There are people in government and private industry whose only job is to sit back and strategically plan for worst-case scenarios, including cyberattacks. We should be grateful to them as a nation because they undoubtedly saved American lives.
However, when assessing potential risks, it is important to distinguish between actual threats and theoretical concerns, as they can cause unintended consequences.
One example of such unintended consequences is the recent signing of the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes the American Security Drone Act of 2023 (ASDA), which imposes restrictions on the use of drones manufactured in China.
A recent opinion piece by Maj. Gen. Mark Montgomery illustrates how these unintended consequences can be wiped out. The United States needs cybersecurity and we need to protect our critical infrastructure. But it is possible to do so through a risk-based approach, rather than just going after Chinese drones. In highly sensitive areas, it makes sense to use the drone without an internet connection or in local data mode, based on the risk profile of the operation, which can vary widely.
Last November, I was part of a film crew filming in Washington, DC. It's probably the most monitored and safest airspace in the United States. Flying a drone here requires very special permission, usually with a government sponsor and a police escort. Despite this, the drones used almost exclusively by authorized personnel are made in China.
But another Department of the Interior flight over 700-year-old Anasazi ruins in Mesa Verde National Park was unable to use the same drone. Published images of the same site. Where is the logic in that? The drones we use do not collect any more sensitive information than what can already be found online.
Although this is not unique to the drone industry, I agree with Montgomery that “we have handed the keys to China.” Over the past few decades, the company has spent so much energy on both manufacturing and research that when DJI created his Ready to Fly drone market, the United States was already hopelessly behind. Fixing it will take time.
It's also no secret that Montgomery and Congress want a domestic drone industry. I think most drone users are in favor of it as long as it makes economic and operational sense for their needs. But undermining the existing market and countless American drone users when no viable alternatives currently exist is unhelpful.
America's drone user base is diverse. That includes thousands of farmers, real estate agents, filmmakers, photographers, researchers, contractors, police officers, fire departments, and more. Even if an equivalent domestically produced drone model could be prepared, there would not be the manufacturing capacity to produce it at a large enough scale to cover the needs created by drone regulations.
End users and first responders alike have warned Congress about this. Our concerns were ignored. In response, more than a dozen private companies and other industry players have partnered as the Drone Advocacy Alliance (DAA) to raise awareness that the voices of drone users are being left out of important conversations. recognized that it should be reflected in policy decisions that affect the lives of people.
It is perfectly reasonable for groups of affected individuals to organize and educate elected officials about how the law affects them. In fact, it's basically an American thing. So it seems odd that Montgomery would take exception to the existence of the DAA, especially considering that American drone manufacturers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying to get these policies passed. That's fine, but it seems a little one-sided to think it's fine for small businesses and first responders to be involved.
Yes, it is good to support US drone companies. Competition is good for everyone involved. But ASDA spills over into non-federal markets, so don't do that at the expense of the entire U.S. drone market.
We're already seeing this problem replicated at the state and local level, and even in the private industry. If this slippery slope follows its natural course, it will decimate the first responder drone fleet and the U.S. drone market, predicted to be worth $50 billion by the end of this decade.
In fact, a recent study conducted by my organization found that nearly two-thirds of commercial drone users would be forced out of business if their drones were not manufactured in China. Think about how many jobs, how many livelihoods, and how many families will be affected across the country.
Congress should use reality and common sense, rather than fear-mongering, to identify clear and efficient risks regarding drone security so that missions at all levels, private and private, can be accomplished without disrupting the drone market. should provide a base route. Maybe next time they will listen to us on the ground and do the right thing to protect our industry.
Vic Moss is a Denver-based photographer and videographer who has owned Moss Photography since 1988. He is a remote his pilot with 10 years of experience and is an expert in FAA UAS regulatory issues.
Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
