On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.

On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 3:50:21 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs..
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement..

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident..
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.

The problem isn't just distraction it's temporary night blindness and, in the case of a hit from close in while landing, the laser diffracting when it hits the cockpit glass can totally wash-out the runway and it's lights. Lightning doesn't do that as its light isn't a focused beam directed into the windshield. Apples and oranges.

There are some youtube videos and a series of still photos showing the affect from different distances. Google them up.

On 12/15/2015 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 3:50:21 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.

The problem isn't just distraction it's temporary night blindness and, in the case of a hit from close in while landing, the laser diffracting when it hits the cockpit glass can totally wash-out the runway and it's lights. Lightning doesn't do that as its light isn't a focused beam directed into the windshield. Apples and oranges.

There are some youtube videos and a series of still photos showing the affect from different distances. Google them up.



The beam of a laser has expanded greatly by the time it reaches the
cockpit. It's no longer a "pin point" of light.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:40:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 3:50:21 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.

The problem isn't just distraction it's temporary night blindness and, in the case of a hit from close in while landing, the laser diffracting when it hits the cockpit glass can totally wash-out the runway and it's lights. Lightning doesn't do that as its light isn't a focused beam directed into the windshield. Apples and oranges.

There are some youtube videos and a series of still photos showing the affect from different distances. Google them up.



The beam of a laser has expanded greatly by the time it reaches the
cockpit. It's no longer a "pin point" of light.

Which is what is shown on the youtube. The fact that it has spread makes the
diffusion on the cockpit window even worse.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 5:40:19 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/15/2015 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 3:50:21 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

On 12/15/2015 3:50 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.


Lasers are a problem but they don't affect the most critical part of
a flight. The aircraft is still at an altitude that, although
distracted by the flash of the laser on the cockpit windows, it's not
likely to cause an immediate crash. Certainly annoying though,
especially if flying under VFR conditions and looking for ground references.

The danger is in take offs and landings with landings being of the most
concern. Altitude is a pilot's friend. During landings, you are close
to the ground to begin with and getting closer. Power is reduced, speed
is reduced and the aircraft is "dirty" meaning flaps are extended and
landing gear is down. In this condition, the aircraft is nowhere near
as agile or responsive, but you are still clipping along at
about 150 kts (in a commercial airplane) with diminishing space between
you and the ground. Not the time for surprises.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:36:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 3:50 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.


Lasers are a problem but they don't affect the most critical part of
a flight. The aircraft is still at an altitude that, although
distracted by the flash of the laser on the cockpit windows, it's not
likely to cause an immediate crash. Certainly annoying though,
especially if flying under VFR conditions and looking for ground references.

The danger is in take offs and landings with landings being of the most
concern. Altitude is a pilot's friend. During landings, you are close
to the ground to begin with and getting closer. Power is reduced, speed
is reduced and the aircraft is "dirty" meaning flaps are extended and
landing gear is down. In this condition, the aircraft is nowhere near
as agile or responsive, but you are still clipping along at
about 150 kts (in a commercial airplane) with diminishing space between
you and the ground. Not the time for surprises.

"...they don't affect the most critical part of a flight."

Oh yes they do!

At National Airport there is a park about 1000' from the north end of the main
runway. Folks lay there and watch the planes take off and land only a few hundred
feet over their heads. Do you not thing that's plenty close for a laser?

--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 12/15/2015 5:49 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:36:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 3:50 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:35:25 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:23 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:11:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:44:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 10:40 AM, John H. wrote:

Any parent could bring their kids to an RC field and get a 'quickie' course for their
kids, along with some buddy-boxed 'stick time'. Responsible parents, buying for their
kids, might do so.

But again, we're not talking responsible adults here.

The FAA agrees with you.



The FAA is used to dealing with professionals and dedicated amateurs.
They are unprepared to deal with the rabble that is buying the drones.
I am still reminded of the CB radio craze and the FCC's inability to
really regulate much of any of it. They finally just walked away. CB
pretty much just died from it's own weight. It became unusable.
I don't see that happening with drones although some of the novelty
might wear off after you have seen all of your neighbors naked.

