U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

[GJH105775]

I have seen a video with a gun attached to a quad, on You tube. I found a link to it on a gun forum.

Yeah, the guy was recently arrested for it, as the projectile is counted as an object being dropped, and he certainly did not take reasonable precautions as he was flying it outside and in the open. That was the video they were referencing in the press release.

 

[HDtallrider]

Man I wish these morons would stop doing stupid poop in public. C'mon Darwin!! We need you!!

 

[HDtallrider]

HaHa!! You edited me!

 

[Bug Eyes]

Yeah, the guy was recently arrested for it, as the projectile is counted as an object being dropped, and he certainly did not take reasonable precautions as he was flying it outside and in the open. That was the video they were referencing in the press release.

He definitely was not using his brain!

 

[Mike]

HaHa!! You edited me!

Ha - it's automated. It actually gets me sometimes too and I'm the one who enabled the feature =)

 

[Twainhearts]

http://hackaday.com/2015/07/22/no-mounting-a-gun-to-a-quadcopter-probably-isnt-illegal/ Is that the flying gun incident that you mentioned?

I also tried to look up if he actually got arrested (he did but not for the drone) and did not find anything about him actually being charged for the quadcopter incident. Could you provide a link or article stating he has even been charged for the quadcopter?

 

[GJH105775]

http://hackaday.com/2015/07/22/no-mounting-a-gun-to-a-quadcopter-probably-isnt-illegal/ Is that the flying gun incident that you mentioned?

I also tried to look up if he actually got arrested (he did but not for the drone) and did not find anything about him actually being charged for the quadcopter incident. Could you provide a link or article stating he has even been charged for the quadcopter?

Not sure about what I had read somewhere now that you mentioned that, but the FAA certainly think it is illegal, though he misinterpreted/misquoted their own laws in stating their belief.

https://youtu.be/ohkIMnImhE8?t=30m

 

[Twainhearts]

Thank you, I'll watch that later GJH (when I am not at work), as for being more related to topic, here is a link that allows the public to comment on the registration until this Friday, November 6th.


http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-4378-0022

 

[ringolong]

Academy of Model Aeronautics
Member Communication

Friday, November 13, 2015

Dear members,

I'm writing to provide you with an update on the U.S. Department of Transportation's UAS registration task force. As you may be aware, the task force met for several days last week and AMA's Rich Hanson represented our members' interests in all of the discussions.

We're limited in how much we can divulge about these meetings because all task force members agreed to a set of ground rules. These rules prohibit us from publicly discussing any details of the task force's internal deliberations. With that said, there has been some misinformation, as well as some inaccuracies surrounding this issue, so we want to provide you, our members, with as much information as we can while still respecting the integrity of the process.

During the task force meetings, AMA strongly argued for our members to be exempt from federal registration, as Congress intended with the Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. This special rule states that the FAA does not have the authority to promulgate any new rules on recreational users operating under the safety guidelines of a community-based organization such as AMA.

AMA members have been flying safely for decades, and we made it clear that our members are not the problem. With our stellar safety record, AMA can be part of the solution, but our members shouldn't have to bear the burden of new regulations. Meanwhile, as our members know, AMA already has in place its own voluntary registration system.

For the new legions of consumer drone users who are not AMA members, we do think that registration makes sense at some level when UAS technology meets an appropriate threshold of weight, capability and other safety-related characteristics.

The task force's detailed recommendations to the FAA are scheduled to become public on Friday, November 20. AMA intends to make our views explicitly clear in these final recommendations and we will continue to advocate for our members to be exempt from registration if the final recommendations state otherwise. And once this information is made public, we will also be able to more openly and publicly address the registration proposal.

In the meantime, we encourage our members to submit comments on the FAA's registration proposal through the regulations.gov portal. Although comments were due by November 6, the docket remains open and the U.S. Department of Transportation has indicated that it will consider all comments received. To submit a comment, click here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-4378-0022.

We thank you for your continued support of AMA and look forward to working alongside you on these important issues.

Kind regards,

Dave Mathewson
Executive Director

 

[GJH105775]

Academy of Model Aeronautics
Member Communication

Friday, November 13, 2015

Dear members,

I'm writing to provide you with an update on the U.S. Department of Transportation's UAS registration task force. As you may be aware, the task force met for several days last week and AMA's Rich Hanson represented our members' interests in all of the discussions.

We're limited in how much we can divulge about these meetings because all task force members agreed to a set of ground rules. These rules prohibit us from publicly discussing any details of the task force's internal deliberations. With that said, there has been some misinformation, as well as some inaccuracies surrounding this issue, so we want to provide you, our members, with as much information as we can while still respecting the integrity of the process.

During the task force meetings, AMA strongly argued for our members to be exempt from federal registration, as Congress intended with the Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. This special rule states that the FAA does not have the authority to promulgate any new rules on recreational users operating under the safety guidelines of a community-based organization such as AMA.

AMA members have been flying safely for decades, and we made it clear that our members are not the problem. With our stellar safety record, AMA can be part of the solution, but our members shouldn't have to bear the burden of new regulations. Meanwhile, as our members know, AMA already has in place its own voluntary registration system.

For the new legions of consumer drone users who are not AMA members, we do think that registration makes sense at some level when UAS technology meets an appropriate threshold of weight, capability and other safety-related characteristics.

The task force's detailed recommendations to the FAA are scheduled to become public on Friday, November 20. AMA intends to make our views explicitly clear in these final recommendations and we will continue to advocate for our members to be exempt from registration if the final recommendations state otherwise. And once this information is made public, we will also be able to more openly and publicly address the registration proposal.

In the meantime, we encourage our members to submit comments on the FAA's registration proposal through the regulations.gov portal. Although comments were due by November 6, the docket remains open and the U.S. Department of Transportation has indicated that it will consider all comments received. To submit a comment, click here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-4378-0022.

We thank you for your continued support of AMA and look forward to working alongside you on these important issues.

Kind regards,

Dave Mathewson
Executive Director

Now that is an idea hahaha.

 

[ringolong]

Based primarily upon an assessment of available safety studies and risk probability calculations, and notwithstanding determinations in other countries with differing weight thresholds, the Task Force recommended an exclusion from the registration requirement for any small unmanned aircraft weighing a total of 250 grams (g) or less. The 250 grams or less exclusion was based on a maximum weight that was defined as the maximum weight possible including the aircraft, payload, and any other associated weight. In manned aircraft terms, it is the "maximum takeoff weight."

http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/RTFARCFinalReport_11-21-15.pdf

 

[GJH105775]

Based primarily upon an assessment of available safety studies and risk probability calculations, and notwithstanding determinations in other countries with differing weight thresholds, the Task Force recommended an exclusion from the registration requirement for any small unmanned aircraft weighing a total of 250 grams (g) or less. The 250 grams or less exclusion was based on a maximum weight that was defined as the maximum weight possible including the aircraft, payload, and any other associated weight. In manned aircraft terms, it is the "maximum takeoff weight."

http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/RTFARCFinalReport_11-21-15.pdf

Well that is nice, but I'd hope to see the bar set higher hahaha. Many SYMA sized and FPV racers are still regulated under that.

 

[HDtallrider]

Well that is nice, but I'd hope to see the bar set higher hahaha. Many SYMA sized and FPV racers are still regulated under that.

I agree. 250g total includes way too many quads to be practical. Just about anything that can be flown outdoors is in that category. Trying to register all those would be a nightmare. Especially the ones owned by kids.
At least they are thinking of how to pair down the numbers. I don't believe they have a clue yet about what size the "problem drones" are. They probably look at a Phantom and think it's a few hundred grams.

 

[GJH105775]

I agree. 250g total includes way too many quads to be practical. Just about anything that can be flown outdoors is in that category. Trying to register all those would be a nightmare. Especially the ones owned by kids.
At least they are thinking of how to pair down the numbers. I don't believe they have a clue yet about what size the "problem drones" are. They probably look at a Phantom and think it's a few hundred grams.

Haha, yeah, unless it comes to talking about them then the media makes sure you know that these things could be 40 pounds!

 

[HDtallrider]

Exactly! Shhhh...Don't tell them they're wrong. Once they form an opinion you don't want to confuse them with facts....... Hahahaha!!!!

 

[ringolong]

Did you guys notice that you have to be 13 to register? I have not made all the way through the doc, but I noticed that in there.

 

[HDtallrider]

Ya know.... I just skimmed thru it. Does that mean preteens can't own a quad?

 

[ringolong]

UAV is what it states, so I think this would include any model aircraft not just multi-rotors.

 

[HDtallrider]

That's not good. Not good at all. I am going to go read it thru this time. From what you say we may have to ground our Frisbees. This is sounding more and more out of control. I'm going to contact my congressman again.

 

[Mike]

Looks like it's coming next week.

AMA and the FAA Registration Process


Today the FAA announced plans for a model aircraft registration process to begin next week. AMA was a member of the task force that helped develop recommendations for this registration rule and argued throughout the process that registration makes sense at some level but only for those operating outside the guidance of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes.
Unfortunately, the new FAA registration rule does not include our advice. The rule is counter to Congress's intent in the Special Rule for Model Aircraft and makes the registration process an unnecessary burden for all of our members who have been operating safely for decades.
While we are disappointed with the new registration rule and still maintain that AMA members should be exempt from registration, the rule is being implemented over AMA objections. Therefore, we want to provide you with important information about the registration rule and how AMA members can comply with the new federal requirements:

• All aircraft that are flown using a ground control system, such as a transmitter, are required to participate. This includes fixed-wing aircraft, not just multirotors or drones.
• Any pilot flying models weighing between .55 pounds (or 250 grams) and 55 lbs is required to register.
• You will not be required to register every aircraft individually. You only need to register yourself and can affix one registration number to all your aircraft.
• You must mark all aircraft with your registration number. The number can be inside the aircraft, such as a battery hatch - but should not require tools to access.
• The FAA plans to launch the online registration website on Monday, December 21.
• There is a $5 fee to register, which is waived if you register within the first 30 days.
• You only need to register once every 3 years.

We are still working out the logistics for this process. Some details are still being discussed, including:

• We are seriously discussing with the FAA a system where your AMA number could be used as your federal registration number as well. At this point, this is only a proposal and details are not yet finalized.
• At this time, AMA members will not automatically be registered when the registration website launches next week. However, we are in conversations with the FAA about the best way to streamline the registration process for AMA members going forward.

This is an ongoing process and we will continue to provide updates on the registration rule. Stay tuned tomodelaircraft.org/gov, social media and your email for the latest news on the registration process.
Thank you,
AMA Government Relations and Advocacy Team