Skip to footer

Drone crashes at US Open. Where is Washington on regulation?

A teacher in New York has been arrested after flying a drone into the stadium outside of its designated operating area on Thursday. One tennis player said she thought it could be a bomb.

|
(Kathy Willens/AP)
A police officers stands beside the remains of a drone that crashed into an empty section of seats at the U.S. Open tennis tournament in New York on Thursday. New York City teacher Daniel Verley, 26, faces charges of reckless endangerment and operating a drone in a New York City public park outside of prescribed area. A police department spokesman said Verley was a teacher at the Academy of Innovative Technology in Brooklyn.

As Italy’s Flavia Pennetta played a second-round match against Romania’s Monica Niculescu at the US Open tennis tournament in New York on Thursday night, she said she heard a buzzing overhead but wasn’t sure what it was. 

Her first thought, she told ESPN, was that it might be a bomb. “A little bit scary, I have to say,” said Pennetta.

Soon, they all found out what it was. A device far less dangerous but increasingly invasive in modern-day society: the drone. The small black vehicle had crashed into the stands of Louis Armstrong Stadium, fortunately landing in an empty section without hurting anyone.

Authorities managed to locate the operator at a marina shortly after the incident, and arrested him the next morning for operating the drone outside of its designated area.

Police say Daniel Verley, a teacher in New York City, is also facing charges of reckless endangerment.

Thursday’s drone scare is a reminder of another high-profile public aerial incident this year, when a small quadcopter crashed onto the grounds of the White House and raised alerts about a potential security vulnerability, The Christian Science Monitor previously reported. 

It also brings renewed emphasis to the need for drone regulation, which varies based on devices' applications, sizes, and weights. 

Recreational drones do not need any kind of license, according to the National Law Review. But the Federal Aviation Administration has limited how high they can fly, and established no-fly zones near people or airports. 

While the drone industry is big and getting bigger, with analysts anticipating its business to surge to $8.4 billion by 2019 and nearly ten times that by 2025, legislation is comparatively limited and slow.

Just this week, the FAA named two officials to oversee the interests of private sector drones, to “allow the existing UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) office to concentrate on rulemaking,” reports Reuters. 

Officials have been under intense pressure, as twenty groups ranging across various industries lobbied the federal government in the second financial quarter about drone regulation, “up from nine mentions in the previous year,” according to CNBC.

Currently, the agency has only issued temporary permits for commercial drones, and is taking suggestions from the public on regulations proposed in February. One rule, for example, would limit the private use of certain drones to only be allowed in the daytime. The FAA would also require vehicles to be kept within the operator's line of sight. 

The FAA is working to finalize its rules on commercial drones, which should be ready within a year, reports Reuters.

Deputy Administrator Michael Whitaker has told Congress the projected start date is June 17, 2016.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Drone crashes at US Open. Where is Washington on regulation?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/0904/Drone-crashes-at-US-Open.-Where-is-Washington-on-regulation
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe