Drones

Commercial Drone Delivery Guidelines Start Taking Shape

When does the taco copter arrive?

|

Drones
Credit: Gabriel GM / photo on flickr

America saw the first formal, government-authorized commercial delivery via drones (or unmanned aerial vehicles—UAVs) over the summer. A small drone by an Australian startup named Flirtey, in conjunction with several government and academic institutions, brought some medical supplies to a rural health clinic in Virginia last July.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been bigfooting all over attempts to innovate commercial drone use, banning them entirely while it attempts to (very, very slowly) craft regulations to oversee a system. The most recent news was that they have attempted to implement a comically broad mandatory registration system for all UAVs, commercial or private, weighing more than half a pound.

But now we're seeing some pulling back on the handbrakes. The FAA has announced a little bit of loosening up. The agency has just decided to double the height of the flight ceiling for UAVs from 200 feet to 400 feet anywhere in the country as long as there aren't other restrictions in place (like restricted airspace or in major cities). Keep in mind, though, the FAA's rule that drones have to remain in visual view of its pilot will still apply. The FAA also made it easier for commercial drone users to register their vehicles online cheaply.

We're also now seeing what sort of recommendations are coming out of the committee the government put together to establish more formal uses for commercial drones. The Associated Press got a copy of the recommendations that were sent to the FAA on Friday, though the FAA isn't actually obligated to implement the rules. The recommendations would create four categories of UAV guidelines, according to the AP:

The first category of drones would weigh no more than about a half-pound. They essentially could fly unrestricted over people, including crowds. Drone makers would have to certify that if the drone hit someone, there would be no more than a 1 percent chance that the maximum force of the impact would cause a serious injury. …

Drones in the second category are expected to be mostly small quadcopters — drones with multiple arms and propellers, and weighing 4 pounds to 5 pounds — but there is no weight limit. Flights over people, including crowds, would depend on the design and operating instructions. Manufacturers would have to demonstrate through testing that the chance of a serious injury was 1 percent or less.

Drones in the third category could not fly over crowds or densely populated areas. These drones would be used for work in closed or restricted sites where the people that the drones fly over have permission from the drone operator to be present. Those people would be incidental to the drone operations and flights over them would be brief, rather than sustained. Manufacturers would have to show there was a 30 percent chance or less that a person would be seriously injured if struck by the drone at the maximum strength impact possible.

Drones in the fourth category could have sustained flights over crowds. Working with the FAA and engaging the local community, the operator would have to develop a "congested area plan" showing how flight risks would be mitigated. As before, the risk of serious injury would have to be 30 percent or less. Safety tests would be more exacting and the FAA would set a limit on how strong the drone's maximum impact could be.

According to the AP, the Air Line Pilots Association and trade associations for helicopters and crop dusters attempted to protect their turf by trying to force drone pilots pass a test administered by the FAA and get a background check. This is protectionism via licensing, a method by which entrenched businesses and workers groups attempt to stave off competition by making it harder (often unnecessarily so) to participate in the industry. They did not get their way, but they apparently were permitted to include a dissent in the recommendations.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

187 responses to “Commercial Drone Delivery Guidelines Start Taking Shape

  1. Heh heh. Tacos rule.

  2. When does the taco copter arrive?

    Racist!

    /places order

    1. Cue sunrise-silhouette of quadcopter carrying sombrero wearer over border to his bright USA future.

    2. Something about “cultural appropriation”.

    3. I can’t wait to start getting my newspaper via drone delivery.

      1. La Opini?n? Double racist!

  3. If you pull back on the hand brakes, don’t you stop completely?

    1. This was my question.

      1. Can’t I mix my metaphors without being judged?

        1. Drones don’t even have brakes, dummies.

          1. I think it was one of those masterbation euphemism

            1. masterbation

              Is this a Canadian spelling? What is the French-Canadian term, la poign?e de la mort?

              1. The Canadian phrase is “polishing the icicle.”

              2. I believe it’s a simple “Hello.”

                1. And that is the origin of hockey.

              3. “Lacrosse”

        2. Realistically? No. No you cannot.

          But you shouldn’t let that stop you, either.

      2. Its like you guys have never seen the Rockford Files.

        1. Coolest investigator/cop/detective character in TV history, IMO.

    2. I dunno, I used to “drift” back in my younger years by pulling on the hand brake while turning. Gave Tokyo Drift a run for its money. Good times.

