UAS and FAA :Drone licensing: Anyone else have one?

[Myk Rian]

First off, let's not turn this into a government bashing.

The FAA now requires a license for ANY RC aircraft 250 grams and up.
Anyone else have a drone? RC plane? YOU need a license.

faa.gov/uas/registration/ I have a $27 toy, but I'll get a license. I plan on upgrading to a serious quad drone.
The license is for you, not each flyer you have. It is not just drones you need to register for.

Back in the 70s I went through the US Governments' CB radio licensing. It really was a joke.
There was no enforcement. All us CB'rs STILL ran our 1,000 watt barn-burners, (linear RF amplifiers) so we could talk to Australia.
Illegal as all get-out, but fun.

Sooo, has anyone gotten through the process?
Has anyone actually gotten to the checkout page?
Let's see a picture of your RCs.

[Wade Lippman]

You are saying that if you register a toy now that doesn't have to be registered, a big one next year doesn't require reregistration and is therefor free? Hey, anything to save $5.

[Ole Anderson]

No drone yet, but I see a possible reason for this is: can you imagine what a sleeper cell terrorist could do with an drone capable of carrying 20 pounds or more? Way more potential than a 1000 watt CB. Require different and mandatory licensing, similar to gun laws for drones capable of carrying a substantial payload. Lay off licensing Walmart toy drones. Go to B&H Photo and you can find drones capable of 100 pound payloads. Expensive, yes, but have you seen some of the equipment ISIS has? Sorry if this crosses the line to political, please remove.

[Erik Loza]

No drone yet, but I see a possible reason for this is: can you imagine what a sleeper cell terrorist could do with an drone capable of carrying 20 pounds or more? Way more potential than a 1000 watt CB. Require different and mandatory licensing, similar to gun laws for drones capable of carrying a substantial payload. Lay off licensing Walmart toy drones. Go to B&H Photo and you can find drones capable of 100 pound payloads. Expensive, yes, but have you seen some of the equipment ISIS has? Sorry if this crosses the line to political, please remove.

I heard an interesting piece on NPR along those lines, where the rep from the FAA basically said that they have increasingly more cases of drones flying into restricted airspaces such as airports, etc. and that they were doing a big push to get these regulations in place prior to the holiday season, since they knew lots of folks would be getting them as gifts. It's a valid concern. My sister in law is a corrections officer at Folsom State Prison and while it hasn't happened there so far, there have been cases of drones dropping contraband into prison yards at other facilities.

Erik

[Bert Kemp]

The whole licensing thing would make no difference at all as far as terrorist is concerned. They can sit in their cellar build the drone at home and use it how ever they want. No regulations will make any difference. All its going to do is make it harder and more costly for regular folks to buy and use drones. Theres all kinds of great uses for these things beside the fun factor.

[Erik Loza]

The whole licensing thing would make no difference at all as far as terrorist is concerned. They can sit in their cellar build the drone at home and use it how ever they want. No regulations will make any difference. All its going to do is make it harder and more costly for regular folks to buy and use drones. Theres all kinds of great uses for these things beside the fun factor.

Bert, I don't necessarily disagree with that except to mention that in the interview I heard, the FAA rep seemed to be focused on what we might call "nuisance drones". Where hobbyists are making bad decisions about flying their toys, which seems to be the more prevalent issue. Onto commercial air fields, for example, or there have been several incidents where CDF fire aircraft were unable to deliver their payolads on active forest fires due to hobbyists flying drones...

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_28543591/fire-officials-drone-operators-if-you-fly-we

My feeling is that that the FAA is sending a message irresponsible hobbyists who do things like that. Obviously, bad guys will do what bad guys are going but in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should do "nothing". Just my 2-cents, of course.

Erik

[Pat Barry]

I was all set to buy a drone and a go-pro camera setup, but now, with regulation, I just don't feel like its cool anymore. But now, the more I think about it, what they should be doing is making anyone who has one of these go thru pilots training.

[Robert LaPlaca]

I was really big time into R/C planes 25 years ago..

Let me say that almost any R/C aircraft powered or otherwise weights considerably more than 250 grams.. Most sane R/C want-to-be pilots, joined a R/C club, one of the restrictions of any R/C club worth its weight was the pilot was required to be a member of the Academy of Model Aviation (AMA), AMA offered the pilot 1 million dollars of liability insurance, the R/C plane club also expected each pilot to qualify and or train with a Instructor rated pilot before they were granted pilot rating.. Generally speaking the whole training process, taught the pilots what was very much off limits, a few limitations that comes easily to mind (and are kind of common sense) is flying near an active airport is prohibited, as is flying over buildings, or any flying over crowds is prohibited..

[Erik Loza]

I was really big time into R/C planes 25 years ago..

Let me say that almost any R/C aircraft powered or otherwise weights considerably more than 250 grams.. Most sane R/C want-to-be pilots, joined a R/C club, one of the restrictions of any R/C club worth its weight was the pilot was required to be a member of the Academy of Model Aviation (AMA), AMA offered the pilot 1 million dollars of liability insurance, the R/C plane club also expected each pilot to qualify and or train with a Instructor rated pilot before they were granted pilot rating.. Generally speaking the whole training process, taught the pilots what was very much off limits, a few limitations that comes easily to mind (and are kind of common sense) is flying near an active airport is prohibited, as is flying over buildings, or any flying over crowds is prohibited..

I feel like the whole drone craze sprung up so fast and like wildfire, before anyone really thought about putting regulations and safeguards into place, that regulatory agencies had no idea what to do until everyone already owned one. Less than ten years ago, what hobbyist owned an unmanned aircraft? Now, you can buy them anywhere. The trajectory of this hobby was so steep.

Erik

[glenn bradley]

The whole licensing thing would make no difference at all as far as terrorist is concerned. They can sit in their cellar build the drone at home and use it how ever they want. No regulations will make any difference. All its going to do is make it harder and more costly for regular folks to buy and use drones. Theres all kinds of great uses for these things beside the fun factor.

An echo of gun control but, I now tread too near the line of the rules and regs and may disappear ;-)

[Myk Rian]

You are saying that if you register a toy now that doesn't have to be registered, a big one next year doesn't require reregistration and is therefor free? Hey, anything to save $5.
Yes, but you don't register the drone, you register YOU.

[Bert Kemp]

Yes it seems there are a lot of irresponsible people flying them were they should not. But there has to be a better way then punishing everybody. I don't know what that is but we have to consider alternatives.
I really don't have any objection to it except for the cost factor. I mean like if I had one I think my own common sense would tell me not to infringe on occupied airspace, or other peoples right to privacy. I just wish common sense was more common and then they wouldn't be putting so many restrictions on us.



Bert, I don't necessarily disagree with that except to mention that in the interview I heard, the FAA rep seemed to be focused on what we might call "nuisance drones". Where hobbyists are making bad decisions about flying their toys, which seems to be the more prevalent issue. Onto commercial air fields, for example, or there have been several incidents where CDF fire aircraft were unable to deliver their payolads on active forest fires due to hobbyists flying drones...

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_28543591/fire-officials-drone-operators-if-you-fly-we

My feeling is that that the FAA is sending a message irresponsible hobbyists who do things like that. Obviously, bad guys will do what bad guys are going but in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should do "nothing". Just my 2-cents, of course.

