Slashdot Mirror
FAA: Small Drones Must Be Registered By February (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has finally unveiled its new drone registration rules. Starting on 21 December, all newly-purchased drones between 250 grams (.55 lbs) and 25 kg (~55 lbs) must be registered before their first flight. Owners of drones purchased before that time must register by 19 February 2016. The FAA will charge $5 to register the drones, though the first month of registrations will be free. "Make no mistake: unmanned aircraft enthusiast are aviators, and with that title comes a great deal of responsibility," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. "Registration gives us an opportunity to work with these users to operate their unmanned aircraft safely. I'm excited to welcome these new aviators into the culture of safety and responsibility that defines American innovation." There is also an age requirement: kids under the age of 13 will not be allowed to register a drone by themselves.
In related news, Bard college has compiled a report on drone safety with respect to encounters with manned aircraft.
they are taking more money from us, so we will be safer!
their solution to everything. disgusting.
Hmm, my quadcopter is 0.41lbs so I guess I'm good. Although I occasionally attach my GoPro to it which puts it at 0.61lbs.
The good news is that now people who want to use RC machines to fly someplace they're not supposed to, or to carry some not-right payload (say, a small bomb, or ferrying contraband over a prison wall, etc) will now be stopped by this new paperwork.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I predict the rise of a huge market for 249g drones in the very near future.
That said, "Civilian drones weighing more than 250 grams (0.55 pounds) must be registered and identified with markings so that authorities have a better chance of finding the owner in the event of an illegal flight or crash"... Riiight, because someone planning to illegally use their drone will certainly make sure to properly register it first?
The Bloomberg article mentions that the $5 fee is actually a government mandate in the law that the FAA is using to claim authority over RC aircraft, but to anyone looking at it, it looks like the RC aircraft equivalent of red light cameras: a government cash-grab that does little to nothing to actually improve safety. I'm having trouble seeing how having tagged drones is going to do anything but allow the government to collect more money in fines, both for unauthorized drone use and for drone use without a license.
But they weren't even commonly called 'drones' until recently.
Did I completely misread this or did we just spend $46 million on a website because of 238 "potentially unsafe" operations? Does the Federal Government even have the right to do this for "aviation" that never crosses state borders?
From the rules (http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=19856):
The FAA estimates that in calendar year 2014, 200,000 small unmanned aircraft were operated in the NAS in model aircraft operations. During this period, the FAA received 238 reports of potentially unsafe UAS operations.
In order to implement the new streamlined, web-based system described in this IFR, the FAA will incur costs to develop, implement, and maintain the system. Small UAS operators will require time to register and mark their aircraft, and that time has a cost. The total of government and registrant resource cost for small unmanned aircraft registration and marking under this new system is $56 million ($46 million present value at 7 percent) through 2020.
Yeah, but those old remote-control airplanes couldn't leave your sight, so people only used them in wide-open fields. It was easy to tell who the operators of an R/C airplane were. Now they have remote cameras and can travel for many miles.
So many of you are complaining about your toys having to be registered with the FAA now. But I put these points to you:
1. Who is really to blame, here? The retards who were irresponsible with their toys, that's who, so go bang on them!
2. What the actual FUCK do you expect the FAA and the government to do? Nothing? Doing nothing means the problem continues. Or do you expect cops to waste their time trying to chase down little flying toys? That's like trying to herd ferrets.. who got into a case of Rockstar; it ain't happenin'. The only other viable alternative I can see, would be to ban non-government drones entirely from the U.S., which no doubt would make all of you froth at the mouth even worse. Therefore: GET OVER IT.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Just because there is a new toy that is out, that happens to have the name of a controversial military device it becomes a major threat.
First, before I get mauled, I'm not entirely crazy about this new proposal. Under a particular altitude and as a hobby I think we should leave unregulated, that said... The drone market is filling up. Drones have way more people in it than the model rocket and RC Airplane markets and I would dare say combined. Drones are also a lot more industrious than say the model rocket or RC plane. Drones are being used for photography, to move goods, be the ultra creeper you've always wanted to be, traffic reports, and so on which are all way more than what the model rocket and RC plane market have ever done.
So considering that the drone market has been able to do all of that and the others are a no go, yeah I can see why the FAA feels there is a need to regulated it. Now that's not to say the others can't do that, it just to say that they haven't, if and when they do, then I'm pretty sure they'll start regulating that as well. But let's be very clear that this comment isn't a voice of support or disdain at the regulation. It's that you can't very easily compare model rockets, RC planes, and what have you with the drone market simply because they are vastly different markets. People have found drones to be really useful and have started creating a lot of points where they intersect with everyday life. The same can't be said for those other markets.
For those who like rigorous formulae on why anyone does anything, I would say (and simply my opinion) that the FAA acts when a particular class of aircraft is used in X number of applications that has Y number of general public using those applications and there are Z number of opportunities to purchase that class of aircraft. (I know really rough formula there, I don't espouse to know what goes on inside the FAA's head) However this rough formula would say that as any of those values X, Y, or Z increases, the likelihood that there will be regulation increases proportionally. Drones are "X" used in numerous applications, "Y" are criss crossing the general public a lot, "Z" you can buy them pretty much everywhere. I'm pretty sure the same could have been said about bi-planes in the early days of aviation.
Again, I'm speculating here as to the logic because it would be wrong for us just to assume, "Hey I'm government and I just want to regulate anything and everything I can possibly." If that was truly the case one would think we'd have a modern Stamp Act. However, considering that we are talking about a public entity, we could forgo the speculation and render my entire comment useless and just simply write them an email asking, "Hey what particular factors does your agency feel led to the regulation of drones and not something like RC airplanes or model rockets?" Again, this just my two cents, I don't condone or condemn this new regulation, just speaking purely out of the these things you talked about model rockets and RC planes != drone market and for better reasons than it's named after the thing we use to murder (don't get me started on that) people around the world with.
Some people seem to have trouble navigating a vehicle safely in two dimensions. Add a third and this is what happens. A steady string of events and incidents from people who just can't act with some responsibility (see earlier comments on why RC aircraft community typically doesn't have this problem)
It's why I never ask when my flying car will show up. As a population we suck enough at driving on the ground as it is.
It's hardly freaking ruined. Spend $5, get registered, nothing else changes. Except they know who you are if you fly like a retard.
And if you aren't registered and fly like a retard, they now have legal recourse.
I'm all for the government minding their own business... But RC Helicopters are hardly ruined by a $5 tax.
Just buy a drone, register it under your enemy's name...and then fly it into an airport.
They are screwed at that point.....
At that point, they appear on all sorts of governmental lists, no fly...no buy weapons...etc.
And those are virtually impossible to get yourself off of....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No, for flying an unregistered drone. Difference is HUGE.
. Define sqrt(x) as something really evil like (x / rand()), and bury it deep. Watch your coworkers go nuts.
RC planes didn't sell 200 units per day from a single retailer (B&H Photo, NY, selling 200+ Phantoms / day). RC pilots tended not to buzz the Macy's Day parade nor drop down on stadiums full of people nor fly around in controlled airspace. The shear magnitude of this phenomenon is staggering. And that is before Christmas.
This is just another Eternal September, albeit with a physical object. There are going to be so many yo-yos out there buzzing up and down that somebody is going to get into serious trouble. Of course, pasting a number on the shell of a drone isn't going to stop stupid anymore than requiring license plates and driver's licenses has stopped road stupid. The system really isn't onerous. Five dollars every three years to register as many drones as you like. Money is refunded if you sign up in the first thirty days (this should be an interesting test to see if somebody can create a website that can scale).
It looks like you're going to have to attest that you have Read The Fine Manual. Of course, that really won't help, people will do what they want. I now am the proud owner of two Phantom 3's. They're great fun and awfully impressive bits of kit for the money. But the forums are filled with people who are blatantly flaunting the rules - flying over people and houses, fly way past visual control. Modding every little bit they possibly can. There are going to be problems with these things (naturally) and having some way of finding the owner of said drone does make sense.
BTW, if you're looking for a good deal on a slightly abused Phantom, I'd watch eBay and Craiglist on Dec 27th (give people a day to charge the battery). Just make sure you have a set of small torx and hex drivers and a steady hand.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I agree with you but I would point out that the FAA has long kept it's finger on model rocketry and radio controlled aircraft. They have been happy to do it with low key regulation and the concept that if they can self regulate and Keep Out Of Trouble, then the long logbook of the law won't bother them. It's a philosophy that has worked with amateur radio for years.
But the sheer number of drones and the various and disparate people crashing them into every object above coffee table height has pushed them to do something.
