US drone registration to return

[UpandOverImaging]

I went to 2 local RC club, first I had to obtain insurance through them, I already have ½ million policy, second they despised drones, and third if a member with his copter or fixed wing came I was then told I would have to get back of the line. Kiss my a_ _ and I left.

WOW that was very ugly way to be treated I fly at a private R/C airport as well and you have to have AMA in order to fly and yes there are tons of heli and fixed wings with all of there tricks and stunts but they also let me fly my UAV for fun and always look to me for all of the cool pictures and videos.

 

[rdonson]

WOW that was very ugly way to be treated I fly at a private R/C airport as well and you have to have AMA in order to fly and yes there are tons of heli and fixed wings with all of there tricks and stunts but they also let me fly my UAV for fun and always look to me for all of the cool pictures and videos.

That's GREAT!!!

 

[rdonson]

I don't know about other areas of the country, but my local racing drone club seems to be quite popular. I'm not a member, because I'm not good enough to race but I pay attention online. In addition to requiring AMA registration from all its members who race (for insurance purposes), my local drone club is a member of Drone Racing League | Competitive FPV Sport Circuit. MultiGP boasts that they have 1100 chapters around the world so maybe that provides the face to face type of thing for at least racing drones. Not sure about AP or just general drones. I think their acceptance at AMA clubs/airfields vary with some being more tolerant or interested than others.

I watch the drone racing series on TV and it looks insane! Lots of fun but skills required that I know I’ll never possess.

I’m delighted to find out there are drone racing clubs.

 

[Warlocc]

**** with 'em. Court said they can't pass that law. That hasn't changed.

Some laws just plain require noncompliance.

 

[glider]

**** with 'em. Court said they can't pass that law. That hasn't changed.

Some laws just plain require noncompliance.

I know a number of people that won't comply.

If an incident occurs they'll have a list of names in the area; guess whose house the Feds will be going to. "Papers please".

 

[dylanfm]

**** with 'em. Court said they can't pass that law. That hasn't changed.

Some laws just plain require noncompliance.

I'm leaning that way myself, although I had already registered the first time and never requested a refund so my hobby registration number is probably still good for awhile (another year?).

This isn't about not complying with a law, it is about not complying with a rule. That rule was ruled by a judge to be illegal. The latest law seems to have thrown out the ruling that it was illegal but I think that is different that ruling that the rule wasn't illegal (congress can't make rulings anyway) or changing the law to make the rule legal.

Initially I was thinking that the FAA put that line (or requested that line) throwing out the court ruling into the latest law just to force another lawsuit regarding the rule which may be true. But I haven't seen anything from the FAA yet saying that they are re-implementing the registration rule. There has been a little bit of press saying the rule is coming back, but has it really? I'm wondering if there is some other legal wrangling or political reason that the FAA would want the Taylor ruling thrown out even if they weren't going to re-implement the rule again right away.

 

[PatR]

**** with 'em. Court said they can't pass that law. That hasn't changed.

Some laws just plain require noncompliance.

I'm not going to be one to tell you what to do but I will say the federal court appellate case that overturned the original drone registration law has been superseded by a Congressional bill that was signed into national law by the President. The applicable registration requirement is part of the new National Defense Authorization Act for 2018. H.R.2810 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018

Understand the justification for the appellate court win was a clause in Part 336 that stated the FAA shall make no law that would directly impact model aircraft. Part 336 did not say that Congress shall make no law. The purpose of Congress is to make law, which they most certainly did with the new bill, which became part of our code of federal regulations when the President signed it.

The AMA was very supportive of re-instating drone registration and provides a few answers to FAQ's on their website Academy of Model Aeronautics - FAA UAS Frequently Asked Questions
The AMA seems to suggest people use their AMA numbers to supplant FAA registration numbers on their aircraft. Bear in mind there is nothing in the law that provides for replacing the FAA number with an AMA number. if you were cited for anything through the use of sUAS and were using only your AMA number for air vehicle identification you would likely be found in violation by the FAA and/or NTSB and subject to a civil penalty. We should also understand that the AMA is not named as THE nationally recognized community based organization, and that the AMA has absolutely zero regulatory or enforcement authority over anything.

The AOPA has also been supportive of drone registration but if enough multirotor operators were to join the AOPA there could be far more people that fly sUAS than people flying full scale in the organization which would help leverage political lobbying more in our favor. Go here for the AOPA view of the new law. Drone registration requirement returns - AOPA

There's another law being considered that every one of us should be very concerned with related to UAS drone tracking: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=06879114-edef-463b-b9bb-b7ca26ca75e2

It's essential that we come together to let our government know drone tracking is something hobbyists neither need or want. Big aerospace does because it will help clear the skies of our stuff and make it easier to incorporate their equipment, equipment that will put small commercial drone operators out of business through excessive, burdensome training and equipment requirements and certification processes. The cost of tracking technology will in one way or another impact us all, and likely reduce or already limited flight time through increased loads on our batteries by adding weight and signal transmissions. If the government was to adopt any given manufacturer's hardware or software for identification transmission every other manufacturer would have to pay a licensing fee to the developer of the hardware/software which would in essence give the developer a monopoly on multirotor development and distribution. It would also give the developer authority to collect and maintain your personal and operational data, something DJI already does.

