A couple days ago we took a DJI Phantom 2 and flew it straight up into the air over Charleston, SC to test its "range". The video, although interesting, was not fully thought out and we decided to pull the video.
Many of the commenters who disliked our "test" were quick to point out that we shouldn't be flying our chopper "in public areas." Personally I feel like this argument isn't legitimate as 95% of interesting drone footage comes from populated areas. Nobody is buying these things to film fly-overs of woods.
Of course the chopper could malfunction and fall out of the sky but I could make the same argument about flying real helicopters or planes over public places as well. Ours would cause far less damage if it malfunctioned. Here's a shot that a Phantom captured today in NYC in a massively populated area.
Learn more about this story here.
We've created a few videos with the Phantom and every single one of them had been in a public, populated place and nobody has been upset. It seemed like the only difference in this situation was how high we went. After doing a bit of research, I am estimating that the Phantom went about 1000 feet into the sky. If the Phantom fell from this height I'm sure it could cause some serious damage but I doubt it would cause more damage than if it fell from a more normal 200 feet.
One commenter made a fantastic point about the dangers of our Phantom and low flying aircrafts like the Medivac helicopter on the top of one of our hospitals downtown. This was a very good point and I could see how our little drone could be a huge problem for an aircraft like that. Most aircraft must stay above 500 feet and our helicopter did go into their airspace.
We love the DJI Phantom and we would never want to set a bad/dangerous example of how to use them. We also would never want to do anything that could limit the use of personal drones later on. We decided to delete the post and the video and in the near future we may attempt the same test again in a safer area with less potential air traffic.
An excellent post!
Thank you for writing down the whole host of reason that I was referring to. ;)
Lee, your ignorant comment that "nobody is buying these things to film flyovers of woods" clearly illustrates your narrow minded hipster world view. Drones are for all types of exploration be it in the urban space or in austere environments. Drones are perfectly suited for recon missions like cave exploration, waterway navigation, land navigation, and even remote wildlife viewing. Bottom line, there are a shit ton of us that use drones responsibly outside of populated areas. I'm not going to include all the academic research that drones are being used for. Please refrain from making silly uninformed comments in the future.
The argument of a drone crashing in a public area is the same as a helicopter crashing in a public area. It doesnt happen all the time, but yes it can happen and it might happen. Does that mean that no flying objects must fly over populated areas ??? 90% of crashes of manned or unmanned flying craft happen not because of equipment failure, but Pilot error
No it's not the same!
It would be the same if:
The Drone was built and tested in accordance with FAA guidelines for helicopter construction; the drone had to have the same safety checks and maintenance as is required for a helicopter; the drone has the proven same safety record for accidents as the helicopter, all of which is does not.
AND
The pilot of the drone me the same guidelines and FAA certification, testing , flight experience and medical requirements as a commercial helicopter pilot....which of course the drone pilot does not!
AND
The drone was flown in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 91 and with compliance with the MSA.
Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA), as defined in § 119 of Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR):
Anywhere: an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground;
Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
Over Open Water or Sparsely Populated Areas: an altitude allowing for a linear distance greater than 500 from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure;
Helicopters: If without hazard to persons or property on the
surface, an altitude lower than in definitions 2, 3, and 4 above,
provided in compliance with any routes or altitudes specifically
prescribed for helicopters by the FAA.
NOW
IF all that were equal, then the arguments are the same. Clearly, they are not!
I think following the established AMA safety guidelines should pretty much be the holy grail of RC aircraft operation. They have worked for decades, and the only thing that has changed is the barrier to entry. (Price)
Following the AMA safety precautions will prevent almost all of the eventualities that the FAA is rightly concerned with, and allow operation by those that truly wish to enjoy the hobby, or use it for commercial purposes.