If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbc...702040341/1006
Police drone plan draws fire Palm Bay wants to fly device; FAA, pilot group raise red flags BY J.D. GALLOP PALM BAY - -- Police Chief William Berger vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions from the Federal Aviation Administration and a national pilots' association that his department must first get federal approval before doing so. Berger said the $30,000, 8-pound aircraft -- which he likens to a model plane and would use to aid police on the ground -- does not fall under FAA regulations. And he said he is prepared to seek assistance from Brevard County's congressional representatives, if necessary. .... FAA officials were steadfast in saying Palm Bay's unmanned vehicle should be grounded until further notice from the federal agency. "We control the airspace, and we control who can fly what, where," said Les Dorr, a spokesman for the federal agency. "Our primary concern is the safety of the airways. If (the police department) starts using the unmanned vehicle then they run the risk of being told 'no, they can't do it.' " The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department also ran afoul of FAA rules after attempting to put its own unmanned vehicle into service last year. Their unmanned vehicle remains grounded. But CyberDefense Systems, a St. Petersburg-based company that markets the Cyberbug said the aircraft -- like a model plane -- flies below 400 feet and would not interfere with flight patterns. Model planes -- like those used by hobbyists -- have flight and range restrictions that typically don't interfere with air traffic, company and FAA officials said. Bill Edelstein, a licensed helicopter pilot and Melbourne Beach resident, said he was concerned about the low-flying aircraft's interaction with helicopters. http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/...fm?newsId=6287 The FAA's Role: Safety First The FAA's main concern about UAV operations in civil airspace is safety. It is critical that these vehicles don't come too close to aircraft carrying people or compromise the safety of anyone on the ground. When the military or a government agency wants to fly a UAV in civil airspace, the FAA examines the request and issues a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA), generally based on the following principles: The COA authorizes an operator to use defined airspace for a specified time (up to one year, in some cases) and includes special provisions unique to each operation. For instance, a COA may include a requirement to operate only under Visual Flight Rules (VFR). Most, if not all, COAs require coordination with an appropriate air traffic control facility and require the UAV to have a transponder able to operate in standard air traffic control mode with automatic altitude reporting. To make sure the UAV will not interfere with other aircraft, a ground observer or an accompanying "chase" aircraft must maintain visual contact with the UAV. http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n172/a08.html Video: http://www.news14charlotte.com/conte...sp?ArID=114414 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
Larry Dighera writes:
PALM BAY - -- Police Chief William Berger vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions from the Federal Aviation Administration and a national pilots' association that his department must first get federal approval before doing so. Berger said the $30,000, 8-pound aircraft -- which he likens to a model plane and would use to aid police on the ground -- does not fall under FAA regulations. And he said he is prepared to seek assistance from Brevard County's congressional representatives, if necessary. Is Chief Berger willing to assume unlimited liability for the aircraft? No? I thought so. I presume that he isn't a pilot. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despitecontentions
Mxsmanic wrote:
.. Is Chief Berger willing to assume unlimited liability for the aircraft? No? I thought so. I presume that he isn't a pilot. More so than you. At least when he sits in front of a computer, something flies. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
Ron Natalie writes:
More so than you. At least when he sits in front of a computer, something flies. In that case, it's hard to understand why he would be foolish enough to want to use a UAV under these circumstances. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despitecontentions
Richard Riley wrote: As long as they maintain visual contact with it at all times and the pilot is a member of AMA, they should be fine. If not - good luck. FAA will stomp on them. Not an FAA issue. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
Larry Dighera wrote:
[ Quoting from an article by J. D. Gallop: ] "We control the airspace, and we control who can fly what, where," said Les Dorr, a spokesman for the federal agency. Um, that statement makes a seriously incorrect claim by the FAA. Flights routinely enter the airspace at arbitrary times and relatively arbitrary places without any specific permission requested from the FAA for those flights. I believe this is what is known as "regulatory overreach." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
