Drones Vs. full scale airplanes - Page 2 - WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight

General Electric Discussions Talk about topics related to e-powered RC flying

Drones Vs. full scale airplanes

Old 11-30-2014, 10:55 PM
  #26  
Turbojoe
Mountain Models Minion
 
Turbojoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 1,247
Default

Originally Posted by fhhuber View Post
Common sense is politically incorrect.
AND an oxymoron.....

Joe
Turbojoe is offline  
Old 12-01-2014, 01:39 AM
  #27  
xmech2k
Ya got any Beeman's?
 
xmech2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,099
Default

It just dawned on me. I wonder if UFO sightings are down the same number as drone sightings are up?
xmech2k is offline  
Old 12-01-2014, 02:02 AM
  #28  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

Originally Posted by maxflyer View Post
When anyone at the field brings out a big heli, I get into my truck and wait them out. Large, fast, unshielded, flying lawn mowers make me nervous. Call me cowardly.
Last year, I traveled to a very big fun fly in Wisconsin where they had a separate area for those Helis. These models ranged from medium size glow powered to 3000 Watt electric powered units.

Those pilots were flying them all over the area they were assigned, doing full speed travels away and toward them selves, stopping the model perhaps 30 feet in front of them.

IMHO, unsafe as hell.

Even worse, the only protective device was a simple rope stretched right behind the pilot. And, right behind that rope was a whole bunch of kids from toddler to teenagers.

Might be the same type of people flying those multi-rotors in unsafe areas???
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 12-01-2014, 02:32 AM
  #29  
fhhuber
Super Contributor
 
fhhuber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,786
Default

I got told I was insensitive for pointing out that a guy who managed to chop the top of his own head off with a high power heli had a lot of videos showing he commonly tried to see how close he could get to himself with the thing...

Sorry but occasionally Darwin wins.
fhhuber is offline  
Old 12-01-2014, 02:55 AM
  #30  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

I like the comparison between those heli's and rotary lawnmowers. Everyone knows rotary lawnmowers are dangerous if you're not careful. Same here.

The AMA rules do not allow intentional flying of any RC model over people. Those people flying those "Drones" in areas that would not be allowed in any AMA RC club are the ones causing 99.9% of the issues between these models and full scale aviation.

Some 30 years ago, a buddy and I were flying 10 foot wingspan sailplanes, about 5 miles from the local international Airport. We would fly at this field when the airlines were using the East - West runway. One day, while we were flying, the wind shifted, and the airlines shifted to the North - South runway, where their approach was about a mile from us.

My buddy and I hit the spoilers, and landed immediately. Sure enough, as we were getting our stuff in our vehicles, a little white van showed up. The guy was from the airport, and indicated the pilots saw our models.

The airport guy was satisfied that we were aware of the full scale airlines, and had landed immediately.

We never flew sailplanes there again.
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 12-01-2014, 05:34 AM
  #31  
abborgogna
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 247
Default

You are correct it was 25 per month not week. Sorry for the mistake, I had it right in the original statement and 25 per month is again what the FAA guy said this morning.
abborgogna is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 01:21 AM
  #32  
fhhuber
Super Contributor
 
fhhuber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,786
Default

Its not just in the USA...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPbcY3W0XtY
fhhuber is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 01:34 PM
  #33  
FlyWheel
Ochroma Pyramidale Tekton
 
FlyWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Blackstock, South Carolina
Posts: 3,029
Default

Since 99% of the "RC problem" is with amateur drone (multirotor and/or FPV) mis-use, then the answer is plain: Limit them to professional or non-profit organizations who must first apply and be approved for a licence to purchase and use them. If the user knows their units are registered and traceable back to them and they will be in unfathomable feces if they is caught I think it will signifigantly reduce these occurrences.

When was the last time you heard of any trouble from anyone floating their BoT around the sky? Tell the FCC to target the trouble makers and leave the rest of us law abiding citizens alone!

Last edited by FlyWheel; 07-29-2015 at 01:54 PM. Reason: grammer
FlyWheel is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 01:41 PM
  #34  
FlyWheel
Ochroma Pyramidale Tekton
 
FlyWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Blackstock, South Carolina
Posts: 3,029
Default

Originally Posted by kyleservicetech View Post
<Snip!>Some 30 years ago, a buddy and I were flying 10 foot wingspan sailplanes, about 5 miles from the local international Airport. We would fly at this field when the airlines were using the East - West runway. One day, while we were flying, the wind shifted, and the airlines shifted to the North - South runway, where their approach was about a mile from us.

My buddy and I hit the spoilers, and landed immediately. Sure enough, as we were getting our stuff in our vehicles, a little white van showed up. The guy was from the airport, and indicated the pilots saw our models.

The airport guy was satisfied that we were aware of the full scale airlines, and had landed immediately.

We never flew sailplanes there again.
Not condemning you, as you acted correctly by immediately downing your birds. But as you were within the 5 mile zone did you think to notify the airport that you intended to periodically fly your models in that area before you did? You didn't mention in your post if you had. Doing this would be especially important when flying large sailplanes which by their nature are flown much higher than other model aircraft and therefore more likely to stumble into an airliner's flightpath.
FlyWheel is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 06:07 PM
  #35  
theapplepi3.14
Totally Non-Newtonian
 
theapplepi3.14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: My House
Posts: 280
Default

Again, multi-rotors are not the problem. It is the onboard computer stabilization systems, and the cameras that present a problem. Requiring a license for either of those would do the trick. I have a nano qx which I fly around the house and stuff. I can fly it with ease when it is in stabilized mode, but I have only just recently gained the ability to control it with it in gyro-off mode. This is after many months of practice. I'm certain that these two things are the root of the problem.
theapplepi3.14 is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 07:44 PM
  #36  
fhhuber
Super Contributor
 
fhhuber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,786
Default

The root of the problem is the loose nuts behind the sticks.
fhhuber is offline  
Old 07-29-2015, 07:51 PM
  #37  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

Originally Posted by FlyWheel View Post
Not condemning you, as you acted correctly by immediately downing your birds. But as you were within the 5 mile zone did you think to notify the airport that you intended to periodically fly your models in that area before you did? You didn't mention in your post if you had. Doing this would be especially important when flying large sailplanes which by their nature are flown much higher than other model aircraft and therefore more likely to stumble into an airliner's flightpath.
Yeah, that was back in the mid 1980's long before what we have now with the drone issues.

The actual distance between the school grounds we flew on was 5.6 Miles from the local airport, just over the current 5 mile limit.

Around that same time frame, there was a very large cross country sailplane race South West of Chicago, where the flight path was 45 miles. These were giant scale models with wingspans of 14 feet or more. And, the people that organized the race had contacted the airports, closing the race course to general aviation. One full scale sailplane had wondered into our course. We found out from that pilot that our models were higher than he was, and his sailplane was at 6500 feet above ground. There was a very high risk of ever taking your eye off the model at that distance. The odds of ever seeing the model again was not good.

Our team was one of the dozens of teams that completed the 45 miles over the giant rectangle route with the requirement of not landing anywhere on the course. And, yes, chase vehicles were required.
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 07-30-2015, 01:00 AM
  #38  
arizona98tj
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Bemidji, MN
Posts: 57
Default

Originally Posted by theapplepi3.14 View Post
Again, multi-rotors are not the problem. It is the onboard computer stabilization systems, and the cameras that present a problem. Requiring a license for either of those would do the trick. I have a nano qx which I fly around the house and stuff. I can fly it with ease when it is in stabilized mode, but I have only just recently gained the ability to control it with it in gyro-off mode. This is after many months of practice. I'm certain that these two things are the root of the problem.
I fly fixed wing airplanes and often times attach a camera to record the flight. It has helped me improve my take offs and landings quite a bit. I won't support having to obtain/pay for a license so I can use my GoPro or Mobius camera on my airplane. While I don't use one, airplanes use computer flight stabilization systems too.
arizona98tj is offline  
Old 07-30-2015, 01:55 PM
  #39  
theapplepi3.14
Totally Non-Newtonian
 
theapplepi3.14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: My House
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by fhhuber View Post
The root of the problem is the loose nuts behind the sticks.
We can't fix the people, only their incentives. And I love getting footage from a Mobius as well. I just feel that the hobby is more important than the cameras.
theapplepi3.14 is offline  
Old 07-30-2015, 06:03 PM
  #40  
xmech2k
Ya got any Beeman's?
 
