So if I don't register my drone the local 5-0 can stop me and ask for my registration? Local and state 5-0 is now enforcing federal regulations? I will take my chances.
So if I don't register my drone the local 5-0 can stop me and ask for my registration? Local and state 5-0 is now enforcing federal regulations? I will take my chances.
The FAA has requested that local Law Enforcement help policing use of drones.
I acknowledged that, the drug dealers and law breakers won't register in most cases! But this gives the PD agencies a way to charge these people if caught with a .56 lb drone and no markings/registration. Before they had to catch you with drone and doing something illegal, which is almost impossible. Now if they see a drone in someone's possession they can check registration and charge in none.
They already have drone catchers, so this way only unmarked/unregistered drones will get away for awhile. Some will get away for awhile but the odds are way better now that some will get caught just for not being registered.
Guess what IS will probably try the drones for a terror attack, again this might be the thing that gets one before the Act!!!
There is no law against having an unmarked drone, one has to be caught flying it before the problem starts.
RT
windwalker wrote:
No a drug dealer will not put identifiers on his or her "Drone" and odds are the illegal flyer will not either. The registration and marking will give grounds to take action against those that do not comply. Take drug dealer, house gets busted, drone found no markings, additional charge. Sure people will still fly illegally, but now some will be caught for not registering or marking their drones.
windwalker wrote:
I acknowledged that, the drug dealers and law breakers won't register in most cases! But this gives the PD agencies a way to charge these people if caught with a .56 lb drone and no markings/registration. Before they had to catch you with drone and doing something illegal, which is almost impossible. Now if they see a drone in someone's possession they can check registration and charge in none.
-- "Internet: As Yogi Berra would say, "Don't believe 90% of what you read, and verify the other half."
There is no law against having an unmarked drone, one has to be caught flying it before the problem starts.
Exactly. And flying it outdoors at that. You can flying indoors to your heart's content without being registered.
The paranoia and scare tactics and straight out misinformation that some other people are spouting really is ridiculous and should stop.
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
Yep, although the FAA has issued a response to those "criticisms" indicating that they they believe that they are in compliance with that.
It isn't a criticism, it's the law and the way the law is written it plainly states the FAA may make not make a rule.
"SEC. 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;" [emphasis added]
Multirotor aircraft equipped with camera (aka "Drone") flown for commercial purposes such as news gathering are a different animal. These aircraft are flown in pursuit of a commercial enterprise for which the operator receives compensation. Flying a quad with a camera and posting the video to venues such as YouTube doesn't necessarily qualify as "commercial purposes."
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
.... Which is one of the reasons AMA sent us an email asking members to hold off registering with the FAA until they can look at all of their options, including possible legal action. They're also asking the FAA to allow AMA members to use their AMA number for registration. Time will tell, but I'm not holding my breath (although I am holding off registering with the FAA to help the AMA).
RT
-- "Internet: As Yogi Berra would say, "Don't believe 90% of what you read, and verify the other half."
It isn't a criticism, it's the law and the way the law is written it plainly states the FAA may make not make a rule.
"SEC. 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;" [emphasis added]
Multirotor aircraft equipped with camera (aka "Drone") flown for commercial purposes such as news gathering are a different animal. These aircraft are flown in pursuit of a commercial enterprise for which the operator receives compensation. Flying a quad with a camera and posting the video to venues such as YouTube doesn't necessarily qualify as "commercial purposes."
Again (and I'm not saying that I agree just that this is the FAA's interpretation), the FAA believes that this new requirement is not prohibited by Sec 336 and is in line with it
Speciafically, that document that they released states "The FAA interprets the section 336 rulemaking prohibition as one that must be evaluated on a rule-by-rule basis."
And I'm not talking about commercial operations either.
I agree with the interpretation that this section precludes the FAA's action(s).
The FAA's current stance is all to common for Federal agencies; they're going to continue unless and until a Federal Court tells them to stop, and that's going to take someone who wants to invest probably around $80k - $100k in legal fees to call their bluff.
-- Nuvi 2460, 680, DATUM Tymserve 2100, Trimble Thunderbolt, Ham radio, Macintosh, Linux, Windows
(RE: Section 336) I agree with the interpretation that this section precludes the FAA's action(s).
The FAA's current stance is all to common for Federal agencies; they're going to continue unless and until a Federal Court tells them to stop, and that's going to take someone who wants to invest probably around $80k - $100k in legal fees to call their bluff.
The FAA is within bounds requiring all sUAV operators flying their aircraft in the national airspace to register, the place they are out of bounds is having the registration number placed on or in the craft.
With such a huge fine, it might actually be challenged depending on what penalties the FAA may try to assess.
FAA claims it can assess 27.5k civil penalties and 250k criminal penalties on the UAS registration Q&A. No information is provided regarding what penalties will actually be assessed.
I understand that Drones need to have some kind of registration for any issues with flying inappropriately but this is stupid for anything about half a pound?!
Yes, the registration requirements apply to operation of fixed wing model aircraft and RC helicopters if they are over 250 grams in weight including the battery but not including the remote controller.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/
If so, this is going to come as a HUGE shock to the entire radio control community who are convinced this law applies only to drones.
The FAA is making this MUCH more confusing by not stating what this applies to. Even their "guide" shows only drones.
So, the way I read it, the law applies. R/C forums are full of information only for drone owners. Good grief.
If you are an AMA member, then you should have received an email today. If you click the link, you will get to this page.
Q: Do only drones and multirotor pilots need to register?
A: The Interim Final Rule regarding sUAS registration requires all unmanned aircraft that are part of an unmanned aircraft system be registered. Being part of an unmanned aircraft system means aircraft that are flown using a ground-control system, such as a transmitter, in essence radio control model aircraft. This includes pilots who fly fixed-wing RC aircraft and helicopters, not just multirotors or drones. Any pilot flying models weighing between .55 pounds (or 250 grams) and 55 pounds is required to register.
Federal Aviation and Transport Canada has announced that new rules coming to Canada, including Registration.
About time. We had a near miss, at the airport outside of Kitchener, of a small commercial turboprop, when one came with in ten feet of the plane. This airport also has commercial airlines that use 737's etc, so the result could be devastating.
unfunded mandate
So if I don't register my drone the local 5-0 can stop me and ask for my registration? Local and state 5-0 is now enforcing federal regulations? I will take my chances.
.
So if I don't register my drone the local 5-0 can stop me and ask for my registration? Local and state 5-0 is now enforcing federal regulations? I will take my chances.
The FAA has requested that local Law Enforcement help policing use of drones.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/stephaniemcneal/faa-asks-local-law-e...
https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=81244
.
duplicate
Not gonna happen.
That's what makes it an unfunded mandate and the local PD will not be enforcing this.
such a joke.
such a joke.
AMA can't fine or lock you up
I acknowledged that, the drug dealers and law breakers won't register in most cases! But this gives the PD agencies a way to charge these people if caught with a .56 lb drone and no markings/registration. Before they had to catch you with drone and doing something illegal, which is almost impossible. Now if they see a drone in someone's possession they can check registration and charge in none.
They already have drone catchers, so this way only unmarked/unregistered drones will get away for awhile. Some will get away for awhile but the odds are way better now that some will get caught just for not being registered.
Guess what IS will probably try the drones for a terror attack, again this might be the thing that gets one before the Act!!!
Not illegal
There is no law against having an unmarked drone, one has to be caught flying it before the problem starts.
RT
No a drug dealer will not put identifiers on his or her "Drone" and odds are the illegal flyer will not either. The registration and marking will give grounds to take action against those that do not comply. Take drug dealer, house gets busted, drone found no markings, additional charge. Sure people will still fly illegally, but now some will be caught for not registering or marking their drones.
I acknowledged that, the drug dealers and law breakers won't register in most cases! But this gives the PD agencies a way to charge these people if caught with a .56 lb drone and no markings/registration. Before they had to catch you with drone and doing something illegal, which is almost impossible. Now if they see a drone in someone's possession they can check registration and charge in none.
"Internet: As Yogi Berra would say, "Don't believe 90% of what you read, and verify the other half."
.
There is no law against having an unmarked drone, one has to be caught flying it before the problem starts.
Exactly. And flying it outdoors at that. You can flying indoors to your heart's content without being registered.
The paranoia and scare tactics and straight out misinformation that some other people are spouting really is ridiculous and should stop.
However, the FAA's authorization states
There is no law against having an unmarked drone, one has to be caught flying it before the problem starts.
Exactly. And flying it outdoors at that. You can flying indoors to your heart's content without being registered.
The paranoia and scare tactics and straight out misinformation that some other people are spouting really is ridiculous and should stop.
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
Illiterate? Write for free help.
.
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
Yep, although the FAA has issued a response to those "criticisms" indicating that they they believe that they are in compliance with that.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf
problem being
It isn't a criticism, it's the law and the way the law is written it plainly states the FAA may make not make a rule.
"SEC. 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;" [emphasis added]
Multirotor aircraft equipped with camera (aka "Drone") flown for commercial purposes such as news gathering are a different animal. These aircraft are flown in pursuit of a commercial enterprise for which the operator receives compensation. Flying a quad with a camera and posting the video to venues such as YouTube doesn't necessarily qualify as "commercial purposes."
Illiterate? Write for free help.
AMA
The FAA Modernization Act of 2012 has a section on unmanned aircraft. Within that section there is a part which precludes the FAA from making any rules covering "model aircraft" flown for recreational or hobby purposes. The other sections of the Act require some specific steps before a new rule is published and the FAA hasn't complied with those steps either.
