Embedded Systems Conference
Breaking News
News & Analysis

Drone Debate to Pose 6 Basic Questions

...and give answers you always wanted to know
1/20/2015 08:45 AM EST
43 comments
NO RATINGS
Page 1 / 7 Next >
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 5   >   >>
Caseem0830
User Rank
Author
Re: Liability more like LIABILITY
Caseem0830   1/30/2015 12:33:37 AM
NO RATINGS
You are absolutely right. Especially when I saw in the news how a drone crashed into the white house perimeter. I think there should be more stricter regulations on how drones should be operated. There is no argument that can justify driverless car versus driverless plane as a reason for flying a drone. The safety rules in the aviation industry is usually strciter than the automobile industry simply beause of the high risk the avaition sector faces. I support the present regualtions, and also more stricter regulations

Anand.Yaligar
User Rank
Author
Re: Liability more like LIABILITY
Anand.Yaligar   1/27/2015 12:34:06 AM
@templar781: Well that is just great. Drones allowed on American Airspace from Septermber 2015 and that is when I plan to stop all kinds of air travel. Seriously speaking, the case you presented is frightening because it is possible. We're seeing at a battery of tests (both flying and technical) being conducted before drones can be allowed. Certainly not around an airport.

Anand.Yaligar
User Rank
Author
Re: More Questions
Anand.Yaligar   1/27/2015 12:28:11 AM
NO RATINGS
@Simon7382: We're looking at drone police now are we? Considering the questions and the possibilities of using drones for the harm of common people, it may be very possible to have people who shoot down drones (or maybe hack them into proper behaviour). 

Thinking_J
User Rank
Author
Re: More Questions
Thinking_J   1/24/2015 8:59:33 PM
NO RATINGS
Simon,..

I didn't say regulations were not needed. Nor did I say that we don't need criminal laws. (really? you got that out of my comment?)

The facts I am pointing out...

- Don't expect these regulatiions to protect you (personally). The questiions being asked indicated a belief that regulations could do this. This is an illusion of safety against certain elements of society. I only pointed out it was an common illusion. It has no basis in fact.

- Makers of regulations rarely have the authority to assign resources to enforcement. The FAA representative indicated this in his comments. For that matter Law makers rarely assign resources to enforcement of most laws being made, even though they can, at the time the law is being made.

Resources (money) assigned to enforcement is generally assigned much later. And then those assigned resources MIGHT be used for the intended purpose, after going through dozens of layers of bureaucracy based on budgetary compromises.

We have 10s of thousands of current laws on the books - with under funded enforcement ( environmental laws, social assistance, mandated school funding, the list goes on and on..), if any funding at all.
Any regulation of drones will be added to this list. Some of the reason why the FAA indicated they will NOT be focused on enforcement of the regulations concerning drones. They believe their efforts willl be most effective with the rules being made and education of the public.

"We are a nation of laws .. randomly enforced" ... Frank Zappa

NONE OF THESE FACTS INDICATE ANY OF MY BELIEFS ON THE SUBJECT.

I do believe there should be regulations of Drones. It has taken far too long to get them. They should have been in place decades ago.

on another note:

Criminals don't try to get "around laws".. that is what corporations, governments and morally questionable people do. If fact many lawyers consider this type of activity their primary purpose (making the most money for their client , finding questionable understanding of a law, etc..). This is the world we live in..

Criminals simply try to avoid being caught or punished. There is no consideration of the law in their actions.  There are some that try to assign some morality to their actions, but they are only fooling themselves.

Simon7382
User Rank
Author
Re: More Questions
Simon7382   1/23/2015 11:28:25 PM
NO RATINGS
"The unspoken fact is: Trying to protect society from idiots or those with evil intentions,  using regulations to stop it will be of limited value. So we shouldn't give regulations too much weight in making us safer. These regulations are there to help well intentioned, reasonable people to share a common resource (airspace) in a safe manner. That is all they can do."

This is wrong. It is akin to say that because criminals will do everything to get around our laws (and often times succeed) we do not need criminal laws.

Regulation, if it is rational, menaingful, and, most importantly, enforced can do much more than help the well intentioned. It can help to combat criminals who want to misuse this new technology, whether for profit or for terrorism, or any other potentially illicit reason.

These things are not toys. Thye can do serious harm to property and life. The longer the FAA procrastinates with issuing meaningful, rational and strictly enforced regulations the more difficult it will become to enact any regulation. This is because the industry will grow and will lobby for their profit interests, just like the gun lobby/NRA does, and all of a sudden they will argue that it is part of our second amendment rights to fly a drone, any drone, wherever anyone wants to fly it and do whatever he/she wants to use it for.

Sheetal.Pandey
User Rank
Author
Re: FAA Regs painted in bad light by people ignorant of them
Sheetal.Pandey   1/23/2015 11:09:54 PM
NO RATINGS
@simon7382 ... Yes that quite possible ...every technology has positive and negatives...lot of negative usage of drone is possible ...if accessed by teenagers it can create really a mess...

Thinking_J
User Rank
Author
Re: More Questions
Thinking_J   1/23/2015 5:31:52 PM
NO RATINGS
Edgear..

