http://www.suasnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/FAA-Law-Enforcement-Guidelines.pdf Just got an email with this from the gentlemen doing my section 333 exemption. It gives local Law enforcment the ability to shut down SUAS operations. Pass it around.
Ugh... that really sucks. Seems Canada is going in the opposite direction - we went from requiring an SFOC for each flight to basically self-regulating for sub-25KG drones as long as they meet a series of requirements.
Ryan this is a 'guidance' document and doesn't give local law enforcement any more authority than what they have today. And notice that they discuss the difference between criminal and administrative law.
Right, But its super easy to use this as an excuse to enforce. Passed it to a friend who is a local LEO last night as well and his comments were "I would just say your are endangering the public" situation does not matter and shut it down. He and the rest of our local force understands how they are tools for good, but that is not ALL LEA. I feel it is scare tactics on the FAA's part.
Perhaps a larger issue is whether law enforcement officers will know how to deal with a pilot and a copter that's still flying. Read this for an example of exactly what not to do: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/31/drone-photojournalist-arrested-gatwick-aiport-near The general words I have received thus far from the UK suggest that there is pretty wide agreement that this was probably the most dangerous approach that the law enforcement officers could have used. It's hard not to be judgmental and not use words like "stupid." There is another story at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/31/photojournalist-police-arrest-drone-complaints Given the FAA is delegating enforcement and evidence gathering, I wonder who will guide the law enforcement in the actual process of enforcement? Andy.
The situation in the UK is a mess=/. The attitude he supposedly had of "I can't talk I am flying" is the wrong way to address that situation as a whole. How did he know there was not a critical issue in the air that required him to ground his craft? It is totally the wrong approach, but on both sides. He should have had a spotter or someone else to run interference with him.
All this reminds us of the value of befriending local authorities. In my experience they can be strong allies, and are generally "on our side". Of course, that can change quickly if the citizenry turn against you, but they can be addressed in positive ways, too. We're all goodwill ambassadors, and should work hard to do a good job at that. And that includes encouraging some folks to keep to the deserts and forests far away from people (and you know who they are...Trappy).
Hey, Ryan: Got some questions for you -- can you email me at ajohnsonlaird AT me DOT com, please? Thanks Andy.
Here in Virginia beach/Hampton roads area I've had several officers stop and watch me fly. A few have talked a few times while I was flying and I would answer simple questions, once they kept chatting or asked more in depth I politly said I need to land to talk more. They understood and allowed me to land. I explained more about the bird, talk about what I was doing, and showed a few clips of what I had just shot. I have never had someone "hassle" me out here and all has been very positive interactions. Like Steve said befriend them will be our biggest help in the coming months.
Situation in UK is pretty good at the moment. The incident above can safely be called an exception and not the norm. Both police and the pilot in the above incident were not acting reasonably. On the whole the police in UK are pretty on side especially if you forewarn them of a commercial flight. With that said, the police in UK appear to be waking up to drones and on the whole seem to be taking pretty sensible approaches to it. With the industry being in its infancy there will always be muppets out there. The policeman in the above incident was probably acting more out of a lack of knowledge than being a difficult plod but it is apparently being used as a good 'training' incident by other forces on how not to act.
'ello, 'elllo, 'ello.....nah then, wot we got going on 'ere, my lad.....we flying one of them funny droney things, eh?
My eyes have definitely gone cross-eyed in reading all of the FAA guidelines. Does anyone know if a single pilots license can/will act as an umbrella for operators in a company or is the FAA stating that each operator hold a separate pilots license?
Each PIC will need: 1. A private pilots license. The FAA have not stated whether it needs to be for a helicopter, fixed wing, glider, balloon, or light sport aircraft, however. So will probably find the glider license easier/cheaper to get. 2. A Class III airman's medical. 3. And you will need to be current in the aircraft for which you hold the pilots license -- that is you have to be legal to fly *that* aircraft -- and stay legal with flight reviews (used to be called biennial flight reviews). Then you can fly an sUA under a Section 333 Exemption grant. Andy.