Erik

[Erik Loza]

Bert, maybe it "should" be more expensive. I mean, why is it that we should feel entitled to be able to buy a drone any time we want and operate it with no oversight or regulation and without having to be inconvenienced? This is obviously just my opinion but I don't think it's "punishing" anyone to require them to demonstrate competency and compliance in order to operate one of these things.

True story: I was walking out of a restaurant in Atlanta with two of my colleagues a couple of years ago. Some guy and his friends were on the street flying a drone over some this apartment complex. This is a busy metropolitan street, not out in a field. All of a sudden, drone takes a hard nose dive and dips out of site behind a row of buildings. Out of control flight, like a missile. Friends of drone-guy are like, "Dude, you just got that. You crashed it already!". However, where it went down was over a parking areas/pool commons. What if that thing fell on someone's car or worse, struck a bystander? Because as it is now, there is no regulation in regards to how/when/where to operate one of these in public areas and as we see, neither is there any requirement for competency, let alone common sense. So, I don't think it's "punishing" someone to require them to demonstrate competency and judgment with a device that can cause damage to life or property. Sure, buy a drone if you want but get trained to properly and safely operate it. Again, just my 2-cents.

Erik

[Clint Baxter]

[ So, I don't think it's "punishing" someone to require them to demonstrate competency and judgment with a device that can cause damage to life or property. Sure, buy a drone if you want but get trained to properly and safely operate it. Again, just my 2-cents.

Erik[/QUOTE]

+1

Clint

[Jerome Stanek]

I think registering the drone would be better than the person. That way if a drone did damage it could be traced back to the owner. How many channels are there for operating a drone on. Back when I flew rc planes you had to confirm no one else was on the channel you ere going to use.

[Erik Loza]

I think registering the drone would be better than the person. That way if a drone did damage it could be traced back to the owner. How many channels are there for operating a drone on. Back when I flew rc planes you had to confirm no one else was on the channel you ere going to use.

Personally, I think the drone should be registered to a purchaser database and that in order to purchase one legally, you should be able to show completion of some type of training or curriculum. Part of the issue, to my mind, is that for folks who would do mischevious things, the drone becomes an anonymous extension of yourself. "Look, I can fly over the sporting event and nobody will know it's me", or, "Look, I can take pictures of these sunbathing girls" (which already has happened, apparently...). If people are made aware that the device could be traced back to them, I personally feel that it would make folks think twice about doing dumb things with them.

Erik

[William Adams]

There should be no need to register a drone which is:

- on the operator’s property w/in a reasonable setback from the property line
- operating at a reasonable height
- operating at a reasonable speed

That said: http://www.aol.com/article/2015/12/02/toddler-has-eyeball-sliced-in-half-during-horrific-drone-acciden/21276925/

[Dick Latshaw]

There should be no need to register a drone which is:

- on the operator’s property w/in a reasonable setback from the property line
- operating at a reasonable height
- operating at a reasonable speed



Ummm..OK.

There should be no need to register an AUTOMOBILE (and in most cases there isn't) which is:

- on the operator’s property w/in a reasonable setback from the property line
- operating at a reasonable height
- operating at a reasonable speed.

Except that some automobile owners are not going to abide by those restrictions.

I think the idea here is to deter some folks from doing stupid things, because their UAV can be traced back to them if it crashes.

[William Adams]

The thing is, one can use a vehicle for “Farm Use”, and not only does it not need to be registered, it can operate on public roads while being used for agricultural purposes.

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/vehicles/farm.html

Private property, on private property should be private.

[George Bokros]

A license should be issued for each owner and then a license for each drone. The drones license number should be required to be on the drone in a reflective paint so it can be seen. The licensing should just like an airplane, boat or automobile.

[Myk Rian]

I think registering the drone would be better than the person. That way if a drone did damage it could be traced back to the owner.
You are required to place your number on ALL your aircraft/drones.

[Art Mann]

Eric, I absolutely agree with your idea. We already have to take tests to prove we understand the rules and are competent operators with boats and automobiles. Many places require competency testing for skilled trades like electrical or plumbing work before you can sell your services. Why not apply the same for those who want to operate drones outside the air space over their own property? Of course, this licensing will do absolutely nothing to deter criminals or terrorists.


Personally, I think the drone should be registered to a purchaser database and that in order to purchase one legally, you should be able to show completion of some type of training or curriculum. Part of the issue, to my mind, is that for folks who would do mischevious things, the drone becomes an anonymous extension of yourself. "Look, I can fly over the sporting event and nobody will know it's me", or, "Look, I can take pictures of these sunbathing girls" (which already has happened, apparently...). If people are made aware that the device could be traced back to them, I personally feel that it would make folks think twice about doing dumb things with them.

Erik

[Jerome Stanek]

As I was reading this on the news they just showed a drone that almost hit a skier.

[Yonak Hawkins]

Making laws is tricky business. If the law is too onerous irresponsible people won't comply, planning not to get caught. If the law is too lax, people will operate to the edge of the law and the law becomes ineffectual.

[Myk Rian]

As I was reading this on the news they just showed a drone that almost hit a skier.
I saw that too. It was a big honkin drone. Could have done some real damage.
Precisely why the FAA wanted the licensing. Without that, the owner could have simply walked away, and nobody would know who it belonged to.

[Pat Barry]

I saw that too. It was a big honkin drone. Could have done some real damage.
Precisely why the FAA wanted the licensing. Without that, the owner could have simply walked away, and nobody would know who it belonged to.
Wasn't that drone one from the company filming the ski race?

[al heitz]

Scariest thing was when I saw video clips of fire-arm shooting drones. And think about all those green lasers blinding pilots - have the idiots making them mobile????? Insane!!!

[John Stankus]

As I was reading this on the news they just showed a drone that almost hit a skier.

There are a whole bunch of drone fail videos on YouTube, including one where a drone takes out the winglet on a southwest 737. That is the real issue

John

[Brian Elfert]

There are a whole bunch of drone fail videos on YouTube, including one where a drone takes out the winglet on a southwest 737. That is the real issue


There are certainly a lot of bad things that can happen with a drone, but the Southwest 737 getting hit by a drone is fake.

[Kev Williams]

The skier almost getting hit speaks volumes- It was mere feet from hitting him square on the head. If the drone itself hadn't killed him, the ensuing crash & burn down the hill could've broken his neck.

Then there's the privacy issues, nearly all of them have still and video camera's. What a great tool for those with less than noble voyeuristic intentions.

And general nuisance issues, like running them into power lines and taking out power to several neighborhoods for hours...

So, I'm making a prediction: With all the drone sales this Xmas, by around oh, let's say Spring of next year, there's going be enough nuisance complaints and video-stalking and injury lawsuits against drone pilots by then that the FAA will be doing a lot more than requiring licenses for these things.

Fine by me. :)

And for the record, I got one LAST Xmas. But it's never left my own yard...

[Greg Peterson]

I suppose folks thought stop signs or traffic signals were an over reach. When you have 300 million plus people surrounding you, some rules are going to have to be put in place to protect the general population.
I'm less concerned with terrorists than I am with people that are irresponsible or thoughtless. We see what licensed drivers do every day. Seems to me drones operated by the masses is a recipe for disaster.

[Jerome Stanek]

Maybe they will have open hunting season on drones

[Pat Barry]

The skier almost getting hit speaks volumes- It was mere feet from hitting him square on the head. If the drone itself hadn't killed him, the ensuing crash & burn down the hill could've broken his neck...
Yeah, I suppose thy can be dangerous, but registering the pilot or the drone wouldn't have made an iota of difference in that situation. It was a drone being operated by the film crew not on flown by some spectator. It was completely authorized

[Clarence Martin]

One person I know, complained about those Drones flying over his house. It had a Camera on it , and it flew over his backyard pool while his Wife was out getting a Sun Tan by the Pool !!

[Clarence Martin]

If someone wants to fly a Drone on their own property, then they should be able to do that without any licensing or registration whatsoever. Whats next, registering Model Rockets ???

[Curt Harms]

Bert, I don't necessarily disagree with that except to mention that in the interview I heard, the FAA rep seemed to be focused on what we might call "nuisance drones". Where hobbyists are making bad decisions about flying their toys, which seems to be the more prevalent issue. Onto commercial air fields, for example, or there have been several incidents where CDF fire aircraft were unable to deliver their payolads on active forest fires due to hobbyists flying drones...

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_28543591/fire-officials-drone-operators-if-you-fly-we

My feeling is that that the FAA is sending a message irresponsible hobbyists who do things like that. Obviously, bad guys will do what bad guys are going but in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should do "nothing". Just my 2-cents, of course.

Erik


That's often how regulations come into being - people being irresponsible knotheads.

[Yonak Hawkins]

Maybe they will have open hunting season on drones

That's all we need .. more bullets flying into the air not knowing where they will come down.

[Jerome Stanek]

If someone wants to fly a Drone on their own property, then they should be able to do that without any licensing or registration whatsoever. Whats next, registering Model Rockets ???

They do make you register some

[Jerome Stanek]

That's all we need .. more bullets flying into the air not knowing where they will come down.

It would be like skeet or trap shooting not with a bullet but pellets from a shotgun just like it is illegal to hunt deer with a rifle in OH but have a slug gun season that by the way starts on Monday

[Jason Roehl]

I suppose folks thought stop signs or traffic signals were an over reach. When you have 300 million plus people surrounding you, some rules are going to have to be put in place to protect the general population.
I'm less concerned with terrorists than I am with people that are irresponsible or thoughtless. We see what licensed drivers do every day. Seems to me drones operated by the masses is a recipe for disaster.


One could make a case that they are an over-reach:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1028740/Accident-free-zone-The-German-town-scrapped-traffic-lights-road-signs.html

[Brian Elfert]

They do make you register some

I am not aware of any requirements to register model rockets. I am really big into high power rockets and have never had to register one. We do need to get an FAA wavier to fly them, but that is not the same as registering them.

[Kev Williams]

Yeah, I suppose they can be dangerous, but registering the pilot or the drone wouldn't have made an iota of difference in that situation. It was a drone being operated by the film crew not on flown by some spectator. It was completely authorizedThat's what I meant in my prediction for future FAA rules- at the moment there's no 'air space' regulations. In the case of the drone over the skier, did it really need to be directly over him? Why not 20' to one side or the other?

Back when the big earthquake hit Japan, I remember watching real-time video of some woman trapped on the top floor of a tall building. She was standing in and around the window, and appeared justifiably worried and I'm sure hoping for help. You could tell it was a woman, and if you knew her, you would likely had been able to recognize her. I bring this up because, after a couple of minutes the camera began zooming out... and out... and out, until half of Japan was now visible! And then it was explained that this relatively high-definition video was being shot from a small airplane 2 miles away!

With cameras THAT good these days, there's no reason a drone needs to be flying directly above you...

Just my opinion...

[Art Mann]

Yeah, I suppose thy can be dangerous, but registering the pilot or the drone wouldn't have made an iota of difference in that situation. It was a drone being operated by the film crew not on flown by some spectator. It was completely authorized

That is true but something like a $50,000 fine and permanent revocation of their operator's license would go a long way towards discouraging anyone else, professional or amateur, from operating the device in an unsafe way.

[Pat Barry]

That is true but something like a $50,000 fine and permanent revocation of their operator's license would go a long way towards discouraging anyone else, professional or amateur, from operating the device in an unsafe way.
That might be just a tad excessive, don't you think?

[Art Mann]

There are all sorts of laws, from local to federal, that prohibit the unrestricted use of any kind of weapon in public places. The important phrase here is "unrestricted use", not "ownership". What is wrong with rerstricting drone operators in the same way? I would not advocate that anyone be prohibited from operating either one on their own property where there is no danger to others. By the way, despite what some people think, there is no right to privacy mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. That is one of those rights that have been manufactured through convoluted logic. There probably should be though.

[Brian Elfert]

I suspect licensing/registration of drones will go about as well as licensing of GMRS radios. Almost every Family Radio sold in recent years includes GMRS bands, but I don't think I personally know a single person who has paid the $75 for the license to use a GMRS radio. The $75 fee is probably the main reason nobody licenses GMRS radios. Probably that, and the seeming lack of enforcement. Maybe drone registration will go better because the fee is only $5.

I wonder how many people who bought these as Christmas gifts even realize they are supposed to be registered/licensed now?

[Myk Rian]

Looks like the GMRS laws got snookered by the manufacturers.
As I mentioned in my OP, that turned out to be just like the CB radio snafu.

[Greg Peterson]

One could make a case that they are an over-reach:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1028740/Accident-free-zone-The-German-town-scrapped-traffic-lights-road-signs.html

Might work in a country that has high standards for driving. Culturally, I don't think the US is ready to trust the general driving public to exercise judgement or manners.

[paul cottingham]

Yet again, my comments disappear without a courtesy note from the deleter. I was expecting it, but it is still disrespectful.

[Keith Outten]

Paul,

You noted in your post that it would most likely be removed because you knew that it was off topic.
I'm surprised that you expected a courtesy note.
.

[paul cottingham]

Sorry, i did not think they were off topic. And i believe a courtesy note is always appropriate.
i would think this would be obvious.

[Art Mann]

I proposed e $50,000 hypothetical fine for blatant violators of drone operation rules.


That might be just a tad excessive, don't you think?

That depends. Do you know anyone who was killed by a drunk driver who had already been convicted of drunk driving? There are 10's and perhaps 100's of thousands of drivers on the road today who have multiple DUI convictions. In that case, the penalty was not great enough. Operation of a drone (or car) is not a God given right. Why not make the penalty for an irresponsible violation of the rules harsh enough so that nobody will be tempted to repeat it?

[Jim Koepke]

By the way, despite what some people think, there is no right to privacy mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.

There is in The Bill of Rights:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It is often ignored, but it is still there.

One thing this discussion of drones and responsibility has reinforced in my mind is the average person's attention to civility towards others is one reason we are a long way from having personal airborne transportation.

To paraphrase Dr. Brown, "Roads? Where we are going we don't need roads."

jtk

[Bert Kemp]

There is in The Bill of Rights:



It is often ignored, but it is still there.

