Recently my Group bought each cadet squadron two quadcopters, and is now starting to look at the ptoposed FAA rules.
I would like to know whether any Group, Wing, or Region has published rules for cadets to fly quadcopters. I realize that any FAA rule would override any CAP rule, but this would be I think the best way to start training cadets.
I am quite interested in this. We have an aviation consortium in the area that would love to help propel UAV initiatives the moment we get rules and regs for them.
Our wing straight out doesn't allow it
Which Wing is that...?
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2015, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2015, 02:24:20 PM
Which Wing is that...?
It's in his signature.
I took it out of my signature recently ;)
As for my wing, I'm in Idaho Wing. They don't want any kind of liability risks involved with UAV's or any kind of drones, so they don't allow it. It's a huge bummer for us because we had some Air Force folks that really wanted to start a program with our squadron.
Quote from: SamuelRosinsky on October 25, 2015, 05:17:00 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2015, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2015, 02:24:20 PM
Which Wing is that...?
It's in his signature.
I took it out of my signature recently ;)
As for my wing, I'm in Idaho Wing. They don't want any kind of liability risks involved with UAV's or any kind of drones, so they don't allow it. It's a huge bummer for us because we had some Air Force folks that really wanted to start a program with our squadron.
Nope, it's still there, Boise, Idaho. >:D
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
Quote from: SamuelRosinsky on October 25, 2015, 05:17:00 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2015, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2015, 02:24:20 PM
Which Wing is that...?
It's in his signature.
I took it out of my signature recently ;)
As for my wing, I'm in Idaho Wing. They don't want any kind of liability risks involved with UAV's or any kind of drones, so they don't allow it. It's a huge bummer for us because we had some Air Force folks that really wanted to start a program with our squadron.
Nope, it's still there, Boise, Idaho. >:D
Fixed it! ;D
Quote from: SamuelRosinsky on October 25, 2015, 05:17:00 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 25, 2015, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on October 25, 2015, 02:24:20 PM
Which Wing is that...?
It's in his signature.
I took it out of my signature recently ;)
As for my wing, I'm in Idaho Wing. They don't want any kind of liability risks involved with UAV's or any kind of drones, so they don't allow it. It's a huge bummer for us because we had some Air Force folks that really wanted to start a program with our squadron.
That's some serious irony in not allowing drones but flying aircraft about and participating in ES activities.
I did this a couple of years ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs) - the flight was 100% autonomous. I have a few more of the same but with much closer passes of the rocket, just have not uploaded any of them.
Currently there are no FAA Rules for recreational use, for commercial use there are rules (you can't fly with out a 333 exemption), I have applied for an FAA 333 Exemption for business purposes.
I build and fly Remotely Piloted Vehicles that have Autonomous capabilities for Aerial Photography and Mapping applications (aka. Drones).
Most 'copters have unprotected propellers spinning at about 10,000 rpm, they can cause serious injuries up to and including removal of fingers. When things go bad it happens in an instant and usually in a direction that involves you, or worse, spectators. The same can be said for a fixed wing RC aircraft and CAP does have a Model Aircraft AE Program.
Where the issue arises is from IDIOTS. They are the ones that decide the rules don't apply to them and will fly their newly bought Quad over people, airports, etc. They are the ones that cause the bad press and soon to be overwhelming regulations for Model Aircraft of all types (can you say N number).
Quote from: Thonawit on October 27, 2015, 02:31:25 AM
I did this a couple of years ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs) - the flight was 100% autonomous. I have a few more of the same but with much closer passes of the rocket, just have not uploaded any of them.
Currently there are no FAA Rules for recreational use, for commercial use there are rules (you can't fly with out a 333 exemption), I have applied for an FAA 333 Exemption for business purposes.
I build and fly Remotely Piloted Vehicles that have Autonomous capabilities for Aerial Photography and Mapping applications (aka. Drones).
Most 'copters have unprotected propellers spinning at about 10,000 rpm, they can cause serious injuries up to and including removal of fingers. When things go bad it happens in an instant and usually in a direction that involves you, or worse, spectators. The same can be said for a fixed wing RC aircraft and CAP does have a Model Aircraft AE Program.
