Slashdot Mirror
Drone Registration Is FAA's Way of Getting You To Read Their "EULA" (hackaday.com)
szczys writes: There is little to complain about when it comes to the new FAA rules regarding drones (unless perhaps you live in DC). The regulations are basically an End User Licensing Agreement and focus on educating responsible operators. Eight simple rules cover how to avoid doing dangerous things with Unmanned Aerial Systems. The FAA has even left alone the small toy drones, and the certification system for those above 55 lbs remains. The one aspect that is concerning is that of privacy; the drone database will be publicly searchable and contains names and addresses of drone owners. If the DMV keeps license plate data protected, the FAA should do the same.
nope. not should. could. might. maybe, but not should.
--because the FAA says the database will be searchable, so all the info you enter will be available to anybody that wants it.
How long until folks start getting all sorts of exciting offers based on their registrations?
See, isn't that a whole lot better than OPM? Go ahead and enter that credit card number...
55lbs is a pretty hefty UAS (not drone).
The rules are about 0.55lbs (1/100th of that.)
https://www.faa.gov/uas/regist...
Enjoy.
E
Aircraft registrations are publicly available. In my country I can download an Access database with every aircraft in the country in it. They seem to have just taken the same rules that apply to aircraft registrations for drones. If this is to be different for drones, new legislation or regulations will be required.
No.. it doesn't.
http://demosrch5.publicdata.co...
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
There are already a ton of localities making up their own patchwork of rules concerning "drones" because the word is scary and unpopular and doing so is a good way for lawmakers and DAs to make a name for themselves. This needs to stop now that the FAA is doing its job wrt/ the airspace as used by quadcoptors and such. The FARs, AIMs, and NOTAMs, for example, are federal and universally applied. And so long as a regular pilot is in compliance with them, it doesn't much matter what J. Random cop, DA, or mayor thinks. The same needs to be true for model aircraft operators, traditional or "drone" or whatever.
Imagine all the people...
The FAA website page (which you linked to) explains that these rules are for drones between 0.55 and 55.0 lbs. Drones over 55 lbs are considered aircraft and must be registered as such, using the "old" system. I surmise that drones lighter than 0.55 lbs (250 g) are considered "toys" and do not need to be registered.
FTFA:
It is completely reasonable to conclude that since the FCC database is capable of reverse lookup (rather than by callsign only), the FAA database will do the same. It also reasonable to conclude that as of now, there are far more ham radio operators than drone operators.
I'm not making a case for or against this. I'm just pointing out a federal system in place which already has this.
Beware of the Leopard.
regulations.
The fee is not particularly excessive, and this is good, but is there any particular reason that does not ultimately reduce to simple bigotry to exclude people who are legally within the USA but not US citizens, possibly even just temporarily visiting from another country, from getting a license to safely fly their so-called "drone" while in the country's borders?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
how many "Mouse, Michael" entries are we going to see in the database, but more importantly, how many "Dave Gorman" [1] entries?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There is little to complain about...
Other than the fact that the FAA is closing down model airplane clubs in the absence of any actual regulation being in place, and is threatening people with tens of thousands of dollars in fines for not registering a 9-ounce toy airplane despite the fact that the 2012 FMRA law prohibits the FAA from doing exactly what it just did. Just another example of the executive branch deliberately ignoring laws they don't like. Again.
There's plenty to complain about.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
If the DMV keeps license plate data protected
Do they? In my state it is considered a matter of public record and you can get the info on a license plate for a very small fee (I forget if it is $1 or $5).
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
"Other than the fact that the FAA is closing down model airplane clubs..."
The FAA is not closing down any model airplane clubs nor any other clubs.
"...in the absence of any actual regulation being in place,"
Yes, there are regulations now in place.
"...and is threatening people with tens of thousands of dollars in fines for not registering"
No, they are not threatening people with fines of tens of thousands of dollars, and they're not
threatening them for not registering. They are saying if you fly your UAS outside of regulations
you are subject to fines. That's not about "registration" as much as it is about "regulation."
