The FAA has never shown interest in the airspace below the top of the 100-plus-foot tall evergreen trees that surround my home. They’ve never inspected. They’ve never inquired. Nothing.
Why? In part because it isn’t “navigable” airspace.
That all changed when the FAA recently issued an Interim Final Rule that states “anyone who owns a small unmanned aircraft of a certain weight must register with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) registry before they fly outdoors.”
The FAA, and the Department of Transportation, believe requiring all UAS operators to register will magically make everyone act responsibly and safely. Just like all people with a drivers license. Oh, wait, never mind.
I own a few RPA toys. [I prefer the term RPA (remotely-piloted aircraft) to UAS]. None have ever flown above the tree tops or beyond the lateral boundaries of my property.
For me, this is a hobby. And now the FAA wants me to part with $5 and register for the fun I have in my own back yard.
Well FAA Administrator Huerta, I’m already registered. I happen to call it a Commercial Pilot Certificate, with multi-engine and instrument ratings. Perhaps I should add RPA with a Sharpie. Personally, I know where I can — and more importantly can’t — operate my toys. I, like the overwhelmingly vast majority of RPA operators, aren’t the problem.
The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) feels much the same. In a recent communication to its members it is suggesting, “AMA members hold off on registering their model aircraft with the FAA until advised by the AMA or until Feb. 19, the FAA’s legal deadline for registering.”
Further, the “AMA’s safety program instructs all members to place his or her AMA number or name and address on or within their model aircraft, effectively accomplishing the safety and accountability objectives of the interim rule.”
I hate hearing people complain about something without offering a solution, myself included.
Wouldn’t it be easier to connect with the relatively limited numbers of RPA manufacturers to encourage them to program their craft with height limiters and geo-fences? That would go a long way to allaying the concerns of those of us who operate inside our aircraft.
For those concerned about privacy, we already have laws in place. If I had one, I wouldn’t be required to register a super telephoto camera lens that’s capable of bringing far away subjects up close.
Beyond that, I don’t yet have a solution.
I just don’t like — or believe — a UAS registry is what the FAA should be doing. For me, right now, I’ll not be adding my name to another FAA registry.
I’m already registered.
So, in a nutshell (no Mike Myers jokes), you can put registration numbers on your drone/toy/RC plane etc and if something happens the feds know who to get, or, no registration numbers and they have no idea who to get? Hmmmm.
While most of these comments have some merit I myself will comply in registering all five of my drones.
Bill, the registration is for the person not the drone. You only have to pay once. Although you will have to mark all your drones meeting the requirements with the # they gave you.
Normally I am the guy who just shuts up and watches all of the discussion. This discussion has been going on for months now. I am for freedom as much as anyone. I am an advocate for safety more than most. Obviously, it takes rules to keep everyone on the planet alive and safe. I am into common sense rules that allow freedom and protect the public at the same time. The lions share of this entire discussion involves bashing the FAA and anyone who isn’t into letting anyone who owns a drone to do whatever they please, irregardless of what risks that may impose on anyone.
There is one very important point that I have never once seen anyone mention in any of this chatter. It is not the FAA that you should be pointing fingers at. They didn’t make any of this stuff up! Regardless of what opinions we may have, both good and bad, none of this was their idea! All of these rules come out of congressional mandates. It is Congress that mandated the FAA to integrate UAS into the National Airspace System. It was Congress that very specifically directed how that would be done, and what the scope of these rules would look like. None of us voted anyone into the FAA. All of us voted everyone into Congress. So perhaps we should look into the mirror when we think about the people who are making the laws that we seem to be so disgusted with. Hmmmm… there’s a thought. OK… That’s my two cents worth. Now I am going to shut up again.
There is a real problem FAA is trying to deal with. The future where of millions and millions of unregulated objects flit about the skies is indeed a threat to safety and commerce. Congress mandated the FAA to get out in front of that before the problem hits critical mass. In that same piece of legislation they also explicitly denied FAA the ability to regulate ‘model aircraft’ used for recreational purposes.
These model aircraft have been with us for a long time and never posed any sort of problem. By in large these models are built by people who are very conscientious and have invested a lot of time and money in their hobby. Congress explicitly acted to protect these people. Now comes the consumer grade multi-rotor drone which the general public took to be a no skills required flying camera. Predictable problems followed as we all know.
FAA’s response was to make an administrative rule change to the definition of an aircraft effectively annexing drones, model airplanes, helicopters, cats in slingshots and everything else, into the UAV domain. Thereby stripping the recreational modeler from the protection Congress intended.
This is the true rub the modeler community has with the FAA. I thought your comments over simplified the issue. I feel for the FAA but I feel they tried to solve a problem in a way that they are not really authorized to do. Time of course, will tell.
Most folks don’t realize that the $5 is actually a vetting process for the Feds. In order to use a credit card, someone in a bank somewhere had to check you out as “real” and, therefore, traceable. THAT is why the FAA is giving it back for early registrants. They don’t care about the money … they want to know that you are who you said you are and nothing more. Sly dogs, they are.
Anyone with a pilot certificate who breaks the new rule and gets caught will also have a pilot certificate problem on their hands. For the small number of people who are going to have a problem and/or get caught breaking the rules, it surely does seem like an onerous requirement … especially for certificated pilots, I agree. For those, writing your pilot certificate on the UAS woulda worked IF you did it.
There’s another ‘bad’ development coming out of this mess. Earl Lawrence, a former EAA Manager who went on to become manager of the FAA’s Small Aircraft Directorate in Kansas City was tapped to run this project. He was truly one of the very few bright spots inside the FAA helping GA. Now he’s gone to DC.
