By law, according to new Florida legislation, any drones owned by the state of Florida or its law enforcement agencies, as well as educational facilities, must be American-made and certified as compliant with U.S. privacy laws.
The new law was passed in response to concerns about Chinese drones being used to spy on US citizens, with the Chinese government potentially using the drones to gain access to sensitive information.
The law is expected to have a significant economic impact, with many companies having to switch to American–made drones or find new suppliers.
In Chipley, Florida, Florida Panhandle Technical College Drone Instructor Paul Goulding is stymied in his efforts to teach his students the drone component of his Digital Video Technology Program, which uses drones as a platform to capture photo and video content.
‘It’s tough to teach drone technology when all your drones are of a manufacturer which were accepted a few months ago, but not today’, said Goulding, ‘and at least for today, we are grounded’.
Additionally, the law could lead to an increase in the cost of drone services in the state, as American–made drones are often more expensive than their Chinese counterparts.
It remains to be seen if other states will follow Florida‘s lead and pass similar legislation, but for now, the Sunshine State is taking a stand against Chinese drone technology.
The law requires all Florida agencies, including law enforcement, to cease using drones made in China. This includes drones flown by police, fire, and other government departments, as well as universities and other public institutions.
The law also prohibits the purchase or use of drones or other unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that are manufactured or assembled in China or a country that the United States has identified as a non–cooperative country of concern.
The law does not provide any additional funding to replace the drones, which can cost thousands of dollars.
This means that departments must find other ways to pay for the new drones, potentially through grants or budget adjustments.
The law also states that any current drones in use must be removed from service within 90 days.
This could cause an operational concern for law enforcement, firefighters, and other agencies that rely on drones for their operations.
The law is an example of an unfunded mandate, which is a law that requires an action without providing the means to do it.
This could be a significant burden for government agencies, who must find a way to pay for the new drones, or risk becoming non–compliant with the law.
‘We (Florida Panhandle Technical College) received a grant to fund our drone operations several years ago, and we received several machines from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, which really kick-started our program’, says Goulding.
‘Now, although we can teach the theory and prepare our students to pass the FAA Part 107 Small Unmanned Aerial System Licensure test’, says Goulding, ‘we cannot put hands on, which is kind of like kissing your sister’.
Skydio, Parrot, Altavian, Teal Drones, and Vantage Robotics are all approved drone manufacturers in Florida. Skydio is the most expensive option, but it offers the most features, such as obstacle avoidance and autonomous flight.
Skydio offers the most features, such as obstacle avoidance and autonomous flight.
Parrot has a range of drones for different uses.
Altavian has a single fixed–wing design.
Teal Drones has an interesting product on the way, the Teal 2, but its controller costs more than a Mavic 3.
Vantage Robotics offers a folding Vespar in various configurations which is the most similar to the Mavic 3 Enterprise.
The ban doesn‘t apply to consumers in Florida, only to government agencies.
