DescentBB

Why limit the range?
Having cameras and long range is the thing that would attract me to the hobby. If I cant explore with it, fly in first person view it doesn't seem like it would be fun. I'm waiting for them to take that aspect of it, as well as battery life, a little further before I tempt myself.

I want to put on a hood and see a view of the surrounding are by turning my head while sitting in a chair with a joystick in hand and I imagine a bunch of us Decent players working out a game of entropy in an abandoned warehouse or shopping mall using this new technology. Using real laser weapons that cumulatively wear down your shields by hitting sensors on the ship....timers take your ship out of play for a respawn if you let the shields go too low...

Capture the flag? Bluetooth to designate which ship has the virtual flag...

You want a better real world usefullness to it? Imagine you are stuck in a bed or wheel chair and someone introduces you to the gear and says 'With this you can go explore the outdoors'.

I can well imagine it would be fun as can be, but still can see serious issues. It's one thing if the rare individual is flying his drone about, seeing his world through new eyes, but there are around 300,000,000 of us here, and if so much as 0.1% of the populace finds this entertaining, you're talking about a hundred thousand of these things zipping through the airspace, which we also use for travel and commerce. Therein lies my concern.

callmeslick wrote:I can well imagine it would be fun as can be, but still can see serious issues. It's one thing if the rare individual is flying his drone about, seeing his world through new eyes, but there are around 300,000,000 of us here, and if so much as 0.1% of the populace finds this entertaining, you're talking about a hundred thousand of these things zipping through the airspace, which we also use for travel and commerce. Therein lies my concern.

Have you noticed how many 3000 pound steel sleds moving at uber deadly speeds are out there right now all locked by gravity on the same plane people walk on?

Have you noticed you need a license, their speed is limited, and you have to remain between the lines, and they are not remotely controlled.

Personally I would have a problem with 15 multi-rotors flying around my neighborhood all day long.

I have no problem with what a person does with these things over private property, but over a public space is different. I wouldn’t feel comfortable unless they were limited to stay above a certain height, no flying at street level. (maybe this is already code, I don’t know)

15 feet above the roof lines would be good for me.

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:I can well imagine it would be fun as can be, but still can see serious issues. It's one thing if the rare individual is flying his drone about, seeing his world through new eyes, but there are around 300,000,000 of us here, and if so much as 0.1% of the populace finds this entertaining, you're talking about a hundred thousand of these things zipping through the airspace, which we also use for travel and commerce. Therein lies my concern.

Have you noticed how many 3000 pound steel sleds moving at uber deadly speeds are out there right now all locked by gravity on the same plane people walk on?

yes, and I notice also that the regulations on them would make for a book about 50 inches thick, if assembled in one volume covering everything from motorist conduct to construction of them.

Im not against regulation...unless it is something like: No cameras....no useful range...etc.

where, when, how loud, etc. those are regulations. Crippling the core functionality is not just regulation.

limiting that function is, Will. Think speed limits. My main car will(according to the owners manual) do 120 mph. Delaware frowns on any attempt to double check that claim on a public highway.

I'm not following your example, your car can go faster than the highest limits in your state.

your cars speed function is not crippled it is left to you to limit the speed depending on where you drive. Go to Nevada and cruise at you and your cars maximum ability

Will Robinson wrote:I'm not following your example, your car can go faster than the highest limits in your state.

your cars speed function is not crippled it is left to you to limit the speed depending on where you drive. Go to Nevada and cruise at you and your cars maximum ability

ok, I see the subtle difference. You are saying that there could be limits upon the range of usage of the aircraft, so long as it isn't mandated that such restriction be built in. I'll accept that, especially given that I know squat about these things and what they are truly capable of at present or in the projected future.

What I'm getting at is they dong regulate cars to prevent all possible dangerous uses.
They leave it to us to drive safe based on conditions. Speed limits are designed based on the study of an area.

So why limit range for all users all the time just because you can imagine a negative outcome that has range as a component for a particular scenario? Instead make it incumbant for users to not create the particular circumstance.

I can't think of anything that should justify limiting range. It seems like it should be that you can either fly over something or you can't refardless of how far you are from the restricted place.

callmeslick wrote:why not, Ferno?

For starters, the AMA (That's the Academy of Model Aeronautics) is a collective voice of over 140,000 members, making any real push for overbearing regulation a physical impossibility. Also, the FAA has published a relaxed set of guidelines recently collectively known as "know before you fly". Anything else would be covered by existing laws and regulations.

oh and.. the FAA tried to take a UAV pilot to court for making money and lost badly.