Search found 4 matches

by ajwakeboarder
Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:50 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Why do they want an AWB?
Replies: 23
Views: 1368

Re: Why do they want an AWB?

Dave2 wrote: Yeah, I think the two main issues are that they're small & quiet enough to bring up privacy concerns, and when they're armed they might make it a bit too easy for the government (or hackers) to "accidentally" kill someone.
You might find this sections from a recent faa notice interesting
Dropping Objects/Expendable Stores or Hazardous Materials. If the intended UAS operation includes the carriage, dropping, or spraying of aircraft stores outside of active Restricted or Warning Area airspace designated for aviation use, or approved Prohibited Areas, the proponent must ensure that specific approval is listed in the special provisions, the operational risks have been sufficiently mitigated as required by 14 CFR § 91.15, and that the hazardous material requirements in 49 CFR have been met. Acceptable procedures for hung stores and loss of control link while carrying stores must be provided to the FAA. A similar case must be made for hazardous materials carried aboard the aircraft and, if approved, will be listed in the special provision section of the COA.
What Hazardous Materials would a UAV need to carry?
by ajwakeboarder
Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:15 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Why do they want an AWB?
Replies: 23
Views: 1368

Re: Why do they want an AWB?

RX8er wrote:Point taken... But, when they can take a picture from 30,000 and count your nose hairs, I don;t think they will be low enough for us to complain.

BTW, I used to be in and out of Waco for RAM and an Annual by a local guy on a 421.
True, and won't be low enough to shoot at either. Waco Regional? I'm studying at TSTC. Right now i'm studying for my end of course for my private. I've seen a 421 come into our airport a few times. Those are really nice planes. I'd love to fly one someday.
by ajwakeboarder
Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:02 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Why do they want an AWB?
Replies: 23
Views: 1368

Re: Why do they want an AWB?

RX8er wrote: Yep, I know about that one but the FARs are not applicable to me, as a homeowner. When I buy a house, I don't sign off agreeing to part 91, 121 or 135? I do however if I am in a close proximity to an airport.
True, but it's what applies to pilots. UAV drivers consider themselves pilots. I can fly 500 feet over the farm houses around Waco. If someone gets mad, there isn't much they can do about it. Heck, I could probably fly lower than that, how would they prove my altitude, but I wouldn't. Its rude. I usually try to stay up around at least 1000 feet AGL unless i'm doing simulated emergency maneuvers. However, I wonder how many government agents flying UAVs looking at women lounging by backyard pools would have the same courtesy. (I realize that not all UAV drivers are like that, but there is always 1)
by ajwakeboarder
Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:46 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Why do they want an AWB?
Replies: 23
Views: 1368

Re: Why do they want an AWB?

RX8er wrote:This brings up a good question... I own my mineral rights but do we, as homeowners, own the airspace above our homes? Maybe up to a certain height? Never really thought about it.
:headscratch
No, you don't. FAR 91.119
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:
(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
[ (d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface--
(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and
(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.]
Theoretically I guess you could say you "own" 500 feet. But that's not much as far as airspace goes.

Return to “Why do they want an AWB?”