete knowledge testing or training, including new subject matter areas related to operating at night. The second condition would be that the small UAS has an anti-collision light illuminated and visible for at least 3 statute miles.

I really like the proposed rule changes.

For night operations, I'm assuming they're referring to strobes (see: 4−3−23. Use of Aircraft Lights). I think this might present challenges to the average DJI (or comparable) drone owner. I have a set of strobes (brand name withheld to protect the innocent). While I've never tested them at any significant distance, it's my opinion that spotting these from 3 miles is wishful thinking.

If this rule change does come to pass (which it probably will), I think it would be a great idea if the FAA would also set operational standards for strobe makers and the aforementioned 3-mile visibility minimum, therefore taking the guesswork out of the equation for well-intended 107 pilots wanting to retrofit their aircraft. In a practical (unscientific) sense, when you have the strobe in front of you - at arm's length, it certainly appears to be very bright. But when you introduce it into the real world, its brightness, relative to its surroundings, drops off dramatically as the distance between the UAS and your eye increases, not to mention competing light elements from moderate to heavily populated areas.

Just my 2 cents...

Moosewax · Feb 16, 2019

Phaedrus said:
This was an interesting take

Was There an Oops in the Proposed Ops Over People Rules? - Inside Unmanned Systems

I thought this article was very interesting too. It sounds to me like the author has a much more realistic idea of where to get scientific based standards for determining allowable potential impacts from falling/crashing UAS.

The authors comments on the need for allowing flights over moving vehicles is also spot on. I think it should come with limits, such as no long term stationary hovering over a freeway, and a minimum height (lets say 100ft AGL or more to prevent being a hazard and extra distraction, no driver wants to see a drone 20ft over a road in active use.

I will be incorporating some of the authors suggestions in my comments.

-Chris

Kristina Fowler · Feb 16, 2019

Fourth, although part 107 currently does not allow operations over people in moving vehicles (§ 107.39), the FAA proposes a new section that makes clear that such operations are expressly prohibited. There is more information on operations over moving vehicles in Section IV.B.12.b).

As much as I hate to admit this, I think it makes sense. Too much discussion on the impact/collision component of the argument and not enough on the visual distraction to drivers and related safety implications. Imagine parking your UAS 30 feet over a busy 2-lane highway....

Moosewax · Feb 16, 2019

Kristina Fowler said:
As much as I hate to admit this, I think it makes sense. Too much discussion on the impact/collision component of the argument and not enough on the visual distraction to drivers and related safety implications. Imagine parking your UAS 30 feet over a busy 2-lane highway....

That's what I am saying too, situations like parking a drone at low altitude over a freeway should be a no-no.

However not being able to transit over a road at 400ft AGL is ridiculous.

R.Perry · Feb 16, 2019

Looks like for many of us category three will be the standards we need to meet for overflights. I did like the wording the would be allowed to transit over people but not hover. I believe what will be the final ruling for heavier drones is a parachute, and prop guards will be required. At least were moving in the right direction.

R Martin · Feb 18, 2019

Kristina Fowler said:
I really like the proposed rule changes.

For night operations, I'm assuming they're referring to strobes (see: 4−3−23. Use of Aircraft Lights). I think this might present challenges to the average DJI (or comparable) drone owner. I have a set of strobes (brand name withheld to protect the innocent). While I've never tested them at any significant distance, it's my opinion that spotting these from 3 miles is wishful thinking.

If this rule change does come to pass (which it probably will), I think it would be a great idea if the FAA would also set operational standards for strobe makers and the aforementioned 3-mile visibility minimum, therefore taking the guesswork out of the equation for well-intended 107 pilots wanting to retrofit their aircraft. In a practical (unscientific) sense, when you have the strobe in front of you - at arm's length, it certainly appears to be very bright. But when you introduce it into the real world, its brightness, relative to its surroundings, drops off dramatically as the distance between the UAS and your eye increases, not to mention competing light elements from moderate to heavily populated areas.

Just my 2 cents...