One thing this discussion of drones and responsibility has reinforced in my mind is the average person's attention to civility towards others is one reason we are a long way from having personal airborne transportation.

To paraphrase Dr. Brown, "Roads? Where we are going we don't need roads."

jtk

We have plenty of personal airborne transportation. There's 1000's of single seat, twin seat and 4 seat aircraft registered in the US and around the world. I call that pretty personal. Not to mention paraglides and like vehicles

[Jim Koepke]

We have plenty of personal airborne transportation. There's 1000's of single seat, twin seat and 4 seat aircraft registered in the US and around the world. I call that pretty personal. Not to mention paraglides and like vehicles

You are correct, there is an existence of some personal airborne transportation.

My post wasn't clear enough to express the idea of personal airborne transportation for everyone.

jtk

[Martin Wasner]

Just a point of my own distaste for a media driven hot button word, but a "drone" is used for raining fire on bad guys. A civilian flown remote control toy, even a big one isn't a drone. Just a pet peeve of mine. Drone is a negative word used to sell advertising by the hustlers of television. Nobody would care hearing about some dope flying his remote control helicopter in the wrong place.

I fly RC stuff. I've got some decent sized gas planes, a bunch of smaller electrics, and a hexacopter that can be flown through a couple of cameras mounted on it. I love aviation and it's the only way I can practically participate. Will I register? Probably, but not until almost the deadline. Last I heard only about 50k people have done so. The AMA is urging their 180k, (I think), members to not do so at this point. I assume they are thinking that their powerless pleads will have some affect and will make your AMA number work as a registration number. This is the FAA, they don't give a crap about anything.

Sooner or later some idiot is going to kill a whole bunch of people. Registration changes nothing with that. Maybe, it will force some education on people, but knowing people like I do, I doubt it. We're mostly made up of morons. The morons that fly around in the airspace should be charged with attempted manslaughter. Plain and simple. The statistical inevitability of some idiot killing a whole bunch of folks should be met with extreme penalties.

The punishment for not registering is ridiculous. Up to $276,000 in fines, and three years imprisonment! Granted, I don't see anyone actually getting the full disciplinary action, but.... Once again, this has nothing to do with the safety of the airspace. As an example, if I don't register my car, the fine is a slap on the wrist, and changes nothing in my ability to do something stupid behind the wheel. It's a strange world we live in.


(edit)- There's a class of ultralites that actually carry people that don't have to be registered. I don't remember the specifics, but it's quite a bit bigger than your average rc aircraft.


(edit2)- The thing with the french skier, that promoters of the event hired that octocopter to get footage. They were trying to save money by not having to rig the cable operated cameras. Something went horribly wrong with the equipment. That was a complete power failure. It looked to have fallen straight down, and while I'm not going to say impossible, they usually don't just fall out of the sky like that. The big ones, can usually keep on flying if they lose a motor. The guys slinging a $5k camera under a $15k airframe like having some redundancy. Whomever lost that one isn't a happy camper. Stuff happens. Would anyone give a hoot had that been a camera on a cable system that failed? Most likely not, and that's why you don't hear about it. It can't be used to sell the people anything.

[Art Mann]

There is in The Bill of Rights:



It is often ignored, but it is still there.

One thing this discussion of drones and responsibility has reinforced in my mind is the average person's attention to civility towards others is one reason we are a long way from having personal airborne transportation.

To paraphrase Dr. Brown, "Roads? Where we are going we don't need roads."

jtk

The quote you supplied confirms my claim perfectly.The modern interpretation of that phrase goes far beyond the protection against unreasonable collection of evidence about which it was written. I agree that we need a constitutional right to privacy of some sort but we need to spell it out exactly through a constitutional amendment. For example, is it or is it not constitutional for the government to collect records of communication between private citizens who are not suspected of a crime? I could make an argument on either side of that issue but the constitution does not address it at all.

[Art Mann]

Martin, you seem to be claiming that it isn't possible to deter stupid people from stupid actions by the passage of laws to prevent it. While no law is 100% enforceable, I am going to have to disagree with you on that point.

[Martin Wasner]

Martin, you seem to be claiming that it isn't possible to deter stupid people from stupid actions by the passage of laws to prevent it. While no law is 100% enforceable, I am going to have to disagree with you on that point.

The law isn't preventing anyone from doing anything other than writing a number on their airframe. Explain to me how that keeps an rc toy out of an airliners engine? All the necessary laws are there, it changes nothing in that respect.

I hate swing freedoms go away, it's a weak law.

[Justin Ludwig]

Martin, you seem to be claiming that it isn't possible to deter stupid people from stupid actions by the passage of laws to prevent it. While no law is 100% enforceable, I am going to have to disagree with you on that point.

Case in point: Drunk driving is against the law. It deters people not as alcohol inhibits rationalization. Pick a law, I can give you a moron. Speeding is against the law - millions of unstupid people do it.

The point of the law is to create an investigative trail when mishaps inevitably occur. (If someone stated this already; I haven't read the entirety of posts.)

[Hoang N Nguyen]

My .02 cents, this whole drone register thing is a load of donkey poo. It will do NOTHING to stop the idiots that fly them like idiots. The FAA is requiring everyone to register themselves like a drivers license almost and write their register number on their aircraft. So, if I register and fail to write my number on my aircraft and decide to crash it on someone. How will they know it belongs to me?

Talk about ISIS using it to drop bombs and what not on people, this new law isn't going to stop them from doing it. This whole drone ordeal is a result of uninformed/misinformed people and the media making a non-issue an issue.

I fly RC planes, helicopters and drones. I'm also registered with the AMA who provides me with over million dollars in insurance in the event of an accident. I fly at dedicated flying fields and they require all members to register with the AMA before you can even become a member. They also require us to write our AMA number on all our aircraft's and they check it at the field.

The AMA is currently working with the FFA to make it where AMA members don't need to register because AMA members have already done what the FFA wants people to do while at the same time providing insurance for their members.

Again, this whole thing is stupid, stupid people will continue to do stupid things regardless of laws and regulations. It's just like how people that practice unsafe woodworking habits will continue to do so regardless of what their told.

[Greg Peterson]

Regulating drone operations won't prevent all the potential harm or damage. In lieu of any organized attempt to address such potential harms, what would you suggest as a more reasonable and more effective approach?

[Hoang N Nguyen]

The issue with trying to regulate drones is no different then trying to regulate guns. A drone and a gun in the hands of a crazy person, criminal or outlaw will still cause harm to people regardless of regulations.

I fly my drones according to FAA suggestions before all this talk of regulations. I fly my drone under 400 feet to avoid man aircrafts because they are not allowed to fly under 400 feet unless landing and taking off. I don't fly near airports so I don't run into man aircrafts while they are landing and taking off. My drone has built in flight restrictions which will not allow me to fly into restricted air zones such as airports. I don't need "regulations" to tell me how I need to fly my drone because I already follow the rules before all this became a big deal. The issue became a big deal because of all the idiots that take their drones up 4000 feet into the clouds (yes they can go that high), fly them over parks with tons of kids playing and flying them into each other.

Regulations will not stop these idiots from doing what they do.

[Erik Loza]

...A drone and a gun in the hands of a crazy person, criminal or outlaw will still cause harm to people regardless of regulations... Regulations will not stop these idiots from doing what they do.

