Government Regulation of RC Airplanes, Drones .... and US????

[Kirk G]

Yesterday, The FAA announced a new registration plan for all unmanned flight devices...meaning drones, but also impacting the RC airplane (and potentially, RC cars, etc).

The bare bones require an owner/operator to register the device and add a registration number in an accessible place. Registration will initially cost $5 but during the first month, it is "free".

The RC community is upset with their national AMA organization. They had hoped to get some concessions through negotiation. Or a 400 foot buffer zone before having to register. But it was not to pass.

Now, some are saying this is not only aimed at drones, but also at all RC devices.

Others fear that this is the first step in a move to eventually control, if not regulated High Power rocketry out of existence.

What do you think? Will they require registration for higher power rockets? Or will they ban everything but BP motors? Or is even that at risk?

 

[TALON]

As a great leader once said: If someone comes up to you and says "I am from the government, I'm here to help"....RUN!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rharshberger]

I doubt rocketry will get lumped into this anytime soon, mainly due to the fact that we are a fairly small hobby group that is already fairly well self regulated. With the introduction of moderately priced RC drones/quads suddenly there were a huge number of individuals acquiring aircraft with capabilities such as FPV that made them too tempting for the immature and irresponsible people to use safely and as the number grew so did the incidents involving them. Its not the fault of the AMA members what has happened its the fault of irresponsible individuals who did not bother to follow the rules as they were for RC aircraft or did not bother to learn what they were.

 

[KennB]

I attended an FAA seminar at a local airport recently. Model and High-power rockets were definitely a different beast than the UAVs.
To the most part, we have a good relationship with the FAA. The sales of the new "toys" have taken off so quickly (sorry about that) and have so many unknowns that the FAA felt they needed to address the usage. For better or worse, rocketry hasn't grown as fast or as large. If we stay inside the lines, we shouldn't have any problems. If they ever do come after us, we have a long history to show extra regulation would only serve to diminish the hobby not make it any safer; we should be able to convince them to keep the status quo.

 

[rharshberger]

Its people that pulled stunts that led to this that give RC folks a black eye https://www.wdrb.com/story/30354128/judge-dismisses-charges-for-man-who-shot-down-drone

 

[rstaff3]

Drones dropping on and around the White House grounds gave the regs a push too.

 

[The_Lone_Beagle]

It was also drones that caused the stoppage of fire-fighting aircraft from dropping their flame retardant, during several California wildfires this most recent year.

After many years of people predicting a flood of problems with drones, this year everything seemed to come up and go wrong. My take is, with drones being as powerful as they are, and flying right out of the box (no assembly or knowledge required to operate), there really isn't any barriers to anybody going out there and doing something stupid. With R/C aircraft and model rockets, the 15 min or so it takes to assemble one serves as some sort of barrier against most idiocy, and proves you aren't in it for the "instant" gratification.

 

[rharshberger]

It was also drones that caused the stoppage of fire-fighting aircraft from dropping their flame retardant, during several California wildfires this most recent year.

After many years of people predicting a flood of problems with drones, this year everything seemed to come up and go wrong. My take is, with drones being as powerful as they are, and flying right out of the box (no assembly or knowledge required to operate), there really isn't any barriers to anybody going out there and doing something stupid. With R/C aircraft and model rockets, the 15 min or so it takes to assemble one serves as some sort of barrier against most idiocy, and proves you aren't in it for the "instant" gratification.

Add to the RTF straight from the box part the fact that some are so simple to control they can be flown via a cell phone, literally very little skill required.

 

[Onebadhawk]

I doubt rocketry will get lumped into this anytime soon, mainly due to the fact that we are a fairly small hobby group that is already fairly well self regulated. With the introduction of moderately priced RC drones/quads suddenly there were a huge number of individuals acquiring aircraft with capabilities such as FPV that made them too tempting for the immature and irresponsible people to use safely and as the number grew so did the incidents involving them. Its not the fault of the AMA members what has happened its the fault of irresponsible individuals who did not bother to follow the rules as they were for RC aircraft or did not bother to learn what they were.

+1.....

Teddy

 

[Buckeye]

Others fear that this is the first step in a move to eventually control, if not regulated High Power rocketry out of existence.

Who are these "others?"

 

[samb]

...
Others fear that this is the first step in a move to eventually control, if not regulated High Power rocketry out of existence.
...

Who are these "others?"

I would like to know as well. Who,other than you Kirk G, is spreading this Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt ? And tell them to stop it. Please.

 

[rharshberger]

Same thread has been posted over on Rocketry Center as well.

 

[jrkennedy2]

Ever had a rocket land where you wish it hadn't? The FAA's new reg mostly addresses a craft after it has landed. You place your "ID" on or inside the craft. These markings will be too small to be seen while flying so I'm assuming it would be after landing the identification would be possible. Right now I see no reference to HPR in the regs but I have seldom seen the govt reduce the scope of regulations once started. This one will be worth watching as I don't think it will greatly reduce knuckleheads flying in stupid ways. Sorta like trying to legislate morality, you can't legislate intelligence. Since we already have a good relationship with FAA it may not make a lot of difference if you have to stow your ID in the rocket. I reckon my participation in the HPR hobby already me on a list or 2 so FAA registration may be of little consequence...

I have quite a few R/C planes and helis so I guess I'll have to "take the mark" :wink: or run afoul of the whole shee-bang.

 

[tmacklin]

Drones dropping on and around the White House grounds gave the regs a push too.

BINGO! We have a winner.

 

[shreadvector]

The rules are for any thing flown using a ground control system, such as R/C.

https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/20151213_IFR.pdf

See "B. Definitions" then scroll way down to par 1.1 General Definitions

§ 1.1 General definitions.
* * * * *
Model aircraft means an unmanned aircraft that is:
(1) Capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) Flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and
(3) Flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
Small unmanned aircraft means an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft.
Small unmanned aircraft system (small UAS) means a small unmanned aircraft and its associated elements (including communication links and the components that control the small unmanned aircraft) that are required for the safe and efficient operation of the small unmanned aircraft in the national airspace system.
* * *
Unmanned aircraft means an aircraft operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.
* * * * *

 

[Samuron]

Right now I see no reference to HPR in the regs but I have seldom seen the govt reduce the scope of regulations once started.

To be fair, it wasn't long ago that they did precisely that when they removed the ATC notification requirement for mid-power.

 

[10fttall]

The rules don't apply to rockets. However, because of the spike in drone sales, MILLIONS of people will now hear about the requirement to register practically anything else that flies. Keep this in the back of your mind as another one of those bad things that could happen if we aren't good neighbors. Somebody that doesn't like rockets could easily misunderstand (or intentionally ignore) the new rule's applicability and literally make a Federal case out of it.

Did they even think this through? Is it just me, or would it not seem likely that some no-good would register his home address and info on a drone he is going to be flying around the local airport, stadium, or government building?

 

[astrowolf67]

Quoted from the FAQ at the registration site at https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/

"Q. Do I have to register a paper airplane, or a toy balloon or Frisbee?
A. No. Even if these things could be considered "drones" or "unmanned aircraft" and met the minimum weight threshold of 250 gm/0.55 lb., the registration rules also require that they be a part of an "unmanned aircraft system." An "unmanned aircraft system" includes the communication links and components that control the small unmanned aircraft along with all of the other elements needed to safely operate the drone. Paper airplanes, toy balloons, Frisbees, and similar items are not connected to such control system."

Typical hobby rockets do not contain communication links or components that allow control of the rocket once it leaves the launch pad.

 

[Mushtang]

I wonder just how big the risk is for not registering? I don't mean what the punishment is. If I get a Syma X5C for Xmas and just fly around my yard and maybe in the park or a few other public places when nobpdy is around, just how likely will it be that I'm required to prove it's registered?

I do hope I get one. And if I do I'll probably fly it a lot in my neighborhood, and I can see that I'd want to fly it around my son's school playground (on a Saturday), and in parks, recording a lot of footage for different reasons.

Does anyone think there will be a lot of phone calls from concerned citizens reporting RC activities so the authorities will come verify that they're registered? I would think it's more likely just a measure to make the public think there's some level of safety, much like the TSA, when in reality nothing will change. That, and some fund raising for some government division.

 

[Samuron]

I think that the FAA saw what happened with cell phones, and doesn't want to drop the ball.

Personal technology is advancing so rapidly that, in a very short space of time, devices that were once limited to a specialty market became ubiquitous. Texting while driving went from science fiction to social ill almost overnight, and the lack of any regulation early on led people to see it as a right. I can certainly see a similar thing happening with out-of-the-box R/C craft.

The new regulation provides a method by which the FAA can contact flyers with temporary flight restrictions and NOTAMs, does so with minimal requirements and at a negligible cost, and clarifies that the FAA has a jursidiction over airspace.

 

[cerving]

So much paranoia...

All they want to be able to do is to figure out who's responsible for doing something stupid with their drone. As it is now, the idiots that landed on the White House lawn and got in the way of firefighters were difficult (if not impossible) to find. The FAA has to look like they're doing something about this, so registration was the simplest and least painful thing they could do. Since the registration is online, about 99% of the people buying drones are going to skip it anyway, so it's not gonna be a very effective tool. Next step will be to require that you fill out a registration form and present a valid picture ID when you buy a drone over 8 oz., and that would probably extend to most other R/C aircraft as well since you can't easily differentiate one type of R/C aircraft from another from a legal perspective. Chances are pretty good that the drone fad will blow over by the time it gets to that point, though.

 

[10fttall]

Does anyone think there will be a lot of phone calls from concerned citizens reporting RC activities so the authorities will come verify that they're registered? I would think it's more likely just a measure to make the public think there's some level of safety, much like the TSA, when in reality nothing will change. That, and some fund raising for some government division.

Perception by Congress and the public that they are doing something. Even if it is ludicrous. It's about like making a rule that all ski masks have to have your name printed across the front, so they can identify you if you try to use one for illegal activities.

 

[samb]

Drones dropping on and around the White House grounds gave the regs a push too.

BINGO! We have a winner.

So, as long as none of you yahoos lawndart a 10 inch carbon fiber Patriot into the Rose Garden high power rocketry as we know it should be safe (for now!). :wink:

 

[ksaves2]

TRA hierarchy explored this already and since the two major rocket societies in this country have been doing such a good job of regulating ourselves, the regulators are pretty much going to leave us alone as long as
some renegade doesn't do something stupid to bring attention for a second look. Kurt

 

[Flyfalcons]

TRA hierarchy explored this already and since the two major rocket societies in this country have been doing such a good job of regulating ourselves, the regulators are pretty much going to leave us alone as long as
some renegade doesn't do something stupid to bring attention for a second look. Kurt

RC airplane and heli folks, along with the AMA, did a great job of regulating themselves for many decades too.

 

[samb]

RC airplane and heli folks, along with the AMA, did a great job of regulating themselves for many decades too.

I agree. Unless your lobby is the size of the NRA I don't think individual hobbyists can influence this kind of thing at the national level, unfortunately. Keep flying within the rules and maybe invite a city councilperson or the county sheriff and their families to a launch. And fight the spread of FUD !

 

[ksaves2]

RC airplane and heli folks, along with the AMA, did a great job of regulating themselves for many decades too.

Sorry, they did not jump on top of this like the NAR/TRA did and took the government to court over propellant. They were asleep at the wheel. Kurt

 

[Flyfalcons]

Sorry, they did not jump on top of this like the NAR/TRA did and took the government to court over propellant. They were asleep at the wheel. Kurt

Even worse, AMA actively brought multirotors into the mix in an attempt to increase its membership level, despite a large percentage of members wanting to keep them separate. The point remains though - if the government decides it wants to regulate something, there isn't much stopping it. In this case the FAA is going directly against a previous ruling that it doesn't have authority over model aircraft used for hobby purposes. It would be unwise to think the FAA couldn't increase its regulations against rocketry.

 

[Samuron]

Even worse, AMA actively brought multirotors into the mix in an attempt to increase its membership level, despite a large percentage of members wanting to keep them separate.

If we consider their official statement,

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.

it appears that they were perfectly fine with registration for non-AMA members; perhaps they saw the threat as a boost to membership, and it backfired.

In this case the FAA is going directly against a previous ruling that it doesn't have authority over model aircraft used for hobby purposes.

I don't think that's quite accurate. Reading the FAA interpretation statement, I agree that they still have authority for issuing NOTAMS and advisories, and requiring registration of owners is arguably a practical necessity to accomplish that.

The key part of the Special Rule For Model Aircraft is:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies

IANAL, but as I found this definition:

The term notwithstanding... is used as a preposition to indicate that the provision that follows is limited by another provision

So, while the Special Rule prohibits regulation specific to hobby aircraft, it may not preempt FAA authority for general registration of aircraft.

 

[grouch]

RC airplane and heli folks, along with the AMA, did a great job of regulating themselves for many decades too.

Then drone folks are a different breed altogether. They do not drive to a field where you have to be an AMA member to fly. They do what they want when they want with little concerns or regard for others or concern if something goes wrong.