Federal Judge To Decide If Consumer Drones Are 'Aircraft' | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne Unlimited-

Airborne Unmanned-
Alt. Wednesdays

Airborne Flight Training-Alt. Wednesdays

Airborne Unlimited-

Airborne Special Programs!
Airborne-YouTube  Airborne Unlimited--08.10.20 Airborne-Unmanned--08.05.20   NEW! Airborne-Flight Training--07.29.20 Airborne Unlimited--08.07.20  The 2020 Avionics Innovation Preview!

Airborne On ANN

Airborne Unlimited--08.10.20


NEW! Airborne-Flight Training--07.29.20

Airborne Unlimited--08.07.20

Airborne's Annual April 1st Episode

Sat, Jun 11, 2016

Federal Judge To Decide If Consumer Drones Are 'Aircraft'

Decision Could Have Significant Impact On The UAV Industry

A court case that could have a significant bearing on the FAA's authority to regulate consumer UAVs is playing out in Connecticut largely out of the media glare.

The case stems out of the Pirker decision, in which an NTSB administrative law judge determined that small drones and model aircraft were not subject to FAA regulations. The NTSB appealed that decision, and determined that drones flown by hobbyists are indeed subject to the FAA's prohibition of "careless or reckless operation."

Analyst John Goglia writes in Forbes that the NTSB's decision is not the final word in the matter, and it is not binding in the FAA's case against Austin and Bret Haughwout, a father and son from Connecticut subpoenaed by the FAA for documents related to two videos posted by the pair which went viral. The videos show a modified UAV firing a handgun, and flaming a turkey on a spit. The Haughwouts have declined to submit the subpoenaed documents, or appear for depositions unless ordered to do so by a court.

The FAA brought the case to the Connecticut Attorney General's Office to force the two to comply with its demands.

Goglia said that in a conversation with Mario Cerame, the pro bono attorney assigned by the judge to represent the Haughwouts, Cerame said that the FAA's definition of an "aircraft" is "crazy." Cerame said that taken to its conclusion, the definition could extend from paper airplanes to bullets and flags.

In March, Judge Geffery Meyer told the parties to prepare their arguments concerning the FAA's authority over small UAVs, and oral arguments are scheduled for July 6.

Cerame told Goglia that for the judge to rule in favor of the Haughwouts, he would have to conclude that the FAA's stance is "obviously wrong."

It's a case that is likely being watched closely by the entire commercial UAV industry.

(Image from file)

FMI: Full Article


More News

ANN FAQ: Follow Us On Instagram!

Get The Latest in Aviation News NOW on Instagram Are you on Instagram yet? It's been around for a few years, quietly picking up traction mostly thanks to everybody's new obsession >[...]

Airborne-Flight Training 07.29.20: King Schools, TPS Commandant, Diamond DA40s

Also: Pakistan License Scandal, United A/L Pilots, Sterling Adds Frasca, King Schools Giveaway King Schools has been busy these last few months, despite the ravages of a global pan>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: Quite The Match! - Daher Completes Quest Aircraft Acquisition

From 2019: Establishing A Complete Scope Of U.S. Industrial Activities Daher has finalized its purchase of Quest Aircraft, bringing the Kodiak utility aircraft into its stable. The>[...]

Airborne-Unmanned 08.05.20: VSR700 Flies, QF-16 Target, EHang 216 CA FltOps

Also: XPONENTIAL 2020 Goes Virtual, FCC Fines Hobbyking, Drones Protect Sea Turtles, King Schools Giveaway The prototype of Airbus Helicopters’ VSR700 UAS has performed its f>[...]

Klyde Morris (08.08.20)

Klyde Clearly Points Out The Major Differences Between Apollo and SpaceX FMI: www.klydemorris.com>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus





© 2007 - 2020 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC