DOT Will Require ALL Hobby Drones to be Registered

gprellwitz said:
For something already on the market, possibly. For something unreleased, just use a software lock that prevents it being used until they enter a registration code. Then provide the code on a website after the user reads a couple of pages about safe use and takes a quick test. Not foolproof, but the idea is to make sure that the responsible owner is aware of the information.
Click to expand...


You do realize you can write your own software and build the thing from parts, right? Where would the magical software lock come from on a homebrew design?
 
denverpilot said:
You do realize you can write your own software and build the thing from parts, right? Where would the magical software lock come from on a homebrew design?
Click to expand...

I do realize that, and I think I actually mentioned it in an earlier post. Presumably if you're enough into the hobby that you're building it yourself, you're learning from the building community and would get the information that way. No, not a perfect or foolproof solution, but I'm looking for a relatively simple and pragmatic solution.
 
docmirror said:
"Records show you registered SuperDuper Xtra drone SN 45-A3383S."
"Yeah, I registered it. I sold it."
"When?"
"What's the problem?"
"An airspace violation was committed on 4 June 2016."
"Yeah, I sold it in May 2016, cya."


pfft
Click to expand...

And if any of that is a lie you just committed a felony Martha Stewart style. CYA in 48 months.
 
gprellwitz said:
I do realize that, and I think I actually mentioned it in an earlier post. Presumably if you're enough into the hobby that you're building it yourself, you're learning from the building community and would get the information that way. No, not a perfect or foolproof solution, but I'm looking for a relatively simple and pragmatic solution.
Click to expand...


As soon as someone builds something and puts the code on GitHub, all bets are off.
 
Geico266 said:
And if any of that is a lie you just committed a felony Martha Stewart style. CYA in 48 months.
Click to expand...

Because a drone is registered to you doesn't mean nobody else can buy it or fly it. In the liability sense the registration scheme is nearly useless. In the criminal sense it's absolutely worthless.
 
How am I going to fit 12 " letters when I register my "drone." Hopefully they allow me 3 " since it's experimental.:D
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    131.1 KB · Views: 36
nddons said:
Wow that's an awesome looking RC!
Click to expand...

Yeah, still waiting to fly it. Too big to fit in my car and take to the field. In the mean time, I've been flying my smaller A-10 to stay proficient. Kinda like "full scale" flying, it's an addicting hobby.
 
I see other news reports claiming independent confirmation of the story.
So I'm baffled as to why the feds think the registration idea can go forward without violating the law in several ways.
 
To stir the pot a bit, news this AM is that the FAA is going to try and put this registration program in-place by Christmas. 2 months when they want to regulate something. How long has third-class medical deregulation been discussed?
 
You will also need to go through a background check, and a ten day waiting period to get your drone. Meanwhile my Estes Rocket based "phalanx" system requires no such registration. He, he, he, he, he.............



:D
 
Anthony said:
You will also need to go through a background check, and a ten day waiting period to get your drone. Meanwhile my Estes Rocket based "phalanx" system requires no such registration. He, he, he, he, he.............:D
Click to expand...

I should have been arrested for the stuff I did with my model rockets back in the day. It would make more sense for registration for people using drones for commercial use than for some 10 year olds christmas present. But this is the government we are talking about. Next step will be mandatory insurance when you buy your drone.
 
Automatic, front-facing drone/bird-seeking missile installation mandated on every plane. Or perhaps a mini-gun. Shoots down all in front of the aircraft.

I think it's the best solution. :) Way more effective and safe than some registration.
 
Anthony said:
You will also need to go through a background check, and a ten day waiting period to get your drone. Meanwhile my Estes Rocket based "phalanx" system requires no such registration. He, he, he, he, he.............



:D
Click to expand...

Don't forget the license, the mandatory classes, inspection by the local gendarme, the need to purchase through a federal licensed dealer, etc. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

I can think of several names that such an office can be named.
 
This thread would be an interesting read if we search/replace "drone" with "gun". I wonder how many arguments would be retracted. Of course that would make it more for the spin zone.
 
I'm still struggling to figure out what problem the pro-registration crowd is trying to solve. And more important, why they think registration makes any sense.

(speaking as someone who doesn't have a drone and probably never will, so I have no skin in the game wrt doing the registration nonsense)
 
ifly4fun said:
This thread would be an interesting read if we search/replace "drone" with "gun". I wonder how many arguments would be retracted. Of course that would make it more for the spin zone.
Click to expand...

Or replace "drone" with "bicycle". Millions of the latter that potentially could be ( and are) ridden on the roads.
 
Anthony said:
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Click to expand...


"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded." But, yes, to blaster. "Yes, Morbius. A simple blaster."
 
denverpilot said:
You do realize you can write your own software and build the thing from parts, right? Where would the magical software lock come from on a homebrew design?
Click to expand...

You can drive an unregistered car, it's just that if you get caught it's gonna cost you. You could fly an unregistered aircraft and same thing but chances of getting caught are pretty slim. Drone registration with DOT is more about someone in the government making it appear as if they are doing something about a perceived problem, the perception of which has been brought on by the large number of yahoos that own drones.

But if there was ever a good example of "the cat's out of the bag" this is certainly one. Wadda ya gonna do now :dunno:
 
Kinda reminds me of back in the day when you were supposed to get a license to operate a cb radio...yea, right.
 
Silvaire said:
You can drive an unregistered car, it's just that if you get caught it's gonna cost you. You could fly an unregistered aircraft and same thing but chances of getting caught are pretty slim. Drone registration with DOT is more about someone in the government making it appear as if they are doing something about a perceived problem, the perception of which has been brought on by the large number of yahoos that own drones.