"...a 9-ounce toy airplane despite the fact that the 2012 FMRA law prohibits the FAA from doing exactly what it just did. Just another example of the executive branch deliberately ignoring laws they don't like. Again. "
Adding the word "Again" to a nonsense statement doesn't imply anyone did anything wrong, only that your temper tantrum went on twice as long.
If you have reason to believe it's unlawful, by all means challenge it. That doesn't mean cry your eyes out on facebook or slashdot. It means file suit. If that's too hard for you and you'd rather someone else does it, that's fine too, just stop crying and wait for the adults to handle the situation.
The FAA has passed regulations and that's life. You don't like and the tears are flowing and that's life. If you think they are in the wrong and don't have the right to do that then... first you should read up on the last two times they tried and how they got shot down and how they changed their method so now they have their ducks in a row... then dry your eyes... reapply your mascara... and challenge the FAA.
There is no law or FAA regulation requiring model aircraft to fly below 400 feet. If you accept the FAA's definition of model aircraft being aircraft as defined by the statutes and regulations, the regulation actually says that except for helicopters and except for takeoff and landing approaches, aircraft must stay ABOVE 500 feet. The 400-foot rule is an asspull published in an advisory circular (advisory meaning it does not set any rules). If you do not accept the FAA's definition of model aircraft being aircraft as defined by the statutes and regulations, the FAA has no authority to regulate model aircraft in the first place.
Once again, reflects only guidance published in an advisory document.
These are published in NOTAMs -- notices to airmen. Model aircraft operators are not airmen (unless they have airman's certificates for full-scale flight). Note that if model aircraft are "aircraft", the regs make it illegal to fly one without such a certificate, so registration will not make you legal.
Probably a good idea, but another asspull. If model aircraft are "aircraft", flying over people is normal and expected.
NOTAMs are often issued for sports events, so this one can be fitted into a consistent intepretation.
Same thing concerning NOTAMS.
Not sure why it's any safer to fly near aircraft when you're not near an airport. Note that if the FAA interpretation is correct, a model airport (including a piece of ground you land your heli or quad) is an airport. And that this would prohibit flying in proximity to other model aircraft (because model aircraft are aircraft, right?)
This one can be read consistently.
The FAA is a federal agency. Should they really be making regulations regarding hobbies? I understand regulating flight, but regulating drones flying 20 feet high? I think this should be left to the states.
Y'know, something filled with helium. Maybe solar cells to gather power so it has longer endurance. Fit it a high-zoom ventral camera to observe things. It could be made fairly large with a 54 lb non-inflated weight.
It could be controlled over cell networks in populated areas. Unfortunately, the data capping shenanigans of U.S. cell companies makes that rather difficult. It might work better in Europe.
Calling an FAA rule a "EULA" is bullshit. FAA rules are mandatory and backed by federal power, including prison and armed police. It's like calling a tiger "just a kitten".
There is a lot to complain about the FAA drone registration. The AMA told us members not to register because congress told the FAA they can't make that kind of law. It's still up in the air if it's legal or not.
Does throwing a .56lb rock falls under this as well? Or a paper airplane? What is my kid let go of a party balloon?
4wdloop
Stupid People will still do stupid things, even if it is against the law. The FAA will still try to regulate that which cannot be regulated, even if it is against the law. This is a severe case of "close barn door after horse escapes," and so few people are registering compared to the number of drones sold it is actually funny. By their own inaction, the FAA has proven that they have failed.
No its not to get you to read the EULA, its to give the FAA legal basis to legislate in this area.
See it can only legislate in commercial airspace, and not for toys. So its defined toy as a very low bar (less than 500 gms), and it asks you to register.
So you think "well its free to register, no problem", so you register your toy drone.
In the process you've done two things:
1. Accepted FAA's definition of a toy as something less than 500 gms.
2. Accepted FAAs right to legislate for your drone.
So then they can write laws to decide what you need, e.g. a license to fly it, a test, penalties, conditions, equipment to check wind speeds, all kinds of rights permissions and rules.
You have already lose 2 challenges to that by registering your drone. You accepted FAA's authority to regulate your toy, and you accepted that a drone greater than 500 gms is not a toy.