I agree with you but does that mean we should just do nothing? Would the fact that someone had to show some type of licensing or permit in order to buy a drone in the first place and then, have to re-up on a routine basis not help weed out the dummies who do things like fly these into fire zones or around aircraft? Speaking only for myself, the fact that nothing has been done doesn't mean that we need to continue to let it be that way. I have never personally understood the whole "Everyone has them, so there's nothing we can do about it" argument. I'm required to show a valid license and insurance to either buy or rent a motor vehicle that's operated on public streets. Doesn't bother me. Sure, many folks drive without insurance or a license but the vast majority do have them and drive responsibly. Would it be unreasonable to ask someone who wanted to purchase an unmanned aircraft that, as of now, has no physcial limitation on being able to fly over private property or crowded public areas, to show proof of competency and perhaps insurance in order to do that?

Erik

[Art Mann]

What you are saying is the same thing as saying licensing an automobile and requiring the operator to have a driver's license doesn't prevent accidents. It is like saying that DUI laws don' prevent anyone driving while drinking. Do you really believe that?


The law isn't preventing anyone from doing anything other than writing a number on their airframe. Explain to me how that keeps an rc toy out of an airliners engine? All the necessary laws are there, it changes nothing in that respect.

I hate swing freedoms go away, it's a weak law.

[Hoang N Nguyen]

I agree with you but does that mean we should just do nothing? Would the fact that someone had to show some type of licensing or permit in order to buy a drone in the first place and then, have to re-up on a routine basis not help weed out the dummies who do things like fly these into fire zones or around aircraft? Speaking only for myself, the fact that nothing has been done doesn't mean that we need to continue to let it be that way. I have never personally understood the whole "Everyone has them, so there's nothing we can do about it" argument. I'm required to show a valid license and insurance to either buy or rent a motor vehicle that's operated on public streets. Doesn't bother me. Sure, many folks drive without insurance or a license but the vast majority do have them and drive responsibly. Would it be unreasonable to ask someone who wanted to purchase an unmanned aircraft that, as of now, has no physcial limitation on being able to fly over private property or crowded public areas, to show proof of competency and perhaps insurance in order to do that?

Erik

You are right, something has to be done but where you are wrong is that something HAS already been done. It's called the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics). They work closely with the FAA and has been doing so long before any of these "drones" have been around. They collaborate with the FFA to set forth guidelines to safe usage of model aircraft's, how they should be used and where.

They have thousands of certified AMA flying fields across the country with hundreds of thousands of members where we can enjoy flying our model aircraft, weather it be an airplane, helicopter, cars or drones. In order to use these fields, you must be a member of the AMA. You pay a fee each year to the AMA, in return they provide you with a membership card with your member number on it. That number needs to be written on every model aircraft you own along with your name and phone number. In addition to that, they also provide you with over 1 million dollar in insurance in the event you were to crash your model aircraft into someones house and set it on fire. Or crash it into a person and send they to the hospital.

So yes, something HAS already been done but few know about them unless you are into this kind of stuff. Those that choice not to become a member of the AMA and fly the way they are suppose to is equivalent to you're analogy of people driving without car insurance. Their required to have insurance to drive but what are you going to do about it if they don't? No one will know until they rear end you at a stop light. The same can be said about people flying their drones and airplanes recklessly.

So I will repeat my first post on this subject, I think the FAA requiring everyone to register their drones is a load of donkey poo. Even the AMA thinks it's a load of donkey poo and they are trying to push back with the FAA to have their members exempt from this new regulation since we already have done something very similar to what the FAA wants. The AMA is also advising their members NOT to register with the FAA until the deadline is due because they want to exhaust all legal and political options first.

Oh, FYI, the FAA wants you to register yourself and not your drone. They will issue you a number in which you have to put on your drone and every other aircraft or radio controlled model you own........ Sounds a lot like what the AMA is doing isn't it?

[paul cottingham]

I think many of these arguments could be made against many other things. The "war on drugs" for example; clearly it has proven that people will take drugs, and pretty much nothing can be done about it. So do we abandon all laws that are unenforceable?

i think such arguments lead to uncomfortable places.

[Erik Loza]

You are right, something has to be done but where you are wrong is that something HAS already been done. It's called the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics). They work closely with the FAA and has been doing so long before any of these "drones" have been around. They collaborate with the FFA to set forth guidelines to safe usage of model aircraft's, how they should be used and where.

They have thousands of certified AMA flying fields across the country with hundreds of thousands of members where we can enjoy flying our model aircraft, weather it be an airplane, helicopter, cars or drones. In order to use these fields, you must be a member of the AMA. You pay a fee each year to the AMA, in return they provide you with a membership card with your member number on it. That number needs to be written on every model aircraft you own along with your name and phone number. In addition to that, they also provide you with over 1 million dollar in insurance in the event you were to crash your model aircraft into someones house and set it on fire. Or crash it into a person and send they to the hospital.

So yes, something HAS already been done but few know about them unless you are into this kind of stuff. Those that choice not to become a member of the AMA and fly the way they are suppose to is equivalent to you're analogy of people driving without car insurance. Their required to have insurance to drive but what are you going to do about it if they don't? No one will know until they rear end you at a stop light. The same can be said about people flying their drones and airplanes recklessly.

So I will repeat my first post on this subject, I think the FAA requiring everyone to register their drones is a load of donkey poo. Even the AMA thinks it's a load of donkey poo and they are trying to push back with the FAA to have their members exempt from this new regulation since we already have done something very similar to what the FAA wants. The AMA is also advising their members NOT to register with the FAA until the deadline is due because they want to exhaust all legal and political options first.

Oh, FYI, the FAA wants you to register yourself and not your drone. They will issue you a number in which you have to put on your drone and every other aircraft or radio controlled model you own........ Sounds a lot like what the AMA is doing isn't it?

I respectfully disagree. During driver's ed classes, you are made fully aware of what can happen if you don't have control of your vehicle. Right now, I can go onto Amazon and purchase a drone, no questions asked, that seems to me large enough to hurt someone or damage someone's property if it flew into them. You can't do that with a motor vehicle. So, it's apples to oranges. Now, someone could argue that they could buy a quad-runner or ATV that is a motorized vehicle that is able to hurt someone or damage property without any special license or registration and that is right. But, they are prohibited from operating that anywhere but on private property. I'm not saying folks shouldn't be allowed to own drones or have their hobbies but I do think that the technology and availability has far outrun our ability to put meaningful regulation into place that could protect folks from irresponsible use. Just my 2-cents as always.

Erik

[Scott Shepherd]

A lot of it could be solved if the laws would allow one to "disable" a drone operating on your property. Only issue is that the air space around your house isn't your property. In my opinion, if you are flying a "drone" (not what it really is) with a camera on it and you are in a position to see video in my house, then I should be able to walk outside, point some sort of jamming device at it, watch it fall from the sky, then walk over, pick it up, and toss it in my trash can, or call the police and have them stop by and pick it up. The jamming device should have a camera on it so you can see it being disabled while operating on or above my property. Then the person who owns it would have to explain to the police why they were watching live video through my windows.

