OT: The Mean Old FAA

[Bullwinkle58]

Story in the local fishwrap today that the FAA has halted, before it began, a new venture involving drones. Specifically drones flying 12-packs of beer to GPS coordinates on frozen Minnesota lakes to deliver suds to ice fishing houses. Said fisherman having put in the order by cell and provided the coordinates. The idea man figured with no trees or buildings lake delivery would be pretty easy. But not yet sez the gov.

An idea whose time has come IMO.[:)]

Edit: the story has a photo of the prototype. There apparently is a viral video which keyed the feds into the scheme. This was a legit business, not some whacko.

http://www.startribune.com/local/242852891.html

[btd64]

Think about it. On the beach or in the backyard and you run out of beer. who you gonna call.[:D][:D][:D]
Cheers

[DaveConn]

You know you have spent too much time with WITP AE when you see "FAA" in the title of the post, and you think "Fleet Air Arm."

[Schanilec]

I thought is was a fantastic idea that would catch on real quick. Amazon was going to start doing drone deliveries last Christmas. I think that also got shot down. Hey, a pun that fits.[:)]

[obvert]

It's going to be really odd if drone deliveries really start happening. I've heard Amazon and others are interested, but would it work? I see some problems right away.

What happens when the drones get highjacked, stolen or destroyed? Who pays for one. Second, it doesn't take too much creativity to think of some pretty nasty uses for pinpoint flying delivery systems that are legal in major cities. [X(]

Are power lines on the GPS map in the drones? How about trees? Can they fly in heavy winds? Hail?

On top of that, without a human level of interaction, what kind of item would you feel comfortable being delivered by a drone? What if it gets the coordinates wrong by 20 feet and the next ice hut over on the lake gets your beer? [:D]

[reg113]

One word - shotguns

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: obvert

It's going to be really odd if drone deliveries really start happening. I've heard Amazon and others are interested, but would it work? I see some problems right away.

What happens when the drones get highjacked, stolen or destroyed? Who pays for one. Second, it doesn't take too much creativity to think of some pretty nasty uses for pinpoint flying delivery systems that are legal in major cities. [X(]

Are power lines on the GPS map in the drones? How about trees? Can they fly in heavy winds? Hail?

On top of that, without a human level of interaction, what kind of item would you feel comfortable being delivered by a drone? What if it gets the coordinates wrong by 20 feet and the next ice hut over on the lake gets your beer? [:D]

Ice fishermen take care of each other. [:)]

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: DaveConn

You know you have spent too much time with WITP AE when you see "FAA" in the title of the post, and you think "Fleet Air Arm."

Seconded! [:D]

[catwhoorg]

I think currently the FFA has blanket rules against the commercial use (ANY commercial use) of drones.

Its something that needs to be addressed.


A small drone was used at the Triathlon I did for some background and swim coverage.

(probably this is actually illegal)

I'm in the green swim cap wave in a bright orange shirt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbE0W3ba ... e=youtu.be

[obvert]

Some more info.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRrxOfgwFyw

and this one of a drone watching protesters and police!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tihH_LuJkLw

[geofflambert]

What if the drone is using Apple Maps? Also, how does a drone card a customer?

[wdolson]

I can see why the FAA squashed this one. Carding customers is one problem with delivering alcohol. Plus each state has their own laws about alcohol delivery. For alcohol shipped via UPS or FedEx, someone over 21 has to sign for it in person in most states. Some states have limits on how much can be delivered in a day and others prohibit it completely.

There are many problems with delivery drones that still need to be worked out, both legal and technological. I saw the stories on the Amazon drone and from what I could tell, it looked like Amazon was just introducing it as a proof of concept that was still years from actuality.

The FAA is hyper about air safety. I worked at Boeing in the 777 program. The FAA spitballs scenarios at the company and the engineers have to come up with the probability that it will or won't happen and then the FAA decides if the risk is worth it. A friend was working on the engines for the 777. One of the scenarios thrown at them was you have a fan burst on one side, a blade from the fan burst goes through the fuselage and takes out the engine on the other side. I don't think there has been a fan burst in the history of jet aviation that took out another engine (though a fan burst did take out the hydraulics to the tail on a DC-10).

The Boeing engineers couldn't prove that this scenario was low enough probability so the 777 had to have armor installed inside the nacelles to prevent this from happening.

With drones flying over cities, I could see many potential problems. What if they drop a package on someone? A case of beer falling from a couple hundred feet could kill someone. What if hackers hijack a drone? A hijacked drone could be flown into the engine of a jet liner taking off, or into a life flight helicopter's rotors, or possibly other things that could cause risk to life and limb of others. The drones have many whirring blades. How is the public protected from injury from these?

I'm sure there are many scenarios I haven't thought of.