The FAA acted pretty quickly on this issue. Too bad they don’t act as quickly on the NPRM for the third class medical relief that the Administrator told us was imminent at Airventure 2014. I guess they get to pick and choose the subjects that are important to them and blow off the rest … even if it’s Congressionally mandated … like the FAR 23 issue.
Personally, I think the lawyer suing the FAA over not following — is it Section 336 — of the Law is a meritorious argument. I hope he wins.
I have it … take away the Administrators Gulfstream until he starts following all the mandates given to his FAA. Let him make speeches via Skype until he and his “Administration” start working WITH us and not AGAINST us.
Here’s something else I’ve not see addressed by anyone. The registration fee is only $5 now but will next be $10, then $50, then $100, and………… everyone with half a brain gets the picture. Like the narcotics license required for doctors. When I first received my narcotics license after graduating from dental school and while in the Navy in 1969, it cost $5. Being an orthodontist I didn’t really need to maintain mine so I let it drop a number of years ago when the fee reached something over $250 (I have no idea what it is now but more than $250 I’d wager). A whole new set of bureaucratic leeches were created to “administer” the narcotics licensing process.
I won’t send them any money period! Catch me if you can.
This rule is typical of big government bureaucracy. Give it an inch and it will take a mile every time. The FAA is one of the most lethargic, under achieving, full of deadwood agencies in the federal government which is why I favor privatizing its ATC function.
Gggrrrrrrr, yeah what he said . . . Gettum tiger! ?
This is yet another”rule” that has no basis or fact behind it. Will it improve safety? No. Will it educate anyone? No. Is it enforceable? Not really. Does it protect anyone? No, except the politicians. Is it cost effective? No.
I’m an ATP pilot and yes, a midair is going to happen. Will this silliness do anythng to avert that. Absolutely not.
It’s just more CYA from the government that is costing the citizens. It’s eyewash for the media anduneducated public, just like most other rules being imposed on us by a government that a lot of people want to protect us from ourselves.
You don’t understand the problem. The FAA requires, for congressional funding, there be pilots and airplanes to regulate. The peak was about 1979, numbers dwindling since. This solves their delemma.
The unelected bureaucrats will not be happy until everyone is a “criminal”
It always amazes me that there are people like Bradley, who seem so eager to do exactly whatever the FAA bureaucrats ask. I cant imagine our early aviation ancestors being so willing to give away such control. Maybe this is another reason why GA is on the decline.
Decline of GA? Hell it’s another step in the decline of a nation. We are a country of laws but the wrong folks don’t follow those laws. Common sense dictates the proper use of our “toys” that would not violate the safety of others. The ones who register their UAS vehicle with the FAA are the ones the bureaucrats really don’t need to worry about. The bureaucracy has grown so over the last 75 years and is now spinning out of control in every aspect of our life. The solution is personal responsibility not regulation. Punishment to those who either refuse to accept personal responsibility or are unable to discern it is the answer for this problem as well as most of the others that confront this nation.
We have become a nation of Chicken Littles.
I would have expected someone with a Commercial Pilot cert to have a little more respect and responsibility. I guess not. Good news is that he publicly stated his intentions of violating the law. He would make a good example for the FAA to follow up on.
Is this web site for people to make little rants? This isn’t news…Just a rant.
Is it a LAW or is it a RULE, Bradley? Congress makes laws, The FAA makes rules.
Nicely put
Kevin, that was poorly put… The rules made by the FAA have the full rule of law behind them. The laws passed by congress authorized the rules. (This is how the whole country operates) Take a civics class if you wish to learn more. You’re welcome to break the rules and find out what it’s like. Breaking “rules” is EXACTLY the same as breaking “laws”. This country is built on laws and following them. Don’t follow them and you receive the consequences. Don’t like the laws, there are proper ways to address them.
There is already a LAW barring the FAA from making this regulation. You are a paid shill, I would guess.
Bradley, as a pilot we can see the absurdity of this rule. Respect and respnsibility have nothing to do with his response. It’s an educated response, unlike yours.
Brad, sounds like you might have sided with the loyalists back in 1776 . Just do as you’re told?
Bradley:
Your comment cut to the chase. B.S.’s comment was just another sour grapes rant. It’s nice to know he is so angelic and upstanding that he need not comply with the rules everyone else must follow. Imagine if other rules could be ignored selectively based upon wealth and ownership of a sufficiently large pchunk of real estate? For example, rules against discharging firearms next to a road in some jurisdictions (BS could assert he would NEVER, EVER point his favorite rifle at the road, so he shouldn’t have to worry about shooting at any time of day or night). BS is a smart guy. If he doesn’t like the rule he knows the process to block or change it. Meanwhile, suck it up and comply.
And how will the geo fencing database be updated? Kind of important to keep these toys from killing a bunch of people on an airliner. Your right to play is less important to me than their right to live.
Remember years ago when we all had to paint bigger registration numbers on our airplanes as well as rivet a data plate to the fuselage? As you recall, that would supposedly end drug smuggling by air… But wait, in the end we the good guys spent a bunch of money and the bad guys just kept right on hauling dope. I am still waiting for the FAA to reimburse me for that failed experiment.
The FAA is way over budget and way behind schedule on EVERYTHING it does and so many of the FAA’s “activities” are simply illustrations of rampant incompetence. And yet the FAA will now waste its time on the administration of this stupid rule. And, since the FAA is already (like ALL government agencies) supposedly under-funded and over-worked, we should expect more delays and budget blow-outs from this under-performing bureaucracy.
This new FAA rule is stupid beyond belief.
AMEN, Peter!!!!!