Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 136 posts

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#121

Post by asynchronous13 »

exDM69 wrote: post #106

This is the only sensible (but temporary) decision that the FAA could have done. The next step is to research reliable methods of navigation and air traffic rules for unmanned and autonomous aerial vehicles, and when that can be made demonstrably safe, this regulation can be revisited. If FAA would have allowed commercial drone operations without further regulation, and the technology would have had widespread adopti…

> This is the only sensible (but temporary) decision that the FAA could have done

Not by a long-shot! The FAA has been dragging its heals for more than 15 years!! I've been personally involved working with unmanned aircraft since 2002, and even back then the FAA was woefully behind the times.

Instead of an outright ban, the more sensible decision would be to allow it under highly restrictive conditions. For example, require that the operator has a pilot's license. Require that the deliveries only occur over unpopulated areas (example, ice fishing lakes). Require that the max take-off weight of the aircraft is very low.

Highly restrictive is more sensible than an outright ban because it provides real data for how to integrate unmanned aircraft while at the same time preventing very dangerous situations.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#122

Post by rlpb »

TerraHertz wrote: post #95

There's a fatal flaw. Even if commercial delivery drones could be engineered to not crash into people or houses, not tangle with power lines, not cause accidents on highways, and not collide with each other once they are common, there's one thing that will instantly get them banned. That will be the time someone uses a UAV to deliver 10 Oz of Semtex and a proximity sensor to someone they don't like. Exactly how are y…

Let's say that I'm one of these people. It's already illegal for me to send a UAV to your house with Semtex and a proximity sensor, since trying to kill you is already illegal. What makes you think that a ban on UAVs will stop me? How will a ban on UAVs help you protect yourself from my illegal murder attempt?

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#123

Post by asynchronous13 »

naterator wrote: post #114
drawkbox wrote: post #83

I'd like the US to be the innovators on drone deliveries but it looks like we'll pass that opportunity up. Maybe we can outlaw any form of driverless car as well. Just as both are getting to be new markets that could increase economic growth. Drones, if they are more efficient than truck deliveries from a cost and energy use perspective, for most things they will be the solution used. It is just does the US want that…

Silicon Valley and the tech sector is full of adult babies. Watching the twitter reaction to this news (and others) is pretty fascinating. You're all so doom-and-gloom the first second the government tries to regulate something. Let's not discuss the histrionics that come out on other topics. Further, you act like there could be no possible logical reason why these things should be regulated. Don't get me wrong, I'm…

You're absolutely right that there should be regulations. The reaction you are seeing is because the FAA is so behind the times that it hurts. This topic is just now coming into mainstream news, but it's been going on for a long long time.

In 2012, Congress told the FAA to hurry up. Do you know how far behind the FAA had to be for Congress to notice that the FAA wasn't doing their job? Yeah, it's that bad.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#124

Post by exDM69 »

mantraxD wrote: post #118
exDM69 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate your opinion and recognize that there are many people who share your opinion but I can't agree. Compared to road and air traffic, it would take a serious amount of drones to match the noise and visual pollution. The pizza delivery man with his car or scooter makes more noise and takes more space than a drone would. And you have to remember that the early jet aircraft were very noisy and inefficient compa…

If machines are flying over your head, would you feel safe going out without a helmet on your head? Despite all safety measures, you know it'll happen at some point. One of those will fail, its safety will fail and it'll drop on the head of some kid and put it in the hospital. I can predict immediately that birds and drones colliding will be one of the biggest problems (and it's not something you can fix with frequen…

> If machines are flying over your head, would you feel safe going out without a helmet on your head?

No, not with the current state of technology. That's why I think that this ban is in the right thing to do for the time being.

> I can predict immediately that birds and drones colliding will be one of the biggest problems

You're definitely right, bird strikes are a hazard for drones, model aircraft and big aviation alike.

Unlike big aircraft (which can dodge big flocks at best), a drone is more maneuverable and could be able to dodge birds to some degree using some kind of camera technology. Of course, a bird may also intentionally attack a drone (they certainly attack my kites occasionally), which is a harder problem to solve.

These are challenges that have to be overcome with navigation, camera and drone-to-drone communication techniques as well as redundancy.

Before we can put a number estimating the statistical risks of drone traffic, it is premature to think about large scale commercial operations. I think that it's inevitable that we'll have such a number (ie. number of incidents per hours of drone flight), and we can utilize technologies that will bring that number down to acceptable levels (ie. near or below existing road and air traffic risks). When that happens, re-thinking this restriction (not necessarily lifting it) is due.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#125

Post by krschultz »

headShrinker wrote: post #78
krschultz wrote: post #66

Huge win for Amazon, which never actually intended to use drones to deliver packages. The whole thing was a PR stunt designed to gain traffic on cyber Monday. Now they conviently can blame the government when they never actually invest the money to build the drones.

