On Feb 24, 5:13 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
When a human pilot is on board, there is a strong incentive for not
crashing. Unless the pilot is suicidal, we can expect the pilot to do
everything humanly possible to avoid crashing. That same incentive
does not exist in UAVs. The worst thing that can happen to a UAV crash
pilot is that he may lose his job, not his life. No matter how
conscientious the UAV pilot may be, there is a huge difference between
paying for your mistakes with your life vs facing disciplinary action.

There are a class of unmanned operations covered by Part 101, "MOORED
BALLOONS, KITES, UNMANNED ROCKETS AND UNMANNED FREE BALLOONS" wherein it
has always been the case that the instinct for self-preservation was never
a motivation for safe operation of those craft. Yet none of them are
outright banned so I don't see why Part 101 can't be modified to include
UAVs.

You are correct that none of them are banned, but I believe the items
described in Part 101 requires notification to the FAA, and a NOTAM
will be issued. If the UAV is going to operate with a NOTAM advisory,
then I have no problem with their operation. Somehow I suspect that
will not be the case because most UAVs are for surveillance and covert
operations.