Where is the AOPA on all of this?
It’s only been out a couple days.....won’t be “published” until 12/31.....
Give them a chance.....the FAA dropped this turd between Christmas and NYE for cowardly reasons.....
Where is the AOPA on all of this?
Anyone care to dumb all of this down? Sounds like none of our current drones will be qualified to operate commercially beginning 36 months after the passing of these proposed rules -- unless some form of transponder hardware can be easily added to the craft that emits specific geo and serial information (which I think is pretty unlikely). I feel for those who own and operate multiple UAVs as part of their business, if I interpret this correctly.
That won't happen until their is a change politically. Conservative swing = deregulation=reduced corporate compliance to self regulation = medical devices or drugs that cause deaths, planes that crash, environmental accidents, etc.The FAA barely has time to keep 737s Max from falling out of the sky. Seriously, all these increasing mandates on their time will go the way most others do unless they get some sort of huge transfusion into their budget.
Not to mention all the companies that have thrived off the drone industry......mapping, Ag, construction, SAR, software and hardware. Surely they too will realize what is going on and understand the impacts. I agree, most manned pilots loath drones, period. I am a part 61 too, and enjoy the freedoms I have had as Part 107.Fred,
I have a different take on where the AOPA is at with this as I believe the fully support it and may have provided input and encouragement for remote ID.
The majority of general aviation and commercial pilots generally loath drones for various reasons. Let’s not forget that full scale pilots are the people filing the dearth of near miss and airspace violation drone reports to the FAA, whether the report was real or concocted, whether positive ID was obtained or not.
The AOPA membership is made up of full scale pilots, and those pilots are the people that vote in AOPA elections. They are also the people that buy the products and services provided through the AOPA and their advertising. The number of drone pilots that have joined the AOPA is small in comparison.
Despite the AOPA’s mission statement, their focus will be serving those that fund the organization. Drone operators are such a small percentage of the membership, providing inconsequential financial contributions, so their voice is being overlooked in favor of the full scale community the AOPA has traditionally served. In the past I have written opinion letters about drones to the AOPA and have never seen one published or even replied to. Considering I’ve been a member since 1988 I find that a bit irritating, but also informative.
From my perspective I just don’t see the AOPA doing anything to promote or protect drone operators until that membership segment becomes a much larger voting block than it is now. What the AOPA has done thus far relative to drones has had the appearance of maintaining operating restrictions to assure full scalers can maintain a rather elitist “playground”. Interestingly, the FAA’s drone registration numbers clearly indicate there are a lot more drone operators than full scale pilots so there is an open opportunity for drone operators to join the AOPA in large numbers to take advantage of an existing successful government lobbying body and leverage it to their advantage. Once drone operator membership exceeds full scale membership the AOPA’s focus would shift in our favor. Unfortunately that has not been happening as drone operators seem to be very short sighted and continue to avoid doing anything to preserve their rights and privileges.
First there is 60 days of comments, then chines and tweaks, then 60 days of comments, then more changes an tweaks, its going to take a year or more to pass, some version of this, then 3 years to fully grand father it in....... I'll worry about this in 4 years. Personally I like it. Should weed out the wanna bees, slo down the growth of those joining the market and help capture law breakers. note "should" do all of that. We all know the alternative is being banned out of existence.
In the past I have written opinion letters about drones to the AOPA and have never seen one published or even replied to.
Unfortunately [...] drone operators seem to be very short sighted and continue to avoid doing anything to preserve their rights and privileges.
I wonder if the companies making radio and camera bits for the FPV/race community could come up an add on board or small module that attaches to our existing drones. The potential market is huge. I visualize something like the strobes that popped up when the night flying new rules were published.
Fred,
I have a different take on where the AOPA is at with this as I believe the fully support it and may have provided input and encouragement for remote ID.
I don't know how "we" can do it because we are so unorganized, for one. And two, we would have to figure out a way to apply pressure even if we were all to get on the same page. Even across all the forums, the percentage of Part 107 holders that participate is tiny. We have no common voice. Now would be a great time for someone(s) with the skills to step up with some ideas.
I'm not so pessimistic, given that DJI decided - without a US regulatory mandate - to add ADS-B receivers to all of their drones over .55 lbs. beginning Jan. 1.Don't get your hopes up. DJI, for example, rarely puts their resources into gear they have already earned their money on.
I'm not so pessimistic, given that DJI decided - without a US regulatory mandate - to add ADS-B receivers to all of their drones over .55 lbs. beginning Jan. 1.
My current fleet is 2 years old and (assuming the projected 3 year implementation holds true) I don't imagine I'll still be flying the same aircraft by the time the new rule goes into effect.
But I would imagine the manufacturers might find it difficult to sell drones going forward (and maybe even expose themselves to a potential class action) if they knowingly sell a product that will be illegal in 36 months (or less.)
This ^ is exactly where and how the AMA, a body “dedicated” to aero modeling, screwed the pooch during and after the first ARC committee. That was the opportunity to embrace not just the amateurs and contest people, but also the commercial side as every one of them was to be impacted by future rule making.