An opinion from Mike Whayman – the term “DRONE” reflects negatively on our hobby and craft type
After reading many forums and research from around the world I have come to the conclusion that the use of the word “DRONE” is not doing the hobby any good in my opinion.
The word “DRONE” is giving a negative effect on the hobby, and the use of the term “DRONE” in reference to craft like the Phantom 2 Vision Plus, Scout X-4 or any similar craft is giving the public a negative feel for the hobby when used in the media.
I am making a stand and drawing a line right here, Craft like the Phantom 2 Vision Plus and similar will be from here on be called either UAV’s (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft), Quad-copters, Quads, Multi-rotors or Flying Camera Platforms, with the last one being used the least if ever. Some countries are also using the term “Dronie”.
Since we are an Australian based website, I will direct you to this CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) link, please note what is said.
I have not talked to CASA personally about this particular topic – but I can see no harm in pointing you to the link above, which makes a particular statement regarding the term “DRONE”
This is an exact extract from that page courtesy of the CASA website;
The term drone can be seen in news stories about military operations in the Middle East using unmanned aircraft. The aircraft flying such missions are precision weapons systems. That is not what we’re talking about when we discuss unmanned aircraft operations in civil airspace.
I think the above is an excellent and fantastic assistance in distancing and totally stating our UAV’s (RPA’s) are not connected to being “DRONES” that are precision weapons systems.
Here at our TASVIEW website you can clearly see we are “SAFETY FIRST” orientated, and as hobbyists flying our UAV’s we are happy to be regulated for safety first and believe that CASA is doing a great job and obviously we want CASA to hold us to the highest of standards including safety, however the terminology to describe our craft has nothing to do with our operations, I just believe it is causing the general public who know nothing of UAV’s to feel threatened by our hobby when the word “DRONE” is used to describe for example a Phantom 2 Vision Plus!.
I feel if the word “DRONE” is used as terminology to describe our craft (UAV’s) it links subconsciously (with the general population of non UAV fliers) us UAV flyers to weapons systems and military application, straight away frightening the general public with this term when used to describe our craft. When in actual fact our UAV’s are used for absolute peaceful operations, mainly photography platforms or FPV (first Person View) close proximity flying (you must always keep the craft in sight under Australian regulation as I understand it), Commercial Photography and video, and hobbyists just having fun flying their craft.
This page is in total only Mike Whayman’s opinion regarding the terminology used to describe our craft, but Mike feels that out hobby needs to make a stand to help make UAV’s less threatening to the general public when being talked about for the sake of making the hobby more approachable, and being fair to the thousands who safely enjoy this hobby.
Please, be it official organizations, UAV pilots or Government Regulators or the general public, give us feedback if you think this page and it’s intentions are incorrect, wrong or even if you agree. I just felt a line needed to be drawn so the hobby is more accepted.
Special note: I am talking from an Australian perspective regarding reference, for safety always check with your local areas laws and regulations regarding operations of UAV’s
[Edited by Tone – I absolutely agree with Mike, I added the term Multi-rotors to cover other UAV prop configurations.]