Yes there are a lot of questions RELATED to drones.. but the subject matter of drone "regulation" has often been confused with more fundamental questions about other subjects.. like privacy.

Privacy issues are already addressed with privacy lawss...not avation laws.
Most of these issues were resolved many years ago when personal cameras became a reality. People can and do take pictures from aircraft without the subject's permmission, all the time. Or over a fence, on the beach, etc..
 based on exisiting privacy laws, this is sometimes illegal. Public debate on the subject was very similar to the debates on drone usaage - but took place about 120 years ago.

Same is true of weapons laws .. Firing a weapon remotely or in an aircraft is addressed in current laws (I am not addressing the issues of good/bad laws on the suject of weapons). Example : it is illegal in most States to fire a weapon within a given distance of populated areas or structures.  Murder is generally against the law too! (who knew?)

As the FAA indicated.. ALL airspace (in the US) is their domain. So their new rulings MIGHT impact the "social or fashion purposes" usage of drones. (was that a hobby or a professional usage of the drone?)

The biggest question - enforcement - was answered by the FAA rep. The FAA's  biggest concerns are safety and education.. not enforcement.

And that is the way MOST laws are put in place, with no concern or funding for any enforcement  (again , I am not addressing the question "is this right?")

The result: no matter what regulations are put in place, if someone wants to do evil or stupid, they can and will. It really isn't that hard to build a small cruse missile. You can look up the plans on the net. I am sure flying it is illegal.

Society will have recourse to punish those ignoring the regulations and laws  "after the fact". Regulations and laws  keep honest people - honest - , but do little to prevent wrongs from happening.

Some people simply don't care about the personal consequences of their actions. The death penalty doesn't stop all murders from happening.

The unspoken fact is: Trying to protect society from idiots or those with evil intentions,  using regulations to stop it will be of limited value. So we shouldn't give regulations too much weight in making us safer. These regulations are there to help well intentioned, reasonable people to share a common resource (airspace) in a safe manner. That is all they can do.

EdGear
User Rank
Author
More Questions
EdGear   1/22/2015 6:01:55 PM
While the FAA and drone manufactures talk about how to share air space there are many other issues related to drones.

Many drones carry cameras. What rights to drone operators have for using those cameras? What privacy rights to individuals and corporations have with respect to unwarranted surveillance? The combination of property, privacy and copy rights will impose restrictions on the use of drones. Individuals and corporations acting to protect their rights will not only drive anti drone legislation but anti drone technology. 

Drones used by the military carry weapons. Drones themselves can act as a weapon when crashed into another object. How do drones fit into the right to bear arms? Do individuals or corporations have the right to build a drone army to protect their rights? If the police have drones how long will it be before criminals have drones?

What about use of drones for social or fashion purpose? What would prevent a person from having multiple drones following them around to create and capture their life experience? Speaker drones, lighting drones, fragrance drones, camera drones... Drone bullying?

If a person sees a drone how will they know the intent of that drone? A default reaction could be to act to defend ones self and rights and bring the drone down. Will people need to carry anti drone technology?

At any point in time there are over 9,000 airliners in the sky and the expense to conrol them is great. With modest drone adoption there could be miliions of drones in the air at all times.

If an attempt is made to allow and regulate drones, how will it be enforced? Will there be a drone police? Can the world afford another global layer of law enforcement?

 

DickB1
User Rank
Author
Piloted vs autonomous
DickB1   1/22/2015 5:09:05 PM
NO RATINGS
To me, there is a significant difference betrween a piloted drone and an autonomous one.  By piloted, I mean a craft like the traditional RC place or heleocopter, which is controlled by a pilot on the ground in constant eyesight of his/her craft.  By autonomous, I mean the type of drone that can be commanded to hover above a subject and follow at a set distance or whatever, wit no constant control input required by an operator.  Of course the lines of disticntion between these types will be come more blurred as technology progresses.  But most of the time the media does not adequately distinguishe between these types.

I think different rules and regulations are needed for these different types of "drone".  An autoonomous drone definitely needs colllision avoidance in my opinion, but does an RC aircraft?  And what piloting skills and training are needed or useful when operating an automnomous drone?

And of course flying either type is nothing like being a pilot flying inside an aircraft.  Requiring a traditional pilot's license to fly a "drone" makes liile sense to me.  The skills and dynamics are different.

 

  

bk11
User Rank
Author
Re: Drones in 'Controlled Areas'
bk11   1/22/2015 4:59:38 PM
NO RATINGS
When I got into model helicopters about 20 years ago, They were much more delicate than today's quadcopters.  Even then an accessory was available that let me attach my transmitter to the printer port of a PC (disabling the radio) and practice flying model aircraft without the spectre of a rough landing "returning them to kit form."

Even on a 75MHz '486 PC the simulators had pretty realistic performance, albeit very simplistic graphics.  I logged many more hours in front of a screen than in an open field.

Now I'll have to go home and dig it up, along with a copy of MS-DOS...

Page 1 / 5   >   >>
March 2015 Cartoon Caption Contest: Mountain Climbing
March 2015 Cartoon Caption Contest: Mountain Climbing
The mountain had formed millions of years before when two tektronix plates collided.
208 comments
Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week