FAA sUAS Registration Task Force Recommendations Nov 21-15

[CircuitFlyer]

Have a look:

http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/media/RTFARCFinalReport_11-21-15.pdf

What do you think?

[david beazley]

So as I read it, everything from 250 grams to 55 pounds needs to be registered.  I don't see any thing in it that would eliminate the need for CL to be registered.  It looks to me like they want to register the owner of the aircraft and the owner is responsible to mark the aircraft with his registration number.  But then again I am dute to get cataract surgery in 2 weeks so I may be missing something.

[jfv]

Unless I read it wrong, each pilot will have a single number assigned to them, similar, or possibly the same as our AMA number that must be displayed on the aircraft. 

[Mike Griffin]

I am going to try and maintain my temper here but to me, this is a bunch of typical beauacratic government, big brother BS .  I too see no specific exemption for control line models in this crap.  This has  been brought on by the proliferation of these quad copters and more specificly the reckless operation by the owners and the promotion of same by AMA and others because of their desire to make money off of them. 

I see no way they can even begin to enforce this and personally I have no intention of registering anything I build with anyone.  This is a money grab and government over reach and I refuse to participate.

Mike

[Eric Viglione]

OK everyone, breath...

The way I read it, this : "the registration requirement will only apply to sUAS (i.e., aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds) that are operated outdoors in the NAS."

So, the delimiter is the weight and use of the NAS... and what is the NAS?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Airspace_System

So, unless your club is located on an airport, or military airbase, or in airport airspace A through G, you are in the clear with no need to register a C/L plane ? Or am I missing something?

The fine print says registration will be free, and not per aircraft, just once, so no money-grab (yet) that I can see.

EricV

[dave siegler]

I am going to try and maintain my temper here but to me, this is a bunch of typical beauacratic government, big brother BS .  I too see no specific exemption for control line models in this crap.  This has  been brought on by the proliferation of these quad copters and more specificly the reckless operation by the owners and the promotion of same by AMA and others because of their desire to make money off of them. 

I see no way they can even begin to enforce this and personally I have no intention of registering anything I build with anyone.  This is a money grab and government over reach and I refuse to participate.

Mike

this is not different than having you AMA number on your airplane, and of all the potential scary ways to solve this very real problem, this isn't bad. 

I will bet the AMA will work out this as far as having one number to register the owner / pilot.

The real issues about user competence and responsibility are not addressed.

My concerns are that a user may consider registration as an approval to fly when and where he wants. 


The tone of your post(s) has given me a new reason to edit my blocked users file. 

[Mike Griffin]

OK everyone, breath...

The way I read it, this : "the registration requirement will only apply to sUAS (i.e., aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds) that are operated outdoors in the NAS."

So, the delimiter is the weight and use of the NAS... and what is the NAS?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Airspace_System

So, unless your club is located on an airport, or military airbase, or in airport airspace A through G, you are in the clear with no need to register a C/L plane ? Or am I missing something?


Hi Eric,

I really hope you are right.  I guess I have become really sensitive to the government trying to control every aspect of our lives with everything to healthcare to what we eat.  I am just sick of it.

Mike

[Dave_Trible]

I guess I don't see any real harm here but nor do I see any point.  Those who would register wouldn't be those who would ever be a problem anyway.  It's going to be those who won't.  And so you've registered... Now what?  This doesn't seem to address something 'built by owner' only 'bought by owner'.  It's also confusing in that is says something about hobby users not being addressed in this report. So ........what?

Dave

[Matt Colan]

I read through most of this and don't see any issue with the FAA taking this stance. A lot of the sUAS that are operated today have autopilots equipped in them, and can be flown via FPV. I've seen people program a flight mission with them and then watched their quads go out and fly the waypoints that it was told to fly to. This is navigating within the NAS, and what the FAA means by it. Class G airspace is uncontrolled airspace so I still believe that sUAS should be given a "have at it" approach there because it is uncontrolled.

The FAA needed to do something because this is getting out of control with the amount of near misses/sightings I hear almost daily. And I guarantee you that most people flying these things don't know what a real model aircraft is. I've been to the mall here in Daytona and they have a kiosk set up with different forms of quadcopters...it made me cringe because I bet the people who buy them, generally speaking, have no idea what they are doing when it comes to operating them safely.

Again, I see no issue with what the FAA is doing and this more than likely will not affect CL because we don't operate within the NAS...my 50cc 91" Yak 54 might be a different story though.

[john e. holliday]

How come nobody complains about having to register all your vehicles that you have.  They have to be licensed and insured, each and every one of them.  My insurance company gave me a break when I had several motorcycles, couple of cars and a truck.   But Control Line planes fly in controlled area unless the lines break or you release the handle and don't use the safety thong/strap.   Of course my radio stuff is collecting dust.

[RC Storick]

I guess the 2012 congressional mandate means nothing.

[john ohnimus]

This is the NPRM from earlier this year regaurding UAS's Feel free to visit FAA.gov for the official word on our model aircraft. Utilize the search at the top of the page and type "UAS"


ALSO SEE ATTACHMENT BELOW!!!!


Small UAS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

The Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration has proposed a framework of regulations that would allow routine use of certain small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in today's aviation system, while maintaining flexibility to accommodate future technological innovations. The FAA proposal offers safety rules for small UAS (under 55 pounds) conducting non-recreational operations. The rule would limit flights to daylight and visual-line-of-sight operations. It also addresses height restrictions, operator certification, optional use of a visual observer, aircraft registration and marking, and operational limits.
The new rules would not apply to model aircraft. However, model aircraft operators must continue to satisfy all of the criteria specified in Sec. 336 of Public Law 112-95, including the stipulation that they be operated only for hobby or recreational purposes.

The 60-day public comment period for the small UAS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking closed on April 24, 2015.
 
 

[Brett Buck]

I guess the 2012 congressional mandate means nothing.

     It might. Bear in mind that this is a recommendation from a study group, not a regulation. Attempting to regulate in contradiction to existing black-latter law still might provide matter to someone, although I am not optimistic.

     This has been my big point of contention with linking and/or making no distinction between drones and model airplanes. We have a carve-out, and linking ourselves with drones eliminates that distinction. The drone manufacturers of course want no distinction in order to take advantage of the special carve-out. And the AMA has apparently gone for that hook, line, and sinker.

    Brett

[EddyR]

NAS is National Airspace System
Google it there is a ton of information.
 I think a CL model would be a maned model there for not covered.

[RC Storick]

A small story.

This has to do with ASCAP. My dad was in the coin opt business a while ago. Around 1980. He had Juke boxes all over. A free registration was imposed for each Juke Box to keep tract of the locations. Next year they started a $2.00 fee for each one and today that same free registration is over $500.00 per year for each box. Beware of people bearing gifts for free!

Outlaws don't follow rules so not only if you don't speak up will it cost you plenty in the end but the problem will still exist.

[Mike Griffin]

     It might. Bear in mind that this is a recommendation from a study group, not a regulation. Attempting to regulate in contradiction to existing black-latter law still might provide matter to someone, although I am not optimistic.

     This has been my big point of contention with linking and/or making no distinction between drones and model airplanes. We have a carve-out, and linking ourselves with drones eliminates that distinction. The drone manufacturers of course want no distinction in order to take advantage of the special carve-out. And the AMA has apparently gone for that hook, line, and sinker.

    Brett

Brett I could not agree with you more.  There should have been a distinction made between model planes and these quadcopters and since there hasn't been and we seem to be grouped in along with everyone else, I foresee big problems in the near future.  I hope to God I am wrong but these people have no common sense...

Mike

[Mike Griffin]

this is not different than having you AMA number on your airplane, and of all the potential scary ways to solve this very real problem, this isn't bad. 

I will bet the AMA will work out this as far as having one number to register the owner / pilot.

The real issues about user competence and responsibility are not addressed.

My concerns are that a user may consider registration as an approval to fly when and where he wants. 


The tone of your post(s) has given me a new reason to edit my blocked users file. 

Thats perfectly ok with me Dave.

Mike

[RC Storick]

Beware for people offering something for free "you can't afford it!".

[phil c]

Unless I read it wrong, each pilot will have a single number assigned to them, similar, or possibly the same as our AMA number that must be displayed on the aircraft. 

This is an arguable point.  To this point flags, kites, small balloons, windmills, buildings, or any other structure that is attached to the ground has not been considered and aircraft.  An aircraft is able to freely move and navigate in the air, not tethered to the ground.