sUAS v Ultralights v Registration v FAA

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 ?

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

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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,

---

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.

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

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.

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?

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VFR-on-top

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martymayes

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.

---

Early registrations are 'free' for the first 3 years. After that it will be 5 dollars every three years.

This is nothing but govt over reach like they always do. They perceive a problem so the 'solution' is to regulate everyone including 10 year old kids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

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.

---

But, it's the Obama Administration's way. If Congress doesn't do what we want, then the King issues a decree, and "It is SO!".

Only if we stand for it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flyboyron

But, it's the Obama Administration's way. If Congress doesn't do what we want, then the King issues a decree, and "It is SO!".

Only if we stand for it...

---

Predates Obama. Pervasive and long standing attitude by the FAA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flyboyron

But, it's the Obama Administration's way. If Congress doesn't do what we want, then the King issues a decree, and "It is SO!".

Only if we stand for it...

---

Who is this "we" you refer to? Was he not elected by the people, twice? You ought to keep politics out of this.

Quote:

---

They perceive a problem so the 'solution' is to regulate everyone including 10 year old kids.

---

Especially kids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VFR-on-top

Who is this "we" you refer to? Was he not elected by the people, twice? You ought to keep politics out of this.



Especially kids.

---

Yes we all know the kids make all the money. They have it flowing out of their pockets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1600vw

Yes, we all know the kids make all the money. They have it flowing out of their pockets.

---

Kids are the group most likely to fly a drone into my powered parachute causing my death and not face consequences. Adults, on the other hand, can be held liable for their recklessness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VFR-on-top

Kids are the group most likely to fly a drone into my powered parachute causing my death and not face consequences. Adults, on the other hand, can be held liable for their recklessness.

---

I will believe that when I see it. Lets say a drone hits an airplane. The people flying the drone just pack up and leave. I know you are suppose to have your info somewhere on the drone. But who is to say they did not put their enemies info on that drone? This law is not enforceable. Not unless someone is going to check all paper work and ID's before they take flight. This law is a joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1600vw

[/B][/I]


I will believe that when I see it. Lets say a drone hits an airplane. The people flying the drone just pack up and leave. I know you are suppose to have your info somewhere on the drone. But who is to say they did not put their enemies info on that drone? This law is not enforceable. Not unless someone is going to check all paper work and ID's before they take flight. This law is a joke.

---

Civil lawsuit. It worked for OJ's victims families.

You can bet if I see a drone flying anywhere near me, I'm going to grab my phone and start taking pictures of the ground. Savvy investigators and/or police will be able to find clues, especially if a death is involved. The first drone that brings down an aircraft will pretty much curtail use of drones by kids outside of "restricted areas."

So what I'm supposed to believe is parents have bought thousands of "drones" for their kids? Really? How did an RC plane become a drone? Just because some moron on a news show says "drone" because its dramatic doesn't make an RC plane a drone. They are not. There are some true drones available however, they're expensive and NOT the toys everybody is playing with. The media just played all of you again and allowed big brother to shaft everybody. Damn, think people, it isn't that hard!