The flying car actually exists in prototype form, but getting it certified by the FAA is a nightmare that has dragged on for almost two decades.

Bill

[jcjordan]

ORIGINAL: reg113

One word - shotguns

A lot of duck hunting goes on up there

[jcjordan]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I can see why the FAA squashed this one. Carding customers is one problem with delivering alcohol. Plus each state has their own laws about alcohol delivery. For alcohol shipped via UPS or FedEx, someone over 21 has to sign for it in person in most states. Some states have limits on how much can be delivered in a day and others prohibit it completely.

There are many problems with delivery drones that still need to be worked out, both legal and technological. I saw the stories on the Amazon drone and from what I could tell, it looked like Amazon was just introducing it as a proof of concept that was still years from actuality.

The FAA is hyper about air safety. I worked at Boeing in the 777 program. The FAA spitballs scenarios at the company and the engineers have to come up with the probability that it will or won't happen and then the FAA decides if the risk is worth it. A friend was working on the engines for the 777. One of the scenarios thrown at them was you have a fan burst on one side, a blade from the fan burst goes through the fuselage and takes out the engine on the other side. I don't think there has been a fan burst in the history of jet aviation that took out another engine (though a fan burst did take out the hydraulics to the tail on a DC-10).

The Boeing engineers couldn't prove that this scenario was low enough probability so the 777 had to have armor installed inside the nacelles to prevent this from happening.

With drones flying over cities, I could see many potential problems. What if they drop a package on someone? A case of beer falling from a couple hundred feet could kill someone. What if hackers hijack a drone? A hijacked drone could be flown into the engine of a jet liner taking off, or into a life flight helicopter's rotors, or possibly other things that could cause risk to life and limb of others. The drones have many whirring blades. How is the public protected from injury from these?

I'm sure there are many scenarios I haven't thought of.

The flying car actually exists in prototype form, but getting it certified by the FAA is a nightmare that has dragged on for almost two decades.

Bill

Being a pilot myself, I don't think I'd want a flying car in every garage like in the old Popular Mechanics mags of what future life would be like as it's bad enough w/ them on the road not to mention all the nutcases & what they might do w/ it. For that reason I just don't think anything will ever become of a flying car design no matter how economical they make it.

As to the 777 what if - tell your engineer friend that the pilots could set it for best glide & land it after all it's been done before when someone ran out of fuel over the Atlantic & had to glide into the Azores (I think) & they even had to slip to a landing [:'(][:D]

[geofflambert]

In the Jetsons the cars stayed in their lanes in the sky. Why couldn't the drones have their own lanes the way we have bicycle lanes?

[wdolson]

Theoretically possible. Though you still need to consider what happens when hackers take over.

Bill

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I can see why the FAA squashed this one. Carding customers is one problem with delivering alcohol. Plus each state has their own laws about alcohol delivery. For alcohol shipped via UPS or FedEx, someone over 21 has to sign for it in person in most states. Some states have limits on how much can be delivered in a day and others prohibit it completely.

There are many problems with delivery drones that still need to be worked out, both legal and technological. I saw the stories on the Amazon drone and from what I could tell, it looked like Amazon was just introducing it as a proof of concept that was still years from actuality.

The FAA is hyper about air safety. I worked at Boeing in the 777 program. The FAA spitballs scenarios at the company and the engineers have to come up with the probability that it will or won't happen and then the FAA decides if the risk is worth it. A friend was working on the engines for the 777. One of the scenarios thrown at them was you have a fan burst on one side, a blade from the fan burst goes through the fuselage and takes out the engine on the other side. I don't think there has been a fan burst in the history of jet aviation that took out another engine (though a fan burst did take out the hydraulics to the tail on a DC-10).

The Boeing engineers couldn't prove that this scenario was low enough probability so the 777 had to have armor installed inside the nacelles to prevent this from happening.

With drones flying over cities, I could see many potential problems. What if they drop a package on someone? A case of beer falling from a couple hundred feet could kill someone. What if hackers hijack a drone? A hijacked drone could be flown into the engine of a jet liner taking off, or into a life flight helicopter's rotors, or possibly other things that could cause risk to life and limb of others. The drones have many whirring blades. How is the public protected from injury from these?

I'm sure there are many scenarios I haven't thought of.

The flying car actually exists in prototype form, but getting it certified by the FAA is a nightmare that has dragged on for almost two decades.

Bill

Each of your questions also applies to radio-controlled airplanes now flying legally for decades.

The FAA can be all careful and so forth, but the horse is leaving the barn, drone-wise. They can get in front of it or be left to clean up. But the things are here now.

