Slashdot Mirror


In Ireland, All RC and Drones Over 1kg To Be Registered (suasnews.com)

New submitter charliehotel writes: The Irish Aviation Authority announced that it will have its drone registry up and running by December 21st this year. This registry will be the first of its kind in Europe, and the Irish Aviation Authority will require all RPA / drones that weigh over 1kg to be registered; this includes model aircraft. I hope that the U.S.'s gathering storm of regulation doesn't start quite that small.

108 comments

  1. The US will start smaller by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 2

    According to this story at AvWeb, the US registry will require registration of all drones over 250 grams.

    At least it will be free and simple, according to the story.

    --
    Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    1. Re:The US will start smaller by goombah99 · · Score: 2

      that actually seems reasonable to me something over half a pound going 30 miles an hour could do some damage. Simply having to register heavier drones seems like threshold to encourage less hazards in the sky.,

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    2. Re:The US will start smaller by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Funny

      that actually seems reasonable to me something over half a pound going 30 miles an hour could do some damage. Simply having to register heavier drones seems like threshold to encourage less hazards in the sky.,

      Pfft This is just step on in taking our drones away from us. Soon the jack booted thugs will be busting into our houses at night to relive os of our rightful property.

      Well, they can take my drone when they pry it out of my cold, dead fingers.

      Jon the NDA today!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now we just need to wait for Australia to confiscate drones so that the leading democratic presidential candidate can publicly support "Australia-style mandatory drone confiscation".

    4. Re:The US will start smaller by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      It's all good. The incentive to develop little bitty drones will compensate.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:The US will start smaller by operagost · · Score: 1

      But it's not free. A multi-million dollar project will have to be initiated, and probably at least 30 permanent employees added to the federal payroll.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:The US will start smaller by kbg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait! Let me get this straight. If you own a 250 gram toy drone you need to register it because it could be dangerous?
      But if you own an assault rifle with 100 round magazine you don't need to register it. Yes, only in America.

    7. Re: The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It took a billion dollars to digitize 1 immigration form, so this should be at least a billion dollar project as well.

    8. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not many have assault rifles. You know a semiautomatic rifle is not an assault rifle, right?

    9. Re:The US will start smaller by TWX · · Score: 1

      Wait! Let me get this straight. If you own a 250 gram toy drone you need to register it because it could be dangerous?

      But if you own an assault rifle with 100 round magazine you don't need to register it. Yes, only in America.

      False equivalency. Besides, many argue for even stronger regulations on firearms, they simply are not able to bring those arguments to fruition.

      RC aircraft are being regulated because of the abuses that have been carried out through the operation of RC aircraft. The desire to regulate firearms comes from the abuses that have been carried out through the operation of firearms. They do not compare, they are each their own specific situation, with only one well known example of overlap.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    10. Re:The US will start smaller by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wait! Let me get this straight. If you own a 250 gram toy drone you need to register it because it could be dangerous?
      But if you own an assault rifle with 100 round magazine you don't need to register it. Yes, only in America.

      No all legal assault rifles owned by civilians are registered in the US and require a in depth background check by the FBI and a tax stamp, gun dealer licence, and large transfer fees. Assault rifles are full automatic (pull trigger bullets fly until you let go), what are unregistered is semi-automatic (one pull one bullet) and manual (pump action, lever action, etc), semi-automatic and manual require a background check and often a waiting period, unless you have a concealed carry permit in that state or dealer licence (in which cases you have already passed the background checks). The only firearms that do not require a background check at some stage are black powder firearms in most states.

      Additionally we have a constitutional provision protecting right to own firearms. But we have no such constitutional protection for ownership of RC toys.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    11. Re:The US will start smaller by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      There is a famous (infamous?) movie where one party was asked to lay down the gun and it answered with:
      pry it out of my cold, dead fingers.
      The other party answered: "That proposal is aceptable!"

      As it had no use for the gun and did not care to wait till the corpse was cold, it just moved on.

      Bonus points if you know the movie, I actually liked it ;)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:The US will start smaller by kbg · · Score: 0

      False equivalency.

      You can't just spout false equivalency without backing up why that is false equivalency, which you didn't.

      Besides, many argue for even stronger regulations on firearms, they simply are not able to bring those arguments to fruition.

      People argue for many things, but if they are not in effect they are meaningless. In this case this is a real drone regulation that is coming into effect. I can assure you that in the next 50 years there will still be no gun regulation in America and Americe will still have a lot of school shootings.

      >RC aircraft are being regulated because of the abuses that have been carried out through the operation of RC aircraft. The desire to regulate firearms comes from the abuses that have been carried out through the operation of firearms. They do not compare

      No you just compared them exactly right in this sentence.

      they are each their own specific situation, with only one well known example of overlap.

      They are different yes, just like all things, but here they are being compared exactly on the same thing. They are being registered so you have some accounability in the event of misuse of the device.

    13. Re:The US will start smaller by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      A lot of things can cause some damage. Like a 80kg guy riding a bicycle on the sidewalk. But we don't require bicycle registration for some reason.

    14. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MIB!

    15. Re:The US will start smaller by SuneSpeg · · Score: 1

      A football weights more and goes faster, fortunately they dont have to be registered. I think a better approach would be to regulate where you can fly. I just started on RC flying in Denmark, we have regulations that says you cant fly 5km from an airfield, above 100meter or near streets,near accidents and some other rules that ought to be common sense for most. If it was mandatory to register as RC pilot first, and complete a simple rc-license-test , i think the growing number of accidents could be reduced dramatically , with little impact of those who fly by the rules.

    16. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, and will the same requirement be made of all radio controlled model aircraft? I'll bet the Academy of Model Aeronautics would have some objections to that.

    17. Re:The US will start smaller by radarskiy · · Score: 2

      You need a gun to shoot down unregistered drones.

    18. Re:The US will start smaller by leonbev · · Score: 1

      You would be amazed how many people do NOT know this. I guess that's what happens when the only things you know about firearms are the sound bites you hear on CNN every time there is a mass shooting somewhere.

    19. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try to transfer an assault rifle (as the original post pointed out, fully automatic) at a gun show without the proper tax stamps & registrations and you're in for a world of hurt. Used semi-automatic rifles can be transferred by private parties without many requirements at gun shows but those are pretty rare. Most gun show sales are by licensed dealers which are required to do the standard background checks. The often quoted "40%" of off the book sales is over two decades old, and even then it was known that a vast majority of those sales were family/friend purchases NOT gun sales. Only about 2% of firearms used in crimes are purchased at gun shows and there are no indications of what percentage of those were purchased privately or via a gun dealer.

    20. Re:The US will start smaller by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      It's all good. The incentive to develop little bitty drones will compensate.

      Indeed. There will soon be plenty of 249 gm drones ... with optional battery packs and cameras sold separately.

    21. Re:The US will start smaller by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Wait! Let me get this straight. If you own a 250 gram toy drone you need to register it because it could be dangerous? But if you own an assault rifle with 100 round magazine you don't need to register it. Yes, only in America.

      I'm pretty sure that the armed forces DOES register all of their assault rifles.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    22. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of things can cause some damage. Like a 80kg guy riding a bicycle on the sidewalk. But we don't require bicycle registration for some reason.

      Ah, but not as much damage as a 80kg guy on a bicycle falling out of the sky!

    23. Re:The US will start smaller by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      that actually seems reasonable to me something over half a pound going 30 miles an hour could do some damage.

      Should I also register a softball or baseball, while they are more like 150g, they can be thrown much faster than 30mph.

      (weird that we're mixing two systems of measurement)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    24. Re:The US will start smaller by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Ah, but not as much damage as a 80kg guy on a bicycle falling out of the sky!

      Nor as much as damage a 120 kg guy to a box of pastries.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    25. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was talking about guns in general

      The only mention of a firearm that you made in your post was about "an assault rifle with 100 round magazine". That doesn't sound like "guns in general". It sounds like emotional hyperbole.

      a gun is a gun and is dangerous

      Yes, but different categories of guns have different tendencies of use. Examples: Manual is justifiable for sport and hunting. A small semi-auto weapon is justifiable for self-defense. A fully-automatic weapon is justifiable for warfare.

      Besides you can always add slide fire to turn it into automatic.

      Not legally, you can't. At that point, you may as well claim that you can carry a concealed pistol on your person in any country that you care too. Perhaps you "can", but you'll have broken the law in many of those places.

    26. Re:The US will start smaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's a fully automatic weapon, a machine gun. Not necessarily an assault rifle. Or even a rifle. (Remember the Mac 10 machine pistols of yesterday?)

      An assault rifle has several aspects on that list that congress came up with. Things like a folding stock, or a threaded barrel. Large capacity magazines have nothing to do with being an assault rifle. That's completely separate.

      Overall, Assault Rifle is just a term congress came up with to scare the public, and mostly corresponds to the weapon looking "scary". The really scary stuff nobody talks about. There's no catchphrase for weapon with a 100 round drum magazine of ,223 rifle ammunition and a short-ranged laser sight modified to be hip fired. That's legal. Expensive as hell to buy all that ammo, but legal and really scary!

  2. US regulation? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    >> Irish Aviation Authority announced that it will have its drone registry up and running by December 21st

    In the US, this would take seven years and $15B to build. And then it still wouldn't work.

    “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency.”

    1. Re:US regulation? by Nidi62 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >> Irish Aviation Authority announced that it will have its drone registry up and running by December 21st

      In the US, this would take seven years and $15B to build. And then it still wouldn't work.

      Nope, but it will still have worked as intended. It will have funneled millions of dollars to contractors, guaranteed a bureaucrat or 2 a lucrative job after government life, and added a few more dollars to the reelection coffers of a few Congressmen.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:US regulation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Irish Aviation Authority announced that it will have its drone registry up and running by December 21st

      In the US, this would take seven years and $15B to build. And then it still wouldn't work.

      “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency.”

      If the US really wanted to be efficient, they'd buy the Irish system.

      But hey, I shouldn't be suggesting that kind of thing here. If they develop it for themselves in the US, that's going to keep a whole load of developers in work for years.

    3. Re:US regulation? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I am so looking forward to this. Finally, a project worthy of my Microsoft Access skills!

      I'm going to hunt up the RFP now.

      Or should I write it in Lotus Notes?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:US regulation? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea, how much would Ireland cost the US? We can probably find enough credit for the purchase.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  3. Only outlaws will have drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And if you don't register it, then what? How will they know you even have it? It's like paying a license for your dog; once you license it, they've got you every year.

    1. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't let my dog drive, license or no license.

    2. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      the net effect however is that the proliferation of heacy dornes will be reduced even iff there are scofflaws. And that's the desired outcome.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    3. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      Which is why in many jurisdictions owners of unlicensed dogs are fined many times more when there animals are out of control than owners of those that are licensed. This idea that idiots can fly their drones wherever they want really needs to be nipped in the bud now. And, from the gist of the comments here, the punishments for violations should be extremely harsh if their attitude of entitlement to the skies is to be curtailed.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    4. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just say you trashed the drone. Scuff off the serial numbers and keep on flying it. You don't need a death certificate of a dog to tell the county that it died.

    5. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a dog that you keep in your home and let run around your big, fenced-in backyard, are you hurting anyone? Maybe you take it out to the middle of nowhere, miles from any people, and let it run loose for it bit. Are you still hurting anyone? I can understand that people would be upset if I let my dog run wild through their neighborhood or all over the town square. It's the same with a drone. As long as I know where it is and its not in places it shouldn't be and I'm not spying on anyone, am I hurting anyone?

    6. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by EzInKy · · Score: 0

      You just might be one the good guys, so you should have no problems with registering to distinguish from the bad guys.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    7. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by Max_W · · Score: 1

      You did not mention that dogs leave unhygienic substances on sidewalks. These substances play a role in spreading dangerous for humans parasites, which cost each of us 3 - 5 years of life time. At least UAVs are using clean electric power.

    8. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      It's like paying a license for your dog; once you license it, they've got you every year.

      Or registering a firearm, once they know you have one it makes it easy to confiscate them all later. And you get to pay for the priviledge.

      (hopefully people recognize hyperbole when they see it)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    9. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      that sounds equivalent to never registering it at all.

      you could go to a junk yard and buy a scrap car and drive it around without registering it. until you're caught doing so.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    10. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Not nearly as much as birds

    11. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather let my own behavior distinguish me from the "bad guys", just as I do in all the other parts of my life. If I'm not doing anything wrong, then there's no reason to force me to register anywhere.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    12. Re:Only outlaws will have drones by Max_W · · Score: 1

      Birds, at least wild life ones, live in forests, at sea cliffs, etc., i.e. where animals should live. But dogs walk exactly where humans do. Basically we are returning to early middle ages when the streets were used as sewer ditches. Certainly it caused epidemics. Nowadays there are antibiotics, but they will protect us not for long.

  4. Why? by EzInKy · · Score: 2

    How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head? In my mind there should be no weight minimums. I simply do not want these things flying around without well enforced rules.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shills for the consumer drone industry is your answer. One the one hand, I see them little more than RC toys we had in the 70s and 80s with glo-plug engines. But they were pretty rare. I've not idea what people use today, who are the Futaba etc. The other hand, though, clearly wants to smash these things are they're little more than tools for paedophiles to spy on children, or similar invasions of privacy. It's not about having fun flying with small avionics now, it's about the cameras. No one into drones is into flying them, it's 100% about the video they capture.

      For Ireland to have a massive weight of 1Kg is pretty impressive. Those in the US don't realise there are plenty of reports of the IRA returning. Not all terrorist and from the middle-east. Of course, those dropping small explosives won't be registering the devices anyway. So what's the point?

    2. Re:Why? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head? In my mind there should be no weight minimums. I simply do not want these things flying around without well enforced rules.

      Safety culture is strong in you.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regulation for regulation sake isn't going to stop much of anything. Much like a locked door, at best it only keeps honest people honest. The problem there is that honest people where never a problem to begin with. All the people who would/will cause trouble will simply either operate unregistered drones or won't even know they needed to register them in the first place. I mean I can't think of the last time I read instructions unless what I was dealing with was so far out of my depth that there was no possibility of me figuring it out without them. So the odds of a lot of people simply throwing their registration reminders away is fairly high, unless registration happens at the POS and assuming they don't simply make their own drones.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because a drone is registered or supposed to be registered doesn't mean people aren't going to act irresponsible with them. Instead, there should be an operator license program for craft over X lbs similar to how model rocket engines are classed. Weight minus a battery would be the easiest way to class them as max altitude could easily change via better motors, battery chemistry, or lighter chassis. As of now, the best batteries have a pretty standard energy density which can easily be converted to total lift with standard motors. This is the potential energy of the battery as determined by the weight of the craft.

      Also, who is going to enforce these rules? The FAA? They are a reactionary agency. The police? Who is going to pay for them to watch the skies, a territory they have no experience in enforcing?

    5. Re:Why? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head? In my mind there should be no weight minimums. I simply do not want these things flying around without well enforced rules.

      So.. You want to force the registration of paper airplanes in the office now? I understand your idea, but I'm a bit confused as to how you intend to write a law that's reasonable and meets your criteria.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:Why? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head?

      It benefits me because I like flying 'em.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > No one into drones is into flying them, it's 100% about the video they capture.

      Really? Not even the folks racing each other around courses, using FPV?
      You might want to trim that brush down a bit...

    8. Re:Why? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      But Regulation also stops amazon from using them with rules or can lead to a big fine if they try to by pass the Regulations by using 1099 workers

    9. Re:Why? by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      Companies can fire people for such absurd behavior, regular homeowners can not.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    10. Re:Why? by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      It is the drone owners who are forcing this on all of us, so the costs should be totally placed on them with licensing fees and fines for violating property and privacy rights. Really, none of this would be necessary if drone operators would just fly under the conditions you specify. So many though seem to think that they are entitled to fly their toys wherever they like.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    11. Re:Why? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      No, regulation makes sure that only qualified (see Government / Corporate) uses are allowed. People for gun control aren't against guns, they are against normal people having guns.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    12. Re:Why? by Solandri · · Score: 1

      If the regulation is unenforceable (i.e. half the kids get a drone for Christmas), then it's a bad thing to have it on the books. The government will then use selective enforcement to punish people they don't like, rather than enforcing in a fair and evenhanded manner. The regulation then becomes a means for the government to control the population, when in fact the population should be controlling the government.

    13. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head?

      It benefits me because I like flying 'em.

      It benefits me because I like flying 'em where I'm where I'm not supposed to. That way, when I kill other people by taking down an airliner, it makes it extremely difficult for anybody to know who to go after.

    14. Re:Why? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Futaba is still around as are my many planes I built in the 70's and 80's. I still build them, and model rockets too. I probably have close to 30 model airplanes still in existence. Most are not currently flyable, but 5-10 hours and some glue would fix that.

    15. Re:Why? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      RC (drone) gliders do not buzz. They're also capable of thermaling and staying in the air for hours.

  5. in my country making paper plane is illegal by vlad.vul · · Score: 1

    Glad to hear they excluded planes below one kg. In some countries, making paper plane is illegal because airplane laws have no exclusions. You shold have license. Dot.

    1. Re:in my country making paper plane is illegal by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Name one

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:in my country making paper plane is illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name one
      Pullitoutofmyassistan

    3. Re:in my country making paper plane is illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Libertatrianscarecrowia.

  6. naturally.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this will create a market for drones weighing 0.999kg

  7. In Ireland third party insurance will be required by ickleberry · · Score: 1

    Maybe not now but when this law is revised. After that annual airworthiness testing, certification. Drone operators will be required to pay €200 to listen to some guy telling you not to fly a drone into a child walking down the street.

    You'll be able to meet all these requirements by handing over a tidy sum of money to companies set up by friends of the politicians bringing in these drone laws. This is how Ireland works. Behind every law there is a backhander and a gravy train.

  8. Dead Wrong by clifwlkr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually, it is about having fun flying as well. Modern Phantom 3 devices can be flown FPV (First Person View), which opens up a whole new world compared to the old RC planes where you can only fly short distances. If flown safely in safe areas, there is little risk that these drones can cause. If any plane if flying below 400 feet over anywhere, they sure as heck better be extra cautious anyways, as there are all kinds of hazards there, of which the random drone is the least of their problems.

    Also, there are people like me who use them more for the photographic and video opportunities. Not spying on people like some pervert. That is like saying we should register cameras cause some sickos use them to take spy pictures in bathrooms. That is the vast minority. Do you want to know what most of us do? Here is a great example and explain to me how I could ever catch this scenery any other way:
    Drone Flight in Utah Desert
    It is just like any hobby. There will be people who abuse it, and the vast majority of people who are just having fun. I am not that paranoid about people spying on me with drones to ban the entire hobby. The real point is registration will do nothing to stop it. People like myself already put their phone numbers on their planes so if lost, there is a chance they will come back to me. The people who are the problems will not do anything. More tax dollars to a solution to nothing.

    1. Re:Dead Wrong by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      I think we're past the point of registering just cameras. What we should instead be doing is requiring and enforcing registration of smartphones and any devices with a camera, and requiring any video recording device to watermark incoming images so that you can identify exactly which device took a particular picture. This would solve all sorts of problems from photo copyright to child pornography. You would be able to tell exactly which device was used to take a picture and find out who the first distributor was.

      There are obviously lots of holes that you have to fill in on the way there - you would have to stop the momentum towards open hardware and software - no more letting ordinary people install custom software on their phones willy nilly. Custom ROMs are leading to the devastation of our society. Custom apps need to be tightly controlled to avoid people developing software to workaround the watermarking (though maybe it is best to just ban them outright).