      (not in my car, of course)

      1. New stick shift cars are coming with electric parking brakes now. It gets rid of the space a hand brake takes up but I find it easy to forget it’s on and I don’t trust the electric motor that operates the things to last.

        1. Or for them to not work when needed.

        2. Just leave the gear in reverse when you park. I have to do this all winter long because the e-brake line in my car freezes when it’s under 25 degrees.

  4. Drone deliveries? I don’t like the idea of fishing my new Dockers out of my gutters. Get on it, government.

    1. Nice pants.

      1. He likes the deep pockets and generous guntal area.

        1. Not that Eugene is obese or anything, but what body fat he does have all collects right there for some reason.

          1. Like a fleshy fannypack?

            1. Eugene’s flesh apron is actually a beneficial adaptation to the harsh environment of Hit’n’Run, because it provides some protection against the constant nutpunches. That’s how come he’s almost always able to be the first commenter on links threads.

              1. It also prevents heat loss from his front anus.

                1. It’s hell to watch him jump on a trampoline, though. Too bad it’s all he does.

              2. And the underside of the flesh apron has evolved octopus-like suckers to facilitate the mating process.

                1. I think all these guesses violate HIPAA.

                  1. Or maybe you could wear shirts more often.

        2. Are Eugene and I the only men who yearn for a simpler time when pants had deeper pockets?

          1. An, the good old days, when your iPhone still fit in your pocket, and there was room left over for pocket pool.

            1. I just want more room to accommodate the phone and other stuff!

              1. When Crusty says “other stuff” he means exactly what you’re afraid he means.

                1. I was trying to keep it classy.

    2. i’d imagine the non-iron would slide right out. unless your pleats got caught up. but nobody wears pleats anymore.

      1. If your pants aren’t made of iron, you’re doing it wrong, anyway.

    3. I took you for more of a bulk Kirkland clothes kind of chump.

      1. I’m just heartened you think of my trousers at all.

        1. It’s like counting sheep. Helps me get to sleep.

      2. Jeez, you buy one pound of underwear and you’re on their mailing list for life.

    4. Dockers? You’re even more of a vulgarian than I thought.

      1. Well, no one makes speedsuits that don’t bind anymore.

        1. What, you’re too good for Garanimals?

  5. These tacos, are they fish tacos?

  6. People will start shooting them down to steal stuff.

    1. New regulation: All drones must be equipped with a self destruct mechanism strong enough to destroy whatever is being delivered.

      1. That sounds dangerous. How ’bout just a device that sprays the merchandise with skunk juice in the event of a malfunction?

  7. there would be no more than a 1 percent chance that the maximum force of the impact would cause a serious injury.

    1% is a huge fucking number when talking about serious injuries.

    1. Pussies like you would have outlawed fire 100,000 years ago.

      1. Fire is a good thing.

        Kids playing with matches, not so much.

        Even a half-pound drone falling from 40 stories into a crowded arena is big fucking problem.

        1. Tort law will deal with that. If the cost of paying for the injuries caused outweighs the benefits of the drones and the cost of producing safer drones, then they’ll go away. Funny how economics works.

        2. There was a tape measure dropped from a height that struck and killed a man. story

    2. The libertarian case for speed limits.

      1. I can live with a legal system that lets an operator drop a 4-lb drone with a go-pro on my wife’s head from 40 stories so long as I get to beat the operator to death with a baseball bat or take his/her house in compensation (my choice).

        1. Well at least you’re waiting until a crime has actually occurred.

          1. Correct.

            Instead of defining regulations for how much drones can weigh and where they can be operated, they need to be defining the liabilities associated with private and commercial operation of drones in public spaces — both criminal and civil.

            1. Why not let states and localities handle that like they do with most other stuff. If you hit someone with your bicycle or something accidentally dropped from a building, the feds usually don’t get involved.

        2. I can live with a legal system that lets an operator drop a 4-lb drone with a go-pro on my wife’s head from 40 stories so long as I get to beat the operator to death with a baseball bat or take his/her house in compensation (my choice).

          these are reasonable compromises.

    3. 1% times the likelihood that an object will actually hit someone is a small number. We’re talking conditional probabilities here.

  8. Shackford strides on the Alt-text field and triumphs!

    1. You and he scoff, but when drones supplant the bedridden obese’s enabling mother for daily caloric delivery, they will become an official health concern.

