On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:48:02 +1300, george152 wrote:


All that is going to happen is that at some stage one of these 'drones'
is going to take out an aircraft.
Then watch laws get enacted by yesterday

That's historically what it has taken to get many new regulations. Transponders
come to mind...

It's not the small ones that worry me so much as the Predators and Reapers
whose manufacturers refuse to equip them with sense-and-avoid technology while
demanding that they be permitted to operate within the NAS despite their
inability to comply with CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS Title 14 Chapter I
Subchapter F §91.113 as all other flights must.

Because the drone operators are safely on the ground, their mind-set is
fundamentally different from that of an actual pilot of an airborne vehicle who
has placed his personal well being, not only in his skills, but the cooperation
of fellow pilots in complying with federal regulations.

Drone pilots have little to lose as a result of violating regulations; the
potential consequences are far more grave for airborne pilots. That
inescapable fact is the fundamental issue that is not being addressed, or even
discussed, by the FAA in its attempts to regulate UAS operations.

My personal experience encountering an unresponsive Predator at 8,500', 12
o'clock and five miles while operating on a flight plan en route from KLAS to
KSBA is what galvanized my opinion of drone operations within the NAS. There
was no chase aircraft observing the drone (required), and the operator failed
to answer repeated radio calls from Joshua Approach Control, causing me to
divert my flight path to avoid the unresponsive drone. This nonchalant
attitude of drone operators is the heart of the UAS issue, and the arrogance of
the drone manufacturers is amazing, not to mention the apathy of airline
passengers.

At some point, as you said, they will all get a wake up call, and the true
hazard UAS' pose will be undeniably revealed in the grizzly results.