xmech2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,099
Default

Originally Posted by theapplepi3.14 View Post
We can't fix the people, only their incentives. And I love getting footage from a Mobius as well. I just feel that the hobby is more important than the cameras.
You mean their intentions?

As far as the hobby being more important than the camera, I see it as the merging of 2 hobbies. RC flight and photography/videography. (And yes I use the term RC flight loosely here, as I'm sort of old school in the opinion that flight involves wings and control surfaces, not just props, gyros, and computers, but everything evolves.) The quads are only a means of getting a camera places you couldn't before unless you were rich. The miniaturization of cameras has also allowed them to be carried on our 'normal' rc aircraft, too. Then since there's all kinds and ages of people, you get a mix of everything in between, unfortunately including the careless ones. How to control them? That's going to be an interesting solution.
xmech2k is offline  
Old 07-30-2015, 06:14 PM
  #41  
pizzano
Behold The Renaissance
 
pizzano's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: So. Calif
Posts: 2,316
Default

Originally Posted by theapplepi3.14 View Post
We can't fix the people, only their incentives. And I love getting footage from a Mobius as well. I just feel that the hobby is more important than the cameras.
People can be fixed, several ways to provide that fix.....education, incarceration, (+) financial changes, religion, life changing experiences.

The intervention, access and cost reduction of technology has not always been the problem. Before multi-rotors, FPV, GPS, stability refinements became available to the masses, there were many guys flying RC well above the ceiling and radius limits set by AMA, FAA and local authorities. Just ask a few "old timers" what the 3meter and over thermo fliers have been doing for years.

The advent of and the ability to publically display and provide information exposure through the means of electronic media has increased the awareness and ability to project to the masses, the "look at me" attitude many in society today seem to desire and need......it may have well been a desire and need for those who seek that type of attention prior to, however, access and distribution was not available to everyone prior to the late 80's.

To just blow the current actions off by expressing the attitude "you can't fix stupid"......is as "stupid" as thinking it can't be fixed.......everything takes time to change........time is the only true constant in the equation.

If the society "gets fed-up enough" and or there becomes an incident that is severe enough to require change (like how stops signs are established at various locations, in this country, it takes a series of at least three serious events to occur or just one fatality, (unfortunate but true) before one is installed.......then we will see regulations imposed and enforced on the infractions..........until then, it will take more than just the RC culture to stand up and shout........!
pizzano is offline  
Old 07-30-2015, 09:22 PM
  #42  
tr4252
Member
 
tr4252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 350
Default

I agree with you, pizzano, but worry about the current situation, which would be hard to change in time for the (responsible) rest of us to remain as free as we've been so far.

The technological genie is out of the bottle; no changing that. What remains is our depending on "drone" enthusiasts to start behaving themselves. I fear that will not happen unless the authorities step in, and that particular net will probably fall on us all, to some degree.

For every hogwit that tries for his 15 minutes of infamy, there are probably hundreds of other irresponsible dummies who will step in after he is dealt with (not if but when).

Unless people in general become more cooperative, accountable, and empowered, and I'm not seeing that happening, we're in for it. Hello 1984.

Tom
tr4252 is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 12:23 AM
  #43  
Bald Paul
Member
 
Bald Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Boiling Springs, SC
Posts: 547
Default

New Zealand has laws regarding ALL R/C aircraft flying that are taking effect on August 1st

http://mac-ops.co.nz/new-zealand-drone-laws/

One of the things on the prohibited list is the POV aircraft. If you can't see it from your flying position, you shouldn't be flying there.

From what I've read on some other forums, there are some pretty hefty fines associated with these laws.
Bald Paul is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 03:17 AM
  #44  
theapplepi3.14
Totally Non-Newtonian
 
theapplepi3.14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: My House
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by pizzano View Post
People can be fixed, several ways to provide that fix.....education, incarceration, (+) financial changes, religion, life changing experiences.

The intervention, access and cost reduction of technology has not always been the problem. Before multi-rotors, FPV, GPS, stability refinements became available to the masses, there were many guys flying RC well above the ceiling and radius limits set by AMA, FAA and local authorities. Just ask a few "old timers" what the 3meter and over thermo fliers have been doing for years.

The advent of and the ability to publically display and provide information exposure through the means of electronic media has increased the awareness and ability to project to the masses, the "look at me" attitude many in society today seem to desire and need......it may have well been a desire and need for those who seek that type of attention prior to, however, access and distribution was not available to everyone prior to the late 80's.

To just blow the current actions off by expressing the attitude "you can't fix stupid"......is as "stupid" as thinking it can't be fixed.......everything takes time to change........time is the only true constant in the equation.

If the society "gets fed-up enough" and or there becomes an incident that is severe enough to require change (like how stops signs are established at various locations, in this country, it takes a series of at least three serious events to occur or just one fatality, (unfortunate but true) before one is installed.......then we will see regulations imposed and enforced on the infractions..........until then, it will take more than just the RC culture to stand up and shout........!
You can fix people, but can never fix everyone, and the people that are hard to fix are the people that cause the problem in the first place! Do you think it would be better if the faa required all individuals to join the AMA, or a local club, or take a short flight course first before flying? They already suggest it. In addition, the faa might decide that, "For example, using a UAS to take photos for your personal use is recreational; using the same device to take photographs or videos for compensation or sale to another individual would be considered a non-recreational operation," can mean they can stop you from posting videos of your flight because it is now being used for a public purpose. I hope not.

Actually, the kid with the gun-quad used the quad for a non-hobby use! He was using it to protest a law! therefore his actions were illegal! MOOOHAHAHAHA!
theapplepi3.14 is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 06:02 AM
  #45  
pizzano
Behold The Renaissance
 
pizzano's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: So. Calif
Posts: 2,316
Default

Originally Posted by theapplepi3.14 View Post
You can fix people, but can never fix everyone, and the people that are hard to fix are the people that cause the problem in the first place! Do you think it would be better if the faa required all individuals to join the AMA, or a local club, or take a short flight course first before flying? They already suggest it. In addition, the faa might decide that, "For example, using a UAS to take photos for your personal use is recreational; using the same device to take photographs or videos for compensation or sale to another individual would be considered a non-recreational operation," can mean they can stop you from posting videos of your flight because it is now being used for a public purpose. I hope not.

Actually, the kid with the gun-quad used the quad for a non-hobby use! He was using it to protest a law! therefore his actions were illegal! MOOOHAHAHAHA!
Continue on your quest for knowledge, truth and understanding Grasshopper..........you have much to learn and experience.....Time always provides for change........change is inevitable. Both are constants in all facets of life.......

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/man-sho...000032027.html
pizzano is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 08:30 AM
  #46  
fhhuber
Super Contributor
 
fhhuber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,786
Default

Originally Posted by pizzano View Post
Continue on your quest for knowledge, truth and understanding Grasshopper..........you have much to learn and experience.....Time always provides for change........change is inevitable. Both are constants in all facets of life.......

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/man-sho...000032027.html

Hope the guy who shot down the quad wins his suit vs the thing's owner.
fhhuber is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 01:13 PM
  #47  
theapplepi3.14
Totally Non-Newtonian
 
theapplepi3.14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: My House
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by fhhuber View Post
Hope the guy who shot down the quad wins his suit vs the thing's owner.
Yah. What jerks! "Um, sir? Did you know that the quad we were using to spy on your daughters is worth $1,800? When you shot it down we felt like our precious money had been violated. Please pay us back or we will sue for peeping tom endangerment."


and lol. I have never been called a grasshopper before! I guess it no longer applies in a literal sense after the age of 1 year because that is how long grass hoppers live.

