全部
← Back to Squawk list
Canada Issues Small UAS Rules
Transport Canada has released the details of its new rules governing the commercial use of unmanned aerial systems. The advisory circular fills in the blanks, explicitly laying out the responsibilities of owners and operators and acknowledging operational circumstances in which some compromise is appropriate. Canada isn't requiring UAS pilots to be licensed, but they do have to complete a ground school course. (www.avweb.com) 更多...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Wonder why the FAA can't come up with something simple and fast?
Three words: United States Government
Speed of Light =" C"
Speed of Sound = "Mach"
Speed of Government = ? May I suggest " <0 "
Speed of Sound = "Mach"
Speed of Government = ? May I suggest " <0 "
I like the part about the knowledge requirements. A similar knowledge requirement should be required in the US. I think that UAS operators need to have a fundamental understanding of the airspace system, weather, and NOTAMS.
Well, there was a drone mfg on CBS this morning that said rules of 400' and line of sight were already in place. Why not just enforce those rather than create another level of buracracy.
I think at issue is the commercial use. That is currently prohibited by regulation and is what many operators want. Add to the fact that there are many lawyers and some judges saying the FAA does not have authorization to regulate drones.
Don't know if they have authority to specifically regulate drones or not but they have the authority to regulate anything in the air. That said, if they stay below 400' and line of sight, which is already in effect, they (the FAA) need to butt out
I would agree, with the addition, not in proximity to airports or other aircraft operations. I have already had to deal with some operators in close vicinity of our airport who feel they can do whatever they want, whereever they want, and no one can stop them.
Their argument is that their little 20lb drone couldn't possibly hurt an airplane. Nevermind all of the time and money spent by the airport controlling wildlife hazards around the airport.
Their argument is that their little 20lb drone couldn't possibly hurt an airplane. Nevermind all of the time and money spent by the airport controlling wildlife hazards around the airport.
Actually, I thought the airport proximity thing was in there too. That said, all the rules in the world probably won't make any difference to the type folks you are talking about. All it would do would be to give the local gendarmes legal standing to do something and it might be upon you to educate them or they might care less.
