FAA launches drone registration website, gives owners February deadline

$5 fee will be waived for those who register by mid-January.

Read the whole story

 

[rick*d]

Dputiger[/url]":c865qyuy]

Please do rattle off examples. There aren't very many considering how ubiquitous quadcopters and RC planes are. Compared to cars, which have registration and licensing and a real ability to cause damage drones have done nothing. This is 100% punishing regular people just having some fun for the actions of a few morons that law enforcement, for the most part, have never had any trouble tracking down anyway.

I'll be more receptive to the need for registration when a dozen odd people are dying or getting hospitalized with serious injuries every month in every major city just like with cars and motorcycles. It's basically a blatant double standard. "Oohh drones scary... we better come up with some BS to show we're doing something..." Meanwhile, Annual deaths to civilian drones in the US? Never heard of one. Maybe it's happened, though. Model rocketry had it's 1st death in over 50 years maybe a month ago. But you can still go and blast one off well above the drone flight ceiling. Without registering.

Ok, how's this?

The $5 fee is the same fee the FAA has imposed on all aviators since 1966. It hasn't been updated. It hasn't been changed. And there's no reason it should be waived when, according to FAA testimony, it's already less money than the cost of renewal and license processing. I linked all this in an earlier post.

It's not a revenue grab. It's a consistent application of an existing fee that doesn't even cover costs.

You can argue that the FAA shouldn't classify drone operators as aviators, sure. But if drone operators are aviators, they should pay the same $5 fee that hobbyist aviators have paid for decades.

Except for one thing. The FAA claims that all R/C model pilots are "aviators" and always have been. But R/C model pilots never had to register and never had to pay the $5. So why now? My R/C airplane has not changed. Where and how I fly it has not changed. I don't fly it downtown and never would. If some idiot got a quadcopter for Christmas and flys it downtown, the city should go after that idiot, the feds shouldn't go after all the rest of us law- and regulation-abiding "aviators".

 

[cerberusTI]

TK[/url]":30getrhs]

lewax00[/url]":30getrhs]And that's when the extra punishments are added on. Your argument seems to be self defeating.

How can you punish someone you don't know the identity of?

The point you seem to be missing is that in order to fine someone for skirting this law, you have to know who they are. In order to fine someone for misusing their drone, you also have to know who they are.

Well then, if it's possible to know who the pilot is, why not just punish the people who misuse their drones and throw out this whole registration thing?

If it's NOT possible to know who the pilot is, then this entire law is broken on its face.

That is true of every law, from murder to jaywalking.

The registration makes it easier to tell who you are, and if you are doing something questionable with it gives them something to revoke.

As to flying without it, I am sure you have heard of an officer asking: "May I see your registration please?" Doubtless there will be penalties if you cannot produce one.

 

[Faanchou]

JasePow[/url]":25b4eg30]

Statistical[/url]":25b4eg30]

It should probably also be pointed out that the FAA hasn't actually established in court whether they even have the right to regulate these devices. I think they'll have a very very hard time convincing any court that they directly regulate ALL airspace, even that on private property under say 100-200 ft.

Sadly the FAA has convinced a court they can regulate any man made object capable of flight and they cover all airspace down the grass in your yard. No I am not joking. The FAA "could" require registration of paper airplanes and frisbees if they wanted to. The judiciary doesn't help when the judges are stupid.

http://gizmodo.com/dumbass-appeals-cour ... 1660086902

That ruling was based on the state of the law prior to the 2012 act, which forbid the FAA from making rules on model aircraft. However there is no meaningful distinction between "model aircraft" and "small UAS."

Ok, I'll bite. What aircraft is, say, a DJI Phantom 3 Pro modeled after?

 

[dermott]

DarthSlack[/url]":ry0m4evh]

slogger[/url]":ry0m4evh]Going to call my congresspeople. This is pretty outrageous. Especially since it doesn't actually do anything to prevent idiocy -- it's one more thing that destroys privacy and inconveniences regular people without actually doing a thing to solve the "problem."

When you do write your congresspeople, be sure to include a better idea for bringing some level of responsibility and accountability to this field. Yeah, this isn't a great solution, but the status quo isn't acceptable either.

Politicians fallacy: "We must do something. THIS is something. We must do THIS."

It is *not* on us to provide a better solution. It is on the party suggesting regulation to get it right to begin with. This will be costly, dangerous to the average consumer (in the form of fines for currently-acceptable behavior) and accomplish... nothing.

I'm seeing zero net benefit.

 

[caldepen]

rick*d[/url]":1hro51zf]

Dputiger[/url]":1hro51zf]

Please do rattle off examples. There aren't very many considering how ubiquitous quadcopters and RC planes are. Compared to cars, which have registration and licensing and a real ability to cause damage drones have done nothing. This is 100% punishing regular people just having some fun for the actions of a few morons that law enforcement, for the most part, have never had any trouble tracking down anyway.

I'll be more receptive to the need for registration when a dozen odd people are dying or getting hospitalized with serious injuries every month in every major city just like with cars and motorcycles. It's basically a blatant double standard. "Oohh drones scary... we better come up with some BS to show we're doing something..." Meanwhile, Annual deaths to civilian drones in the US? Never heard of one. Maybe it's happened, though. Model rocketry had it's 1st death in over 50 years maybe a month ago. But you can still go and blast one off well above the drone flight ceiling. Without registering.

