One of the larger problems with the FAA proposal
...is that it lumps all remotely piloted vehicles (RPV) together under the generic term "drone" which is decidedly ambiguous. There are enormous differences in size/usage/modes of flying between, for example, a professional multirotor used for aerial inspection/photography and a consumer-grade DJI quadcopter and a 2m wingspan scale model of a DeHavilland Mosquito and a 50cm wingspan child's toy Cessna 172. The ONLY thing those examples have in common is a pilot on the ground rather than onboard the aircraft. The consumer quadcopter and child's toy are generally more accessible to a casual user and more likely to be used in an unsafe or cavalier manner. The scale Mossie significantly less so, if for no other reason than cost. The DJI and professional multirotor can be flown virtually anywhere, including BVR (beyond visual range), whereas the Mossie and (to lesser extent) the child's toy Cessna require significantly more open space and are nearly always flown within Line Of Sight. These distinctions are important because:
1) None of the reported safety/security incidents I'm aware of involving remotely piloted vehicles were fixed wing hobbyist airplanes - they were all camera-equipped multirotors flying in a manner that is already prohibited (near airports/other controlled airspace).
2) there have been zero downed "traditional" aircraft or on-the-ground fatalities in any reported incidents - even though those persons were flying unsafely and/or outside existing regulations.
I have no problem with putting the proposed regulations on the professional multirotors because those, by design and intended use, will be employed in more potentially sensitive locations for legitimate purposes (inspecting crops or industrial equipment, filmmaking, news reporting, etc). The hobbyist quadcopters COULD be lumped in with the professional ones but probably shouldn't be. The hobbyist fixed wing aircraft, by nature of their different mode of operation and "theater of operation" should be exempted. And yes, there are idiots who disregard the rules and common sense and fly in unsafe/illegal manner - and those persons should be caught and punished accordingly. However, the FAA proposal as currently written clearly "throws the baby out with the bathwater".
Biting the hand that feeds IT