Changes and time are constant in in all facets of life?! Does that mean the first derivative is equivalent for all facets of life, or that the second derivative is a constant, or that the first derivative is actually a constant? What if you were refering to time?! Ag! by the same process as before, we can see that you could have said time does not hold meaning! Oh no!
theapplepi3.14 is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 01:39 PM
  #48  
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 6,120
Default

Originally Posted by Turner View Post
I hear you. It is not cowardly at all. I basically do the same thing. Those things have killed numerous people including the pilots flying them.
Lets please not start dragging helis into the same conversation as drones flying over airports etc. Large helis are potentially dangerous, as are large fixed wing planes. People have unfortunately been killed and injured by both, probably statistically more by fixed wing if you really want to compare.

We certainly aren't going to be able to put up much of an argument against these idiots who overfly airports and disregard all common sense rules by infighting amongst ourselves about what type of RC model is 'safe' and what isnt. They are all potentially dangerous if not used responsibly, 'drones' are no different. It's not the type of model that's the problem, it's the type of owner.
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 02:55 PM
  #49  
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 6,120
Default

Originally Posted by theapplepi3.14 View Post
It is the onboard computer stabilization systems, and the cameras that present a problem. Requiring a license for either of those would do the trick. I have a nano qx
Licensing (the type you pay for but don't need to qualify for) is totally impractical and wouldn't even help anyway. The problem we have is not the people who obey the law but the ones who don't. So those same people who disregard laws and common sense and fly over airports aren't going to pay a licence, and in any case how would paying a licence make them safer?

If you are talking about compulsory training and tests to get a license in the same way you have to to get a private pilot licence that's a pretty effective sure fire way of ending the RC hobby as we know it. And make no mistake, the law would see all RC aircraft as 'drones' not just multirotors. FWIW a guy i fly with took a commercial drone test last week, it cost the company he works for 5000 (about $7500).. and he failed and will have to take it again.

The hobby would be wiped out overnight. So be very careful what you wish for.
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
Old 07-31-2015, 05:45 PM
  #50  
pizzano
Behold The Renaissance
 
pizzano's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: So. Calif
Posts: 2,316
Default

"FWIW a guy i fly with took a commercial drone test last week, it cost the company he works for 5000 (about $7500).. and he failed and will have to take it again."

Straight out of the FAA Info Guide published in 2014.......:

"In the United States, the United States Navy and shortly after the Federal Aviation Administration have adopted the name unmanned aircraft (UA) to describe aircraft systems without a flight crew on board. More common names includeUAV, drone,remotely piloted vehicle (RPV), remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), remotely operated aircraft (ROA).

These “limited-size” (as defined by the FAI) unmanned aircraft flown in the USA’s National Airspace System, flown solely for recreation and sport purposes such as models, are generally flown under the voluntary safety standards of the Academy of Model Aeronautics, the United States’ national aeromodeling organization. To operate a UA for non-recreational purposes in the United States, users must obtain a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate in national airspace. At the moment, COAs require a public entity as a sponsor. For example, when BP needed to observe oil spills, they operated the Aeryon Scout UAVs under a COA granted to the University of Alaska Fairbanks.COAs have been granted for both land and shipborne operations."

"As of March 23, 2015, the FAA will automatically grant "blanket" COA's for flights at or below 200 feet to any UAS operator with a Section 333 exemption, provided the aircraft weighs less than 55 pounds, operations are conducted during daytime Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions and within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilots, and stay certain distances away from airports or heliports."

There is a licensed and FAA-FAI approved school in Arizona, US, that charges less than $4,000.00 for a commercial COA license........and the price at other academies are about the same price nationwide, unless you intend to work for a public (government) agency like the Border Patrol, Home Land Security, FBI or your local Sherriff's Department, State Troopers or Highway Patrol...........They have their own schools one must attend........I have this information "first hand" since I looked into it and have two flying buddies who are licensed "commercial" UAS pilots.
pizzano is offline  

Quick Reply: Drones Vs. full scale airplanes


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.15927 seconds with 14 queries