I think you are wrong. I will abbreviate the article wrote on this very subject found here: http://fritzw.com/2013/12/03/theres-little-doubt-about-amazo... Amazon’s devices will be used for a single purpose they will be optimized in ways we have never seen in the multicopter industry. Their delivery scheme will be completely computer controlled, and will account for weather, airspeed, air density, and flight path, be…

First off, if package handling is more efficient using quad copters than wheeled robots, why doesn't Amazon use them inside their warehouse? It is a controlled environment (no weather, no wind, can have localizing beacons all over, fixed map, etc etc) and doesn't require FAA approval. Not to mention products in the warehouse are lighter weight and smaller because they haven't been packed for shipping yet.

I would argue that is at least a first step on this road if they ever intend to actually deliver packages by drones. The fact that they haven't done even that simple step before announcing it publicly makes me believe it was pure PR.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#126

Post by asynchronous13 »

DannyBee wrote: post #91
cromulent wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the FAA, they clarified this in 2007. No flying a UAS for commercial purposes, only one case has ever been approved. http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240

at least the 2012 act requires them to allow flying UAS for commercial purposes (at the very least in the arctic, and likely elsewhere, depending on how you read it), and start a rulemaking about it

The 2012 act requires that the FAA have rules in place by 2015. So far, the FAA has missed nearly every deadline that was required by the 2012 act.

In theory, the FAA's funding is contingent upon having rules in place. In practice, I'm sure congress will grant them an extension when they end up late.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#127

Post by kjhughes »

UPDATE:

"This is about hobbyists and model aircraft, not Amazon," said Mary Osako, a spokeswoman for the Seattle-based company. The rule, she said, doesn't apply to commercial entities such as Amazon and "has no effect on our plans."

The rule applies only to hobbyists and was meant to clarify what services are considered legal and what are not within that category, FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown told CNET. For hobbyists, "using a model aircraft to move a box from point to point without any kind of compensation," is OK, according to the guidelines, while accepting a fee for delivery services is not.

Source: http://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-dont-worry-our-drones-are-st...

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#128

Post by exDM69 »

asynchronous13 wrote: post #121
exDM69 wrote: post #106

This is the only sensible (but temporary) decision that the FAA could have done. The next step is to research reliable methods of navigation and air traffic rules for unmanned and autonomous aerial vehicles, and when that can be made demonstrably safe, this regulation can be revisited. If FAA would have allowed commercial drone operations without further regulation, and the technology would have had widespread adopti…

> This is the only sensible (but temporary) decision that the FAA could have done Not by a long-shot! The FAA has been dragging its heals for more than 15 years!! I've been personally involved working with unmanned aircraft since 2002, and even back then the FAA was woefully behind the times. Instead of an outright ban, the more sensible decision would be to allow it under highly restrictive conditions. For example,…

> Instead of an outright ban, the more sensible decision would be to allow it under highly restrictive conditions. For example, require that the operator has a pilot's license. Require that the deliveries only occur over unpopulated areas (example, ice fishing lakes). Require that the max take-off weight of the aircraft is very low.

These are all very good suggestions and I have no doubt that something like this will happen in the long run. Of course, government bureaucracy is painfully slow.

The FAA also needs to make these decisions (e.g. maximum takeoff weight) based on some facts, not just gut feeling, and I'd guess that they are hard at work (as hard as a government bureaucrat can) to try to figure out the regulations under which drone operations can be permitted.

There are people who would want to allow unregulated, autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles and do so now. I think that this is a pretty crazy idea...

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#129

Post by asynchronous13 »

kjhughes wrote: post #127

UPDATE: "This is about hobbyists and model aircraft, not Amazon," said Mary Osako, a spokeswoman for the Seattle-based company. The rule, she said, doesn't apply to commercial entities such as Amazon and "has no effect on our plans." The rule applies only to hobbyists and was meant to clarify what services are considered legal and what are not within that category, FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown told CNET. For hobbyists…

Not sure if Mary Osako is clueless or trying some PR angle that I don't get.

Yes, the FAA statement was to clarify what is okay for hobbyists. The FAA clearly states that accepting payment takes you out of the hobbyist category and puts you into the commercial category. And there is a blanket ban if you fall into the commercial category.

Re: FAA bans the use of drones to deliver packages

#130

Post by szierk »

krschultz wrote: post #66

Huge win for Amazon, which never actually intended to use drones to deliver packages. The whole thing was a PR stunt designed to gain traffic on cyber Monday. Now they conviently can blame the government when they never actually invest the money to build the drones.

Source?
Post reply on HN