Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
The all-natural burger at Carl’s Jr.
So why didn't you just order the burger sans mayo and ketchup? Problem solved.— August 17, 2015 7 p.m.
Sell, sell, sell that Tribune Publishing stock
How ironic is it that Manchester bought Foxhill, the Copley estate? Well, at least he didn't pay the asking price, so maybe he can afford to at least pay the water bill though he'll probably have to dump a bit more Tribune stock. I guess since he claims to be making that his primary residence, San Diego will still have Dougie to kick around, at least for a while.— August 17, 2015 10:34 a.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
You didn't specify, but I'm assuming that you are referring to links for drone regulations. I don't save the links because I prefer to download the files so that I have them on hand. You can usually find anything issued at faa.gov/news/ and the regulations are pretty easy to find. In this instance though, I'll help you out. Here are the currents for Model Aircraft Operations (hobby or recreational purposes only): http://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ and are the summary of proposed regulations for non-hobby operation: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemakin… The current regs for drones pretty much come straight from FAA Advisory Circular 91-57, Model Aircraft Operating Standards, which was issued back in 1981. Anyone who flys an RC,should already be familiar with it. When you refer to your plane, I am assuming you are referring to an actual plane, not an RC, and so you absolutely call the authorities if you encounter one in your airspace. But I do wonder why you would call the cops simply because you see one "overhead. "— August 16, 2015 8:45 p.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
don bauder But isn't that usually the case?— August 16, 2015 7:47 p.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
Actually, I didn't imply any such thing. I simply wondered where you had heard that because it is in complete contradiction to what I have read that was released by the FAA. I used to fly RC planes, albeit many, many years ago. It was a blast. And that is the exact reason I bought a drone a few months ago. Takes some time to be proficient at it, especially if it is equipped with a camera as mine is. I am ok with it at this point, but it is something that just takes time to get really good at and I sure as hell don't want to destroy something that expensive. But it is a blast to fly. I agree completely that there are reasonable uses for drones, both commercial and personal. I also agree that there should be penalties for improper use, but I think those penalties need to be balanced against the severity of the violation. As for using them for deliveries, all I can say is that it is not the first time that something abstruse has come out of the mouth of.Jeff Bezoz. For some reason, as I read your post, the movie Blue Thunder comes to mind.— August 15, 2015 10:35 p.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
don bauder By the way, a few days ago, I saw an interview on one of the cable news channels with a member of the California state legislature. They were discussing the use of drones and the problems that have been encountered by firefighters fighting the wild fires, in particular the fire in the Cajon Pass recently. This legislator, whose name escapes me at the moment, said that there are several members considering introducing legislation restricting where drones can fly in California even further than the current federal regulation. The plan he talked of was to limit the use of personal, or hobby, drones to a ceiling of 300 feet and to require commercial operation of drones to operate between 400 and 500 feet, leaving a 100 foot buffer between hobby and commercial drones. No drones at all would be permitted to operate above that 500 foot ceiling, leaving that in control of the FAA. He also acknowledged that while legislation might be able to regulate where and when drones can fly, for all practical purposed, authorities simply can't control how drones are used. They can only react to the improper use, hence Dianne Feinstein's proposal to require registration of all drones at the point of sale level.— August 15, 2015 10:11 p.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
don bauder Please read my comment again. Nowhere did I refer to the nefarious uses of drones that you listed. I was replying to the comment that the FAA was increasing the operational ceiling for drones and provided the most current info for both commercial and personal/hobby drones. I have 2 answers to your equation. The first is that it seems to me that there is a difference between the classification of the drone and the purpose for which it's used. If I am flying my drone and I follow the operational rules and restrictions, then it is a hobby drone. If I decide that I want to fly over your home in Colorado, still within those parameters required, and spy on you, technically, the drone is still a hobby drone, but it's how I am using it that is illegal. Similarly, if someone is operating within those same parameters and uses it to smuggle drugs, it's still a hobby aircraft, just one being used for illegal purposes. Secondly, does it really matter how drones used as you described are classified? When they are used for such purposes they are being used unlawfully and the "classification" for which their use was initially intended is irrelevant. For example, if you take an airplane that was initially intended to carry passengers and fly it into a tall building, does that original classification really have relevance any longer? My point is this. At this point only 2 classifications for technical operational standards: commercial or hobbyist seem to be needed. As things proceed, I can see where those classifications may each have their own sub classes. As for their uses, there will only ever be 2 uses. One is the legal use of a drone, whether it be a commercial or personal/hobby drone and the other is the illegal use of a drone, whether it be a commercial or personal/hobby drone. That is it! It's either used legally or it isn't. It's no different than a plane, an ultralight, a car, a truck. a bike, etc. Their are ALWAYS be those that will try to exploit the uses for their own illicit activities, be it drugs, weapons, spying, terrorism. I mean you name the activity and someone will try it.— August 15, 2015 10:10 p.m.
And the drug war droned on and on
Yours is an interesting post. I wonder where it is that you heard that they've "raised the ceiling to 500 feet from 400." The FAA is expected to produce final regulations in late 2016 or early 2017. In February of this year, the FAA released its proposal for governing drones. The proposal would allow drones weighing up to 55 pounds to fly within sight of their remote pilots during daylight hours. The aircraft must stay below 500 feet in the air and fly less than 100 mph. People flying drones would need to be at least 17 years old, pass an aeronautics test and be vetted by the TSA. Now of course hose rules are for commercial use of drones. According to an interview I read with Dianne Feinstein a couple of days ago, because of the huge increase in drone/aircraft encounters, she has introduced a bill to regulate drone use by hobbyists. Basically, it seems that she wants drones to be registered to their owners at the point of sale. According to the article, as the rules stand now, drones are considered hobby aircraft and are exempt from registration because they are supposed to be operated below 400 feet, pilots must keep their drones within sight, avoid other aircraft and notify air-traffic control when flying within 5 miles of an airport. Those rules were published in the Federal Register in June and took effect immediately.— August 15, 2015 9:55 a.m.
Fabiani has a laugh
don bauder " According to my sources, the Rose Bowl has dropped out." I am not sure what you mean by "my sources", but it was widely reported by national media that the Rose Bowl Operating Co.decided by a unanimous to not even respond to a request for proposal the NFL sent them for the use of the Rose Bowl as a temporary NFL facility.— August 11, 2015 11:19 a.m.
Water wars: View from the delta
I'm not sure that Torrey Pines would be the best example to use. I believe since about 2008, Torrey Pines has been irrigated using reclaimed waste water.— August 7, 2015 12:06 p.m.