In the aftermath of pirker, Questions of Policy Versus Law on Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) By: Sarah J. Nilsson, JD, PhD, MAS Assistant Professor of Aviation Law and Regulations College of Aviation - Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Introduction Unmanned aircraft are flying in the National Airspace System (NAS) under very controlled conditions, anywhere from the surface up to above 50,000 feet (FAA, 2015a). Currently unmanned aerial systems (UAS) operations in Class B airspace (over major urban areas and high density air traffic airports) are unauthorized (FAA, 2015a). Yet, in just one year pilot reports of UAS have increased from a total of 238 sightings in all twelve months of 2014, to more than 650 as of August 9, 2015 (FAA, 2015a). Meanwhile firefighters battling wildfire blazes in the western part of the country have been forced to ground their operations on several occasions for safety reasons when they spotted one or more unmanned aircraft in their immediate vicinity (FAA, 2015a). In January of this year, CNN news reported that a smuggler’s UAS flying from Mexico had crash-landed just
south of the US border of San Ysidro, California in a failed drug delivery (Valencia and Martinez, 2015). Apparently the smugglers’ greed was their undoing as they loaded the UAS with more than six pounds of the synthetic drug crystal meth, exceeding the load capacity of the six-propeller Spreading Wings S900 model (Valencia and Martinez, 2015). In addition to these issues, the public outcry over the invasion of privacy is loud enough to be heard from space. And the lack of federal regulation has led to conflicting policies and sometimes diametrically opposed laws from state to state. To illustrate this point, one must first familiarize oneself with the precedent created by the Pirker case, and next the policies, not yet laws, emanating from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which have led to the creation of state laws to fill the void left by, as yet unwritten, federal ones.