Where the issue arises is from IDIOTS. They are the ones that decide the rules don't apply to them and will fly their newly bought Quad over people, airports, etc. They are the ones that cause the bad press and soon to be overwhelming regulations for Model Aircraft of all types (can you say N number).
You mean like the idiot that caused a major power failure in Hollywood today by flying their drone into power lines and causing a short circuit that blew several transformers? >:D
We did some quadcopter flying at an aerospace camp we held over the summer. We set up an obstacle course inside our hangar that allowed people to follow a designated track, hover around traffic cones, and fly through hoops before landing on a designated helo pad. They absolutely loved it, and they got to learn about the principles of flight while doing it. I believe the one we used had enclosed rotors so they wouldn't be easy to fly into someone and clip an ear, but we were able to set it to a maximum height from the ground and made sure we had a designated "play area" to avoid anyone walking near a flying "aircraft."
Quote from: PHall on October 27, 2015, 03:00:30 AM
Quote from: Thonawit on October 27, 2015, 02:31:25 AM
I did this a couple of years ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs) - the flight was 100% autonomous. I have a few more of the same but with much closer passes of the rocket, just have not uploaded any of them.
Currently there are no FAA Rules for recreational use, for commercial use there are rules (you can't fly with out a 333 exemption), I have applied for an FAA 333 Exemption for business purposes.
I build and fly Remotely Piloted Vehicles that have Autonomous capabilities for Aerial Photography and Mapping applications (aka. Drones).
Most 'copters have unprotected propellers spinning at about 10,000 rpm, they can cause serious injuries up to and including removal of fingers. When things go bad it happens in an instant and usually in a direction that involves you, or worse, spectators. The same can be said for a fixed wing RC aircraft and CAP does have a Model Aircraft AE Program.
Where the issue arises is from IDIOTS. They are the ones that decide the rules don't apply to them and will fly their newly bought Quad over people, airports, etc. They are the ones that cause the bad press and soon to be overwhelming regulations for Model Aircraft of all types (can you say N number).
You mean like the idiot that caused a major power failure in Hollywood today by flying their drone into power lines and causing a short circuit that blew several transformers? >:D
Looks like the DoD wanted in on the action. (//http://)
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on October 28, 2015, 08:06:38 PM
Looks like the DoD wanted in on the action. (//http://)
Bad link.
I think he was trying to link to the story about the Aerostat that broke free from it's moorings today Dave.
Bah. That's what I get for trying to correct one link issue before the lockout on posts happens:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/breaking-jlens-aerostat-breaks-loose-over-pennsylvania/ (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/breaking-jlens-aerostat-breaks-loose-over-pennsylvania/)
Unmanned balloon?
Place a remote controlled switch to open a discharge valve. Follow it, and when it approaches a suitably deserted area, hit the switch. Deflated balloon, goes aground. If no area available, have police or Army contingent close part of one...
But this happened during both wars. One anti-aircraft weapon used extensively were the barrage balloons. Sometimes a balloon would break loose, and had to be chased and retrieved. I guess they never learned...
There is a much greater effort in place these days to conserve helium. The world's supply is diminishing. Simply venting it does not fit that goal.
I see... So it is preferable to cause hundreds of millions (billions?) in $$$$$$$$$, and put people's lives in probable jeopardy than to vent it?
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on October 30, 2015, 12:03:39 PM
I see... So it is preferable to cause hundreds of millions (billions?) in $$$$$$$$$, and put people's lives in probable jeopardy than to vent it?
Lighten up, Francis. I think there could have been more of an effort to retrieve the helium. The potential damage you propose seems to a gross exaggeration.
That was not what was presented...
The news reported cities left without electrical service, 911 overwhelmed. If as a result of this... overwhelming a heart attack or other emergency call was delayed, that victim could die. Stop lights being out... Crossing guards directing traffic to make up...?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/10/28/the-army-lost-control-of-a-giant-unmanned-surveillance-blimp/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/10/28/the-army-lost-control-of-a-giant-unmanned-surveillance-blimp/)
To the OP, I thought I should mention that some local municipalities, especially those in more urban areas where folks are crammed closer together, have passed or are in the process of passing local laws or ordinances that govern the use of UAV's within their boundaries, both fixed-wing and rotary-wing. Local law is typically more restrictive than Federal or State law/regs. It might be wise to check your local Town/County code to make sure, if you do get a go-ahead from your Group or Wing. I ran into this issue recently (but on the job, not with CAP) while working on an aerial photography effort to document changes over time in tidal wetland boundaries.
