DRONE REGULATIONS The Micro UAS ARC What’s That Light At The End Of The Tunnel?
This story is a good news-bad news story. Good news is, it looks like there might just be a micro exemption, but the bad news is its less than 250 grams. The micro ARC is was in full swing, and the usual suspects were getting educated at the community’s expense as the bottom falls out of what’s left of the pretenses of a square game.
D.C. insiders, and folks with experience tried in vain to sound the alarm about the dire consequences of giving the FAA consensus on an arbitrary weight as it could very well establish the NAS risk. The self declared experts pushed back on all the warnings, and later tried to save face by declaring participation victories that the weight limit wasn’t zero grams and registration was only five bucks. Unfortunately, for the marginally represented members of the small business and hobby drone community, it looks like someone might have been right yet again.
The FAA HQ made it known that they were keeping the membership roster lean and mean. They made it clear that they have an aggressive timeline and that they intend to meet the announced deadline. That may have been the official line, but other groups were let on after the announcement. The email sent right around kickoff also indicated that Earl Lawrence was the FAA’s point man for picking qualified participants to represent the NAS stakeholders. Perhaps we should cut the new guy a little slack, but slack is in short supply as we have a lot riding on this.
After perusing the roster posted here at sUAS News http://www.suasnews.com/2016/03/42467/ I had an inkling that we were in for a good old fashion boondoggle, and from all accounts, it appears that the FAA is not going to disappoint this time either. After nearly twenty-five years of private “public” airspace integration effort, it is getting so predictable you can just about set your watch (or wearable) to it.
Objectivity is called into question yet again as some members as they are actively seeking VC funding under the guise of being a solution provider assisting the FAA in its draconian regulatory policy. These products and services would be users will have to purchase under without any say or representation, does this serve the public’s best interest?
However, in this instance (like all of the rest) was going to be different; we had a DIY insider, Nancy Egan industry co-chairing the committee. You may be scratching your head thinking the name sounds familiar, but she is no relation to the author. While on the 3DR subject, I’d like to stop and pose a question we are all collectively thinking;
With the FAA’s new Aerospace forecast and industry groups still touting economic reports with a 90 billion dollar shooting fish in a barrel market why is the maker of the world’s smartest drone faring so poorly?
In light of recent reports, and after considering all of the investment industry insiders are wondering if anyone at the company is qualified to head up a committee to promulgate the rules for a skins game of Pin the Tail on the Donkey?
One must also take into consideration that in the airspace integration game just being a lawyer doesn’t make for a qualified facilitator. This friend is not a case law exercise as the backroom deals rarely make it into the law book library.
By all accounts, some of the big fish (Google) decided it wasn’t even worth the trip?? I don’t know what we are to make of that besides the distinct possibility that they know something the little people don’t or, their invited representative rightly had trepidations about guilt by association debacle. Or, possibly the second Titan foot (drone) is right behind the first foot (robotics) out the door? Amazon, on the other hand, is reported to be out doubling down (writing checks) all over town.