As things currently stand, if you register your aircraft for warranty purposes with a manufacturer the government already has a starting point to look for people. If you have a DJI system that becomes even easier for the government as DJI (although they deny it) receives your flight data via automatic reports from their GO App and during firmware updates, and will instantly provide it to a government agency. This has already happened with the incident between the Phantom and Blackhawk. The owner of the Phantom was found because of flight data collected and provided by DJI.

Again, I'm not going to suggest anyone register with the FAA. The maximum fine is only $200k. I don't have anything like that to spare, but some of you are likely much better off financially than I am.

 

[glider]

If you DIY how many millions will the Fed spend to find the owner? They have unlimited resources.

If there's any hint that Yuneec would turn over their constitutionally protected privacy (serial numbers) to the FAA on a whim or a threat (like the gubmint tried to do with Apple), they will never see another dime of my money. Oops, I just spilled the beans for why I won't buy DJI.

I don't know the details of the new "law", and haven't asked John Taylor about it, but regardless, Congress must follow the law too; it doens't matter if they make a "new" law to make up for the old illegal rules.

 

[PatR]

Constitutionally, Congress is responsible for making law. As the rule was incorporated into a bill, approved by both Houses, and signed into law by the President, it meets Constitutional requirements. The kicker is the registration rule was incorporated as critical to national security. A snowball has a better chance of surviving in **** than any chance of over turning the registration law does.

We should also remember the FAA is a department created under Congress and as such must comply with Congressional legislative law. Congress is not subject to NPRM requirements. The FAA is when they write law, but not Congress. The Legislative branch holds the high ground unless and until the Supreme Court finds a legislative law unconstitutional.

 

[rdonson]

One thing Pat didn't mention is that Congress is **** bent to continue the surveillance policies and perhaps even expand them. The NSA and other intelligence agencies have strongly spoken out for it. It hasn't been put to a vote yet but it will likely happen in the next month.

On a side note there is a bill that was introduced but seems to not be going anywhere fast that protects GPS tracking of people without warrant. H.R.1062 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): GPS Act

It's a complicated world when our US government gets involved.

 

[PatR]

Indeed. There is little our governments won’t do to take control over every part of our lives. The only people that can stop that; is us.

 

[dylanfm]

I'm not going to be one to tell you what to do but I will say the federal court appellate case that overturned the original drone registration law has been superseded by a Congressional bill that was signed into national law by the President. The applicable registration requirement is part of the new National Defense Authorization Act for 2018. H.R.2810 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018

Understand the justification for the appellate court win was a clause in Part 336 that stated the FAA shall make no law that would directly impact model aircraft. Part 336 did not say that Congress shall make no law. The purpose of Congress is to make law, which they most certainly did with the new bill, which became part of our code of federal regulations when the President signed it.
.

Part 336 said the FAA shall make no Rule regarding model aircraft. They did it anyway then a judge said they couldn't.

While congress can make whatever laws they want, I would argue they didn't make a law that required model aircraft registration, they made a law that a judges ruling was invalid. I'm not sure that is legal or binding. If they had put in something that said "the FAA can make rules on model aircraft regarding registration and marking" then that would be different in my opinion, but they didn't.

IANAL, but it looks like they just made a law that said an illegal rule was re-instated, which doesn't change the legality of the rule or prevent it from being litigated again. I'm guessing if there is another lawsuit the FAA lawyers will point to this new law and say it indicates that congress meant to allow the FAA to make these kind of rules and that might work. But I think it we are a long ways from being able to say that there is a law that requires model aircraft from registering or even a law that clearly says that the FAA can make rules regarding model aircraft.

Unless I'm missing something in the bill. I admit I haven't read it, just searched for the info that seemed applicable to me. I could have miss stuff.

 

[glider]

Constitutionally, Congress is responsible for making law. As the rule was incorporated into a bill, approved by both Houses, and signed into law by the President, it meets Constitutional requirements. The kicker is the registration rule was incorporated as critical to national security. A snowball has a better chance of surviving in **** than any chance of over turning the registration law does.

We should also remember the FAA is a department created under Congress and as such must comply with Congressional legislative law. Congress is not subject to NPRM requirements. The FAA is when they write law, but not Congress. The Legislative branch holds the high ground unless and until the Supreme Court finds a legislative law unconstitutional.

