Dark Days in Droneland

Patrick in discussion with the FAA

Regarding the NPRM comments/questions section, I have stated publicly in articles, on forums, on social media platforms, and in several interviews; the FAA is under no obligation to change one word of the NPRM due to public comments. This regulatory situation is like trying to negotiate peace from the losing side of the Carthaginian War.

It took years of conversations, capitulations, folly, and ex parte deals with representatives from the Chinese Toy Company (and Chinese investors) to arrive where we are currently with private-public rulemaking. All of this allegedly being done on behalf of US citizens. The RID NPRM represents the US Government’s own institutional dysfunction and it was facilitated by the DOD, DOJ, DOT, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA, et al.

But NASA is so cool and all about data and science…so it’s fine right? Yeah, not so much. They have been on the receiving end of hundreds of millions of dollars and are doing whatever they can to cash in on the disaster that is befalling the American Aerospace industry. UTM, in my estimation, is not needed beyond what Amazon, Google, Wal-Mart, UPS, UBER, and the rest of the would-be burrito delivery barons want you to subsidize.

The FAA and/or NASA have no idea what is transpiring in US airspace. However, the lack of empirical data (or hard science) does not stop anyone entity or person, be they expert or lobbyist, to advocate for more half-backed regulations that will get placed upon Unmanned Aircraft end-users fluttering through United States airspace.

Anecdotally, since 2016, we know that drones are a few orders of magnitude safer than GA aircraft.

Some experts erroneously speculate that it is because droners are following the law.
Who wants to buy a bridge? The whole 15-month PrecisionHawk (chair of the DAC) Pathfinder Part 107.31 Waiver (#BVLOS for the Best Buy flyer) and its subsequent ineffectiveness has invalidated that notion entirely. As a side note, that company was purportedly operating BVLOS; had numerous shootdowns, flyways, spotty training, no VOs, and a veritable laundry list of potentially hazardous operation. And nobody took responsibility for these setbacks. The punch line of this, in the end, is that they couldn’t turn a profit! Thankfully, no one got hurt, at least that we know about, and the FAA couldn’t be bothered to leave the FSDO so they closed the investigation. #safetyoftheNAS

*I would suggest anyone who is experiencing arbitrary enforcement actions by the FAA to contact me as I have information that would be of use to your legal counsel.

Well, the good news is there is always a silver lining…even in these dark days. It has come to my attention that the lobbyists are unhappy with the comments that people are making since it is now muddying their water. These swamp creatures reek of the same kind of desperation common amongst degenerate gamblers who seem to know that if this RID hand doesn’t pay off, none of their client members will pay their dues.

So, maybe making comments is a good thing, after all?