And that problem is, government regulation.

I did a couple hours research on rules and regulation for UAs today, and I came away a little depressed.  Depressed, because I looked at the history and extrapolated into the future and saw us relegated to standing in our backyards taking videos of ourselves (an obvious exaggeration to make a point).  And the reason I see this bleak outlook is, we have no legislative representation.  More on that later.   

From what I can tell, not counting the FAA, most new drone laws and regulations are knee-jerk reactions to three things:
1. A drone operator exercising poor judgment and causing an incident.
2. A video posted that causes public alarm—whether the operator was following good protocol and was doing nothing illegal, or not.
3. What I call the "paranoid faction" hollering about the invasion of their privacy.  I'm sure you've seen the t-shirt attack video.
And seems, in each case, resulting laws are passed quickly and without input from those who have a good knowledge of what drones can and cannot do.  

Case in point: The National Park Service.  I'm willing to bet that the NPS ban on drones was a result of a handful of incidents.  Someone buzzed a herd of bison, someone annoyed a group of fellow nature lovers, someone crashed into one of our national treasures like one of Yellowstone's hotspings.  All very bad situations.  And while I do understand their concerns, a blanket ban on drones seems excessive and unfair.  No, applying for a permit, no following safe and prudent guidelines—no drones, period.  Dead are my dreams--and everyone else's--of sweeping aerials of massive herds of Bison.  Of stunning panoramas of Grand Prismatic Spring (if you've ever seen an aerial of it, you'll understand what I mean). And frankly, it makes me sad.   

Even my home state of Tennessee has passed a law banning drones from all public gatherings over 100 people.  And sadly, the law was a result of a Youtube video of a fireworks display where it was never shown that the operator was acting unsafely or in violation of any law.  Again, I'm sure the law was passed without equal input from an experienced drone community.

And, I'm sad to say, the issue effects both hobbyist and commercial users alike.  I see a huge commercial potential for drone operators.  But it will never be realized as long as most of us have to operate under the radar.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that most people making money with drones are doing so without FAA approval (even making money from Youtube videos falls under this), and that the FAA has been very stingy passing out permits.  The way I see it, this is restraint of trade.  They are crushing a huge area of potential economic growth.  I'll bet each of us can think of at least a dozen ways to make money with our birds.                     

So, this is the point where I'm supposed to tell everyone what needs to be done.  But, honestly, I really don't know (the passing of new legislation and lobbying is way outside my scope of experience).  But, I'm hoping someone out there does.  But even with my limited knowledge, there are two things I know for sure about lawmakers:
1. Money talks.
2. The guy with the biggest voice usually get his way.
Don't assume that lawmakers will act in fairness and consider the best interests of us drone enthusiasts if we don't have an effective voice.

That brings up another question.  Companies like DJI have a major stake in this, too.  Does the fact that they are not a US corporation tie their hands as far as new legislation?  If so, maybe they should consider another joint venture.  I'm assuming the US is there biggest potential market.        

There.  I got that off my chest and I feel much better.  

I was also curious, is this issue being discussed on the other forums?  

     

Love the title.   It's up to the drone manufacturers to lobby.  Unfortunately most of the laws will be on the local and state levels.   There's plenty of open country to fly drones.  Doesn't have to be in a natural parks

i was also shocked when they banned National Parks in USA i was planning on taking sweeping panoramas and videos there! :-( its always one idiot who spoils for everyone! But more to the point the UAV enthusiasts NEED TO ORGANIZE and lobby like any group of stakeholders! How?

Even Railways had stiff opposition from Farmers in early days one of the arguments i remember from history books , was the cows will stop milking from the sound of trains!!

Companies like DJI have a major stake in this, too.  Does the fact that they are not a US corporation tie their hands as far as new legislation?  If so, maybe they should consider another joint venture.

DJI and other manufacturers do not lobby directly.  They form nonprofit US-based coalitions and contribute to them.  The coalitions do the lobbying.

One of the best known lobbying groups for companies like DJI is this one: http://www.smalluavcoalition.org

PeteGould Posted at 2015-6-17 21:05
DJI and other manufacturers do not lobby directly.  They form nonprofit US-based coalitions and con ...

Thanks for the info, Pete.  That makes me feel a little better.  

arunmehta Posted at 2015-6-17 15:56
i was also shocked when they banned National Parks in USA i was planning on taking sweeping panoram ...

Excellant points.  

PeteGould Posted at 2015-6-17 21:05
DJI and other manufacturers do not lobby directly.  They form nonprofit US-based coalitions and con ...

That's a pretty comprehensive list on their website.  I guess it wouldn't hurt for us end-users to have some input, too.  

