sUAS v Ultralights v Registration v FAA

[Jim Heffelfinger]

The modeling community (AMA) is really pretty upset over the registration process the FAA has suddenly imposed for ANY UAS systems over 250 grams. It includes a $5 fee, re-registration every 3 years and significant penalties for playing with an unregistered toy. The great majority of R/C aircraft exceed this weight and have been operating in the NAS for nearly 80 years under AMA guidance with very few issues regarding law enforcement local, state and federal - including the FAA. They (R/C aircraft) operate commonly in designated areas away from houses, line of sight control and have no autonomous systems. Now things have changed - they are being called aircraft ( sUAS) and swept in with the drones.
I offer the comparison with part 103 aircraft - clearly operating in the NSA and well over 400 feet, with no registration, no required training, well over the 250 grams, and not called aircraft.
Will we be subject to the slippery slope of unintended consequences? For the education of a few bad actors who have voyeuristic tendencies, or desire to be part of activities where security of people , places or things are needed ?

[Dana]

Probably not. There weren't tens of thousands of ultralights given as Christmas presents this year.

[FlyingRon]

The AMA has specific right to be upset. The FAA action is in direct contradiction to an exemption they have in place in FEDERAL LAW. The FAA has clearly overstepped their authority here.
There exists no such statutory protection for ultralights. The loosy goosy treatment of ultralights has always been at the FAA's regulatory discretion.

[1600vw]

I want to see them enforce this. I would bet dollars to donuts in the last seven days people have posted video's to youtube of unregistered quad copters flying all over the United States. This law is about as enforceable as spitting on the sidewalk.

[martymayes]

The modeling community (AMA) is really pretty upset over the registration process the FAA has suddenly imposed for ANY UAS systems over 250 grams. It includes a $5 fee,

My son registered his drone and there was no fee (He explained but I forgot the reason why). I'll follow up in 3 yrs if there is a fee for re-registration.

[rwanttaja]

The main reason is that problems in the ultralight world are self-limiting. Stupid ultralight pilots die. Stupid drone pilots whip out their mastercard and buy a replacement drone.

Ron Wanttaja

[jimklick]

Ron,
unfortunately, if they have knocked my Aeronca out of the sky, I'll (my estate) will get blamed for crashing in the schoolyard.
250 grams will not even be slowed down by my windshield.

[Bill Berson]

AMA members already have a number and $2.5 million of liability insurance. We fly in approved fields under supervision of club safety officers.
The vast majority of fixed wing recreational RC models are not automated drones.

All Model airplane Operations at AMA fields should have been excempted from this hastily drafted drone rule. This was apparently created and imposed without lawful Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking, as far as I can tell.

Further, EAA should oppose this. Almost all future young pilots start with models. This threat of $27,000 fines or 2years jail will dampen or kill model aviation and further kill general aviation.
I almost quit model aviation over this. (Still might) Why risk an obscure fine and revocation of all my FAA certification, from some future unfriendly FAA official?

[VFR-on-top]

Cheap drones flown by reckless operators can bring down certain ultralights and LSAs. I'm for regulating drones.

[FlyingRon]

Cheap drones flown by reckless operators can bring down certain ultralights and LSAs. I'm for regulating drones.

Then get congress to enact a law permitting it. There is enacted law carving out the AMA's exemption. The FAA in their typical "We don't give a damn about the law" fashion enacted a procedure they are specificly enjoined from doing.