New US drone rules get positive reviews from researchers

first_imgNew U.S. rules on drone operations are getting a general thumbs up from researchers who rely on the unmanned aircraft to collect data and make observations. That marks a shift from a few years ago, when worried researchers went to court to block Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) drone regulations that they argued were overly restrictive and would harm academic science.The final FAA rule, released by the White House on Tuesday, seems to have alleviated many of those concerns. (You can read all 624 pages of the final rule here). The new regulations are “fantastic, just late,” says biogeographer Benjamin Heumann of Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant, who uses drones to map biodiversity and invasive species and had been critical of early versions. “It’s nice to have the FAA come forward with some new rules that kind of follow some common sense. … This is where we should have been 2 years ago.”The new rules outline how people can legally operate what are officially known as small unmanned aircraft systems (sUASs), defined as drones that are fewer than 25 kilograms and operate at 160 kilometers per hour or less. In general, they forbid operators from flying the aircraft over people who are not participating in their operations, and above 122 meters in altitude. Flights must be conducted during the daytime and the aircraft has to remain within the pilot’s line of sight. And drone pilots must be at least 16 years old and take an online test to earn a government permit known as a remote pilot airman certificate. Students or research team members who don’t hold such a certificate can fly a drone if they are under the direct supervision of someone who holds a certificate. The final rule has been years in the making. This past February, FAA issued a draft for public comment and received more than 4600 public comments, including many from universities, individual researchers, and scientific societies.Many of those commenters had been critical of earlier FAA efforts to regulate drones, which the agency worries pose a growing threat to commercial aviation and privacy. But many researchers said FAA’s approach was preventing them from fully exploiting a valuable new tool that has a wide range of uses, from surveying archaeological sites to observing weather, fires, and wildlife.One prominent critic was engineer Paul Voss of Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. In 2014, he coordinated a protest letter to FAA signed by nearly 30 researchers that raised a number of concerns. It noted, for instance, that FAA considered researchers who wanted to fly drones as “commercial operators,” meaning they needed a pilot’s license in order to fly even small drones, and had to apply to FAA on a case-by-case basis to get permission for each project. Such cumbersome rules created an “undue burden” for researchers, says Voss, and even led some, including Voss, to terminate the use of drones in their research.As a result of such concerns, in 2014 the Council on Governmental Relations—a Washington, D.C.–based group that represents 188 research universities—filed a lawsuit against FAA to challenge existing drone rules. And two allied associations—the Association of American Universities and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, both based in Washington, D.C.—presented a letter to White House officials, arguing that university researchers needed a “timely, workable mechanism … to secure FAA approval to conduct important research and instructional activities utilizing sUAS technology.”The Obama administration appears to have responded to that request in crafting the new rule, Voss and other researchers say. “It’s a good step forward,” he says, adding that it may even prompt him to start using drones again.One change that has pleased many researchers is that researchers at private institutions are now treated the same as those working at public schools; previously, FAA authorization to operate drones for research was available only to researchers affiliated with public colleges or universities. Another welcome change, researchers say, is an FAA decision to drop special rules for drones carrying a payload, such a camera or scientific instrument, so long as it is “securely attached” and doesn’t interfere with flight. And FAA has said it will create an online portal to make it easier for researchers and others to request special waivers to the rules for unusual projects.The new rule will take effect in August. Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Countrycenter_img Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwelast_img read more