But if there was ever a good example of "the cat's out of the bag" this is certainly one. Wadda ya gonna do now :dunno:
Click to expand...

One can drive an unregistered car on private land without a problem. I do it regularly. One can fly an unregistered plane(ultralight) within the parameters of the UL class without a problem. One can operate a drone now without registration by following the rules of drone ops(height, distance, etc).

I agree that the registration deal is a sop to the flying public. I think it's misguided and another fed boondoggle. At some point, there will be a guy with one of those ever bigger drones and he'll get hit by a comm operator. I don't know if it'll bounce off, or cause serious damage, or even cause fatalities, but the feds are trying to preempt this scenario. How much preemption are we willing to live with to reduce the potential for a problem? I don't know, but registration sounds like a bad plan. If someone drives an unregistered car on the highway and has an accident, it's unlikely the lack of registration was the proximate cause of the accident. So, even car registration is not a safety issue.
 
Bob Noel said:
I'm still struggling to figure out what problem the pro-registration crowd is trying to solve. And more important, why they think registration makes any sense.

(speaking as someone who doesn't have a drone and probably never will, so I have no skin in the game wrt doing the registration nonsense)
Click to expand...

This:

Washington Post said:
But regulators hope that forcing owners — many of whom are aviation novices — to register their drones with the government will at least make them think twice about their responsibility to fly safely and the possibility that they could be held accountable for an accident.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4961be-7664-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html

In other words, it's all about a bully pulpit and making it easy for police and officials to do their jobs. And to give them the ability to confiscate should they determine that they want to. I expect this will go as well as mandatory registration of guns went in several states.
 
Gah - what a freakin' can of worms. Technology allows the average 12YO Joe to endanger a comm aircraft and there's nothing that can be done about it.

My head hurts thinking of all the mess we're in with this.
 
Silvaire said:
But if there was ever a good example of "the cat's out of the bag" this is certainly one. Wadda ya gonna do now :dunno:
Click to expand...

I disagree that the cat is out of the bag on this problem. We are still early in drown population growth.

Unlike the gun problem. We should have severely limited access to guns about a hundred years ago.

ANOTHER THOUGHT ON THIS SUBJECT: It seems to me that hobby drones are kind of fad right now. And we all know that fads go away after a while. Is it possible that this problem may solve itself when the fad dies out?
 
Got this email today:

2MCkUIN.png
Click to expand...

Links:

https://www.transportation.gov/fastlane/uas-registration-announcement

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/am...ama-joins-dot-task-force-on-uas-registration/
 
docmirror said:
Those guys, not us guys.

Divide and conquer, AMA bought in.

Typical.
Click to expand...

Yep. Amazing how people who normally oppose regulation when it gores their ox or increases their costs don't hesitate to support regulation when it hurts the other guy.
 
wsuffa said:
Yep. Amazing how people who normally oppose regulation when it gores their ox or increases their costs don't hesitate to support regulation when it hurts the other guy.
Click to expand...

I could care less about the small things that stay outside of airspace used by manned aircraft. The problems come where drones are showing up at pattern altitude or higher, especially in or near airports. We are licensed pilots, and part of our responsibility is to see and avoid. That works best when both parties are seeing and avoiding. I think that's not really possible with drones, and it won't be long before an airliner or GA aircraft injests or collides with one, with a possible loss of life.
 
nddons said:
I could care less about the small things that stay outside of airspace used by manned aircraft. The problems come where drones are showing up at pattern altitude or higher, especially in or near airports. We are licensed pilots, and part of our responsibility is to see and avoid. That works best when both parties are seeing and avoiding. I think that's not really possible with drones, and it won't be long before an airliner or GA aircraft injests or collides with one, with a possible loss of life.
Click to expand...

Well said
 
nddons said:
I could care less about the small things that stay outside of airspace used by manned aircraft. The problems come where drones are showing up at pattern altitude or higher, especially in or near airports. We are licensed pilots, and part of our responsibility is to see and avoid. That works best when both parties are seeing and avoiding. I think that's not really possible with drones, and it won't be long before an airliner or GA aircraft injests or collides with one, with a possible loss of life.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. The problem lies with risk. When a little toy hits your plane and you crash and burn in the field there is no equal risk to the UAV operator. They can walk away and say, "That gosh darn airplane broke my $400 toy. Why were they up there at 1000 feet above me?"
 
nddons said:
I could care less about the small things that stay outside of airspace used by manned aircraft. The problems come where drones are showing up at pattern altitude or higher, especially in or near airports. We are licensed pilots, and part of our responsibility is to see and avoid. That works best when both parties are seeing and avoiding. I think that's not really possible with drones, and it won't be long before an airliner or GA aircraft injests or collides with one, with a possible loss of life.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. Whatever.

Regulation cuts a wide swath. It applies everywhere, not just "pattern altitude or higher, especially in or near airports". Same as the certified aircraft regulations. Or medical regulations. Or gun control.

The FAA freely admits that this won't solve the problem - it only makes another possible hurdle to the law-abiding operator & serves to try and reduce the number of drones in circulation. The current proposal MAY create an exemption for very small drones - exactly the kind that may show up on final approach (see Gravely Point at DCA as an example of what I mean). In other words, this is a knee-jerk set of regulations. If anyone thinks it'll stop here, I have more regulations to show you in the future.

If these would be truly effective, I can see it. But they won't be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top