.... Which is one of the reasons AMA sent us an email asking members to hold off registering with the FAA until they can look at all of their options, including possible legal action. They're also asking the FAA to allow AMA members to use their AMA number for registration. Time will tell, but I'm not holding my breath (although I am holding off registering with the FAA to help the AMA).
RT
"Internet: As Yogi Berra would say, "Don't believe 90% of what you read, and verify the other half."
.
It isn't a criticism, it's the law and the way the law is written it plainly states the FAA may make not make a rule.
"SEC. 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;" [emphasis added]
Multirotor aircraft equipped with camera (aka "Drone") flown for commercial purposes such as news gathering are a different animal. These aircraft are flown in pursuit of a commercial enterprise for which the operator receives compensation. Flying a quad with a camera and posting the video to venues such as YouTube doesn't necessarily qualify as "commercial purposes."
Again (and I'm not saying that I agree just that this is the FAA's interpretation), the FAA believes that this new requirement is not prohibited by Sec 336 and is in line with it
Speciafically, that document that they released states "The FAA interprets the section 336 rulemaking prohibition as one that must be evaluated on a rule-by-rule basis."
And I'm not talking about commercial operations either.
Sec 336--
I agree with the interpretation that this section precludes the FAA's action(s).
The FAA's current stance is all to common for Federal agencies; they're going to continue unless and until a Federal Court tells them to stop, and that's going to take someone who wants to invest probably around $80k - $100k in legal fees to call their bluff.
Nuvi 2460, 680, DATUM Tymserve 2100, Trimble Thunderbolt, Ham radio, Macintosh, Linux, Windows
RE: Section 336
(RE: Section 336) I agree with the interpretation that this section precludes the FAA's action(s).
The FAA's current stance is all to common for Federal agencies; they're going to continue unless and until a Federal Court tells them to stop, and that's going to take someone who wants to invest probably around $80k - $100k in legal fees to call their bluff.
The FAA is within bounds requiring all sUAV operators flying their aircraft in the national airspace to register, the place they are out of bounds is having the registration number placed on or in the craft.
Illiterate? Write for free help.
Such a huge fine
With such a huge fine, it might actually be challenged depending on what penalties the FAA may try to assess.
FAA claims it can assess 27.5k civil penalties and 250k criminal penalties on the UAS registration Q&A. No information is provided regarding what penalties will actually be assessed.
D. F. A.
I want to get a drone and stencil Death From Above on it.
I do not, however, like the smell of napalm in the morning.
Wow.....
I don't own a drone, but this interesting.
RKF (Brookeville, MD) Garmin Nuvi 660, 360 & Street Pilot
I understand that Drones
I understand that Drones need to have some kind of registration for any issues with flying inappropriately but this is stupid for anything about half a pound?!
You have to admire the US
You have to admire the US government...creating new paperwork to drive new job creation.
.
Yes, the registration requirements apply to operation of fixed wing model aircraft and RC helicopters if they are over 250 grams in weight including the battery but not including the remote controller.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/
If so, this is going to come as a HUGE shock to the entire radio control community who are convinced this law applies only to drones.
The FAA is making this MUCH more confusing by not stating what this applies to. Even their "guide" shows only drones.
So, the way I read it, the law applies. R/C forums are full of information only for drone owners. Good grief.
If you are an AMA member, then you should have received an email today. If you click the link, you will get to this page.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2015/12/17/frequentl...
If you scroll down, you will find this paragraph.
Q: Do only drones and multirotor pilots need to register?
A: The Interim Final Rule regarding sUAS registration requires all unmanned aircraft that are part of an unmanned aircraft system be registered. Being part of an unmanned aircraft system means aircraft that are flown using a ground-control system, such as a transmitter, in essence radio control model aircraft. This includes pilots who fly fixed-wing RC aircraft and helicopters, not just multirotors or drones. Any pilot flying models weighing between .55 pounds (or 250 grams) and 55 pounds is required to register.
Section 336 challenge filed--
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2673936-Taylor-v-FAA...
filed by an attorney challenging under 336. Looks like trouble for the FAA!
Nuvi 2460, 680, DATUM Tymserve 2100, Trimble Thunderbolt, Ham radio, Macintosh, Linux, Windows
There we go
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2673936-Taylor-v-FAA...
filed by an attorney challenging under 336. Looks like trouble for the FAA!
There we go: a lot of time, effort, and money going to waste to keep the government from doing useless things.
Registration and New Rules Coming to Canada
Federal Aviation and Transport Canada has announced that new rules coming to Canada, including Registration.
About time. We had a near miss, at the airport outside of Kitchener, of a small commercial turboprop, when one came with in ten feet of the plane. This airport also has commercial airlines that use 737's etc, so the result could be devastating.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/drone-regulations-transport-...
See the full info.
DriveSmart 65, NUVI2555LMT, (NUVI350 is Now Retired)