Welcome to Ars UNITE, our week-long virtual conference on the ways that innovation brings unusual pairings together. Today, we examine the one population that may secretly shape the future of drone use in the US. Join us this afternoon at 1pm Eastern (10am Pacific) for a live discussion on the topic with Ars drone aficionado Cyrus Farivar and his expert guest; your comments and questions are welcome.

As the popularity of personal drones continues down a path of exponential growth, so too does the amount of controversy attached to their use. Most arguments boil down to a “pro-drone vs. anti-drone” debate, but even within the pro-drone community two seemingly rival camps have formed. On one side are those who advocate a measure of training and education for drone flyers; opposite them are the manufacturers engaged in a headlong race to make their products ever more accessible to unskilled pilots.

Ignoring big-picture debates such as privacy concerns sparked by camera-equipped drones or the glacial progress of policy development (both worthy discussions), these drone supporters are at odds over perhaps the most important population for the device's future—newbies.

GoPro payload With all the attention, even the mere use of the word “drone” seems to stir debate today. To some, it is a sinister term that suggests unseen, missile-laden predators. It is also the layman’s moniker for hobby-grade multi-copters (which are the vehicles we'll be referring to here). While I personally prefer “multi-rotor” or “quad”—as most drones have four rotors—there’s no sense in swimming upstream over petty semantics. So when you see “drone” within the context of this article, know that the most ominous payload carried by the referenced machine is a GoPro camera.

Think of the drone-related mishaps and close-calls that immediately come to mind when you hear the term: “ Drones ground helicopters fighting fire ,“ " Drone gets too close to White House ," " Drone crashes and hits child ." Such stories have become frighteningly common, leading many people to feel that it is only a matter of time before something truly bad happens. Now, yes, some drone flyers are incurable jerks. But the majority of such incidents are the work of drone n00bs. And given the upfront financial risk (many camera-toting drones are $1,000+), potential for collateral damage, and widespread visibility, such headline-producing shenanigans are not sustainable behavior for most individuals. It’s just that today there is a tsunami of new pilots learning these harsh lessons… on the 6 o’clock news.

The dangers posed by unskilled and/or uneducated (at least with regard to safety) drone pilots are obvious, but the benefits of new pilots are less so. On the surface, autopilot-like provisions that lower the bar for new flyers seem to be mere marketing strategies intended to sell more units at the cost of public safety (there’s probably some truth to that, sadly). Yet, the advantages afforded by a large and rookie-rich cadre of drone pilots are many. Perhaps most significant are the economies of scale. Thanks to their blossoming popularity with newcomers, drones continue to become more capable and more affordable. Additionally, the more brains that are focused on the drone equation, the more quickly and thoroughly we can explore the utilitarian potential of this still-emerging technology. And to circle back to drones' complicated present, the easier they are to fly, the greater the number of pilots there will be.

Safety first

Many of those calling for improved training and safety consciousness come from the ranks of traditional airplane and helicopter radio control (RC) aeromodelers. Token curmudgeons notwithstanding, most RC flyers take no issue with drones per se. In fact, the majority of RC pilots that I know are interested in all styles of flying machines. There's also no evidence of widespread concern over the influx of beginning flyers within this population; after all, even the most skilled of pilots were rookies at some point. Any friction here is rooted in the well-advertised notion that drone flyers do not require training before they take to the skies.

Admittedly, the “fly today” claims of drone manufacturers are largely true. Artificial stabilization systems integrated into most $1,000+ drones allow someone with zero experience and a scan of the quick-start guide to get their new machine airborne with little difficulty. The onboard gadgetry will even prevent the drone from drifting downwind or can bring it back home with the push of a button. That’s all handy, high-tech stuff, but it fails to address all of the burdens tacitly (and perhaps unwittingly) accepted by the pilot.

At a fundamental level, first-time drone flyers don’t know what they don’t know. If it even occurs to them to ask “Is it safe to fly here?,” “Is this propeller still OK to use?," or “Is the wind too strong?,” they probably lack the experience base and resources to reach the proper answers to these very important questions.

Additionally, the drone features that augment a beginning pilot’s lack of skill are not foolproof. Many systems rely on GPS signals, which are subject to masking by trees, buildings, or electronic noise. If GPS is lost during a flight (it happens all the time), the only thing left in an unskilled pilot’s toolbox is luck.

By comparison, the vast majority of RC airplane and helicopter pilots receive some degree of instruction from a mentor, usually through an organized club. Computer-based training simulators have eased the learning curve in recent years, but most airplane/heli students still need personalized coaching to get them over the initial hurdles of becoming a competent RC pilot. The key thing to note is that these teaching sessions are rarely limited to just the proper control inputs. Students invariably receive instruction on preflight inspection techniques, proper maintenance, flying etiquette, and safety protocols. All of these things are critical components of an RC pilot’s skill set, and no amount of artificial stabilization and whiz-bang gadgetry can compensate for their absence.

The Overseers

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the government agency tasked with keeping American skies safe. Most of their business revolves around airliners, biz-jets, and privately owned Cessnas. RC fliers were but a tiny, insignificant blip on the FAA’s radar for several decades. That all changed with the advent of consumer drones and the widespread aeronautical tom-foolery that followed. Whether the agency actually has jurisdiction over RC flyers (including consumer drones) is the subject of heated debate. The laws are worded loosely enough that interpretations can be shaped to support either argument.

As the concern over consumer drone use intensified during the last several years, it appeared that the FAA was maneuvering to take a hardline stance on all RC flying activities. For instance, there were rumors of licensing requirements for RC pilots. More recent actions by the FAA have adopted a much softer tone. Many believe that the FAA’s change of heart is largely due to efforts put forth by the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA), a national organization representing 175,000 RC flyers.

The FAA recently announced a drone registration initiative that it hopes will help them track down rogue operators. Other than the project’s extremely ambitious timeline, no details of the plan are currently available. The jury is still very much out regarding whether drone registration will be an effective enforcement tool or just an administrative burden for rule followers.

The core of the FAA’s current efforts to manage consumer drones appears to be centered on education. One example is the “Know Before You Fly ” (KBYF) campaign. This project constitutes a partnership between the FAA and the AMA, as well as the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) and the Small UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) Coalition. The primary product of the campaign is a website that reads like an FAQ list for drone newbies.

Although the FAA has taken a “good cop” approach to its drone problem, it still pursues and prosecutes drone flyers who present egregious safety hazards. Activities like flying near airports or over crowds of people may be obviously taboo to some, but such things are not intuitive to everyone. The KBYF website spells it all out in simple terms. It’s very good information. The challenge is making sure that new flyers know about it and read it.