      1. You really can see the future, fist.

        1. That is eerily…prescient.

    2. He has taken the lead over Krayewski, but a large part of Ed’s demise is connected to his use of a foreign language in the alt text. This is America, and we speak American!

      1. I agree! If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it should be good enough for Reason’s staff!

        1. +1 King James Version

  9. So I’m pretty sure I’m fated to be killed by a drone. The only question is whether my number will come up on President Clinton’s (either II or III) disposition matrix before I happen to be standing in the wrong place when a quadcopter’s battery dies while delivering a case of Bud Light Lime.

    1. At least have the damned thing drop a case of Two-Hearted Ale or such on ye?!

    2. It has to be lime doesn’t it? Poetic.

    3. Why hasn’t Bud Light Lime been banned?

      1. Because no amount of it can get you to the legal limit of intoxication.

        1. Just before the buzz sets in, the diarrhea takes hold.

          1. Yup. And that’s just science.

            1. hydrostatic equilibrium.

      2. I keep buying it to give out in the ski lines instead of redbull.
        I have so many more points in gnar this year.

    4. …standing in the wrong place when a quadcopter’s battery dies while delivering a case of Bud Light Lime

      Because being killed by a falling case of beer that doesn’t suck is asking too much.

    5. If the spent drone flares at just the right time during its autorotation down on top of you, you might just get a gentle tap on the noggin and a lap full of beer.

  10. What will lefties label situation when nobody sends drones to Compton anymore because they never come back?

    Will it be ‘Drone Divide’ or will it be ‘Drone Desert?’

    1. Drone Desert, I should think.

      1. Ever since the Crips got SA-2’s, only Chang’s liquor store stealth-drones venture over the desert.

      2. Drone Desert Demonstrates Digital Divide.

          1. Damn, Swiss, i never knew that consonance made you happen to yourself.

            1. *startled look crosses face….then understanding dawns*

              Ouch. I think I sprained a couple of gaze narrowing muscles. I hope I don’t have to go on the DL – Upper Body injury, Day to Day. The playoffs are almost here!

              1. you play through that in the playoffs.

              2. I hope I don’t have to go on the DL – Upper Body injury, Day to Day. The playoffs are almost here!

                Ew. I expect more out of you.

              3. That’s the most abstract masturbation euphemism yet. Congratulations, i guess.

                1. No no! That would have been “Lower Body”.

    2. Drone inequality?

  11. When does the taco copter arrive?

    Another euphemism?

    1. Drone delivery ladies of negotiable virtue.

      /sld

    2. Its euphemisms all the way down, Loki. All. The. Way.

      1. All the way Down. Neck to Nuts, so to speak.

  12. Manufacturers would have to demonstrate through testing that the chance of a serious injury was 1 percent or less.

    Define “testing.” Define “serious.” This reads like a flippant government bureaucrat thinking that drone makers are like pharmaceutical companies, when they are often hobbyists and tiny businesses.

  13. I see one over my property and I will make an effort to shoot it down.

    1. Are you shooting at aircraft now? If not, why not? At what altitude is your property line?

      1. As high as I can shoot.

      2. 500 feet per FAA.

        A drone over my property without my permission is committing criminal trespassing.

        1. So, any point on a structure above 500 feet is public property? Just trying to understand how this works.

          1. Ask the FAA. Any unamnned vehicle operating below that without my permission risks becoming target practice. I don’t trespass on or above those people’s property.

            It would make sense for them to either gain/purchase access rights or to fly above public roadways.

        2. So, do you shoot down kites from neighborhood kids that cross your property?

          1. The neighbors’ kids don’t fly kites. They do shoot at coyotes though.

            1. A coyote flying at less than 500 feet deserves exactly what it gets.

      3. Oddly enough had a plane buzz the house at about 200 feet. We straight over so I couldn’t get his tail id. I think I know who it is but would have been nice to confirm.

    2. Here’s a math problem for any of you STEM types: if you owned a mile of property on the equator, how long would your piece of the geostationary zone be?

  14. Why didn’t the FAA start developing these rules 20 or 30 years ago, before drones were even a thing, in preparation for this day? I’d suggest the reason they didn’t start developing rules for drones before there were drones is because they had no idea drones were going to become a thing – and yet now they’re developing these comprehensive rules as if they’re qualified to say what the future of drones should look like. How screwed up is it that the bureaucrats most fundamentally opposed to thinking outside the box and most in favor of going by the book are the ones in charge of regulating the innovators who only bring about progress by thinking outside the box and not going by the book? Imagine what automotive traffic would be like if 125 years ago the DOT came up with comprehensive rules dealing with these dangerous new-fangled high-speed mechanical toys on unpaved roads interfering with the regular pedestrians and the livestock.