I'm not saying the Congress can't make law. I'm saying if the latest law is in conflict with a previous law THEY passed, it still can be challenged in court. It doesn't have to be the SCOTUS to do it either.

 

[RaeThrills]

WOW that was very ugly way to be treated I fly at a private R/C airport as well and you have to have AMA in order to fly and yes there are tons of heli and fixed wings with all of there tricks and stunts but they also let me fly my UAV for fun and always look to me for all of the cool pictures and videos.

When drones first started getting popular I remember certain clubs in minnesota didn't want the fpv cameras on drones. Unfortunately the speed racers are gonna get most the flack because of the damage that they can cause at those speeds. I stopped going to clubs because I had 2 planes and a ton of drones. I didn't want to be asked to stop.

 

[glider]

When drones first started getting popular I remember certain clubs in minnesota didn't want the fpv cameras on drones. Unfortunately the speed racers are gonna get most the flack because of the damage that they can cause at those speeds. I stopped going to clubs because I had 2 planes and a ton of drones. I didn't want to be asked to stop.

That's funny to me because the racers are small and in a controlled environment more so than any RC plane.

Don't feel bad. I stopped going to clubs 25 years ago because frankly the members were a bunch of stuck up fossils that didn't like anything that resembled higher technology or didn't fit their definition of a "model airplane". Heli's were going to ruin the sport they said...stuff like that. Plus I didn't like the regimented procedures required to operate at the field. Several of us did our own thing over the corn fields with a makeshift runway and had much more fun.

Maybe it was just me, but did you ever notice how the members acted like they weren't having any fun and really didn't want to be there? People hardly spoke to each other, and when they did it was so serious, like they were doing military exercises.

 

[AH-1G]

There is a certain group that like the "Need For Speed" but at my age I like to slow down a bit, So here's my thought of a challenge.
Create an obstacle course, using the H. For instance you can use a wire close hanger (cut) put it between the landing gear, then at a certain altitude at a nominal forward speed raise landing gear a bag of flour drops a on a specific target, just one of several obstacles on the course.
Receive points for accuracy and time. Yea I have to much time in the evening thinking about these elder games.

 

[RaeThrills]

That's funny to me because the racers are small and in a controlled environment more so than any RC plane.

Don't feel bad. I stopped going to clubs 25 years ago because frankly the members were a bunch of stuck up fossils that didn't like anything that resembled higher technology or didn't fit their definition of a "model airplane". Heli's were going to ruin the sport they said...stuff like that. Plus I didn't like the regimented procedures required to operate at the field. Several of us did our own thing over the corn fields with a makeshift runway and had much more fun.

Maybe it was just me, but did you ever notice how the members acted like they weren't having any fun and really didn't want to be there? People hardly spoke to each other, and when they did it was so serious, like they were doing military exercises.

I appreciate the honesty man. I wanted to say more but you nailed it. It was die hard model builders from 30 years back. Slow to new technology to say the least. I almost crapped myself when I seen one guy still using one of the Tx from the 90’s. That antenna was long extremely long. Lol

 

[glider]

There is a certain group that like the "Need For Speed" but at my age I like to slow down a bit, So here's my thought of a challenge.
Create an obstacle course, using the H. For instance you can use a wire close hanger (cut) put it between the landing gear, then at a certain altitude at a nominal forward speed raise landing gear a bag of flour drops a on a specific target, just one of several obstacles on the course.
Receive points for accuracy and time. Yea I have to much time in the evening thinking about these elder games.

A kind of 'shuffle board' for drones. I'm not quite ready to check myself in to the nursing home yet

 

[PatR]

Be nice, I still have three or four of them. One from the late 70’s. They all still work[emoji6]

For you young whipper snappers, they are 72MHz with ranges of several miles[emoji848]

 

[glider]

I appreciate the honesty man. I wanted to say more but you nailed it. It was die hard model builders from 30 years back. Slow to new technology to say the least. I almost crapped myself when I seen one guy still using one of the Tx from the 90’s. That antenna was long extremely long. Lol

I still have a 7 ch Futaba radio, paid like $300 back in 1988. Except for the frequency, it's ready to go. Actually those 72 hz (?) radios will go out a LONG way if I recall. We just didn't have the technology to bring them back. One big problem was losing connections or someone hopping on your frequency; then it's all over baby. I remember being at a show with my dad and watched a huge B-17 crash on the field. Right away the announce was trying to found out who else was transmitting. These days you can have dozens flying at the same time without worry. I always hated the flag on the board thing......yes it was necessary for the time, I just didn't like it.

I digress.

Well, the problem is the AMA is still populated heavily by the "old Guard". They hate mulitrotors. Many places forbid them at their field. If you go their forums, you can feel the animosity. They hate the very word "flight controller", "gps", "compass" LOL.....oh, and hide the monitors and cameras. Electric? You've got an ELECTRIC plane? I've gone a bit overboard, but it's not far from the truth.