[geofflambert]

For those of you not familiar with the Jetsons, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7BcpVGA0cg. Their story is on a level equal to Moby Dick, Huckleberry Finn and The House of Seven Gables.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I can see why the FAA squashed this one. Carding customers is one problem with delivering alcohol. Plus each state has their own laws about alcohol delivery. For alcohol shipped via UPS or FedEx, someone over 21 has to sign for it in person in most states. Some states have limits on how much can be delivered in a day and others prohibit it completely.

There are many problems with delivery drones that still need to be worked out, both legal and technological. I saw the stories on the Amazon drone and from what I could tell, it looked like Amazon was just introducing it as a proof of concept that was still years from actuality.

The FAA is hyper about air safety. I worked at Boeing in the 777 program. The FAA spitballs scenarios at the company and the engineers have to come up with the probability that it will or won't happen and then the FAA decides if the risk is worth it. A friend was working on the engines for the 777. One of the scenarios thrown at them was you have a fan burst on one side, a blade from the fan burst goes through the fuselage and takes out the engine on the other side. I don't think there has been a fan burst in the history of jet aviation that took out another engine (though a fan burst did take out the hydraulics to the tail on a DC-10).

The Boeing engineers couldn't prove that this scenario was low enough probability so the 777 had to have armor installed inside the nacelles to prevent this from happening.

With drones flying over cities, I could see many potential problems. What if they drop a package on someone? A case of beer falling from a couple hundred feet could kill someone. What if hackers hijack a drone? A hijacked drone could be flown into the engine of a jet liner taking off, or into a life flight helicopter's rotors, or possibly other things that could cause risk to life and limb of others. The drones have many whirring blades. How is the public protected from injury from these?

I'm sure there are many scenarios I haven't thought of.

The flying car actually exists in prototype form, but getting it certified by the FAA is a nightmare that has dragged on for almost two decades.

Bill

Each of your questions also applies to radio-controlled airplanes now flying legally for decades.

The FAA can be all careful and so forth, but the horse is leaving the barn, drone-wise. They can get in front of it or be left to clean up. But the things are here now.

The difference, as explained in the video I linked, is that the FAA policy for remote airplanes is a line of sight and several other factors listed in the article from Scientific American quoted below:

[font="Trebuchet MS"]In 1981, however, that all changed. The FAA, which has the authority to regulate all American civil aviation, mentioned model planes for the first time in an “Advisory Circular,” signed by then director of air traffic services R. J. Van Vure. The document sets forth voluntary guidelines that address basic safety concerns. It essentially asked radio-controlled copter hobbyists to avoid flying their aircraft above 120 meters, and near airports, spectators (for untested planes), full-scale aircraft and noise-sensitive areas.

Then, in 2007 the FAA turned its attention to model airplanes once again. Now termed drones and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), the agency banned their use for business purposes. “We recognized that unmanned aircraft systems [UAS] would expand significantly and [took steps] to make sure UAS operation [did] not adversely affect safety,” said an FAA spokesperson who would not give his or her name. “Integration of UAS into the nation’s skies must be deliberate and incremental to avoid introducing unacceptable safety risks,” the FAA says.[/font]

The article goes on to state many examples, and also make it clear that this so far is only a policy, but not a law, although at least one fine for commercial drone flights doing videography has been given out, which is being challenged in court. Very interesting.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/drone-pilot-challenges-faa-commercial-flying-ban/

I've been thinking of getting a camera drone for ages, and I have to check out the current regulatory status in the UK.

Check this out though. The flight that got Team Black Sheep fined $10k. A bit close to some very sensitive areas in NYC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cSxEqKQ78

This London copter drone is much more interesting, going into the tube and other buildings as well as some very up-close personal views of parliament and other famous spots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghDXBIy_BSM

[wdolson]

There is also a matter of scale. Model airplanes are relatively few and far between in our skies. They are the plaything of hobbyists for the most part. When something is a hobby off in the corner of the "market", it's relatively easy to ignore. There are so few of them and they operate in out of the way areas that they pose relatively minor risks to the public.

When something goes commercial or becomes a popular thing, regulators need to step in to make sure people aren't put at risk. Commercial delivery drones are going to be moving around urban centers densely packed with people. Because they are carrying merchandise, they will become the target of people who want to steal that merchandise and hackers will be working to divert these drones. Other hackers will get interested in what kind of mischief or harm (depending on their motives) they can do with hijacked drones.

Flying a model airplane in a city park on a weekend afternoon is a very different problem from scores of Amazon delivery drones buzzing around Manhattan. R/C aircraft enthusiasts have been motivated for some time to police each other so as to keep regulation to a minimum because the wise people in that group recognized that as long as they stayed a minor nuisance at worst, the regulators would ignore them. So there are rules about endangering people when you fly R/C aircraft in areas designated for that purpose.

I expect that the FAA will work out some rules for drones used commercially and for other purposes in urban areas in the next couple of years. There is a lot of pressure from people with money who want to use them.

Bill