Considering MRF blastmail system to address FAA regulatory process but need your help

[Bartman]

anyone? comments?

 

[Bartman]

cover letter for requests to sign the petition

Thank you in advance for your time in considering this request.

The FAA is moving very quickly to prohibit the commercial use of Small Unmanned Aerial Systems, sUAS or “drones”, until a complete regulations document can be drafted.

Commercial sUAS operators have already been providing safe and affordable aerial services to a wide range of industries by following common-sense guidelines, many of which strongly resemble the current commercial sUAS guidelines in use in the UK.

This is not a fight with the FAA but a respectful assertion that the UK commercial sUAS regulations are a worthwhile way to move forward with sUAS integration while preserving the positive economic contribution that they are already making in the United States.

We therefore ask that you consider signing the petition at WHITEHOUSE.GOV so that the commercial use of sUAS may continue for the benefit of those that operate and employ them in the course of their normal business operations.

Thank you.


<Please insert your name above mine>
For additional information about this petition please contact:
Bart Cocchiola
bart@multirotorforums.com

 

[Old Man]

Up the aircraft gross weight to align with the AMA/FAA established 55lb limit already recognized and your proposal looks pretty good. Putting a link to a petition on other M/R forums is a good idea. Some will do little other that open the post but those that become engaged and sign are more than we would have had. I still believe using the AMA as a podium is the best way to go for more direct lobbying. The more input they receive from people like us the better chance we obtain some relief from the system.

I'm a moderator at a low membership G/S RC forum, Team Flying Circus, and I'll post the link to the petition there, and at RC Groups. If someone could get to www.flyinggiants.com there are a lot of members that would sign. Word the request for help in a manner that won't be viewed as inflammatory or confrontational to avoid having the post stricken. I cannot go there, the site owner and I have a history. If you have a link to the UK rules is would expedite reviews that could be used to expand what we are trying to do here.

I do not believe the battle is lost. If that were so the FAA would have released a document that became enforceable immediately. I prefer to take the long view with things like this and I think they are finally starting to open up airspace but are using a club to generate separation where a pop sickle stick would be more effective. OTH, what I'll call the Phantom Fool group has well demonstrated the need for a means to prevent them from doing what they have been so prolific in accomplishing, which is putting everyone at risk.

 

[Old Man]

With your permission I would like to post your signature request at Team Flying Circus immediately.

 

[Bartman]

new thread

http://www.multirotorforums.com/sho...rcial-sUAS-petition-is-live-at-Whitehouse-gov

 

[Bartman]

With your permission I would like to post your signature request at Team Flying Circus immediately.

of course! why isn't it done already!!???!!

 

[Bartman]

i'm hitting the forums sites,

scott, you've got the facebook groups (manufacturers, hobby's, interest groups, etc.)

i'm also sending it to all of my current customers as i hope everyone will do!

 

[Old Man]

RC Groups and Team Flying Circus are handled.

 

[Old Man]

One more site is www.rcuniverse.com if someone can get to it. Between RCU, RC Groups, and Flying Giants a very large portion of the RC flying community will be exposed to the petition.

 

[Bartman]

i hit rcgroups and the freefly forum so far. go ahead and hit rcuniverse please. we can also post to each thread to keep them active and at the tops of the listings.

everyone should reach out to everyone that they can. news outlets use sUAS for aerial media and so it will be beneficial if they get as many emails as possible.

 

[Motopreserve]

FPVlabs as well. I know that there needs to be a distinction between the hobby/FPV community and the commercial aerial A/P contingency, but at this point, you never know who you might reach by spreading the word far and wide. I'm sure there are some FPV enthusiasts who have also been using their evil skills for commercial work

What do we think about posting directly to the news outlet facebook pages???

 

[Bartman]

that's a great idea. the more people that do it, the better.

 

[Old Man]

i hit rcgroups and the freefly forum so far. go ahead and hit rcuniverse please. we can also post to each thread to keep them active and at the tops of the listings.

everyone should reach out to everyone that they can. news outlets use sUAS for aerial media and so it will be beneficial if they get as many emails as possible.

Working it. Will also try to post on DIY Drones if I can remember my log in.

 

[jfro]

Taking a lunch break and seeing a flurry of activity here. Bart, maybe your petition should mention the key points of the rules you are talking about. I have no idea what other countries require.

 

[Av8Chuck]

Chuck,

you keep mentioning that we can't agree here, and although I realize that time is an issue, it seems to me that the dialog and debate raised in this thread is how you hone an argument (and hopefully as a byproduct, goals and direction). Obviously someone will have to take the lead, and cull the ideas into an actionable focus, but I would hope the dialogue is what will help shape that focus. So perhaps the time spent hearing ideas is valuable?

