Gotcha. They are moving. I've been tempted to pick one up but I think the novelty would wear off quickly. Like my Heli that sits on a shelf.
DroidForums.net | Android Forum & News
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Innovation vs Public Safety
- Thread starter pc747
- Start date
That's just it..I don't think they will really look for an alternative.. Don't get me wrong..I'm all for safety.. I don't want anyone hurt due to stupidity.. I see that all the time on Houston roads...it gets old...its expensive and time consuming..
But the government sticking their noses in everything has really gotten to me as well...
I think if you're going to start..they should make them have limited range with fly back or hover feature, if they get too far out...and probably look into jammers...I know I've seen a pulse rifle that will scramble them...idk..its just for me ...more government is never a good thing...and they seem to make noise over the stupidest stuff anymore...I think if a competent group was assembled.. They could find a way to deal with the issue and not have to regulate/tax a bunch of stuff...yes..set some rules down and enforce them... But registration is just a way to make more money..
You make a good point. Because this is rushed. According to reports they are trying to have a law passed in time for the holiday season. Last time we rushed a bill we got the healthcare plan we have now, which I actually was on the side for having but not at the cost of one party rushing it out. I feel like though we need to address the issue of drones just slapping a bill on it is not the end all solution.
As far as having a "kill switch/jamming" who's going to pay for it?
You can force the airlines to put one in the aircraft but that would be costly and they are already barely making money as it is. Plus US air carriers are not going to want to take the liability of potentially getting sued for destroying a toy or jamming it and it ends up through a car windshield.
The reality is this is a potentially growing industry and as a result we do need to deal with it. Though regulation is not the complete answer, it is an answer only if it is done in a thought out way.
Example: why not have manufacturers put n numbers on the toy at the plant and then when the person buy the toy at a retailer they are registered there. Then you let the customer know that upon purchasing they are liable. So if their kid fly one into an aircraft or car they can be held accountable. Does that mean the parents may be put into an unfair position because of what their kids are doing, yup and that means as a parent before you let your kid go solo you spend some time showing him how to fly and when and where to fly the same way we teach our kids how to handle a rifle for hunting.
The other addition is to add a restriction where once it gets outside a certain envelope it returns to the user.
Unfortunately being the election period is underway and the outgoing is not going to get much done I fear we will see a rushed bill that does nothing but cost more money for everyone and does not solve a thing.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Edit: Wow the grammar errors from me swiping on the go.
Last edited:
Wow, government reacting in a knee-jerk reactionary way, to a product that they don't really understand...
We have people that do not own and have never shot a gun, making gun laws... people with no medical experience making healthcare laws... people with no economics background making tax and economic policy laws...
It's like asking your sanitation worker to consult on neuro-surgical procedures...
We have people that do not own and have never shot a gun, making gun laws... people with no medical experience making healthcare laws... people with no economics background making tax and economic policy laws...
It's like asking your sanitation worker to consult on neuro-surgical procedures...
MissionImprobable
Silver Member
This is pretty much inevitable. The question is whether or not the technology to keep them as safe is possible is developed enough at the time the programs reach approval. A bunch of low-altitude semi-automated drones are probably a lot safer than extra drivers all over the road delivering Amazon packages in neighborhoods that they aren't familiar with and looking for addresses when they should be watching the road.
That said, I don't really want to see the sky filled, semi-filled, or on occasion buzzed by drone traffic. I'm sure it will happen, though, so again, my thought is that it should be efficiently and safely handled both on Amazon's and the government's side.
That said, I don't really want to see the sky filled, semi-filled, or on occasion buzzed by drone traffic. I'm sure it will happen, though, so again, my thought is that it should be efficiently and safely handled both on Amazon's and the government's side.
I didn't have to say it LOL..but quad copters and drones are way different... Hell..I'll "register" an actual drone...if the government gives one to me..LOL...a predator should launch nicely out of the bed of my truck...I applaud you @94lt1 for holding back and not pointing out how Mr. Drone strike himself is wanting to regulate drones in America. See you can talk about a political subject and remain civil.
There has been this back and forth debate between the FAA and Amazon about Amazon wanting to use a drone program for delivering goods door to door. Amazon voiced wanting the FAA to follow Europe's lead (Amazon says the FAA is so slow the delivery drone it approved is already obsolete The Verge which I must interject in saying our aviation safety record is much better than that of the programs overseas. In fact as much as the FAA has caught heat over the years they have done an awesome job cracking down on companies and keeping aviation safe especially in the area of public transportation. But I have to ask do you side with Amazon on allowing innovation or do you oppose the idea of drone technology outside of the military and law enforcement?
My opinion is I side with the fed's on this one. We already have a crowded airspace as it is and now we want to add drones to the mix. The other issue that has to be taken in to account is liability. With drones it is a matter of when one crash into someone's house or a place of business. I just do not feel like public greed to have something right now should outweigh public safety.
One year later.......
A passenger plane may have collided with a drone for the first time
That was on our news a few days ago....
But I was a helo or something...
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Unless it was a hacked Drone, it can't fly near airports or above a certain height. It's software locked down.
Yes I read the article. DJI drones have GPS zones they can fly. It's global.
DJI - Fly Safe: No Fly Zones
Not saying it was a dji drone. Just that other drones should be compliant.
Last edited:
Was that a dji drone that hit the aircraft, I couldn't open the WSJ on my phone. I know I did an article on a dji drone for Hollywood but I missed that was the same company that was involved in the incident.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk