Drone on Safely

[RichardB]

Figure if nothing else the subject will get you to click the following link to a new Scouting Safely Alert:

 

http://www.scouting.org/Home/HealthandSafety/Alerts/Drone_Safety.aspx

 

RichardB

 

PS:  Not to be confused with long winded SMs or their snoring or excessively long threads on the forum..... 

[Zaphod]

They should include a warning about checking local ordinances too. I know... that line is usually just obligatory fine print but in my town drones are prohibited from flying above public parks which includes a couple forest preserves where scouts often camp. The ordinance was just passed this year so not commonly known but my company ran into some problems trying to take aerial footage for a promotional video. 

[T2Eagle]

There was clearly some droning on there....

 

Sorry RichardB, I couldn't resist.

[Tampa Turtle]

Enjoy them before National has to make some big payouts and we have new rules. I know some boys that now know you cannot fly to close to a military base without an eventual police visit.

[Stosh]

As a naturalist who favors the sounds of nature and the silent sports, having to listen to the incessant whine of a drone is not conducive to a LNT lesson and falls short in the category of courtesy towards ones privacy.  If ever the drones become part of the Shotgun MB, I'll be the first to sign up as a counselor.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Stosh

[Tampa Turtle]

As a naturalist who favors the sounds of nature and the silent sports, having to listen to the incessant whine of a drone is not conducive to a LNT lesson and falls short in the category of courtesy towards ones privacy.  If ever the drones become part of the Shotgun MB, I'll be the first to sign up as a counselor.

 I thought same thing...

[John-in-KC]

Moderator's Note:

 

Folks, remember, the Federal Aviation Administration has rules on small UAS as well:

 

Here is the FAA page for "flying UAS for fun"

 

Read the summary of the FAA rules on small UAS here

 

Here's the website for UAS at the FAA

Edited July 13, 2016 by John-in-KC

[qwazse]

There are some pretty heated discussions on the use of drones in Wilderness Recreation Areas. On one hand the photos and videos are spectacular and insightful (especially for a guy looking to bushwhack to a better cranberry bog ). On the other hand, folks didn't set aside time and hike/paddle to the most isolated spot they could find only to hear motors ... or for their ground-to-sky shot to be photobombed by a pesky drone.

 

Some purists are bemoaning the horseback tours through Dolly Sods. I most definitely would discourage a pilot to try catching late fall foliage (small game season).

[Beavah]

Yah, hmmm....

 

Yeh all know yeh can fly real airplanes over wilderness areas, county parks, etc., right?   And helicopters with all kinds of camera gear?  

 

Not to mention ultralights?

 

I reckon this is another case of us old folks mindlessly objecting to whatever new technology comes along to change da world we remember from our halcyon days of youth.

 

Teach the lads courtesy, but let them participate fully in this century.  Fight mindless regulation, both local and national, so as to protect liberty for da next generation.  We owe it to those who gave us da liberty to drive cars even though they spook horses, and to those who allowed us to fly coast to coast in airplanes, even though it messes up da pretty blue sky when they were off campin' in da hills.

 

There was a time when da United States embraced innovation and progress.  We were a world leader back then, eh?  But we also had a younger, less fearful populace.

 

Beavah

 

P.S.  Yah, @@RichardB, why does H&S feel it's useful/important to regurgitate this stuff.  I'm not aware of any sudden rash of drone accidents, are you?  It's hard to see da safety issue here.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Beavah

[walk in the woods]

Yah, hmmm....

 

Yeh all know yeh can fly real airplanes over wilderness areas, county parks, etc., right?   And helicopters with all kinds of camera gear?  

 

Not to mention ultralights?

 

I reckon this is another case of us old folks mindlessly objecting to whatever new technology comes along to change da world we remember from our halcyon days of youth.

 

Teach the lads courtesy, but let them participate fully in this century.  Fight mindless regulation, both local and national, so as to protect liberty for da next generation.  We owe it to those who gave us da liberty to drive cars even though they spook horses, and to those who allowed us to fly coast to coast in airplanes, even though it messes up da pretty blue sky when they were off campin' in da hills.

 

There was a time when da United States embraced innovation and progress.  We were a world leader back then, eh?  But we also had a younger, less fearful populace.

 

Beavah

 

P.S.  Yah, @@RichardB, why does H&S feel it's useful/important to regurgitate this stuff.  I'm not aware of any sudden rash of drone accidents, are you?  It's hard to see da safety issue here.

There you go talking about that old-timey liberty and stuff.  

[qwazse]

Yah, hmmm....

 

Yeh all know yeh can fly real airplanes over wilderness areas, county parks, etc., right?   And helicopters with all kinds of camera gear?  

 

Not to mention ultralights?

 

I reckon this is another case of us old folks mindlessly objecting to whatever new technology comes along to change da world we remember from our halcyon days of youth.

...

@@Beavah, if I were to guess, most of these griping commenters are in their 20's-40's. They don't necessarily appreciate how much the land is breathing a half-century sigh of relief from when it was a proving ground for D-day munitions. A little horse-processed hay pales in comparison to unexploded ordinance.