    1. +1 Red Flag Act

      http://www.carhistory4u.com/th…..d-flag-act

  15. Look, is there something that’s unregulated? Just tell me so I know whom to vote for… for whom to vote.

    1. Anything unregulated is a thing, up with which I will not put.

  16. OT (& apologies if already covered):

    what happens when medical marijuana and asset forfeiture meet.

    1. They obtained the permission of the landlord of the building where the dispensary, called the DNA Wellness Center, was to be housed. They went to local planning commission meetings to obtain the proper permits and licenses. They discussed business hours, security measures and even signage requirements with the planning commission.

      Isn’t that cute. Even when you ask for permission, you might not have it.

      1. And yet, read the comments, there are folks who will excuse anything the police do.

    2. The Shattuck family has experienced this harm first-hand. Beyond the financial burden, the raids have left the family with considerable emotional trauma as well. When the task force raided her home, Shattuck’s mother was babysitting her four children, who were all under age 10 at the time. “During the dynamic entry, armed DTF officers wearing ski masks separated the children from their grandmother at gunpoint, shouting at her to get the dog under control or they would shoot it,” a court briefing filed by the Shattucks’ lawyer alleges. “The deputies kept the children lined up on the couch at gunpoint, refusing even to remove their masks to help calm the kids.”

      Donnellon called this a “misrepresentation of the incident.” During raids like this, he says, it’s standard for officers to enter with weapons drawn. “If you come in at a dynamic entry raid, you’re going to aim that gun at the parents. Children are going to be sat at a couch. There’s absolutely no way in hell would we point a gun at child on a couch,” he said in an interview.

      He added that his officers typically don’t wear ski masks, either. “These guys on the SWAT teams are dads, too,” he said.

      They are dads? That makes it all okay!

      1. I think Sheriff Donnellon made it perfectly clear that there is absolutely no way in hell would they point a gun at child on a couch. Since he wasn’t there, he would know. Why would you believe an eye witness instead.

      2. Somebody has to be the dads of the next generation of insufferable assholes.

      3. There’s absolutely no way in hell would we point a gun at child on a couch

        Sure, buddy.

        He added that his officers typically don’t wear ski masks, either.

        Uh-huh.

        Let’s back up: why was their a SWAT raid on this house, exactly? Why not knock on the door and serve a warrant like a civilized human being, instead of a roided-up baboon?

    3. Also, while I get the problem with the initiative, I like the suggestion that only Top Men should be writing laws.

      some drug policy experts say are the shortcomings of writing drug policy via ballot initiative. A more carefully considered piece of legislation may have clarified the gray areas that led to the raid on the Shattucks’ home and business, for instance.

      Michigan’s medical marijuana law, approved by voters in 2008, “is a very confusing statute,” according to Stephen Guilliat, chief assistant prosecutor for St. Clair County, where the dispensary was located. “Whoever drafted it was either crazy as a fox, or didn’t know what they were doing.”

  17. Save me, JEEZISS Gummint!

  18. Apologies if this has been pointed out above (not going to bother reading them), but “Taco Copter” would make a great album title or a pretty good band name.

    1. An album by the Rural Homos

      1. And they could do a live album from the accompanying tour “Mexicans, pot and ass sex live”.

      2. And then the big follow up record, “Buck Naked”. That would be when the band stripped down and got back to its roots.

  19. In a way this is already regulation. Flying is considered an inherently dangerous activity, for those on the ground at lease, and whenever an aircraft crashes, the owner is strictly liable for any damage it causes. So if your taco copter hits me or harms me in any way, I can sue the living fuck out of you.

    The bigger issue is there needs to be a serious rethinking of how property ownership includes the airspace above it. Right now it doesn’t. And that makes sense when you are taking about airplanes. It makes no sense when you are talking about drones. They need to amend that rule and say the property owner owns say the first 100 feet above the highest point on his property. A drone buzzing across my property at 20 feet is a trespass in a way an airplane flying over at several hundred or a thousand feet is not.