      Any software capable of loading and transmitting a file needs to be tightly controlled so that we know exactly who is sending these images where.

      It is ridiculous that with the state of technology today we still allow people to run arbitrary software on personal computers and devices. We need to lock all this down before the harm to society is irreversible.

    2. Re:Dead Wrong by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Why not, when we catch one of those Child Molesting perverts simply toss them into General Population ? Instead we protect them from the consequences of their own actions by giving them "special" treatment. I have no problem letting prison justice work itself out.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  9. Re:In Ireland third party insurance will be requir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is how government works. Behind every law there is a backhander and a gravy train.

    FTFY

  10. drone registration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good.

    I can take the smaller ones down with just a flyswatter.

  11. R/C and drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was under the impression that "drone" is merely the pop-culture term for "R/C", as they were called up to about 5 years ago before the Hollywood Nightly News decided to re-term it.

    1. Re:R/C and drone? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that "drone" is merely the pop-culture term for "R/C", as they were called up to about 5 years ago before the Hollywood Nightly News decided to re-term it.

      All of the things that people are flying are RC. I believe a drone would be autonomous. I am not sure if such a thing exists, and if it does, it is probably only in the military.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    2. Re:R/C and drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have a look at Ardupilot.

    3. Re:R/C and drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The line between remote control and autonomous is fading. The flight stabilisation in RC helicopters is quite advanced these days, which allows micro helicopters to function without a balance bar (a weighted bar connected to the rotor wing angle, they also exist in some real helicopters), by directly controlling the servos which control wing angle.

    4. Re:R/C and drone? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      It costs about $60 to turn any rc plane (car or boat) into an autonomous vehicle. Basically an arduino and a $2.25 ebay gyro/magnetometer board and free open source software.

    5. Re:R/C and drone? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      "Drone" is an ambiguous term. Some people might mean "any R/C aircraft". When I think of it, I think of the more-sophisticated varieties of multi-rotor copters (quad-, hexa-, and octo- copters) with cameras, either supporting recorded video an programmed, GPS-controlled, autonomous flight or first-person view video, giving the operator/pilot a real-time stream from the perspective of the vehicle. A non-autonomous vehicle, operated purely by line-of-sight, and without recording capabilities says "not a drone" to me.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  12. Not Going to Fly... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Where I applaud the Irish for their effort (and whiskey and red hair), I'm not sure how this is really going to work.

    1. Having a registry available by December 21st seems very aggressive.

    2. The privacy concerns of those registering seems to be an unaddressed concern with the whole process.

    3. I'm not aware of any penalties for not registering, or violating any of the IAA rules.

    4. Who knows how much this will cost? Are there registration fees? Is it per aircraft or per operator or what?

    5. Who's got the responsibility for enforcement? Do they have the resources to actually do enforcement?

    This whole idea seems to be just a voluntary "Please register with us!" idea which is pretty much pointless. It won't force anybody to register, it won't force anybody to actually know or follow the existing rules, especially the idiots who insist on doing stupid things. What you really need is ENFORCEMENT, quick and harsh, for folks who insist on being stupid. A couple of test cases and the PR they would bring will do more to help the problem than all the rules and laws you can pass.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Not Going to Fly... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      >> What you really need is ENFORCEMENT

      What the government would prefer is an orderly cash flow from the millions sheeple who register so they can spend it on something else.

      It's not like any local police department will ever get involved in enforcement of unlicensed drones. They already have the tools they need to deal with nuisance situations, of which "being a dangerous ass with a drone" is just a particular type.

      >> It won't force anybody to register

      They won't go after consumers, any more than asking consumers to "please pay your state sales tax for things you bought online" ever worked. Instead, they'll focus on the points of sale, so you'll have to kick in your fee when you buy the drone, and part of the fee registration process will allow the government to hit you up for renewals, etc.

    2. Re:Not Going to Fly... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      For lots of things we don't have a real enforcement in europe.
      You get cought sooner or later, and if the problem is server enough they proclaim, you are violating rules since you started having the device. Then you have to show that you did not.

