Reckless Drone Operators Undermine the Promise of Commercial Drone Use
- Patrick Hurley
- Oct 8
- 3 min read
Reckless Drone Operators Undermine the Promise of Commercial Drone Use
A sobering reminder landed recently: a tech executive in Culver City was sentenced to 14 days in federal prison + 30 days home detention for flying a drone into a Super Scooper firefighting plane during the Palisades Fire — damaging its wing and taking it out of the fight. He was also ordered to pay approximately $156,000 in restitution and fines.
This headline may seem like a sensational outlier. It's not. Reckless, irresponsible drone operators put manned aircraft and flight operations at risk every day, and it highlights a much larger threat facing the drone industry in the U.S. — and, by extension, to everyone working toward safe and responsible commercial drone operations, the applications of which are limitless. But we've just scratched the surface.
This operator was not certified under Part 107. Even if someone is, in the absence of any other aviation experience, it does not make them a "pilot" or an aviation professional. Like any other certification, it signifies that someone possesses the minimum amount of knowledge required to begin their professional journey. It's a ticket to learn.
It should come as no surprise that the FAA is leaning toward total autonomous operation for proposed Part 108 compliance and all future Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations while eliminating BVLOS options under Part 107. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. However, irresponsible operators, including those with the FAA's TRUST certification—the absolute minimum required for recreational operators—as well as many certified under Part 107, are partially responsible.
Why This Matters - Public trust is fragile.
Every time a recreational, or even worse, a "commercial" drone pilot flies when and where they shouldn't — into restricted airspace, near emergency response operations, too close to manned aircraft or airport operations — it erodes public confidence. For every high-profile incident that receives broad media coverage, many more go unreported. But cumulatively, they feed the narrative that drones are unsafe nuisances that need to be tightly regulated.
Regulation/enforcement backlash looms.
When the public and policymakers see headlines like "drone collides with firefighting plane," the inevitable reaction is "we need stricter laws and harsher penalties." That may sound good on paper, but overregulation, flight restrictions, or outright bans harm legitimate commercial activities and hinder advancement, while seldom punishing bad actors or deterring bad behavior.
Professional drone operators and their operations are often unfairly grouped with irresponsible and reckless operators.
Whether they are conducting inspections, responding to emergencies, mapping, implementing precision agriculture, working on infrastructure, or providing security, the work becomes more challenging when the narrative surrounding drones is that of a "dangerous toy." Insurance rates rise, rules become tighter, and access becomes more constrained, while costs increase, stunting the growth and scalability of the industry.
What We Can Do — From Within the Industry
Amplify real-world examples: Share stories like this widely to raise awareness, educate, to help solidify a solid foundation of knowledge and judgment required of all drone operators.
Self-policing matters: Industry groups, associations, and service providers should promote best practices and discourage risky behavior. Clients should demand it.
Collaborate with regulators: Work closely with federal, state, and local agencies to ensure standardization. Engage with lawmakers, legislators, and rulemakers at all levels to prevent the implementation of unnecessary restrictions that could hinder legitimate, well-planned, and safe commercial operations.
Expanded Continuing Education Requirements: The continuing education requirements for hobbyists (R/C, FPV, drone photography) must be expanded, and compliance must be enforced.
Clarify Consequences: Violations and penalties must be reported, quickly publicized, and easily accessible.
Expansion of compliance tools: Tools like geofencing, ADS-B, and automatic no-fly enforcement.
Bottom line: One drone flown irresponsibly, especially in a high-stakes scenario, can do enormous harm to the industry, not just physically, but reputationally and commercially. If we want drones to realize their full potential for good (public safety, infrastructure, environmental monitoring, etc.), we can't allow reckless operators to dominate the headlines.
Comments