    1. Serious question, how does current law deal with me sticking a camera on a 20′ pole in my yard, which gets a full view of the neighbor’s yard over their fence. That’s a potential thorny issue that removes drones from the equation, keeps my activities within the border of my property but presents the very same privacy issues drones present.

      1. You are not in his airspace. So it is not an issue. You can do it. It is no different than looking out your window.

        1. I find it hard to believe it’s that simple.

          1. Why wouldn’t it be? There could be zoning issues that prevent you from building the poll.

            1. Well, I can argue with zero authority on this because I lack the legal background, but I have to think that sticking a camera on a pole and pointing at an area that’s not generally publicly viewable might be legally questionable. For instance, we know that Google Street View cars can operate because they’re viewing what can be seen from the street. But what’s in your backyard, especially if there are fences involved seems like a more grey area. As far as the height of the poll, I had considered that when I wrote my post but I didn’t want to get into secondary areas of regulatory action such as sign-height or antenna height (those HAM radio guys who always get into neighbor disputes). My argument presumes your poll height is well within regulatory limits. I have a two story house with daylight basement and a steep, peaked roof. I can see clear over to Bellevue from my upper windows.

              I’m not suggesting that it MUST be illegal, but I’m merely arguing that there have to be thorny issues that aren’t entirely settled, black-letter law.

              Here’s an on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand view:

              http://www.nolo.com/legal-ency…..perty.html

              1. Pole…pole… pole… Jesus I’ve got polling on the brain.

                1. Pole…pole… pole… Jesus I’ve got polling on the brain.

                  That is not even abstract.

              2. As a general rule you don’t own the airspace above your property. IT is possible that your neighbors could have a light easement that prevents you from building above a certain height but that is about it. There is no general right of privacy to anything that can be seen from the street or other property. So, there is nothing stopping you from filming your neighbor’s back yard all you like.

                You might run afoul of stalking laws or some such. But there is nothing in property law that stops it.

                1. You might run afoul of stalking laws or some such. But there is nothing in property law that stops it.

                  Fair enough.

                  *heads to home depot with shopping list: 25′ 2 x 2, fencepost digger.*

                  1. Slow down, there, Paul. Most zoning ordinances have height restrictions. If you can’t build more than a two story house, you can’t stick your pole up any higher than that.

        2. Would these airspace restrictions apply to all objects that I own? Could I extend the pole over his property? If not, then do I now have to trim all my trees so they don’t cross the property line? What if I accidentally throw a football into his yard? Is the FAA now going to bust down my door?

          1. Is the FAA now going to bust down my door?

            Yes.

            1. Yeah, that was an easy one.

            2. Whelp… no more tennis balls for my dog. He’ll be… upset.

          2. I would argue that any tree branches (or objects) which extend over your property, you can hack down.

            1. True, but that’s different from your neighbor having an obligation to hack them down for you at your whim.

            2. And you would be correct. You ahve a right to trim any plants that extend onto your property.

              1. Now if I only had the right to kill the pestiferous plants in my neighbor’s yard that *spawn* onto my property…god I hate that stuff!

          3. If not, then do I now have to trim all my trees so they don’t cross the property line?

            Umm, you probably have to do that now if the neighbor requests it.

            Saying you don’t own the airspace doesn’t mean your neighbor can build a cantilevered deck one inch off the ground that covers half your property, as long as it never touches your dirt.

            1. Technically, I don’t think you can be made to trim your own tree.

              But you’d be a fool not to. When the alternative is your neighbor hacking it up, that is.

      2. I was going to write something similar. I don’t think you should be able to fly a drone over my property and take high resolution photos of whatever I’m up to. Cops need a warrant, but if some busy body neighbor turns in a picture? From an airplane, you might make out the brand of tractor I own. Google maps has a rough look at my yard, but nothing serious.

        1. Google maps has a rough look at my yard, but nothing serious.

          Yeah, hopefully you’ve got enough brush around to break up the outline of your railgun emplacement.

          1. This discontinuity in dirt color make the buried particle accelerator stand out like a sore thumb, though.

          2. Google maps has a rough look at my yard,

            You can actually see my dogs napping in their yard on Google Maps. Its kind bleary, but there’s no mistaking it.

            1. My parents house in vermont is much further up than mine here. I assume it’s a population based system.

  20. Last week I received a phone survey regarding local versus federal rules pertaining to drone regulation.

    1. “Neither.” *click*

      1. Sadly it wasn’t an option. It was automated. Some of the questions had libertarian answer choices but not many. I think it was about 25 questions.