If they were an actual person, looking through my windows, they'd be arrested. There's the mismatch to me. Make the laws treat "drone" operators just like people. If you are looking through the windows of someone's home, then you will be treated just like you were standing on the ground, not hiding behind technology out of sight, peeking in.

Just my two cents.

[Hoang N Nguyen]

I respectfully disagree. During driver's ed classes, you are made fully aware of what can happen if you don't have control of your vehicle. Right now, I can go onto Amazon and purchase a drone, no questions asked, that seems to me large enough to hurt someone or damage someone's property if it flew into them. You can't do that with a motor vehicle. So, it's apples to oranges. Now, someone could argue that they could buy a quad-runner or ATV that is a motorized vehicle that is able to hurt someone or damage property without any special license or registration and that is right. But, they are prohibited from operating that anywhere but on private property. I'm not saying folks shouldn't be allowed to own drones or have their hobbies but I do think that the technology and availability has far outrun our ability to put meaningful regulation into place that could protect folks from irresponsible use. Just my 2-cents as always.

Erik


You completely miss my point, must of us ARE already registered. What the FAA is requiring is basically making us register ourselves TWICE. How about you I make you buy your normal car insurance as you've always done, then I make you another car insurance policy for stupid drivers an make you pay nearly as much? How would you feel? Unless you own a drone or are more informed in what is going on with this issue and not just repeating what the "media" is telling you. You don't have much grounds to stand on when it comes to it.

I know nothing about wood turning so I will not come on here telling you how to turn something. I won't tell you this and that isn't safe because I don't know jack about what I'm talking about.

Anyways, we'll just agree to disagree. I feel this issue will be a back and forth thing and no one will yield.

[Martin Wasner]

What you are saying is the same thing as saying licensing an automobile and requiring the operator to have a driver's license doesn't prevent accidents. It is like saying that DUI laws don' prevent anyone driving while drinking. Do you really believe that?


Art, a dwi law made it illegal to have a set limit on the amount of alcohol in your system while driving. It protects people. This new law made it illegal to fly an rc toy with out a number on it. There's a difference, if you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you. Vehicle registration is there to help fund infrastructure. Statically nobody has any driving training other than those few hours before you get your license, so I don't understand what you're getting at there either.

In 2012 the faa decided that uas were aircraft. Model or not, manned or not, if it flies, it's an aircraft. As such, your subject to all the rules of flying with the far/aim manual. Registering a piece of plastic is frivolous and accomplishes nothing. Charging $5 is great, but once they find out they need another couple hundred million dollars to build a website, they'll jack the price up. It's dumb. Period.

[Martin Wasner]

I respectfully disagree. During driver's ed classes, you are made fully aware of what can happen if you don't have control of your vehicle. Right now, I can go onto Amazon and purchase a drone, no questions asked, that seems to me large enough to hurt someone or damage someone's property if it flew into them. You can't do that with a motor vehicle. So, it's apples to oranges. Now, someone could argue that they could buy a quad-runner or ATV that is a motorized vehicle that is able to hurt someone or damage property without any special license or registration and that is right. But, they are prohibited from operating that anywhere but on private property. I'm not saying folks shouldn't be allowed to own drones or have their hobbies but I do think that the technology and availability has far outrun our ability to put meaningful regulation into place that could protect folks from irresponsible use. Just my 2-cents as always.

Erik


Same can be said for baseball's, bicycles, roller skates, sling shots, etcetera.

The products you sell disfigure more people than rc aircraft a year. Should I need a license or registration to buy a T130?

Slippery slope. How much control do want others to have over you?


Btw, you're local rep hasn't gotten back to me on pricing yet.

[Mike Henderson]

Same can be said for baseball's, bicycles, roller skates, sling shots, etcetera.

The products you sell disfigure more people than rc aircraft a year. Should I need a license or registration to buy a T130?

Slippery slope. How much control do want others to have over you?


Btw, you're local rep hasn't gotten back to me on pricing yet.
I think Erik's point is that things that can cause serious injury to other people from untrained operation should perhaps require some licensing and proof of skill.

But this is a gray area where there aren't hard and fast lines. It's obvious that operation of a motor vehicle on the public highways should be regulated, while using a baseball in a game should not be. But in between is not so obvious.

Mike

[I'll just add that there's a difference between safety devices mandated on a device, such as seat belts, and regulation of operation, such as driver's licenses.]

[Myk Rian]

Would anyone give a hoot had that been a camera on a cable system that failed? Most likely not, and that's why you don't hear about it. It can't be used to sell the people anything.
Precisely why you no longer see those cable cams at NASCAR races. One cable did fail, and fell on the track. 200 mph cars hit it, and slung it into the stands. People got hurt, sending a couple to the hospital.

[Jerome Stanek]

You completely miss my point, must of us ARE already registered. What the FAA is requiring is basically making us register ourselves TWICE. How about you I make you buy your normal car insurance as you've always done, then I make you another car insurance policy for stupid drivers an make you pay nearly as much? How would you feel? Unless you own a drone or are more informed in what is going on with this issue and not just repeating what the "media" is telling you. You don't have much grounds to stand on when it comes to it.

I know nothing about wood turning so I will not come on here telling you how to turn something. I won't tell you this and that isn't safe because I don't know jack about what I'm talking about.

Anyways, we'll just agree to disagree. I feel this issue will be a back and forth thing and no one will yield.


Not the same. If you have a pilots license for a fixed wing air craft and want to fly a rotary air craft you have to have a different license

[Scott Donley]

Next thing you know the major cities will have buy back programs, $50 if you turn them in, then the Fed's will pass a law that makes private ownership illegal, turn them in or go to jail. You can't reach the end without a beginning. Sounds familiar :) HAPPY NEW YEAR !!

[Erik Loza]

...Should I need a license or registration to buy a T130?..

The only person a shaper will hurt if used incorrectly is the operator, not random folks in public places. That's the difference. There are OSHA requirements for industrial machinery use, businesses need to have liability insurance, etc. And this works, because I can go into most shops and see that the OEM safety equipment is in place, guards are being used, etc. None of that exists for one of these hobby drones. I think some enthusiasts want to frame the discussion in way to make it appear as if "regulation" = "banning" and nobody is saying that. At least I'm not saying it. Buy as many drones as you want. If someone wants me to show proof of competency and a license to use, because that removes liability from me and makes other folks safer, I'm all for it. It's a good thing, not a hindrance. Again, I don't buy the whole "It's never going to work so we shouldn't even try"-argument.

Erik

[Gerry Grzadzinski]

You completely miss my point, must of us ARE already registered.

Do you really thing that most drone owners are AMA members? I would be surprised if 25% were.

[Pat Barry]

Regulations don't solve problems. Regulations create more government. Its that simple. Some brainless politicians create a regulation, puff out their chests like they found the cure for cancer and then leave all us to pay for their attempt at governance. Licensing drone pilots is not doing anything productive at all and never will. Punish those that cause problems through the existing laws and court systems. If your neighbor is spying on you then call the cops.

[Kev Williams]

I'm chuckling at those who say these things aren't actually "drones"...

Yeah, they are :)

One definition:



an unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyond line of sight: the GPS of a U.S. spy drone.
(loosely) any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely: a radio-controlled drone.


As for 'navigating autonomously', many of our 'spy' drones are under 'human control', much like our 'toy' drones...