Sadly, I do agree with what you and Old Man have said. It seems to be a game stacked against the little guy - and without some big $ it seems very unlikely that that little guy will be able to help steer the course in any meaningful way. Without sounding defeatist, I will also say that making an effort - ANY effort, will perhaps provide a small amount of comfort by way of "at least we tried." I accept it's a very small conciliation. But in my experience, although bitter sweet, I've personally always felt some small bit of comfort after at least making the effort for something I had a passion for, regardless of whether I failed to achieve my intended goals or not.

So what would you two suggest as the best, realistic course of action?

What I mean about not being able to agree is that we sometimes get bogged down in the details when I don't think the details are that important at the moment. We only need enough explanation to get people to join our effort, any more than that it will just start more debate. However, regarding your comment about continued dialog, THANKS. I could not agree more. Productive debate that incubates an idea combined with the power of the internet might get us to the numbers we need.

Chuck,

it almost seems like you recognize the problem but are accepting defeat in advance. time and funding is not available to address the commercial sUAS sub-group but what is and what can be done in the short term?

as a union pilot I've tried to lobby a large group for support and it's very hard. giving people info to write their own letters doesn't work (the AMA is trying to do this, we'll see how many letters it generates, I'm skeptical). Trying to get enough people to show up on any given day for a protest doesn't work. what works is a link with the opportunity to vote and it's got to be as quick/easy as possible. online petitions do the most you can ask for in a short amount of time and there is the potential to get news coverage if it pops fast and hard.

fwiw, the marine in mexico, as unfortunate as the situation is, isn't the same situation and the petition process shouldn't be compared just because he's still in jail.

I'm not accepting defeat, I just want to reframe the battle a bit. I don't believe we have the time nor can we win the hearts and minds of the select committee so I think we have to not only pick our battle but also when and where to wage it. If others agree then you'll hopefully see why I'm arguing for a PAC to develop the credibility we need to fight this in the courts and in the media.

I hear you about trying to motivate large numbers of people, I'm not against the petition, I just doubt its effectiveness with the FAA. Having said that, as Motopreserve said there's a lot to be gained from the process and I also believe that there are plenty of motivated people that don't need to be "motivated" as such, they just need to believe that that it isn't futile to get involved. Challenging the prerogatives of large companies and government is not easy but I'm hoping that with a little focus and leadership we can simply leverage the motivation that's already there. I have a saying, "You can't be a chimp and do business with a gorilla." Gorillas will always eat your banana. But you get enough chimps together you can fight any gorilla.

I sure have appreciated the insight and knowledge coming from members who've posted on this thread. Chuck, you know you are not alone in your frustration. Knowing just how to respond is not easy.

No doubt a PAC/Professional Association specifically representing sUAS Commercial Aerial Photographers (sUAS CAP) could make a difference. I just wonder how many of us there really are that would be willing to pay $100 to $250 annually to belong to such an organization and what are the real numbers that we'd need. Is it 20,000? That would be great but if the number is that large, I wonder if we'd come close. Additionally, it would take a couple of individuals with a tremendous amount of time and motivation to make it happen.

I found your post about the potential cost of commercial certification for small sUAS to be very informative as well. Having worked as a professional in aviation, I am aware of the costs that airworthiness certifications can add to any product. On this point, I could not agree more. If sUAS Commercial AP is to exists on a level that small operators can afford, we MUST have some separation from the UAS entities that plan to operate large vehicles in the NAS.

There are several issues regarding raising money through membership to PAC but those issues can be addressed later, but if we can get enough people to at least announce their intentions to join then that actually provides us with leverage as well. I don't know where the threshold is but if we can get 10K+ "pledges" then the "sponsorship" fee could be $10 or $20. The better defined our message is the more likely people are to join our cause.

TITLE of the petition
WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO: Compel the FAA to adopt the UK's commercial sUAS standards immediately

BODY of the petition (800 word limit)

Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS or "drones") are already providing valuable services safely and for-hire to a wide range of industries (real estate, agriculture, public safety, etc)


The FAA's present interpretation (FAA-2014-0396) shouldn't seek to indirectly regulate commercial sUAS operations by better defining hobby usage


Commercial sUAS operators should be managed by an sUAS member-operator interest group to be overseen by the FAA


Peripheral issues such as privacy can and should be handled at the local/municipal level


Therefore, the FAA should adopt the UK commercial sUAS standards immediately so as to preserve the benefit of safe and low-cost sUAS aerial services for the tens of thousands of small business people that are already operating and employing them

The only difference between a good idea and a bad idea is a good idea gets done! What you've started and have here is a GREAT idea!

The only thing I would change is to petition Congress, this is not a partizan issue so remove any potential reference that could be perceived as partizan.

As far as out reach, make it personal. We need to call in favors to get people involved that might not otherwise care but could still be influential. SleepyC, we could sure use your help. Can you get the word out at FlyingGiants and RCGroups? Not just as a potential thread but as an email blast? Also, you do a ton of great reviews so I'm sure you have some influence with those companies you do the review for as well as with other reviewers you might collaborate with, can you ask for their support? To start we just need these vendors reviewers to evangelize our cause, a good word from them would go a long way to spreading the word quickly. Plus it would be great if you could contribute more to this debate, your experience in the MR community would be invaluable.