Although it doesnt restrict CAP from using them, just be aware that there are states where unmanned ops are not used with LE. FL has SB-92 The Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act. You will be hard pressed to find an agency in FL that would allow CAP to use a drone if its affiliated with an LE operation. We get people who volunteer all the time to come out and bring their quadcopters. Since pretty much every missing person or SAR has a crime scene aspect to it until determined otherwise, you could launch on a missing person call that ends up being a homicide and using a drone could ultimately void any evidence located by the drone. Not to mention.... the political fall out wont be touched with a 10' pole.
So before anyone gets all excited, just make sure you check your individual states.
Quote from: Thonawit on October 27, 2015, 02:31:25 AM
I did this a couple of years ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XEXtW7NNs) - the flight was 100% autonomous. I have a few more of the same but with much closer passes of the rocket, just have not uploaded any of them.
Currently there are no FAA Rules for recreational use, for commercial use there are rules (you can't fly with out a 333 exemption), I have applied for an FAA 333 Exemption for business purposes.
I build and fly Remotely Piloted Vehicles that have Autonomous capabilities for Aerial Photography and Mapping applications (aka. Drones).
Most 'copters have unprotected propellers spinning at about 10,000 rpm, they can cause serious injuries up to and including removal of fingers. When things go bad it happens in an instant and usually in a direction that involves you, or worse, spectators. The same can be said for a fixed wing RC aircraft and CAP does have a Model Aircraft AE Program.
Where the issue arises is from IDIOTS. They are the ones that decide the rules don't apply to them and will fly their newly bought Quad over people, airports, etc. They are the ones that cause the bad press and soon to be overwhelming regulations for Model Aircraft of all types (can you say N number).
Actually, there ARE rules for recreational drones (AKA R/C model aircraft). If flown legally they are less than 55 lbs, flown only for recreational purposes (absolutely NO commercial purpose for any flight), flown below 400' AGL, not flown in a reckless or careless manner (like over an airport), not over 'congested areas' or near other people, etc.
Dunno if I'd characterize the rule breakers as "idiots" though. "Clueless" or "Criminal" might be better adjectives.
And then you have the ones who try to get freelance news footage at traffic accidents and almost run into the EMS helicopter. Idiots.
Quote from: Flying Pig on November 04, 2015, 01:37:16 PM
And then you have the ones who try to get freelance news footage at traffic accidents and almost run into the EMS helicopter. Idiots.
We had a bunch of major fires here in good 'ol Idaho, and drones were preventing fire aircraft from doing their jobs.
Quote from: SamuelRosinsky on November 04, 2015, 11:44:18 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on November 04, 2015, 01:37:16 PM
And then you have the ones who try to get freelance news footage at traffic accidents and almost run into the EMS helicopter. Idiots.
We had a bunch of major fires here in good 'ol Idaho, and drones were preventing fire aircraft from doing their jobs.
Just like we did in California.... >:(
Fl has had a couple EMS helicopters divert. There are people who make honest mistakes and then people who really are just to stupid to be responsible for anything capable of powered flight.
Quote from: Flying Pig on November 05, 2015, 01:49:26 AM
Fl has had a couple EMS helicopters divert. There are people who make honest mistakes and then people who really are just to stupid to be responsible for anything capable of powered flight.
Most of the drones that stopped the fire aircraft from doing their jobs were people that wanted that "Cool Shot" of the fire and didn't really care for anyone else.
We had another situation where drones almost prevented a Hot Air Balloon event that the city hosts every year. But they quickly grounded the drones and the show continued as plan. Honest mistake.
Edit: forgot to add some details.
If only those water bombers could be more maneuverable... A drone in my way? I will raise my altitude by 200 feet and drop the water when over the drone... Done, no more drone.