And something, so far, has been pretty reasonable.
It's a compromise. Nobody is happy.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
It allows an investigation to find the person responsible.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
What about my 18 pound Remote control airplane that goes about 50 mile an hour? I'm far faster and far more deadly than any "drone" which is uneducated speak for quadcopter.
These new rules were written by morons in response to knee jerking.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
ya because your finger prints and none of his are in the RC chopper.
Jack of all trades,master of none
Note, that is $5 every three years. The FAA is making a list without any benefit to the people on the list. Thanks.
It will be interesting to see how well they validate registrations.
I'm sure it will go over just fine. How hard could it be for the government to setup a functioning website?
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
I'm all for the government minding their own business...
Just noting that minding your/mine/our business *is* their business. If everyone was honest, fair and responsible (etc) and minded their own business we wouldn't need government to legislate and arbitrate things.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
How about we only require remote controlled aircraft large enough to carry a weapon to be registered...
The problem is not "weapons" but collisions. If a drone collides with a manned aircraft, it doesn't matter if it is carrying a weapon or not. Of course, a 250 gm drone is not going to fly high enough or be big enough to be a problem. This law is fine in principle, but is a big overreach in going after toys.
No, the model rocket and traditional radio controlled aircraft activities were largely self regulating. With the understanding that if they didn't do it themselves, the FAA would be happy to ban them. And, prior to this, it worked. Now, no so much.
BTW, you DO have to register certain model rockets with the FAA as well as getting specific clearance for flights for the larger rockets. The ones that go thousands of feet in the air. The little ones only go several hundreds of feet.
So there.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
...using a credit card you bought with cash under your target's name at some convenience store?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
The potential for misuse seems pretty small to me.
The hell there isn't potential for misuse. Registering drones means now the gubermint has a list of names and addresses. First they will come and demand my drones. Then they will do it with guns! Hell they are even trying to say i can't have guns on my drones - how stupid is that?
> But RC Helicopters are hardly ruined by a $5 tax.
RC helicopters and RC fixed-wing aircraft have no registration requirement. Only "drones" are subject to this requirement.
The Academy of Model Aeronautics and its sincere and earnest outreach efforts (the majority of which is its cultivation and support of local RC model aeronautics clubs, and the remainder of which is its liaison between the FCC and the model airplane clubs) has done a *really* good job of cultivating a culture of safe, sane, and responsible RC piloting.
I know that the existence of a liaison between a federal agency and regular citizens is a *strong* indicator of graft and/or corruption. In the case of the AMA, it is most definitely *not*. The AMA is a *really* great force for good in this space and uses the money collected from dues effectively and responsibly. Full-scale pilots universally agree that the regulations that the AMA and the FAA hammer out are sane, safe, and (most importantly) prioritize the safety of full-scale air traffic over the operation of a model airfield.
It's a damn shame that *so* many retailers sold semi- or fully-autonomous RC aircraft without *strongly* stressing that the purchaser go take a serious look at the local model airplane club. Every store that specializes in model aircraft steers purchasers towards the local club. the training that these clubs provide prevents the purchaser from augering their new toy into the ground ten seconds after they put it together, *and* teaches them how to fly it responsibly and safely, rather than flying it like a fucking asshole and endangering themselves and others.
licensing requirements for CB radios were back in the 1970s.
And just like the FCC, the FAA isn't going to have the resources to go after every kid with an RC quadcopter.
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
That's less than a quarter million per incident. Can't you see what a great value that is? Just think, our government can protect us from hundreds of dollars of damage! Isn't it wonderful?!
I'm inclined to think that you're being too harsh on the drone operators and too nice to the government. Don't you think the abuses people have committed with their UAVs is mostly due to negligence and/or stupidity. I highly doubt that people are deliberately flying their equipment anywhere and everywhere to make a political statement about their "rights". Same with people who own guns. The gun rights activists aren't the ones committing crimes and using firearms irresponsibly.
"Politicians ... are the same lazy bums that we are. They couldn't care less what you do. As long as you are not a threat to anyone."
As long as you aren't a threat to THEM you mean. Besides, the new rules aren't being formulated by politicians. These regulations are the work of FAA bureaucrats. ALL bureaucrats have one basic motivation: To preserve and expand their own power. They certainly don't give a f*** about what's good for the public. Endless amounts of rules and regulations are their job security.