British definition:
3. pilotless radio-controlled aircraft

And my favorite 'word origin', notice the 'civilian' reference, and the date...

Drones, as the radio-controlled craft are called, have many potentialities, civilian and military. Some day huge mother ships may guide fleets of long-distance, cargo-carrying airplanes across continents and oceans. Long-range drones armed with atomic bombs could be flown by accompanying mother ships to their targets and in for perfect hits. ["Popular Science," November, 1946]

"Radio Controlled Aircraft" seems to be the common denominator. And if they're NOT drones, what are they? ;)

[Martin Wasner]

I'm chuckling at those who say these things aren't actually "drones"...

Yeah, they are :)

One definition:



an unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyond line of sight: the GPS of a U.S. spy drone.
(loosely) any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely: a radio-controlled drone.


As for 'navigating autonomously', many of our 'spy' drones are under 'human control', much like our 'toy' drones...

British definition:
3. pilotless radio-controlled aircraft

And my favorite 'word origin', notice the 'civilian' reference, and the date...

Drones, as the radio-controlled craft are called, have many potentialities, civilian and military. Some day huge mother ships may guide fleets of long-distance, cargo-carrying airplanes across continents and oceans. Long-range drones armed with atomic bombs could be flown by accompanying mother ships to their targets and in for perfect hits. ["Popular Science," November, 1946]

"Radio Controlled Aircraft" seems to be the common denominator. And if they're NOT drones, what are they? ;)





Webster's definition is similar, but I don't think most people consider a rc airplane to be aircraft. I don't, and the faa didn't until recently either.

[paul cottingham]

Regulations don't solve problems. Regulations create more government. Its that simple. Some brainless politicians create a regulation, puff out their chests like they found the cure for cancer and then leave all us to pay for their attempt at governance. Licensing drone pilots is not doing anything productive at all and never will. Punish those that cause problems through the existing laws and court systems. If your neighbor is spying on you then call the cops.

Then i must ask: in your utopian, liberterarian world, where is the line? No regulation? Only "necessary" regulation? (Whatever that may be? And who sets thise regulations?) Let the cops sort out what is legal and what isn't?

A lot of what i have read here sounds like this: "we can't really control these people, so why try? And besides, regulating them will somehow infringe on my rights and freedoms!"

Let me be clear. I am not really sure I favour licensing drones. But I am also not convinced that self regulation is any kind of solution. Part of this boils down to what privacy expectations actually exist in this day and age. In my experience, many people who argue for licensing drones "for privacy reasons" also have no problems with the NSA reading my email. Me, i am fully in favor of people not being able to peek into my home, or read my email.

It is a very complex issue, and one with no one size fits all answer.

[Yonak Hawkins]

Sounds familiar

Familiar to what ? What do you associate it with ?

[Pat Barry]

Let me be clear. I am not really sure I favour licensing drones.....
So, what you are really saying is that you just want to argue and resort to name calling. What do you call your world Paul? I never claimed to be either of the things you pinned on me.

[William Adams]

My problem w/ the licensing is that it creates yet another crime which a person can easily run afoul of if the government wishes to harass a person, if it doesn’t have the exemption which I noted for being on private property and not needing to be licensed.

How much liberty will be left if we continue to make a special law for every instance of a failure of common sense, decency and consideration for others?

When asked what sort of government resulted from the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin is said to’ve replied, “A republic, if you can maintain it.”. 1984 was supposed to be a cautionary tale, not a guide.

[Scott Donley]

Familiar to what ? What do you associate it with ?

Maybe,
Gun control debate, ?

[paul cottingham]

So, what you are really saying is that you just want to argue and resort to name calling. What do you call your world Paul? I never claimed to be either of the things you pinned on me.

You are quite right, Pat, and i apologize. It was a generic comment, that was attached to a quote. I will edit it, if you wish.

[Martin Wasner]

.How much liberty will be left if we continue to make a special law for every instance of a failure of common sense, decency and consideration for others?

Simple and well said.

[Keith Outten]

We need to move this discussion back to the topic of Drone Licensing specifically, its wandering in a bad direction.
.

[Myk Rian]

Let the cops sort out what is legal and what isn't?
This is pretty much what the FAA has done. The local police will enforce the law. That will probably work out as well as them enforcing fireworks laws. It didn't really happen. More often than not the LEO would sit and watch them along with everyone else, just to make sure they were being used safely.

Something the FAA left out of the law is "Who will pay for the enforcement"? No provisions were made for that.

[Jason Roehl]

This is pretty much what the FAA has done. The local police will enforce the law. That will probably work out as well as them enforcing fireworks laws. It didn't really happen. More often than not the LEO would sit and watch them along with everyone else, just to make sure they were being used safely.

Something the FAA left out of the law is "Who will pay for the enforcement"? No provisions were made for that.

Ahem. "Rule". The FAA (and any other government agency) can only write rules. It takes a legislative body to write a law. It's a bit of hair-splitting, but it is important to know and understand the difference, lest we drown in bureaucracy.

[Mel Fulks]

I think there is a real old Supreme Court case that settled that stuff. Regulatory agency rules are enforced as laws. Knew the name of the case ......until I took the test

[Marvin Hasenak]

This is like most laws and regulations, they are written because a few people fail to use common sense and respect other people rights. Using common sense should tell most people not to fly around and airport, but some PEOPLE DID IT ANYWAY. Spying on your neighbors, that is lack of respect for your fellow man, but some people HAVE DONE IT. Laws and regulations are generally followed by over 90% of the people, the other 10 percent won't pay any attention to them, they "think" they are smart enough to not get caught. The courts and prisons are full of the 10% group.

One drone in a friend's rural neighborhood met up with some number 7 bird shot. Living out in the sticks the shooter claimed he was hunting doves when the drone invaded his air space, and that it was an accident. The deputy told the drone owner there was nothing he could do.

[Martin Wasner]

One drone in a friend's rural neighborhood met up with some number 7 bird shot. Living out in the sticks the shooter claimed he was hunting doves when the drone invaded his air space, and that it was an accident. The deputy told the drone owner there was nothing he could do.

See now the shooter is extremely lucky the deputy is ignorant of the law. The shooter could be facing the same charges as if he had shot down a manned aircraft.

I don't fly like a douche, but had someone knocked my $3k toy out out the air, bad things would happen to the knocker.

[Jerome Stanek]

This is like most laws and regulations, they are written because a few people fail to use common sense and respect other people rights. Using common sense should tell most people not to fly around and airport, but some PEOPLE DID IT ANYWAY. Spying on your neighbors, that is lack of respect for your fellow man, but some people HAVE DONE IT. Laws and regulations are generally followed by over 90% of the people, the other 10 percent won't pay any attention to them, they "think" they are smart enough to not get caught. The courts and prisons are full of the 10% group.

One drone in a friend's rural neighborhood met up with some number 7 bird shot. Living out in the sticks the shooter claimed he was hunting doves when the drone invaded his air space, and that it was an accident. The deputy told the drone owner there was nothing he could do.

