FFA registration of drones overthrown by courts

[xsubsailor]

uploading images

A D.C.-based appeals court struck down a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rule on Friday requiring recreational drone users to register their model aircraft with the federal government, in a major win for drone hobbyists.

 

 

http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/334233-appeals-court-strikes-down-federal-registration-rule-for-toy-drones

[peejman]

3 hours ago, xsubsailor said:

uploading images

A D.C.-based appeals court struck down a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rule on Friday requiring recreational drone users to register their model aircraft with the federal government, in a major win for drone hobbyists.

 

 

http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/334233-appeals-court-strikes-down-federal-registration-rule-for-toy-drones

Good for the D.C. Appeals court. I doubt that'll stick given the threat misused drones pose to private and commercial aircraft.  If quadrotor users would abide by the long established rules for model aircraft operation, this wouldn't have been an issue.

I suspect the FAA will redefine the rule to only apply to true drones, those capable of autonomous flight. 

[1fast4by]

Damn, and I just paid their $5 stupid tax on a recent one I built LAST WEEK!

 

I want a refund!

[xsubsailor]

10 minutes ago, 1fast4by said:

Damn, and I just paid their $5 stupid tax on a recent one I built LAST WEEK!

 

I want a refund!

Hold your breath 

[1fast4by]

Just now, xsubsailor said:

Hold your breath 

Nah, I prefer living

[Omega]

I registered when it kicked off, it's not a drone registration per se, you are the one that gets registered and use your reg# on any and all drones you buy.  The bs part was that to be able to fly your drone, you had to always be able to see it.  That limited you to pretty much only open fields unless you had a drone pilots licence which was darn near the same as a normal pilots licence in both time and $.  I use mine to survey my fence line for fallen branches/trees so I can repair it, if I have to be in visual range, I might as well just walk the perimeter.

[peejman]

13 hours ago, Omega said:

I registered when it kicked off, it's not a drone registration per se, you are the one that gets registered and use your reg# on any and all drones you buy.  The bs part was that to be able to fly your drone, you had to always be able to see it.  That limited you to pretty much only open fields unless you had a drone pilots licence which was darn near the same as a normal pilots licence in both time and $.  I use mine to survey my fence line for fallen branches/trees so I can repair it, if I have to be in visual range, I might as well just walk the perimeter.

It's the same as many other things, a few idiots ruin it for everyone.  

Though since yours is capable of autonomous flight, I'd argue that it's not a model aircraft in the traditional sense and does need some level of oversight/training beyond line-of-sight type model aircraft. 

[Omega]

10 hours ago, peejman said:

It's the same as many other things, a few idiots ruin it for everyone.  

Though since yours is capable of autonomous flight, I'd argue that it's not a model aircraft in the traditional sense and does need some level of oversight/training beyond line-of-sight type model aircraft. 

How so?  As far as I know, before this was passed, there were no difference between hobbyists and pros except use and weight of the rc aircraft.  Like many things, instead of punishing the act, they punish the instrument. 

[bersaguy]

On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 9:36 PM, xsubsailor said:

Hold your breath 

Please breathe when youhave turned Blue and Purple while waiting on your refund.....

[peejman]

14 hours ago, Omega said:

How so?  As far as I know, before this was passed, there were no difference between hobbyists and pros except use and weight of the rc aircraft.  Like many things, instead of punishing the act, they punish the instrument. 

It can fly itself. It can change course, climb, descend, or proceed to a predefined location entirely on its own regardless of what might be between here and there.  

Prior to quadrotors with cameras, instances of RC aircraft interfering with real aircraft was effectively zero.  I'd guess that's because years ago, RC aircraft capable of flying high and far enough to cause problems were only operated by folks with lots of experience.  It took a lot of time and money to work up to planes or helicopters that nice.  Generally they were only flown from purpose made fields well away from any sort of normal air traffic.  

Now any kid with a couple hundred bucks can buy a drone big enough to cause serious damage to a light aircraft and fly it from practically anywhere.  They take minimal skill or experience to fly and the folks don't realize how fast they can get away from you.

Its a concern. 

I agree that the act should be punished. Registering users is one way of determining who to punish. Maybe not the best way, but it's a start. 

[Omega]

8 hours ago, peejman said:

It can fly itself. It can change course, climb, descend, or proceed to a predefined location entirely on its own regardless of what might be between here and there.  

Prior to quadrotors with cameras, instances of RC aircraft interfering with real aircraft was effectively zero.  I'd guess that's because years ago, RC aircraft capable of flying high and far enough to cause problems were only operated by folks with lots of experience.  It took a lot of time and money to work up to planes or helicopters that nice.  Generally they were only flown from purpose made fields well away from any sort of normal air traffic.  

Now any kid with a couple hundred bucks can buy a drone big enough to cause serious damage to a light aircraft and fly it from practically anywhere.  They take minimal skill or experience to fly and the folks don't realize how fast they can get away from you.

Its a concern. 

I agree that the act should be punished. Registering users is one way of determining who to punish. Maybe not the best way, but it's a start. 

Not buying it, sounds akin to the reasoning for gun control.  While other models may be different than mine, mine will return back if signal is lost.  The farthest I sent it is like 700ft horizontal,  at around 10-15ft AGL,  

At airports, they should deploy jammers for rc frequencies,  that way aircraft will be safer.

[peejman]

7 hours ago, Omega said:

Not buying it, sounds akin to the reasoning for gun control.  While other models may be different than mine, mine will return back if signal is lost.  The farthest I sent it is like 700ft horizontal,  at around 10-15ft AGL,  

At airports, they should deploy jammers for rc frequencies,  that way aircraft will be safer.

Owning a gun is a Constitutional  right. Flying a drone isn't. 

I'm sure jammers are among many options being evaluated (I'd guess transponders are too).   But again, what does the drone do when the frequency is interfered with?  If it goes back "home", where is home?  What if it's on the other side of the airport?  If it just lands where ever it loses signal, what if that's over a busy road?  

One of the biggest problems is there's no standard protocol for how drones are programmed, just like autonomous cars.  The technology has advanced well beyond any sort of standardization, so you've got a wide variety of people developing their product more or less in a vacuum.  Different models can react very differently to the same scenario. Everyone is trying to prove their product is best and there's no integration across platforms because profits are at stake. 

[Omega]

1 hour ago, peejman said:

Owning a gun is a Constitutional  right. Flying a drone isn't. 

I'm sure jammers are among many options being evaluated (I'd guess transponders are too).   But again, what does the drone do when the frequency is interfered with?  If it goes back "home", where is home?  What if it's on the other side of the airport?  If it just lands where ever it loses signal, what if that's over a busy road?  

One of the biggest problems is there's no standard protocol for how drones are programmed, just like autonomous cars.  The technology has advanced well beyond any sort of standardization, so you've got a wide variety of people developing their product more or less in a vacuum.  Different models can react very differently to the same scenario. Everyone is trying to prove their product is best and there's no integration across platforms because profits are at stake. 

Never indicated Right vs hobby, just saying the arguments are alike.  In that frame of reasoning, lasers should be banned/registered as well since more laser incidents have been reported than RC ones.  There are many things that are not standardized, yet, it's up to the user to know his equipment, just like some guns won't fire without a magazine, many employ differing safety features.   If I accidentally cause an issue, I should be held liable for said issue whether I intended to or if was just the way the equipment behaves. 

My particular drone goes back to the spot it took off from when signal is lost and as far as I know it does not have any avoidance built in so more than likely it will hit a tree before it gets back.  Myself, I would prefer that I get to choose what it does when that occurs because in my case I would rather it just hover until I get within range again.  I will test this feature in a large area to be sure, but I won't be taking any chances with it anyway.  As with anything I do, I weight the risk/benefit of things and there is no way I will endanger anyone or their property just for a hobby.  The most likely outcome for me is wrecked props from branches I fail to see crossing my fence line, or some animal taking offence at me violating its space.

[peejman]

4 hours ago, Omega said:

Never indicated Right vs hobby, just saying the arguments are alike.  In that frame of reasoning, lasers should be banned/registered as well since more laser incidents have been reported than RC ones.  There are many things that are not standardized, yet, it's up to the user to know his equipment, just like some guns won't fire without a magazine, many employ differing safety features.   If I accidentally cause an issue, I should be held liable for said issue whether I intended to or if was just the way the equipment behaves. 

My particular drone goes back to the spot it took off from when signal is lost and as far as I know it does not have any avoidance built in so more than likely it will hit a tree before it gets back.  Myself, I would prefer that I get to choose what it does when that occurs because in my case I would rather it just hover until I get within range again.  I will test this feature in a large area to be sure, but I won't be taking any chances with it anyway.  As with anything I do, I weight the risk/benefit of things and there is no way I will endanger anyone or their property just for a hobby.  The most likely outcome for me is wrecked props from branches I fail to see crossing my fence line, or some animal taking offence at me violating its space.

I agree that the arguements follow similar lines, and with what you're saying. 

Lasers above 5mW are regulated here and in many other places.  

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_pointer

 

[Omega]

48 minutes ago, peejman said:

I agree that the arguements follow similar lines, and with what you're saying. 

Lasers above 5mW are regulated here and in many other places.  

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_pointer

 

Yes, but above 5mw, just as the drones are above 55lbs.  Most laser incidents involved standard laser pointers, albeit most are the new(er) green lasers, but under 5mw.  The problem is really those mentally challenged individuals that do not think about or maybe care about what happens when they do stuff like that.  No form of law or regulation will stop them from doing those things, and it is only the ones that are already willing to follow the rules that will be effected.

On the same token, I think the FCC needs to be told to back off the FMRS band as well.  But that's another whole ball of wax.

[peejman]

Seems the FAA has tried to gather relevant info and put it in one place.... novel concept, right? 

https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_briefing/

There's also an interesting article about flying the Global Hawk. I didn't know the Navy had any of them.