I don't know how successful this will be but we need to plan for our eventual success, getting people to sign the petition is great but we don't want it to end there, that's too passive, which means we need to be working on the next thing. Along with a link to the UK's commercial sUAS standards we need to provide a link to our PAC's mission statement and how people can join and get involved. I hate to use this term but we're also going to need talking points. If we get any traction then the media will certainly start asking questions, if they bait us into a debate about what we think the rules should be we will squander any hope for positive PR. Our talking points should be well though out and trend predominately towards our desire to protect the rights of small businesses to operate in this industry.

Also as part of a strategy going forward we need to figure out how to position our PAC (or whatever anyone would like to to call our organization) so we have to create a message that is more inclusive of the concerns of the AMA and AOPA so they know we don't intend to dilute their install base and so the rules committee also understands that we are well organized and not really a threat to their agendas so that we can be invited to join the committee. Again we'll need a lot of credibility for something like that to happen as well as well thought out messaging.

Does anyone know a Law Firm that might be willing to take on this effort, preferably for free or maybe at least deferred depending on enrollment?

 

[gtranquilla]

ChrisViperM,
your posting reminded me of this incident that I first heard on the local news back in 1983.

During the filming of a segment of the 1983 movie The Twilight Zone, producted by Steven Spielberg, actor Vic Morrow and child actors Myca Dinh Le (age 7) and Renee Shin-Yi Chen (age 6) died in an accident involving a helicopter being used on the set. The helicopter was flying at an altitude of only 25 feet (8 meters), too low to avoid the explosions of the pyrotechnics used on set. When the blasts severed the tail rotor, it spun out of control and crashed, decapitating Morrow and Le with its blades. Chen was crushed to death as the helicopter crashed. Everyone inside the helicopter survived sustaining minor injuries.

The accident led to legal action against the filmmakers which lasted nearly a decade, and changed the regulations involving children working on movie sets at night and during special effects-heavy scenes. The incident also ended the friendship between director Landis and producer Spielberg, who was already angered before the accident that Landis had violated many codes, including using live ammunition on the set.

Every single online dealer/sponsor should have a strong interest.....

Another thing what stumbles me is how quiet the Hollywood guys are....with the strong cost pressure on them they should be the ones screaming loudest....

I think to make that a success (as one of the possible ways to reach results) is to get in contact on a senior level with the other major forums and give this a much wider base....for a limited time, if we can get over the "competion" between forums for net traffic, and to avoid having lots of different petitons floating around, let's all unite.....at least for something important like this.


Chris

 

[gtranquilla]

The American Society of Civil Engineers demonstrates a great deal of interest and involvement in the use of small UAVs as indicated here:
http://www.asce.org/searchResults.aspx

Meanwhile the Civil Engineering departments at many individual Engineering firms are already implementing sUAVs deemed best "fit-for-purpose" size and cost for aerial imaging etc.
They also have federal and state advocacy groups: http://www.asce.org/Government-Relations/Government-Relations/

ASCE Members can help identify the value of sUAVs to regulators thru this process:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3MCFLRB

One does not have to be a ASCE member if he/she is an affiliate such as a member of Engineers without Borders, or http://www.aaes.org/ and others (not all listed).

These organizations will listen to MRF members with Engineering credentials.

here's an idea...

what professional associations have members that benefit from the services of an aerial media company that uses sUAS?

1. Professional Association of Realtors
2. Professional Association of Civil Engineers
3. Professional Association of Architects
4.
5.

6.

who else? get a list, circulate a petition to have the US adopt the UK sUAS standard while getting the larger UAS standards worked out and have everyone do the grass roots thing to get a few hundred thousand signatures on the petition.

i'm working on a petition for this and i'll post when i have something. but until then, let's see a list of professional organizations. between facebook, linkedin, your contacts lists, how many people can we reach out to in a week? 100,000?

 

[Old Man]

Currently the petition has been posted on RC Groups, RC Universe, DIY Drones, Team Flying Circus, and posted in a private M/R professional group's discussion forum for review and signature. Those are the postings I'm aware of. Hopefully someone got to Flying Giants since I cannot go there....

 

[Mike SF]

I suggest to add the link to the audit report of the US Department of Transportation to your cover letter. It's very recent and clearly shows that the FAA is behind their schedule with little attention to finish the sUAS rules. Without knowing that users might wrongly think those regulations will come out by end of the year while in reality they might not come for a long time.

http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/FAA Oversight of Unmanned Aircraft Systems^6-26-14_0.pdf

 

[Old Man]

Perhaps people thinking the rules are imminent would be more productive. Too many put off for tomorrow, or never, that which needs to be handled immediately given the opportunity.