      E.g. you have to declare that you are brewing beer, 200l per year is tax free.
      You did not declare it and you are brewing provable more than 200l this year. By checking your machine building year they figure you own it minimum 5 years.
      So you get fined for not having declared your intention to brew beer for minimum 5 years and you get taxed for an amount they simply 'estimate' based on the amount of beer you could have breewed with that machine ofer that time, or an estimate in the bottles they find or on your bills for buying hops.

      Sonner or later everyone gets cought, no need to have a police state checking in every few weeks to see if you actually operate an RC air craft.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:Not Going to Fly... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this. The elephant in the room is DJI - the manufacturer of the Phantom series of drones, arguably the most popular drone around. And one which weights 1.3 kg with battery and rotors. DJI has a lot of money invested. They want to play nice and would fall over themselves to force a registration at time of sale. They would even pay for it themselves.

      Set it up in Ireland, debug the issue and now you can register (most) drones without even thinking about it.

      'Pssst, buddy.... wanna buy an unregistered Phantom?'

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Not Going to Fly... by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I didn't even RTFA but can probably answer most of those questions with guesses.
      If the Aviation Authority is responsible for the implementation, then copy and paste your questions to any other regulations in place by the same organisation and you will have your answers.
      Implementing new regulations is not new to them. This is their job.

  13. When drones are criminalized... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    When drones are criminalized, only criminals will have drones...

    Therefore, open season , bitches!

    *grin*

  14. Pffft by felixrising · · Score: 1

    Building a drone, over 1KG, and in the USA, over 250g! is trivial... Requiring registration for people's toys is idiotic (what are they going to do, attach a sticker?! to what easily replaceable part?) and unwarranted (how many actual drones - excluding military - have been involved in actual accidents with aircraft? none).

  15. So much butthurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Model rockets over 1.5kg have to get a specific wavier with location, time of flight, size, impulse and receive a specific waiver (and have a NOTAM filed) from the FAA every single time we fly. Suck it up, buttercup.

    1. Re:So much butthurt by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Model rockets over 1.5kg have to get a specific wavier with location, time of flight, size, impulse and receive a specific waiver (and have a NOTAM filed) from the FAA every single time we fly. Suck it up, buttercup.

      Model rockets that weigh over 1.5 kg (hopefully) go much further than the 400 vertical feet drones are limited to. And they go much faster. Yes, in those cases it is definitely appropriate for the rocketeers to tell other people using the airspace that something is going up very quickly. For the smaller drones, not so much.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:So much butthurt by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Model rockets that weigh over 1.5 kg (hopefully) go much further than the 400 vertical feet drones are limited to

      Drones are not limited technically to 400 feet. Many of the more advanced (but still reasonably affordable) drones can easily do 500+ feet without much effort. The 400 foot "limit" is FAA guidance that doesn't constitute legal advice - if you're being an idiot at 100 feet, the FAA can still prosecute you for reckless flying. (Including flying your drone into people)

    3. Re:So much butthurt by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1
      When I was 7 years old, I flew a bat kite up way over 500'. It was actually my friend's kite, but we pooled our money and bought 10 rolls of string (the kind that came on yellow cardboard tubes).

      We had 2000' of string and flew it once in a dust storm.

  16. Good, it's a big f-ing drone by iamacat · · Score: 1

    If a 1kg drone falls on my head, it will likely kill me. I am very much interested in knowing who has these, where they are allowed to fly and what is the maintenance record.

    1. Re:Good, it's a big f-ing drone by ColdWetDog · · Score: 0

      If a 1kg drone falls on my head, it will likely kill me. I am very much interested in knowing who has these, where they are allowed to fly and what is the maintenance record.

      Dear Paranoid Sir:

      May I interest you in the latest bit of drone protective gear? In the constant see saw between the Evil Forces and your physical integrity, this impressive device will completely shield you from their nefarious antics. The classic styling will fit in with any decor or occasion. For added protection, an aluminum foil EMF shield can be added to keep those unwanted thoughts to a bare minimum (if you get my drift...).

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Good, it's a big f-ing drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a 1kg drone falls on my head, it will likely kill me.

      The sky might fall on your head too.

  17. Re:In Ireland third party insurance will be requir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the point of that is so that some fucker doesn't claim they didn't know not to fly it into a child walking down the street. "I mean, they just sold this to me on the net and didn't warn me it might be dangerous!".

  18. 40 years and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been flying a 'drone'/helicopter for 40 years and now because of a name change and popularity it is all EVIL.....

    Let's start calling Obama a drone. Please?

    1. Re:40 years and... by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      An RC Helicopter is not a drone. But thanks for your contribution...

  19. AR vs flying hazards and pervs by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    Most people are not live firing their assualt rifles up and down the street in the their urban neighborhoods every weekend. No AR owners are looking at my daughter sunbathing in our atrium through their gunsights. No one sees weekly reports of AR being dropped from a height on passersby. There are traceable gun records for original shop sales, too.

    1. Re:AR vs flying hazards and pervs by Morgon · · Score: 1

      Please provide evidence that everyday people using quadcopters are using them to "look at your daughter".
      If we base everything on "what ifs", we'd have absolutely nothing.

      --
      [DISCLAIMER: This post is a work of satire and should not be misconstrued as a holy text upon which to base a religion.]
  20. Legislating on a phantasm by Max_W · · Score: 1

    There is not a single serious accident involving a drone. The one which you can see on youtube is a fake.

    At the same time about a million and a half people die each year in traffic accidents. http://www.who.int/gho/road_sa... About 20 million wounded. These are the figures of the World War 3, and they continue to grow. And what we see - cars and motorcycles are getting even more overpowered and overweight. Streets and roads are overcrowded by cars.

    At the same time delivery by drones could free roads and streets and save millions of lives.

  21. What does the registry do? by Macdude · · Score: 1

    What is the point of the registry?

    Is it better for me if the person using a drone to spy on me mowing my lawn has a registered drone? Is my privacy being invaded more if it's not registered?

    If you're going to say that we would be able to track down the person responsible if a drone is used to take down a plane you're lying. A drone used in such a manner would be homemade, unregistered, stolen or the registration markings would have been removed. The registration database would be completely useless.

    The registration is just the government being control freaks and not happy that someone is able to do something without their express permission.

    "Drones, Oooo scary. We need to do something, this is something, we need to do it".

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
  22. Re:RESPONSIBILITY, or lack of, that is the real is by tompaulco · · Score: 2

    RC pilots were responsible. Planes and copters were safely flown in designated areas.
    This legislation is only necessary because the day of the responsible RC pilot are now gone. Now we have irresponsible RC pilots (because they aren't drones, they are RC craft) who want to fly their toys around airports, in other people's yards, interfere with emergency operations, and any number of other intrusive and dangerous behaviors.
    They believe that people in public (ie, their own backyard surrounded by a privacy fence) should have no privacy, but if you tell them they need to register their drone, then it is "But!, But! My PRIVACY!".

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  23. Time to arm my drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I'm going to be fined for flying drones, I might as well make it worth doing.

    So, I think it's time to design/build an autonomous drone equipped with a pair of 50-cal machine guns. I'm sure this is totally doable. Maybe I could add on a follow mode, and convert it into the ultimate close-support 'pet' for the military. Too bad it would only have a flying time of an hour at best.

  24. Dear drone owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for fucking up flying model aircraft. As per usual laws get enacted to rein in the idiotic minority that can't behave responsibly without them, the net effect being the ruining things for everyone else.

  25. Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I hope that the U.S.'s gathering storm of regulation doesn't start quite that small.

    The question is controversial alright, but aside from the more sensitive aspects, 1kg hitting your head is mostly an ensured sudden death.

    This is not one of those cases of unit analphabetism, is it? I suppose everyone knows 1kg is about two pounds...

    And is this the weight of the drone alone or must it include its cargo?

  26. Does this mean that... by easyTree · · Score: 1

    ...people are safe from being murdered by a US drone in Ireland?

  27. I take it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is ok?