Steve, you nailed it.

Ushere - when you take a pop shot at the drone flying within 150m of "your airspace" and miss, the stray pellets or bullet may hit some poor unsuspecting soul walking down the street!

Anyhow, to protect your privacy you need one of these mounted on your garage roof just in case a terrorist quadcopter flys by......

Steve Said: [I]Have you seen the photo? Here's a challenge to those who haven't seen the photo. Find the nude. Then try really, really hard to not be offended. (Hint, she is inside the yellow rectangle).[/I]

As I said, it was a media circus. However, did you spot her? Hint, she is not inside the yellow rectangle, that is the property they were advertising, she is next door.

You would have no chance of recognising her at all, perhaps that was her motivation, she looked like a shapeless pink blob and was not impressed by the look :-)

Crash history? Just Google hexacopter and crash, and see how many come up. This particular one is a worry, this guy in Sweden flies up above the clouds and then when he tried to descend, he lost control and then lost the aircraft:

"The AMA is making a turn on this, just check out their site. I just re-joined them after a multi-year hiatus because they are the only lobbying voice I could find right now. "

I am not ready to publish this on the drone forums yet because I am providing the named organizations to check for factual errors. (It's been a week and two have replied, the AMA has not). Here's my draft summary of the representative organizations I am aware of:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1421565/copter/Who%20Represents%20Us.doc

" However, did you spot her? Hint, she is not inside the yellow rectangle, that is the property they were advertising, she is next door."
You are correct - and I knew what I was looking for. But I changed the hint in my post.

"Typing quadcopter crash into google gives me 38,600 results, on youtube you get 204 000 results"
"If they continue to be unregulated, more and more of those crashes will happen over populated areas and injure/kill people."

And how many of them hit people on the ground? Injuries? Deaths?

Out of 204,000 YouTube results involving crashed quadcopters, don't you think the fear-mongers would have found at least one involving serious injury? ONE? Where is the ACCIDENT history? Where's the blood that justifies all the hysteria to prohibit them? Or to regulate them?

"no worries, better than trap shooting with my 12 bore, and much more fun with a .22 with tele sights.

yes, i'm serious.

if you haven't asked permission to fly over my airspace (approx 150mt), then you're by law trespassing... higher than 150mt you'll need a permit from the faa or equivalent"



"I can't speak for Australian law, but that would get you in a heap of trouble in the USA.

United States v. Causby 328 U.S. 256 (1946) was a United States Supreme Court decision related to ownership of airspace above private property. It held that a landowner "owns at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land".

With the latest Pirker ruling by the NTSB, drones are aircraft so shooting at a drone will land you in jail just as quickly as shooting at a manned helicopter.
18 U.S. Code § 32 - Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities, states in part:
"(a) Whoever willfully—
(1) sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both."

In fact, just threatening to shoot down a drone could invite problems:
"(c) Whoever willfully imparts or conveys any threat to do an act which would violate any of paragraphs (1) through (6) of subsection (a) or any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of subsection (b) of this section, with an apparent determination and will to carry the threat into execution shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

>>>>But what's missing is the news stories of quads filming something falling in to mass crowds and the line of ambulances<<<

And people who don't want any regulations would like to see that situation rectified?

With the latest Pirker ruling by the NTSB, drones are aircraft

I am just wondering. If a drone is an aircraft, don't need a license to fly one?

Update this morning in the Wall Street Journal:

(1) FAA will issue regulations by year-end

(2) Daylight flights only

(3) Rules will be the same for all drones 55lbs and under (so little drones will be lumped with the giant commercial ones)

(4) Line of sight and 400 feet (I think)

(5) MUST HAVE A PILOT'S LICENSE



This is insanity, but then it's the US government. Most of us have given up on ANY common sense coming out of Washington these days, so this fits the pattern.

MUST HAVE A PILOT'S LICENSE

Where do you get one and how much would it cost and how often would it have to be refreshed?

Just curious as I'm in the UK so won't apply, but this could be the end of the fun for the US boys and girls...... depending on who gives a rat's a**e and doesn't just ignore it!

Perhaps someone should organize a "million drone fly-in" in Washington D.C. to protest the regulations.

To get a commercial license to fly a drone in the UK apparently costs about £3,000, because you have to take an official course and then pass an exam, and from then on keep records of all your flights. There is much concern in the UK over drone flying, but hopefully this will not lead to yet more restrictions.

More fuel for the fire...

http://www.flyingmag.com/news/faa-and-fbi-investigating-uav-sightings-near-jfk