  21. Some haikus I wrote during basic training:

    a green hand grenade
    grab it, pull the pin, frag out!
    thunder in the snow

    early morning frost
    groggy, sweating young soldiers
    PT is not fun

    we call it “latrine”
    safe from ice and wind in there
    why the different name?

    1. Number 1 is the “not.”

      1. It;s #3 the third line has 6 syllables.

      2. CORRECT! “Thunder in the snow” is really the latrine.

        1. And, all due respect to the poet, makes a much better Haiku. IMO, YMMV.

        2. Derpy, next time you’re in latrine-land, try to start a new tradition of yelling “frag out!” when you, err, download a file.

  22. Spot the Not: Things I said to Drill Sgts

    1. As you wish, drill sgt.
    2. Your left boot is untied, drill sgt.
    3. I haven’t called anything except drill sgt, drill sgt.
    4. Drill sgt, I’m running on nothing but raw determination and honey lemon cough drops.
    5. Down like a clown charlie brown
    6. I hear and I obey- sometimes, if I feel like it.

    1. 6.

      You were doing pushups when you said #2 weren’t you?

    2. 6

    3. 6 is the Not, and I did not get in trouble for #2. When I said it, the soldiers around had a “what have you done!?” look on their faces, but the drill sgt actually thanked me and fixed it without saying much else.

      I never, ever got tired of pointing out drill sgts’ shortcomings.

  23. I read this headline and I KNEW it was Baltimore before I clicked on it. I mean KNEW like how you know it’s day time right now and that it’s April.

    Them are my crabs, bitches!

    1. The cold, snow, and freezing rain that I have experienced today tell me that it is currently January.

      1. Getting colder here now too, and raining.

    2. Its a good thing there was no Natty Boh involved. Then they would have shot one another.

  24. Spot the Not: things drill sgts said to me

    1. You’re ugly
    2. Fix your belt
    3. You a smart muthafucka
    4. Goddamn you’re ugly- also fix your belt
    5. Stop looking at me like I’m stupid
    6. Are you calling me a liar?

    1. 3. Unless it was sarcastic.

    2. 6. You don’t seem like the type who would fall into that trap.

    3. I’m leaning toward #5. I’m also assuming that #3 was said sarcastically.

      Also, welcome back, sir.

        1. Don’t “sir” him. He’s not an officer, dammit. He’s still a person.

    4. 4 is the Not. It’s a conflation of two actual quotes.

      3 happened when explained the reason the Army uses a flanking movement during a response to a far ambush is so the the enemy has to defend in two directions (front & side), but we only need defend in one direction (front).

      6 happened after I repeatedly denied I was a smart-ass. The drill sgt then began to repeatedly ask that question, to which I finally said “I haven’t called you anything except drill sgt, drill sgt”. It all started when I was waiting in line to throw practice grenades. The guy in front of me asked if I had taken out the mail. He then asked if I had put it in the mail box. Irritated at his stupidity, I shouted “yes, I put it in the mailbox. That’s why I said ‘yes’ when you asked me if I took out the mail.” Well, that got the drill sgt’s attention, and he yelled at me and told everyone to stand at attention. He then told everyone to say “Thanks, Derpy”. When they said it, I tipped my hat as if to say “you’re welcome”, and that got him really pissed and yelling about how I was being a smart-ass.

  25. According to the AP, the Air Line Pilots Association and trade associations for helicopters and crop dusters attempted to protect their turf by trying to force drone pilots pass a test administered by the FAA and get a background check. This is protectionism via licensing, a method by which entrenched businesses and workers groups attempt to stave off competition by making it harder (often unnecessarily so) to participate in the industry. They did not get their way, but they apparently were permitted to include a dissent in the recommendations.

    I really don’t see the rent-seeking angle you’re trying to dig up. Of those three groups, only the crop dusters could possibly see drones as competition, and that’s a stretch at this point in time. It seems more likely that they’re concerned about having drones crashing into their aircraft because operators don’t know what they’re doing.

  26. RE: Commercial Drone Delivery Guidelines Start Taking Shape
    When does the taco copter arrive?

    1. Do you need a license from those who enslave us to operate a drone?

    2. Fuck the taco copter. Give me a taco truck any day.

  27. Before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    http://www.JobToday60.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.