jrm11
lvl.3
Flight distance : 224577 ft
United States
Offline
|
"I have looked at some of the zones, and they make no sense at all. There is a beaut one off the coast near Cairns that is in the middle of a patch of ocean, no idea at all what it is meant to be covering. But as has been mentioned earlier, if you report them, they will be reviewed, nothing is set in concrete yet. "
The areas off the coast (at least the ones I have seen in my area of the US) are restricted/controlled flight zones. Either military controlled or used for international flight routes. They are published on the aeronautical maps used by pilots. Most people would be surprised at how much airspace is "controlled." how this may or may not apply to small, low altitude drones is a separate issue.
You have made several comments stating these zones are government dictated and implied the initiative is being mandated by the government - specifically the US FAA. There are some issues with your assumption.
In the US, the FAA cannot unilaterally (and secretly) reach out to a specific company and dictate rules. There is a process. Supposedly, the FAA has been working on drone "rules" for some time now. Their heads are still up their collective backends.
The FAA cannot tell DJI what rules are for their products. They would have to make a policy in the proper way, release that policy to the public and they require ALL manufacturers to follow that policy in the same way.
Maybe the government in your country can force secret, back room mandates on foreign companies. It doesn't work like that in the US. Even if the FAA tried something like this, they have no power to enforce it upon a manufacturer. That would require a different process and a different agency to stop the import of the devices. The FAA has no power to regulate the importation or sale of these devices. They only claim the ability to regulate their USE (they will go after the operator, if a US citizen).
The restricted and authorization zones I have seen in the US certainly did NOT come from the government. If it did, there would be considerably more "red" on the map. This was obviously complied by a non-government source, using aeronautical charts and other (apparently inaccurate) data. The restrictions do not match up with any rules or laws currently in effect. Frankly, I am more inclined to believe the "some 16 year old" theory. There are too many problems with the data - some areas should not require authorization and other areas should be red.
As it stands, some flyers will not be able to fly in perfectly safe areas, and others are likely to get in big trouble flying in highly restricted areas which do not require any authorization.
Just to add.. the scary thing is what happens when the goernment DOES weigh in on these maps. They will all want to add plenty of "red" zones. It is highly likely that the map wil become more restrictive when the govenrment areas are added to the DJI areas.
|
|