FAA Eases Drone Restrictions Around Washington, DC (roboticstrends.com)

An anonymous reader writes with a link to Robotics Trends, which reports that: After doubling the radius of the "no-drone zone" from 15 miles to 30 miles outside of Washington, D.C. in 2015, the FAA announced drones can now fly in the "outer ring" of the Special Flight Rules Area. This means drones can operate between a 15- to 30-mile radius outside of the nation's capitol. Drones that fly between the 15- to 30-mile radius still have to operate under specific conditions: drones must weigh less than 55 pounds, be registered and marked, fly under 400 feet, stay in the operator's line of sight, only fly in clear conditions, and avoid other aircraft.

Comments

Damn you FAA

[flopsquad]

...and avoid other aircraft.

Will the oppressive over-regulation never stop!?

Drone Loophole

[BrookHarty]

So if you used a tethered control cable its not a drone by definition, its not unmanned. Loophole!

Re:Drone Loophole

[bobbutts]

Good try, but no loophole to be found there
https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/

Q20. What about tethered drones?
A. Both tethered and untethered UAS must be registered.

Re:Drone Loophole

[mark-t]

So would that include children holding a model plane over their head and pretending it is flying under its own power? Technically, it's "tethered"... via the child's arm.

These restrictions are so outlandishly vague that they are absurd. At the very least, a minimum flying height should be mentioned, but it is nowhere to be found.

I have seen a childrens toy that has a tethered helicopter which cannot roam anywhere further than a couple of feet from the base of the tether Should those also be covered by the law?

Re:Drone Loophole

[mark-t]

I'm suggesting that it would have made much more sense if they had made more explicit regulations that would leave toys and casual hobbyists that are not and have not ever posed any threats to anyone alone. For example, if they had said registration is only required for anything that flies more than a certain distance above the ground, or can be reasonably navigated while out of eyeshot of the operator, or possesses any autonomous flying capabilities beyond perhaps the ability to simply not immediately crash if connectivity to the controller does happen to get lost, or if the operator is not stationary, but is inside a moving vehicle themselves while controlling the UAV.

Such limitations would drastically reduce the opportunity for using UAV's in the socially irresponsible manner that has even prompted this kind of legislation, while also increasing the chance that given the proximity between it and the person controlling it who was complying with these requirements, the operator would thus be more easily identifiable.

Re:Are there that many drone in the air in the US?

[Coren22]

I live in this zone, I was concerned enough about this $20k fine that my son's drone has been grounded since it was announced. I don't know frankly what they were thinking, it isn't like many drones would be able to fly the original 15 miles to the white house/pentagon/cia headquarters, let alone an additional 15 miles. I never particularly understood this reg, but it is not worth risking the fine.

Re:FAA doing it right

[ScentCone]

Other than that, they have no reason to exist and should be shot down, no mater where they are.

So you're thinking that these machines, which people have been flying for decades - an activity enjoyed by millions of people over multiple generations, should all be shot down? Really?

If I find your car annoying or your mobile phone to be an intrusive image-capturing device, can I shoot at them? No? Why not?

Re:Are there that many drone in the air in the US?

[ScentCone]

Are there really that many drones kicking around that they are this much of an issue?

The rule (and its change) wasn't about "drones" - it was about any and all RC-controlled flying things. Balsa-wood models that grandpa has been flying around in circles in his back field for 40 years, for example. Hundreds of thousands of people have been flying RC aircraft for many decades. And no, it's never been an issue and still isn't. The FAA's random rule-generating system has nothing to do with reality.

Re:Unpopular opinion

[pixelpusher220]

where most users were hobbyists who cared about safety

So you're banning cars then? FAR more people are using actual cars to commit acts of terrorism (tm) than flying drones...

Re:Are there that many drone in the air in the US?

[pixelpusher220]

There aren't many terrorists in the US....but we still spend BILLIONS in fear of them. The driver on his phone driving next to you is FAR more of a threat to more people than drones or terrorists are - and kills more people every year.

The conflicting info is that my drones do not have to be registered being the toys that they are...yet to fly them in my own damned back yard (inside this 'outer circle') I need to register them AND notify the FAA an hour ahead of time and of course notify Dulles airport?

I can imagine the hilarity if every hobbyist starting calling the airports multiple times a day.

Dear Timothy

[koan]

You stupid, useless fuck, they aren't "drones", that's a negative connotation and RC modellers have been out flying planes and helis since the 1930's.
Long before the real "drones" took to the air to kill children and vaporize wedding parties.

I am so tired of you fucking sheep that believe what you're told, that live in some fucking mirror World that has 0 connection to the real World.
People like you swallow hook, line and sinker every turd the gov drops down your throat.

Go fuck yourself, and in the process please sterilize yourself, the World doesn't need yet another millennial waste of space.

Re:What is wrong

[dcw3]

What is wrong with those rules ?

Only that it means that ~9.5 million people are unable to fly a drone in their own back yards. Pure bullshit.

Re: Are there that many drone in the air in the US

[ScentCone]

The FAA is banned from regulating model aircraft if I recall.

Which is why the Obama administration just instituted their new RC aircraft owner registration system (you have to sign up by the 19th of this month, or face up to $20,000 in fines ... and that includes operating any toy RC machine as small as just under 9 ounces/250g) through the Department Of Transportation instead of through the FAA. It's a sleazy maneuver that directly goes against the spirit of the law congress passed to prevent exactly such things from happening.

Hopefully you're not surprised that an administration that has been found repeatedly by federal courts to have overstepped separation of powers by issuing unconstitutional executive orders would be trying to once again work around the law?

Doesn't matter. Most people who fly RC planes for fun can't afford to fight the administration in court or risk that $20,000 fine. There are a couple of groups trying to take the matter to court, but that will drag out years. In the meantime, we have to play along with the illegal action by the administration.