{"id":3300,"date":"2019-07-02T14:42:44","date_gmt":"2019-07-02T18:42:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.musingsbymichael.com\/blog\/?p=3300"},"modified":"2019-07-02T14:42:44","modified_gmt":"2019-07-02T18:42:44","slug":"more-restrictive-flight-rules-for-drones","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.musingsbymichael.com\/blog\/2019\/07\/02\/more-restrictive-flight-rules-for-drones\/","title":{"rendered":"More restrictive flight rules for drones"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"toy<\/a><\/p>\n

Why is the government creating more restrictive flight rules for drones? Will the probability of a collision between an aircraft and a drone being so low<\/a>, \u201cSince the probability of any collision with any UAS is around 3.06×10<\/i>\u22125<\/i><\/sup> per 100,000 flight hours.<\/i>\u201d It seems that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is imposing new rules not for the benefit of the public, but for those companies that want to use drones to deliver packages to your home.<\/span><\/p>\n

A report by George Mason University<\/a> states that, \u201cOur analysis has been based on actual bird strikes, not near misses or simple sightings. We find in general that small UAS under 2kg pose a negligible risk to the safety of the national airspace. We estimate that 6.12×10<\/i>\u22126<\/i><\/sup> collisions will cause damage to an aircraft for every 100,000 hours of 2kg UAS flight time. Or to put it another way, one damaging incident will occur no more than every 1.87 million years of 2kg UAS flight time. We further estimate that 6.12×10<\/i>\u22128<\/i><\/sup> collisions that cause an injury or fatality to passengers on board an aircraft will occur every 100,000 hours of 2kg UAS flight time, or once every 187 million years of operation. This appears to be an acceptable risk to the airspace.<\/i>\u201d Since humans are smarter than birds, I think that we can assume that something is wrong with the FAA. What these new rules are doing seems to be clearing the way for commercial drones used to deliver items to the public.<\/span><\/p>\n

Earlier this year there was a panic about a drone being sited near Gatwick Airport<\/a>. Well guess what, there was no drone. From a site, Airprox Reality Check<\/a>, \u201cin all cases UKAB has no confirmation that a drone has flown close to an aircraft other than the report made by the pilot(s).<\/em><\/span>
\nSimilarly, other than from the report of the pilot(s), UKAB has no confirmation that a drone was involved.\u201d <\/em>So as you are reading this the idiots in the UK are making new draconian rules about where and how you can fly a drone in the UK. The reality is that there is no need for rule changes and this is the bureaucrats going crazy about something that never happened.<\/span><\/p>\n

I must say that while the FAA is making some rule changes that make sense, many others do not. The biggest change is that you can not fly above four hundred feet. There is absolutely no evidence that this will prevent an aircraft drone collisions at all! So I think that the FAA needs to calm down and rethink the rule changes they have made or are going to make.<\/span><\/p>\n

Unless the FAA is stopped, a great hobby is going to be ruined.<\/span><\/p>\n

That is my opinion- Jumpin Jersey Mike<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n