Oh the horror!



The people doing the most complaining of drones operated by hobbyists
are private and commercial pilots. They are the ones pushing the FAA
for the enforcement of regulations regarding their use. The
regulations exist. Registration is an attempt to further enforcement.

I can attest from experience that a sudden, unexpected distraction at
a critical moment in your approach to landing could cause an accident.
Birds are a problem (especially seagulls in our area). So are idiots
flying drones near an airport.


I played golf with a pilot Sunday. He's concerned about drones, but thinks a bigger
problem is lasers. He said he knows several pilots who've quit flying because of
lasers.

A drone could definitely damage an engine, but it's doubtful whether it could bring a
plane down.

Taking a plane down isn't the concern. Distracting the pilot (same with
the lasers) at a critical moment is the concern. Ask your pilot golfing
buddy.



If a pilot is so distracted by a laser that he can't fly the plane, I
certainly don't want him sitting up there in a thunder storm or even
the most minor mechanical problem.


Lasers are a problem but they don't affect the most critical part of
a flight. The aircraft is still at an altitude that, although
distracted by the flash of the laser on the cockpit windows, it's not
likely to cause an immediate crash. Certainly annoying though,
especially if flying under VFR conditions and looking for ground references.

The danger is in take offs and landings with landings being of the most
concern. Altitude is a pilot's friend. During landings, you are close
to the ground to begin with and getting closer. Power is reduced, speed
is reduced and the aircraft is "dirty" meaning flaps are extended and
landing gear is down. In this condition, the aircraft is nowhere near
as agile or responsive, but you are still clipping along at
about 150 kts (in a commercial airplane) with diminishing space between
you and the ground. Not the time for surprises.

"...they don't affect the most critical part of a flight."

Oh yes they do!

At National Airport there is a park about 1000' from the north end of the main
runway. Folks lay there and watch the planes take off and land only a few hundred
feet over their heads. Do you not thing that's plenty close for a laser?


How many times have lasers interfered with an aircraft from that
location? Betcha not many, if at all. Too easy to locate and apprehend
them in a space with high aircraft traffic.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 19:37:03 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 5:49 PM, John H. wrote:

At National Airport there is a park about 1000' from the north end of the main
runway. Folks lay there and watch the planes take off and land only a few hundred
feet over their heads. Do you not thing that's plenty close for a laser?


How many times have lasers interfered with an aircraft from that
location? Betcha not many, if at all. Too easy to locate and apprehend
them in a space with high aircraft traffic.

I was thinking the same thing. I doubt you could light a joint in that
park without being swarmed by the US park Police. They kept a pretty
close watch on that whole area, even before 9-11. There used to be 2
radio cars that didn't do anything but drive up and down that parkway
watching the parks as far back as the 60s.
(my reserve unit was over represented by the various police forces)
DC/metro is actually the most policed area in the US with a dizzying
number of different agencies with police forces. Most stay right there
in the federal area.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 20:36:35 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 19:37:03 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 5:49 PM, John H. wrote:

At National Airport there is a park about 1000' from the north end of the main
runway. Folks lay there and watch the planes take off and land only a few hundred
feet over their heads. Do you not thing that's plenty close for a laser?


How many times have lasers interfered with an aircraft from that
location? Betcha not many, if at all. Too easy to locate and apprehend
them in a space with high aircraft traffic.

I was thinking the same thing. I doubt you could light a joint in that
park without being swarmed by the US park Police. They kept a pretty
close watch on that whole area, even before 9-11. There used to be 2
radio cars that didn't do anything but drive up and down that parkway
watching the parks as far back as the 60s.
(my reserve unit was over represented by the various police forces)
DC/metro is actually the most policed area in the US with a dizzying
number of different agencies with police forces. Most stay right there
in the federal area.

Actually, there aren't that many cops in the park during the day. The bicycle mounted
cops come through, but don't stay long. But the park is closed at night, IIRC. Always
had to get the boat in before sundown.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!