As to claims? OOps, sorry, we are not that agile when on a water drop, I did not see your drone until after I initiated the water drop... That is the risk you took by flying it here...
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 05, 2015, 01:50:58 PM
If only those water bombers could be more maneuverable... A drone in my way? I will raise my altitude by 200 feet and drop the water when over the drone... Done, no more drone.
As to claims? OOps, sorry, we are not that agile when on a water drop, I did not see your drone until after I initiated the water drop... That is the risk you took by flying it here...
So you can see that drone a half mile away through the smoke while you're heading towards it at 130MPH while manuvering to put the drop where you want it while trying to miss the mountain?
Impressive!!! :clap:
Ooops. The details. Don't bother me with those little pesky things!
:-[
I am not a pilot. But suppose you had instruments that are actually in existence, would it not be nice to do that to a drone intruding?
>:D
Firemen actually use such that type of camera to see inside a smoky area. . .
>:D >:D
Helium is ridiculously expensive these days, but many groups, including quite a number of CAP squadrons, have raised the money to build HAB ( High Altitude Balloon) and buy the lift gas and still build payloads with nice gear. GoPros, Trackers, Video imagery, etc., are all part of projects flown by groups from Elementary Schools to Grad students! Of course, you can't have motive power ( no props) But you can get a permit to build an HAB that is so large as to be a danger to aircraft and anything else you might find floating around up around 120,000 feet. Big Balloons use Radar reflectors, and are restricted in launch zones, and the FAA requires advance notice for NOTAMS. You don't have to worry about breaking the balloons generally; as soon as they reach the lower pressure at altitude they start to expand and quickly break, and descend under parachute canopy ( Well, that's the way its supposed to happen anyway...) All that background is a little superfluous. My main point is that Hydrogen is readily available, has a higher proportional lift, and is safe to use as long as proper precautions are followed. I have always thought that a cheap gas R/C aircraft would be great to fly with an ELT receiver and telemetry downlink. Having your receiver even a few hundred feet AGL increases the transmitter detection range dramatically. With an R/C aircraft, you would at least get your gear back!
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 05, 2015, 01:50:58 PM
If only those water bombers could be more maneuverable... A drone in my way? I will raise my altitude by 200 feet and drop the water when over the drone... Done, no more drone.
As to claims? OOps, sorry, we are not that agile when on a water drop, I did not see your drone until after I initiated the water drop... That is the risk you took by flying it here...
I'm at about 50' above the trees or terrain when I drop...... Climbing 200' would turn my drop into a useless nothing.
Quote from: Flying Pig on November 22, 2015, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: Luis R. Ramos on November 05, 2015, 01:50:58 PM
If only those water bombers could be more maneuverable... A drone in my way? I will raise my altitude by 200 feet and drop the water when over the drone... Done, no more drone.
As to claims? OOps, sorry, we are not that agile when on a water drop, I did not see your drone until after I initiated the water drop... That is the risk you took by flying it here...
I'm at about 50' above the trees or terrain when I drop...... Climbing 200' would turn my drop into a useless nothing.
He was suggesting that you drop on the drone. Yeah, not a very good idea... Especially if it's
your house you're trying to protect!
At the cost per drop on many of the fixed wing, an aborted drop could be in the 10s or thousands. When the 747 and DC10 comes, I believe its pushing $1M a drop were the last numbers I heard.
The FAA has released the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Registration Task Force (RTF) Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) Task Force Recommendations Final Report.
See: http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTUxMTIzLjUxNzk5NzYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE1MTEyMy41MTc5OTc2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3NjAxNjEzJmVtYWlsaWQ9aGlnaGZsaWdodEBxLmNvbSZ1c2VyaWQ9aGlnaGZsaWdodEBxLmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&&&100&&&http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/RTFARCFinalReport_11-21-15.pdf
(http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTUxMTIzLjUxNzk5NzYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE1MTEyMy41MTc5OTc2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3NjAxNjEzJmVtYWlsaWQ9aGlnaGZsaWdodEBxLmNvbSZ1c2VyaWQ9aGlnaGZsaWdodEBxLmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&&&100&&&http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/RTFARCFinalReport_11-21-15.pdf)
Happy reading. ;D