Dont be so glum...Drones are legal both commercially and for private use in Canada...We are also restricted from Federal Parks as well as Provincial Parks...UNLESS you apply for a document called an SFOC and get Transport Canada okay .Your equivalent of the FAA...Lots of bureaucracy  but it can and is being done.  Some say we are about 10 years ahead of the FAA in Canada and what you will probably end up with is something like what we have.  Countries like Australia the EU and Canada are trying to harmonize laws regarding UAVs. I have applied to the Alberta Parks Dept for a permit in our parks and have been denied but not in writing.They are waiting till the Provincial Govt gives them some direction on the issue.  It will take time and patience so sit down on a nice summer day with a glass of good scotch and a nice cigar and wait...

I can say I have the same concerns with where things are going. The main point is that, the laws and regulations to date have to cover basically the whole public. Products like the DJI series and 3DR series are only now starting to become popular on top of the lower end quadcopters. With their popularity, it is attracting more and more people who have no right to fly, to go out and do so without any sort of training or practice. I can say, this will only get worse. I think that there are plenty of us on the forums that have places on our list to fly over but cant due to regulations passed but all in all its a good thing for now. Too many people getting these and treating them like toys without giving them their proper respect. Not to mention I wouldn't trust a drone flying over my head at a gathering of less than 100 people either.

I will also say that anyone looking to build this into a business will have to be extremely patient. It will most likely be a long road. All you can do is fly safe, practice often and log every flight in a hard copy for when certification comes into play. Oh yeah and have fun flying in the places that aren't off limits.

Everybody has the right to fly.   We all start some place.   I started with helis inside my home.  Little ones.  Graduated to fixed pitch.  Then to FBL.  Then to a blade nano.  Then to a phantom 3.  Then to an inspire.   I've logged countless hours on a flight sim.   People have the right to fly.  But should do so in an area safe for crashing.   And have a product they can learn from and rebuild themselves or take it to someone local to fix it.   That my view.   If everyone went out with the philosophy that they would fly in an area safe to crash, their would be far less problems.    And also look at it like driving a car.   Learn the vehicle.   Take a class.   Drive in a parking lot....small steps before hitting the freeway

We have just adopted an excellent piece of legislation in Nevada AB 239. All the players from industry, user groups, law enforcement, ACLU all came together for what just might be the model for many other states. Yes the knee jerk reaction of the NPS has been concerning since we all know they are addressing this at a snails pace!  My thoughts, yell like hell at your federal delegation to move the NPS off the dime as soon they will be out of the entire issue! Just my take from Nevada

River 1 Posted at 2015-6-19 11:56
We have just adopted an excellent piece of legislation in Nevada AB 239. All the players from indust ...

I just read through the Nevada bill.

With all due respect: it is NOT an excellent piece of legislation.

First and foremost, the only thing a state can regulate is where an aircraft can take off and land.  Everything that happens while it is in the air is within the purview of the FAA.  So right off the bat, everything in the bill that refers to FLYING OVER the state is, and should be, void on its face.  A longstanding tenet of the law of the skies is that there should be one uniform set of aerial regulations that pilots learn ONCE and may then fly throughout the nation.  A patchwork of different laws, where (for instance) an in-demand flight crew that travels a lot has to learn 50 different sets of regulations, must be avoided.

This is not to say that state laws that are violated incidental to the operation of an aircraft should be void.  If you use an aircraft to steal you are guilty of larceny.  If you use it to murder you are guilty of murder.  But in terms of who may fly, and when, and where, and how - that's under the FAA, not state government.

That aside, the Nevada statute makes it a misdemeanor to use a UAS to create a photograph or other recording of a person without their consent.  It says nothing about how large or detailed a photograph or recording, merely a photograph or recording.  If you're shooting a cityscape and there are faces in any of the windows you have committed a crime based on how this statute is written.  If you fly up the coast and get shots of bathers or surfers you may be guilty of multiple counts.  It's then up to law enforcement and the court system to decide whether or not to prosecute.

The states really need to keep out of this or they're going to make an even bigger mess than the FAA.

Using piloted aircraft is big business.  From the pilots, to aircraft maintenance to fuel providers to rental space providers for the aircraft themselves.  People make a lot of money professionally using actual piloted aircraft doing what most of us do as a hobby, from the ground with little expense.  Don't think that those types aren't fighting tooth and nail to keep you out of the market simply because what they are doing can be done faster and cheaper by us.  

AegisFC Posted at 2015-6-19 23:11
Using piloted aircraft is big business.  From the pilots, to aircraft maintenance to fuel providers  ...

Agreed.
Yes, being a retired pilot this is very true and the FAA will be swayed by the aviation industry. It important for all of to comment to the FAA during the proposal of UAV rule (guideline) changes. The larger the voice the better chances we have to keep our right to fly.
Unfortunately, with the ease of use and dumbing down the skill needed to fly drones, we will experience Dumb A"ss out there ruining it for everyone.  Now 3DR is selling the new Solo at BestBuy, although this is pretty cool, it is not a laptop. I can only see the matter getting worse before getting better.

Rich