Maybe he should use the 3S approach that a county official told me. Shoot Shovel and Shut up

[Pat Barry]

One drone in a friend's rural neighborhood met up with some number 7 bird shot. Living out in the sticks the shooter claimed he was hunting doves when the drone invaded his air space, and that it was an accident. The deputy told the drone owner there was nothing he could do.
Sounds like your typical redneck backwoods neighborhood doesn't it?

[Jerome Stanek]

Sounds like your typical redneck backwoods neighborhood doesn't it?

except we are in a higher income area

[Rich Sabulsky]

I was very active flying RC Helicopters,, airplanes, and a hexcopter up until 2 years ago. (I started wood turning and lost interest, imagine?) The biggest change in recent times is the auto-stabilization and navigation features of the newest batch of multirotors make them MUCH easier to fly than anything that has come before. Where in the past you had to be very determined, have some disposable income, and have a bit of help to learn to fly these things (usually in a club), the new ones are inexpensive and really just charge and fly. If you let go of the sticks, they hover in place. If you lose orientation because it's too far away, you can activate a feature that causes it to fly back and land where it took off from with no help from you.

New battery technologies and more efficient electric motors are making longer and longer flight times possible. When you add in the FPV gear that is becoming ever cheaper and better, people are finding new and exciting ways to get into trouble. There are pilots using Ham radio bands to transmit control inputs up and video down from airplanes and multirotors that are literally miles away.

This new rule is designed as a way to assign blame and punish the irresponsible, but it requires that they first do the responsible thing and register as a pilot and mark their equipment with their assigned ID.

I'm not sure how they would track an unmarked craft back to a even a registered pilot, though. I hope this rule helps in some way, but I'm a bit skeptical that it will be effective.

[Myk Rian]

I suppose some people don't know what we're discussing here, so here are pics of mine.

The first was an Xmas gift from my BIL. Cute little thing. Excellent little bug to annoy a cat or dog, if you have one.
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad222/MykRian/Helis/20160107_190556_zpskhffi1zp.jpg

This one is my $27 dollar Ebay "Captain America". Can be flown outdoors in a light wind.
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad222/MykRian/Helis/20160107_190646_zpsxklchxvv.jpg

And lastly, I'm building this one right now. Been at it for 2 days now. Still have a ways to go.
This is an Ebay clone FPV (First Person Video) racer. It's a 250mm model. I will be mounting a camera in the front. The idea is you can race these, or fly it out of your view and see what it sees using a 7" LCD screen, or wearing a headset goggles. These things have come a long way.
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad222/MykRian/Helis/20160107_190747_zpsufweujiy.jpg

View of the receiver and maze of wires.
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad222/MykRian/Helis/20160107_190710_zpshjhnaqfu.jpg

[Pat Barry]

Myk, do any of those need you to register?

[Myk Rian]

I am registered for any drone I fly. I will have to put my reg. number on the one I am building. It weighs more than 250 grams.

If anyone is interested in building one, be forwarned that NO instructions came with it. You're flying by the seat of your pants, so to speak. ;-)

[Pat Barry]

I am registered for any drone I fly. I will have to put my reg. number on the one I am building. It weighs more than 250 grams.

If anyone is interested in building one, be forwarned that NO instructions came with it. You're flying by the seat of your pants, so to speak. ;-)
What is the payload weight for the one you are building?

[Brian Elfert]

I'm not sure why everyone insists on calling quad copters drones. Aren't real drones aircraft like the Predator military drones?

[Myk Rian]

What is the payload weight for the one you are building?
It should carry a light camera like a GoPro on a gimbal mount underneath. The GoPro is very popular, but pricey.

[Gerry Grzadzinski]

or fly it out of your view and see what it sees using a 7" LCD screen, or wearing a headset goggles.

Isn't that a violation of an FAA rule or something? I thought I read that anything you fly must remain in your sight?

[Myk Rian]

You might argue that point, and it's valid. If you're flying around a park and it goes around a stand of trees, you need that view to see where it is.

[Brett Luna]

Ahem. "Rule". The FAA (and any other government agency) can only write rules.

^^^This. I work for the FAA in air traffic (nothing high level, I assure you) and we're still sorting all of this out too. I do not speak for the agency but big league bureaucrats aside, I will say that what we care about in my little corner of the aviation world is safety of the National Airspace System. UAS incidents are increasing every month it seems and we clearly can't do nothing. I'm pretty sure these rules will evolve over time.

[Myk Rian]

This is the kit I'm building.
ebay.com/itm/201482901848
It comes with extra parts for repairs. It was missing the camera, but a note to the seller was answered immediately. A new cam is on the way.
You need to buy a battery, or more, and a charger. Li Po batteries are finicky, and need to be used correctly.

This is the article I'm following for the build. A bit light on the electronics, but good overall. I'll have to find more info on the electronics.
The bodies are made out of soda bottles. Imagine a flying Coca Cola. Hmmm.
learnrobotix.com/uavs/quadcopter-build/fpv-racing-quadcopter/how-to-build-a-fpv-racing-quadcopter.html (http://learnrobotix.com/uavs/quadcopter-build/fpv-racing-quadcopter/how-to-build-a-fpv-racing-quadcopter.html)

[Martin Wasner]

I'm not sure why everyone insists on calling quad copters drones. Aren't real drones aircraft like the Predator military drones?

Right?! It's stupid

[Myk Rian]

I'm not sure why everyone insists on calling quad copters drones. Aren't real drones aircraft like the Predator military drones?
Yeah. It's stupid, but those in the hobby call them drones.
No need to nit-pick.

[Erik Loza]

They apparently are working on a solution in the Netherlands...

http://time.com/4202469/dutch-police-eagle-drones/

Erik

[Larry Browning]

I'm not sure why everyone insists on calling quad copters drones. Aren't real drones aircraft like the Predator military drones?


From dictionary.com:
noun
1. the male of the honeybee and other bees, stingless and making no honey.

2.

an unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyond line of sight: the GPS of a U.S. spy drone.
(loosely) any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely: a radio-controlled drone.


3. a person who lives on the labor of others; parasitic loafer.

4. a drudge.

Does this clear things up for you?

[Myk Rian]

Some of them can be programmed with a set flight path and altitude. You turn it on, give it coordinates, and away it goes.
It's a drone. They can also be told to follow you, and return to you. All by themselves.

[Larry Browning]

I have found that being technically correct is not always the best way to communicate. Just ask Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory.

[Richard Hines]

I have found that being technically correct is not always the best way to communicate. Just ask Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory.
The kid next door has one. It is quite large. I told him if I saw it flying over my house I would give a load of #6 shot. He gave me the "Right" look. I just smiled and walked off.

I really hope he tries it.

[Pat Barry]

The kid next door has one. It is quite large. I told him if I saw it flying over my house I would give a load of #6 shot. He gave me the "Right" look. I just smiled and walked off.

I really hope he tries it.
Great idea posting your devious plans on-line!

[Myk Rian]

Most people introduce themselves for the first post.
Perhaps we have a troll.

Anyway, for a GPS/barometric enabled drone, you're looking at $1,500, to start.
The one I'm building can have those modules added in, and connected to the flight controller. These things aren't exactly toys. You have to set the receiver/flight controller up with your computer.

[Gerry Grzadzinski]

Most people introduce themselves for the first post.
Perhaps we have a troll.


A very patient one, waiting 5 years for his first post.