So far, it also appears that the issue of "safety and UAs" is seen primarily as the safety concerns these aircraft raise. There doesn't appear to be much thought yet as to how the newly developed technology for UAs might someday improve safety for general or commercial aviation, particularly when pilots or flight crew become incapacitated.
Embry-Riddle's Owen adds that there are many low-end UA operators chomping at the bit to see the domestic industry open up a bit more, and are frustrated by FAA's reluctance to issue new regulations. Chief among Owen's legislative proposals for Congress would be the creation of a federal "knowledge manager" position. This individual, who would reside at an as-yet undetermined place in the federal bureaucracy, would serve as a single point of contact for many other civil agencies considering UA activities, disseminating information, and funding research and development to help both civil and commercial operators.
Nicholas Sabatini's testimony and other witness statements from the March 29 hearing are at http://www.house.gov/transportation.
>>Contacts: ALPA, (703) 689-2270, www.alpa.org
[Copyright 2006 Access Intelligence, LLC. All rights reserved.]
The preferred term at this juncture is not simply "unmanned aircraft," but "unmanned aircraft systems" (UAS), because there's so much more than just the aircraft.
At issue is whether unmanned aerial systems (UAS) will ever provide "an equivalent level of safety" to manned aircraft operating in the NAS.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Very Light Jets (VLJs) will challenge FAA and airports nationwide.
The UAS pilot program mandates the FAA select six test sites.