Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Got Hit by a Drone Today

Frank Glencairn said:
That's so typical lawyer think.

I would rather have a sane, responsible person flying a drone around me, than a licensed idiot.
I don't understand, why you think that licensing would stop idiots, doing idiotic things. You can see that when it comes to cars, motorbikes, weapons andwhatnot.
A license never stopped and idiot, being an idiot and doing big time damage.

Also you imply, that a sane and responsible person, is an idiot, that would not be able to fly a drone, before getting a license.

If someone gets hurt or not, is a question of responsibility and good old common sense.
Licenses don't provide any of it.

Once we start regulating drones, what will happen?
No flying over people
No flying over streets (cars)
No flying over cities
No flying over boats
No flying over animals
No fling over areas where somebody could be, even just animals, cause you could hit a cow
No flying in national parks

So what you gonna use you drone for?

The only thing that makes totally sense, is restriction around airfields, since you share the same airspace.

Other than that, licenses or restrictions don't provide any safety, as long as there are licensed idiots around that don't care about the restrictions.
Everybody else would do no damage in the first place, licensed or not.

Licenses are just an other tool that is giving the illusion of safety, making money, and a handle for lawyers to sue somebody,
but they will not prevent any damage.

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
Benjamin Franklin
Click to expand...

I would just point out:
These things can, and have, killed and maimed.
Licensing and insurance is a basic framework to broadly protect people when potentially hazardous activities are being conducted in a public place.
Rules and regulations surrounding deadly tools foster a culture of awareness and safety.
Saying "oops, my bad" and crossing your fingers that the now-eyeless victim won't sue you and keep you in poverty for the rest of your life, or that you won't go to the "big house" and do time is not the right answer.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Last edited:
Scott Crawley said:
More than just experience behind the stick, a commercial pilot's license certifies that they have learned the many rules of the road and how to respond to various emergencies, the physics of flight and how to responsibly maintain their aircraft for safe operation.

Again, obtaining a pilot's license is nothing like a motor vehicle license. You can walk in off of the street and after a brief exam acquire one of those. No training certificate is required at all (In the U.S.).
Click to expand...

Why I'm comparing it to a drivers license is because anyone can go into a hardware store and buy a drone today. Without regulations and licenses it will be chaos the cheaper this tech becomes and the more people use it. This technology is in it's infancy and there are no views on safety what so ever. No one is obligated to comply with anything other than common sense, which is something a lot of people lack.

Harry Clark said:
I would just point out:
These things can, and have, killed and maimed.
Licensing and insurance is a basic framework to broadly protect people when potentially hazardous activities are being conducted in a public place.
Rules and regulations surrounding deadly tools foster a culture of awareness and safety.
Saying "oops, my bad" and crossing your fingers that the now-eyeless victim won't sue you and keep you in poverty for the rest of your life, or that you won't go to the "big house" and do time is not the right answer.
Cheers,
Harry
Click to expand...

Well said, insurance is protecting the user of the drone not the victim of a crash. Rules, regulations and licenses help to protect the victims instead.
 
Quote Originally Posted by Frank Glencairn View Post
I can't see how the age (daughter) or gender of a person, that was injured by a drone would make any difference.
Would it be less bad if it happened to a 40 year old guy?

Hi Frank,

The original post posed the question: "Do you think I did the right thing? I did what I did because I only had a small injury and the knuckelhead seemed very apologetic" I offered a up the possibility of a different outcome which was more severe and yet personal. The fact that the drone was operated with hazard to persons and property on the surface is an undeniable fact, regardless of the outcome. Careless and reckless operation is careless and reckless operation regardless of outcome, even if no one is injured. I think you and I agree.
 
Vance Colvig said:
Careless and reckless operation is careless and reckless operation regardless of outcome, even if no one is injured. I think you and I agree.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.
I was preaching the gospel of responsibility as the only real thing that prevents accidents (and insurance when they happen for some other reason), since the whole thread.

What is really on my nerves is, when somebody tries to throw that old rhetoric trick - "...but, what if XYZ would have happened to YOUR kid/wive/sister/dog" - at me.
Kind of worn out. Like in a lot of debates, when - at some point - somebody pulls a hyperbolic comparison involving Nazis or Hitler (Godwinds Law) out of the hat.
Sorry, but that sort of hyperbowling (not a typo) really needs an answer(or in this case a question) sometimes.
 
Harry Clark said:
Rules and regulations surrounding deadly tools foster a culture of awareness and safety.
Click to expand...