Not it won't be profitable, but the required recurring testing will be.
Well, as someone else here said earlier today, you can thank all the assholes for ruining it. That's what happens when things are democratized (in this case, because it became inexpensive): you get all the masses, and the masses are generally moronic assholes. Things seemed better in the past because things like this were expensive hobbies, so only people with a lot of money, or people with a very strong interest willing to dedicate their more-limited financial resources to it, would get involved. That not only limited the sheer numbers of people involved, it kept the quality level a lot higher.
Does that include remotely controlled kites and control line models?
How much do you think it will cost to administer the program? Surely more then 5 dollars per registration.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Since you can legally be in the USA without necessarily being a citizen (just visiting, legal permanent resident, et al), are non-citizens forbidden from flying drones?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Note, that is $5 every three years. The FAA is making a list without any benefit to the people on the list. Thanks.
The point of the list isn't to benefit the people on the list, the point of the list is to benefit everyone else against the people on the list.
I'm a licensed amateur radio operator. I have a very basic tech/no-code license, and as such I am limited to a very specific set of frequencies and power levels. This is to protect everyone else from me, while giving me some guidelines so that I may actually pursue the hobby, so that your TV and radio and cordless phone and cell phone and WIFI don't stop working because I'm pursuing my hobby.
Licensing of drones works in a similar fashion- it gives the hobby some room to operate but works to curtail abuses and abusers. I expect rules to be developed for where people can fly and what can be flown in what kinds of locations and conditions. I expect rules on altitude, the crossing of private property, the use of cameras regarding private property, etc. Given that I legally own the airspace over my house to a certain extent, operators will have to learn what they are and are not allowed to do, in the same way that I don't transmit on frequencies that break your electronics.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
This, a thousand times this.
There are great, AMA-sponsored clubs almost everywhere, and they usually have a nice, well-equipped location for flying, and sometimes cool events like indoor (gym) dogfights and all kinds of fun stuff. For instance, the drone racing nationals:
http://dronenationals.com/
Fun stuff. The switch from local hobby shop purchaser being the norm, to Amazon "4.3 stars out of 5.0, I should buy this" purchaser is what's leading to all this crap, IMO.
You don't require a driver's license to drive on your own property, or private property with permission of the owner. This FAA license is required for absolutely all drones that are flown outdoors, whether they are only ever used on private property or not.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Which reminds me of a point.... that kites would technically be considered drones by this act, since kites can fairly easily be maneuvered remotely from the ground by tugging on the string or strings in different directions.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I warned you about this years ago when "drone" operators started acting like idiots because the price barrier made idiots able to be drone operators. I even gave you a few suggestions as to how to help avoid this. I even offered to help and I am not a drone operator. I offered to help because I hate draconian regulation harming hobbyists.
But no... I was modded down and you told me that you'd do what you want. This is just the beginning. The offer to help still sort of stands but I'm fast approaching a point where I won't have time to help.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Or, do just like I will, not register and fly anyway.
No one is going to register, this is a publicity play on the way to an outright ban, when no one registers, they'll use that as an excuse.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
As GP pointed out, typical consumer drone flight does not take place in restricted airspace.
In fact, the vast majority of it takes place in what is often referred to as "Class G" airspace, which until now has remained unregulated, for a very good reason: the FAA does not have authority under the Constitution or, for that matter, under the laws that established it as part of the Commerce Department in 1926.
Flying drones as a hobby is not a matter of Interstate Commerce, nor does it (legally) take place in airspace that is under the purview of the FAA. If it does, then the FAA would be right to take action.
But this attempt to regulate formerly unregulated airspace is nothing but a power grab by the FAA, similar to the unsuccessful attempt by the EPA to regulate "all" waterways in the US.
They just don't have authority to do it. The entirety of their authority is derived from the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution. If the area or activity does not involve interstate commerce (and private drone flight in Class G areas pretty clearly do not), FAA has no jurisdiction. At best it's a State matter.
To put it another way: other than restricted airspace -- which routes and altitudes are clearly shown on aviation charts -- I own the rights to the air above my property, in precisely the same way I own the rights to the water and minerals underneath it. There are a few minor limitations but this is a long-established area of law.
No, you do not
You are wrong about it not being written anywhere.... as I quoted above:
Also, not getting caught is really beside the point, it is still explicitly illegal.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'