Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Major unanswered questions (Score 2) 50

by bobbied (#47998821) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

thought i made a spelling mistake, but at least Wikipedia agrees with me. Winter does bad things to aircraft. ;-) ice accumulates at the leading edge of wings and props, until the profile is no longer generating lift. That is why most aircraft have heating in the wings leading edge and mechanical deformation to break of the ice.

Actually, usually only larger aircraft have deicing capacity. Most private airplanes have none beyond heat for the airspeed probe.

Commercial aircraft carry it only for convenience because the flying rules state that you cannot fly into known icing conditions without it. They take it along so they can more easily make their schedule and not have to fly around stuff.

Finally, I'd like to point out that there are multiple kinds of deicing setups and what you describe is pretty much how the low end stuff works. Most commercial jets just heat the leading edges using high temperature bleed air from the turbines. The rubber boot thing doesn't work so well at high mach numbers...

Comment: Re:I get it (Score 2) 50

by bobbied (#47998751) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

Actually, that's the arguably the biggest problem here. The FAA was directed to develop a policy for commercial drones, and it's initial reaction was to determine, without any sort of rule making process, that drones that followed the model rules were not in fact models, and attempt to prohibit any sort of autonomous flight whatsoever. A couple months back they were even saying that first person view direct remote control under model rules was unacceptable, and still claiming that no rule making was required.

For Commercial operations yes, the FAA has totally banned drones for commercial use (until now)... Hobby use, not so much. Where the FAA technically governs anything from the ground up outside a building, they've never really handed out regulations for individual private hobby flying toys and I doubt they care about them as long as they don't interfere with manned flight operations.

It's the same sort of thing they do for ultralights. Keep the aircraft under a specified weight and out of controlled airspace and you don't need to register the craft, have a pilot's license to fly it or have a license to maintain it. Just stay out of controlled space and they don't say anything. Try to sell rides in your ultralight and voila a whole host of regulations hit you because it's now a commercial operation. Same with Drones. Keep it small, low and for personal use, they won't bat an eye, but start doing commercial things with it and they are going to inspect you every which way and twice on Sunday.

You see, the FAA really only cares about the commercial use of the airspace, which is really their mandate. Yea they govern private aviation too, but only because they use the same facilities as commercial and unless everybody follows the same rules when mixed up, bad things will happen. But you get a private plane outside of controlled airspace and they won't care much about you anymore. Just don't endanger the commercial operations..

Comment: Re:Special Permit Only (Score 1) 50

by bobbied (#47998479) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

And let people use drones not in controlled airspaces as they see fit. Really complicated.

Which is what we actually have now with one more restriction. COMMERCIAL use is banned outright. Private Individual Hobby use is already allowed outside of controlled airspace below about 200' AGL as I understand it.

Comment: Re:compromising the safety of existing air traffic (Score 2) 50

by bobbied (#47998451) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

So drones are flying at 38,000 feet or circling over international airports now?

Not by individuals or companies. I'm guessing we have government doing this already, if for no other reason than to allow testing.

Surely there is a minimum allowable altitude for any manned aircraft so simply mandate all drone stay below that. There you go FAA, i just saved you millions in lost man hours and other random crap associated with this kind of nonsense. I'll be expecting my cheque any day now.

There are *recommended* limits, how high you should fly over obstructions, how far away you should stay from people etc, but if you are flying VFR over farmland it's pretty much pilot discretion outside of controlled airspace. You will get blamed if you ball it up by hitting a tree and you might even get cited for being reckless, but if you are PIC and you think it's safe, knock yourself out all the way down to the ground.

I suppose you could just declare that Drones under 500' AGL (maybe 200'?) outside of controlled airspace that maintains minimum distances from humans and property are allowed for any reason that's not commercial. Just issue a NOTAM and tell pilots that they are only protected above 500' AGL, problem solved. I think I'd put size and weight limits on these unlicensed drones, but apart from the size and weight limits and commercial operation that's what we have/had until now.

Comment: Re:No special privleges (Score 1) 50

by bobbied (#47998337) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

If a company can do it, I can. Its just a person after all.

If a reporter has some right, so do I.

Given tax breaks to movies and the NFL, there is so much free content out there. Govt sponsored = crown copyright = no copyright.

You ALREADY have permission to operate a drone as an individual. RC hobbyists have been doing this for decades. There are places you cannot fly them of course, but flying a drone for hobby use is allowed now and has been allowed for the whole of the FAA's existence.

What's being restricted is COMMERCIAL use, and flying in controlled airspace. We don't have rules and procedures in place to allow us to deal with this safely, which is why commercial use has been prohibited until now. The FAA is actually relaxing the rules for commercial use under conditions similar to private hobby use of drones.

So, actually, being a private individual over a company gives you more rights to fly drones, or it used to before now.

Comment: Re:I get it (Score 4, Insightful) 50

by bobbied (#47998237) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff
Keep it under about 200', and away from airports and you are free to move about the country. RC models have been operating under these conditions for a long time. So individuals CAN operate drones NOW as a hobby. What is being limited in COMMERCIAL use of drones, and drones that impact existing air traffic.

Comment: Re:celebgate (Score 1, Flamebait) 93

by bobbied (#47989097) Attached to: Apple Allegedly Knew of iCloud Brute-Force Vulnerability Since March

apple really screwed the pooch with celebgate. protecting against brute force attacks is like security 101

Seriously? I think the celebrities where/are stupid.

Who in their right mind takes compromising photos and allow them to be stored on anybody's cloud, while knowing that said pictures would be of great value to the public? Security 101 says, DON'T TAKE THE PICTURES in the first place, but if you insist on doing so, DON'T PUT THEM ON THE INTERNET.

Apple may have messed up by not notifying their customers of hacking attempts, but you are not thinking if you put things of value in anybody's hands for safe keeping up on the net, even if it's Apple. It's a bad idea to give up control of your data if it is sensitive in any way, unless it's well encrypted.

Celebrities where primarily responsible, they where plain stupid to allow such pictures to be taken, much less store them protected by no more than a password. What do they THINK is going to happen? Putting tens of thousands of dollars worth of "personal photos" online protected by a password? Even if Apple had done all due dalliance, you can bet somebody would have eventually found a way.

Comment: Re:Steve Jobs (Score 3) 203

by bobbied (#47988297) Attached to: Apple Yanks iOS 8 Update

As sad as it sounds, I think you are right. Steve was apparently an SOB to work for, making demands and taking no excuses for failure, but that's what it takes to stay on top with technology. I'm thinking that they are falling into the corporate "manage to quarter" mindset. They are just running in the same well worn rut now and will follow Steve into the grave...

Question is who will replace them.

Comment: Re:Also... (Score 1) 240

by bobbied (#47966095) Attached to: Friendly Reminder: Do Not Place Your iPhone In a Microwave

Don't put an unopened bottle or can of soda in a microwave. Or at least not in a microwave you ever want to use again.

Also, don't put your phone in gas oven, or on a hot griddle.

Similarly, don't touch anything hot enough to cook, and don't stick a knife into your gut.

You forgot: Never play Russian Roulette with an automatic....