I hear that very often, but nobody was ever able to proof those words.
When you look into it, you gonna see, that in many areas, that where unregulated and unrestricted, less accidents happened, than after the regulation.
Like bike helmets. People wearing bike helmets, have much more ugly accidents, than the guys who don't wear them (cause they drive much more cautious).
Guys with helmets (and with high-vis wests lately) think if they just follow the rules, they are bullet proof. It generates a false sense of safety, that just isn't there.
Also since lumberjacks have to wear special protection clothing and gear, the number injuries went up. They are just not as cautious anymore, and more accidents happen.
 
Last edited:
How crazy that this happened to a Reduser. Those were lottery odds! Really glad it wasn't more serious.

This will all get sorted out at the speed of government. My hometown heros the Wright Bothers first flew in 1903. The Air Commerce Act didn't come along until 1926 after many fatalities. Drones in the US won't have to wait quite 23 years for regs. Even then they will need to be enforceable. Texting while driving is a good example of how challenging something so ubiquitous can be to reign in. There were far fewer comments to the proposed regs than expected so regs could be less than a year away. That said, they have more of a commercial verses recreation focus.

There are things that individuals can do now. If you see someone flying a drone over the public, take a photo of the drone offender and tell them if they don't land you will report them to the FAA for being reckless. The FAA also has a hotline to report careless unmanned aircraft operations on their website. As an FAA approved operator, I am not allowed to fly within 500' of any nonessential personnel.

The next step will be city ordinances against drone flights at public events. This is police enforceable right now.
 
The DFS (German version of FFA) released a set of rules and regulations, that is taking effect, from tomorrow on.
It's a pretty basic and reasonable list of dos and don'ts.

So this is the new "drone law in a nutshell" in Germany now.

DO:
Make sure you know your craft, and RTFM
Check wind and weather
Avoid collision with manned aircrafts
Avoid power lines
Embrace privacy
Keep intervisibility
Get insurance

DON'T
Fly near Airports (they specify certain distances and heights)
Fly over military installations, hospitals, power plants, crowds and prisons
Drink and fly (also no drugs)
Fly without lights at night
Start from private property without permission
 
Last edited:
Welp, a drone got Enrique iglesias. These things really are flying lawnmowers.
 
Dominik Muench said:
He tried grabbing it in mid flight....sorry but this is hardly the operators fault.
Click to expand...

And what if it was an inexperienced drone operator who lost control and chopped out someones eye in the audience? I really don't see how drones during concerts like that are safe, especially with pyros and that stuff flying around Enrique. What if the timing was wrong etc.?
 
And nobody saw this coming? Amazing. I have a blimp with a Gopro for concerts which regularly gets turned down for liability concerns.

Hopefully the band Muse will take note for their "Drones " tour.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
And what if it was an inexperienced drone operator who lost control and chopped out someones eye in the audience? I really don't see how drones during concerts like that are safe, especially with pyros and that stuff flying around Enrique. What if the timing was wrong etc.?
Click to expand...

And what if i took a duke and the toilet exploded? The world is full of what ifs.
Accidents and mistakes will always happen regardless if the pilot was a pro or inexperienced... For starters, I HIGHLY doubt any label/artist/venue would allow an inexperienced pilot to fly a drone and create that level of responsibility/liability. What if the pyro malfunctioned entirely and caused a fire? It's happened... many lives were lost. It's a risk - these risks have always been there.
 
Most of the people will immediately press for charges, especially in a country known for litigations. You appear to be an exception and seem to be a very understanding person. I think only a person with inner strength can forgive.
God Bless You!
 
Frank Glencairn said:
I hear that very often, but nobody was ever able to proof those words.
When you look into it, you gonna see, that in many areas, that where unregulated and unrestricted, less accidents happened, than after the regulation.
Like bike helmets. People wearing bike helmets, have much more ugly accidents, than the guys who don't wear them (cause they drive much more cautious).
Guys with helmets (and with high-vis wests lately) think if they just follow the rules, they are bullet proof. It generates a false sense of safety, that just isn't there.
Also since lumberjacks have to wear special protection clothing and gear, the number injuries went up. They are just not as cautious anymore, and more accidents happen.
Click to expand...

Statistics? Proof? Studies? Articles?
Cheers,
Harry
 
Frank Glencairn said:
I hear that very often, but nobody was ever able to proof those words.
When you look into it, you gonna see, that in many areas, that where unregulated and unrestricted, less accidents happened, than after the regulation.
Like bike helmets. People wearing bike helmets, have much more ugly accidents, than the guys who don't wear them (cause they drive much more cautious).
Guys with helmets (and with high-vis wests lately) think if they just follow the rules, they are bullet proof. It generates a false sense of safety, that just isn't there.
Also since lumberjacks have to wear special protection clothing and gear, the number injuries went up. They are just not as cautious anymore, and more accidents happen.
Click to expand...

No one was able to prove these word? I hope this is not a serious post . Safe sets (and other workplaces) come from safety policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top