I am a certificated pilot, and I am an aircraft owner. My name, address, certificate status, medical status, aircraft registration, and aircraft registration status are all available in a publically searchable FAA database. I this is requried of me to be a user of the national airspace system, why should drone operators be exempt?
Complete the following questionaire:
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a drone with a gun is ___________________________________,
*shudder* /me puts on a helmet and runs for the hills.
-
Ooo! Ooo! I know this one! A new Patriot Act!
(captcha: repress)
Maybe we should just start rigging pyro charges to our drones (especially in areas containing the serials)
This way if we crash *FWOOSH!* "Well! We've got a melted lump of plastic that we can't ID! MUST BE TERRORISTS!:
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Quit your bitching and register it. Wah wah wah.
Just like getting a FCC license for amateur radio, your name and address become public. However, you can use a Post Office Box instead.
I would look into the rules from the FAA to see if they allow you to register using a Post Office Box.
Title 49 United States Code 40103:
(b) Use of Airspace.—(1) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall develop plans and policy for the use of the navigable airspace and assign by regulation or order the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. The Administrator may modify or revoke an assignment when required in the public interest.
Note that bold clause says "the airspace necessary" and is not restricted to navigable airspace.
Public Law 112-95 (The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012)
Section 336 Special Rule for Model Aircraft:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational
use;
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based
set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;
The vast majority of drone operators do not belong to the AMA and are not following their safety guidelines. This exemption does not apply, the FAA is free to regulate.
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds
unless otherwise certified through a design, construction,
inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered
by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
the "and" means that all 5 of these provisions have to be met to be exempt from the FAA's control
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator
of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport
air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located
at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft
operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of
an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating
procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the
airport)).
(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall
be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue
enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who
endanger the safety of the national airspace system.
(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model
aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating
the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
The FAA did not arbitrarily define Model Aircraft. It's in the law passed by Congress that grants the exception to FAA rules, and also defined in 14 CFR 1.1.1. The exception is explicitly defined as needing to meet 5 criteria- criteria 1,3,and 5 are part of the rules the FAA communicates on registration and do not conflict, and 2 is a criteria the vast majority of drone operators do not meet and have thus far shown complete ignorance of. Criteria 4 allows every rule and regulation the FAA has to apply to an operator who causes a hazard to a manned aircraft.
The 100 foot buffer zone between the drone maximum height and navigable airspace is just simple common sense. The minimum standard for passing maneuvers on the flight test for a private pilot license is +/- 100 feet.
You might want to read the comment you are replying to, which is stating why the regulation is legal to refute those who claim the FAA has no authority or that the registration isn't legally sound.
It's the opposite of bitching about registration. It's totally in favor of regulation, and cites the exact portions of the law which allow it.
I find it highly interesting the change in tone of this article compared with the previous.
basically every R/C model out there
This is plain wrong. The vast majority of sales of drones are in the "couple ounces" range and don't require registration at all.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
It's not just "drones". It's every flying R/C model that weighs more than 250 grams or more. Which is basically every R/C model out there.
The US Congress passed into Federal law the Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 which states in part;
"The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft."
The FAA has no authority under Federal law, and is in fact prohibited by Federal law, to promulgate rules or regulations of this nature & scope.
FAA can go pound sand.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
The rules are deducible if you are intelligent, have a sense of responsibility towards others, and believe that bad things can happen to *you*.
Making people read those rules won't make the idiots/sociopaths behave themselves.
So, next step is tracking and control.
This is an extension to the already racist policy of restricting DC airspace. A lot of black people live in Washington DC. This hurts them. I know, there's this BS about the government being there, however can someone say DC is more important than say LA or NYC? Of course not. NYC and LA are more important than a bunch of political blowhards. General Aviation hasn't been used in a terrorist act anywhere in the world. It's just not effective. Get some idiot with a car to do the job. They're a dime a dozen.
See it for what it is. It's racist. They should remove restrictions to flying over DC.
Also note that airliners - that are used in terrorist attacks can still fly right into Reagan airport - just a stone throws from DC. Another example of privilege.
Should find these people making these rules and expose the for the racist bigots that they are.
If drones have Facial recognition software they'll become ultimate killing machines;
Casteism