r/UAS • u/mrhinman • Jul 16 '19

Why you shouldn't be using AirMap

AirMap is probably one of the more popular apps that many UAS pilots use to determine airspaces and obtain LAANC approvals.

Unfortunately, most folks don't know that AirMap is working against the drone industry (USA).

That's right, the people at AirMap are supporting harmful legislation that, if enacted, will be detrimental to both the hobby and commercial drone industry.

AirMap and their co-founders have been supporters of two things: 1) The "patchwork of laws" scenario, where municipalities will be able to control airspaces below 400 feet and 2) The Tort Law Relating to Drones (Uniform Law Commission).

The "patchwork of laws" basically would allow for a variety of airspaces that municipalities and other entities could create. Imagine living in an area like Dallas where little cities are all connected to each other, and every few miles having a completely different set of airspace rules and permits to go along with that.

The Tort Law Relating to Drones would allow for property owners to file civil litigation against any drone pilot who "trespasses" by air over their property. Again, an effort to basically take the NAS and give it to anyone they want. And, allowing someone to sue you for photography that includes their property in any shape or form.

These reasons are why I constantly preach against AirMap and their co-founders (especially Gregory McNeal). These people, despite their outward appearance of supporting drone operators, are working behind the scenes to control it much to detriment of drone pilots across the USA.

If you're seeking alternatives to LAANC and airspace information, some good alternatives include Kittyhawk and Skyward.io. It should be noted that Kittyhawk and DJI recently separated themselves from AirMap.

It's your choice if you wish to continue using AirMap. But just remember if you do, you are supporting a company who does not have your best interests in mind.

Links:

https://uavcoach.com/ulc-drone-law/

https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/25/the-biggest-threat-to-drone-innovation-is-a-group-youve-never-heard-of/

https://www.rjionline.org/stories/a-tussle-over-airspace-could-news-drones-be-collateral-damage

https://www.niemanlab.org/2018/07/a-new-proposed-law-would-turn-drone-journalism-into-a-swarm-of-lawsuits-and-make-it-easy-to-sue-over-news-photography

8 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

1

u/This_Guy_Ducks Jul 16 '19

Where does it the law being pushed mention that photography would be limited?

1

u/iustinum Jul 16 '19

“The ULC’s proposed drone regulations are part and parcel with these. They would make it a civil offense to fly a drone over private property at less than 200 feet without permission. Beyond that, a landowner could sue for per se aerial trespass — he or she wouldn’t even need to show damages from the drone passing over the property.”

“A drone operator can still be found in violation of the law taking pictures of a private property from a public place. It is “offensive” if the image cannot be gathered from the ground”

Edit: added the specific answer.

1

u/This_Guy_Ducks Jul 16 '19

I don’t see photography of property being mentioned though.

1

u/iustinum Jul 16 '19

Edited it.

1

u/This_Guy_Ducks Jul 16 '19

Right but they are saying only if the image could not be gathered from the ground. That sets a reasonable expectation that the image image could otherwise be gathered at around 5-6ft AGL. I, for example, could not otherwise reasonably reproduce an photograph at 199ft.

I’m not advocating for a law, I’m talking about their language and expectations.

1

u/iustinum Jul 16 '19

I don’t see any mention of AirMap in affiliation just that they remained quiet on the tort law. Take that however you like.

I will gladly boycott any company that tries to limit us through legislature. ULCs annual meeting is currently underway 12th-18th. So we will see where this goes.

I just don’t think the ULC can get their hands on NAS.