[NSRCA-discussion] FAA scolds sheriff for flying drone

[Terry Terrenoire]

I think the long range determinate will be the restriction on letting the
plane get out of your sight.
Somewhere, I read recently that this was a requirement for "sport"
aircraft.
On the other hand, Why can't the Sherrif's dept get the proper
authorizations?

Terry T.


On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 07:18:13 -0500 "White, Chris" <chris at ssd.fsi.com>
writes:
It makes me ill to think how the Feds might continue with this….RC
aircraft brought up as an excuse.
 
I hope the AMA and established flying sites are enough to keep things
status quo.   This excerpt from the IPILOT newsletter today.
 
Chris
 
FAA scolds Los Angeles sheriff for flying surveillance drone
The FAA has launched an investigation into the actions of the Los Angeles
Sheriff's Department after the demonstration flight of a small and nearly
silent unmanned aerial vehicle last week. The week before, the FAA had
warned the Sheriff that any such flights of the 6-foot-wide SkySeer drone
without the appropriate certificate of authorization could subject the
law enforcement agency to disciplinary action, the Los Angeles Times
reported. The Sheriff's office has argued that the drone is no different
than remote control planes, which can be flown by anyone. And the
department says the drone would fly below 300 feet as it helps officers
track fugitives and locate missing people, keeping it at an altitude
below aircraft and helicopter traffic in the Los Angeles Basin.
<http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-drone22jun22,1
,6812639.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california>
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060626/710e1f9d/attachment.html