 

The sods are less prone to fly-overs because the landscape is just not that majestic from high altitude. I'm not sure that an ultralight from Timberline would get much of an updraft! So for decades, folks have been used to silence. For a while, not even gun-shots, until land managers realized that deer that come eat out of your hand are probably doing so because they had overgrazed as badly as John Dolly's livestock.

 

So yeah, our job as old folks is to remind fellow citizens that our responsibility is to share the land, and show how to effect government regulations to ensure that's done responsibly.

 

If a scout wanted to pack in a drone, I'd have the boys think long and hard about the LNT implications.

[Tampa Turtle]

There are some pretty heated discussions on the use of drones in Wilderness Recreation Areas. On one hand the photos and videos are spectacular and insightful (especially for a guy looking to bushwhack to a better cranberry bog ). On the other hand, folks didn't set aside time and hike/paddle to the most isolated spot they could find only to hear motors ... or for their ground-to-sky shot to be photobombed by a pesky drone.

 

Some purists are bemoaning the horseback tours through Dolly Sods. I most definitely would discourage a pilot to try catching late fall foliage (small game season).

 

I thought Cranberries grew on Cranbery Trees!

[NJCubScouter]

RichardB, thank you for posting this information.

[NJCubScouter]

Teach the lads courtesy, but let them participate fully in this century.  Fight mindless regulation, both local and national, so as to protect liberty for da next generation.  We owe it to those who gave us da liberty to drive cars even though they spook horses, and to those who allowed us to fly coast to coast in airplanes, even though it messes up da pretty blue sky when they were off campin' in da hills.

I think there is a balance to be struck between "fully participating in this century", and courtesy. I am not opining on where the balance should be struck where drones are concerned, because I don't really know anything about them. I have never had one intrude on my solitude or create a dangerous situation in my presence. Yet. But I think that as a society, we are still stuck in the mindset that "if it can be done, it should be done." And forget camping for a second. Do we really want a society where everywhere you turn there are things whizzing through the air delivering packages, spying on people to see what they are doing, etc.? And on that last example, we as a society are well on our way to giving up our last shred of privacy in the name of security, efficiency, etc. Is that what we want, just because the technology is there?

 

There was a time when da United States embraced innovation and progress.  We were a world leader back then, eh?  But we also had a younger, less fearful populace.

It think it still does, and I think we still are. I think American society embraces innovation and progress more than it ever has before, though there are some points of resistance, some of which are good, some of which are bad. (I would give some examples but then I would have to move this thread to Issues and Politics, because of my own post.)  

 

I think the real problem is that as technology becomes more and more advanced, and we embrace it and use it more and more, it creates more and more conflict with our expectation of how life is supposed to be lived, and with some of the "values" that go along with that. Things like privacy, tranquility, reflection, prudence, things like that. I can tell hundreds or thousands of people what I ate for breakfast this morning, or at least I could if I had a Twitter account and/or more than 5 friends on Facebook, but why would I want to? And yet people do that, and more. That is a trivial example, but the ground-level air being filled with drones (see above) is another example.

 

The fact that there is conflict does not mean that we should reject new technology, but it does mean that we should "manage" the conflict. I don't think that we are doing a very good job at that, as a society, and as the technology gets more and more wondrous (and potentially more dangerous to our values), the problem will only get worse.

 

That's enough philosophizing for right now.

[Stosh]

One also has to take into consideration the flight of aircraft is done by a occupant pilot who is trained and licensed.  Even though they can fly over certain terrain, it is forbidden in some areas, i.e. military bases, Washington DC, and BWCA just to name a couple.  They must also maintain a MINIMUM flight so that if there is a problem they have time to react and set their aircraft down in a non-populated area if possible.

 

So now we have drones.  It's not new technology.  Radio Controlled aircraft have been around for many years.  The only difference is it's now a fad and everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.  With the influx of pilotless aircraft, the rules are now more evident.  I don't know how many of these where in existence 15 years ago before the gotta-have-a-drone phenomena came along, but I it makes sense to have the ground personnel be able to see the aircraft, be able to keep it under control, keep it out of piloted aircraft air space, etc. 

 

Therefore I don't think it's any modern knee-jerk reaction to the younger generation, it's just a reiteration of what's been on the books for a long time and as more and more people get into flying RC aircraft, a reminder of the rules is in order. 

 

I have a number of friends who are RC hobbyists and fully realize it's not an issue of "modern technology".  They've been flying both rotary winged and fixed wing pilotless aircraft for many years.

 

It's a bit like 10 years ago, one would have been looked at askance if they had a kayak on their car instead of a canoe.  But now that the kayak rage is in full swing, canoes have almost all disappeared except at the rental outlets.  Kayaks might be the hot-new technology that has replaced the canoe, but the Inuit seal hunter will just smile and ignore the whole thing.

 

Don't think for a moment that pilotless remote controlled aircraft is a new technology.   It just isn't so.