On Feb 12, 11:20 am, Jim Logajan wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote: [ Quoting from an article by J. D. Gallop: ] "We control the airspace, and we control who can fly what, where," said Les Dorr, a spokesman for the federal agency. Um, that statement makes a seriously incorrect claim by the FAA. Flights routinely enter the airspace at arbitrary times and relatively arbitrary places without any specific permission requested from the FAA for those flights. I believe this is what is known as "regulatory overreach." The average cycle for an ag pilot is around 8 minutes. Are Les Dorr and his workmates aware of all those movements they don't boss ? Or microlights? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
"Richard Riley" wrote in message ... : On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:12:26 GMT, Larry Dighera : wrote: : : : : As long as they maintain visual contact with it at all times and the : pilot is a member of AMA, they should be fine. : : If not - good luck. FAA will stomp on them. AMA membership is NOT required to fly an RC aircraft, most folks join so they comply with a club's requirements and for the AMA provided insurance coverage... FAA can try to stomp, but this 'small' aircraft will be flying ~400' high and will be within sight of the operator, not real different from a plain ol' RC airplane. Sounds like it would be an interesting test case at least. I say go for it; we need better surveillance type police work these days, not the blanket searches like in front of 'airline security' or the so-called sobriety check points... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:28:48 -0800, Richard Riley
wrote in : My company has many people working full time on COA's to allow our various unmanned aircraft to fly outside the limits of the AMA exemption. http://www.uavm.com/uavregulatory/ce...orization.html On this page: http://www.uavm.com/uavregulatory/ai...ification.html This link is broken: http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert...iment/uas_faq/ Here is the updated link: http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert...s/uas/uas_faq/ What does a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category allow me to do? The operating limitations issued with this type of certificate allow a UA to be operated only within the line of sight of an observer, during daylight hours and when other aircraft are not in the vicinity. According to this General Atomics blurb: http://www.ga-asi.com/news.php?subac..._from=&ucat=1& Today Altair routinely operates in NAS under a national Certificate of Authorization (COA) which allows it to fly in restricted airspace during takeoff and landing before quickly ascending to altitudes high above commercial air traffic. Under its new one-year experimental certificate, Altair will not only be able to fly at higher altitudes, but also expands its geographic operations. Similar to a COA, an UAS experimental certificate contains certain conditions that must be met to ensure a level of safety equivalent to manned aircraft operations in the NAS. This includes “good weather” conditions and a requirement for a pilot and observer, both of whom may either be on the ground or in an accompanying “chase” plane. While COAs are issued to the customer (e.g. NASA, NOAA), the experimental certificate has been issued directly to GA-ASI, providing it with the opportunity to use Altair for company purposes such as experimental flight testing, marketing demonstrations and crew training. Operation of their Altair must: "ensure a level of safety equivalent to manned aircraft operations in the NAS." So I suppose that means, that at altitude it must be accompanied by a manned chase plane, and that ensures that the UAV operates with the equivalent margin of safely as a "flight of two." Is that correct? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Police Chief vows to deploy an unmanned aerial vehicle despite contentions
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:48:11 GMT, "Blueskies"
wrote: As long as they maintain visual contact with it at all times and the pilot is a member of AMA, they should be fine. If not - good luck. FAA will stomp on them. AMA membership is NOT required to fly an RC aircraft, most folks join so they comply with a club's requirements and for the AMA provided insurance coverage... FAA can try to stomp, but this 'small' aircraft will be flying ~400' high and will be within sight of the operator, not real different from a plain ol' RC airplane. Sounds like it would be an interesting test case at least. When you consider that 12-year-old kids can go to Wal-Mart and buy an electric RC plane...complete with camera...for $150, this is going to be an interesting problem to try and squash. Here's a couple I took last Friday, flying one of those. http://www.wanttaja.com/rcpix.jpg http://www.wanttaja.com/rcpix2.jpg Plane supposedly can go to 1,000 feet, and fly for ten minutes on a NiMH battery pack (the camera is powered by two "button" cells). I suppose for another $29,850, the cops'll have one that'll fly longer and have better resolution. Ron "My wife buys me neat toys for Christmas" Wanttaja |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CVN 76 to deploy to WESTPAC soon | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 11 | February 4th 07 01:39 PM |
X-45A unmanned combat air vehicle 060922-F-1234P-103.jpg | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 0 | November 19th 06 09:27 PM |
How do you deploy the Quad Tiltrotor? | Henry J Cobb | Naval Aviation | 2 | September 17th 06 06:39 PM |
Aerial Photographs/Aerial Patrols | [email protected] | Piloting | 10 | December 15th 04 01:43 PM |