Ok, how's this?

The $5 fee is the same fee the FAA has imposed on all aviators since 1966. It hasn't been updated. It hasn't been changed. And there's no reason it should be waived when, according to FAA testimony, it's already less money than the cost of renewal and license processing. I linked all this in an earlier post.

It's not a revenue grab. It's a consistent application of an existing fee that doesn't even cover costs.

You can argue that the FAA shouldn't classify drone operators as aviators, sure. But if drone operators are aviators, they should pay the same $5 fee that hobbyist aviators have paid for decades.

Except for one thing. The FAA claims that all R/C model pilots are "aviators" and always have been. But R/C model pilots never had to register and never had to pay the $5. So why now? My R/C airplane has not changed. Where and how I fly it has not changed. I don't fly it downtown and never would. If some idiot got a quadcopter for Christmas and flys it downtown, the city should go after that idiot, the feds shouldn't go after all the rest of us law- and regulation-abiding "aviators".

What you are railing against are facts of life when living in a society. The fact that you behave in a certain manner, does not matter. Rather how our society as a whole behaves. It was inevitable that this, like cars hundred years ago, would be regulated and much like today, I imagine the wagoneers were up in arms over the whole thing.

 

[TK]

cerberusTI[/url]":3jku8ll3]That is true of every law, from murder to jaywalking.

Not so. In all of the bad analogies given in this thread, they all have the person present. You drive drunk and cause a crash, you're in the car. You jaywalk, obviously someone saw you do it.

Toy aircraft? The person flying the thing has no requirement to stand directly under its current location. If I'm standing out in a field with my iPhone and there's a drone overhead, good luck proving beyond a reasonable doubt that I was controlling it.

As to flying without it, I am sure you have heard of an officer asking: "May I see your registration please?" Doubtless there will be penalties if you cannot produce one.

Not gonna happen. The FAA doesn't have the time, money, or people for those kind of spot checks.

 

[Statistical]

Dputiger[/url]":32g9srgm]

Please do rattle off examples. There aren't very many considering how ubiquitous quadcopters and RC planes are. Compared to cars, which have registration and licensing and a real ability to cause damage drones have done nothing. This is 100% punishing regular people just having some fun for the actions of a few morons that law enforcement, for the most part, have never had any trouble tracking down anyway.

I'll be more receptive to the need for registration when a dozen odd people are dying or getting hospitalized with serious injuries every month in every major city just like with cars and motorcycles. It's basically a blatant double standard. "Oohh drones scary... we better come up with some BS to show we're doing something..." Meanwhile, Annual deaths to civilian drones in the US? Never heard of one. Maybe it's happened, though. Model rocketry had it's 1st death in over 50 years maybe a month ago. But you can still go and blast one off well above the drone flight ceiling. Without registering.

Ok, how's this?

The $5 fee is the same fee the FAA has imposed on all aviators since 1966. It hasn't been updated. It hasn't been changed. And there's no reason it should be waived when, according to FAA testimony, it's already less money than the cost of renewal and license processing. I linked all this in an earlier post.

It's not a revenue grab. It's a consistent application of an existing fee that doesn't even cover costs.

You can argue that the FAA shouldn't classify drone operators as aviators, sure. But if drone operators are aviators, they should pay the same $5 fee that hobbyist aviators have paid for decades.

Except for one thing. The FAA claims that all R/C model pilots are "aviators" and always have been. But R/C model pilots never had to register and never had to pay the $5. So why now? My R/C airplane has not changed. Where and how I fly it has not changed. I don't fly it downtown and never would. If some idiot got a quadcopter for Christmas and flys it downtown, the city should go after that idiot, the feds shouldn't go after all the rest of us law- and regulation-abiding "aviators".

I don't know because times change. I flew RC planes for a number of years and it was a small niche tight knit community. The FAA contends they COULD have regulated it at any point but chose not to because it was small and mostly well behaved (self regulating). The modern multirotor changed all that we went from maybe 50,000 well trained operators to millions of mostly juvenile idiots.

Guess what the first car owners didn't need licenses or registration either. As the numbers grew licensing and registration became the norm. You had to know this was coming. No way the FAA was going to try one remotely controlled flying thing differently than a similar sized remotely controlled flying thing just because you want to be excluded.

 

[crustytheclown]

Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

 

[Statistical]

Not gonna happen. The FAA doesn't have the time, money, or people for those kind of spot checks.

Just like the DMV doesn't do spot checks of driver's licenses. Oh but cops do right? A lot is going to depend on where you live but if you live in an area with a large number of reckless drone idiots and politicians demanding cops do something I wouldn't be surprised if a cop asks you to show your registration.

 

[billyk]

I am just as happy TO register my quads. They already know me around town as "That drone guy" so I if anything happens with a quad or any other UAV I can just guess who they'll come looking for. If I register my fleet that I can say for sure it was not me. That is well worth the $5 spot. Beside I want to get a club going in my area... kinda need to keep legit.

 

[rick*d]

xaustinx[/url]":asulrgds]

jtyranski[/url]":asulrgds]Also, if you are registering to be used exclusively as model aircraft, it is $5 for your entire fleet. Otherwise, it's $5 per aircraft.

Registration fee Persons intending to use the small unmanned aircraft other
than as model aircraft.
• $5 to register each aircraft.
Individuals intending to use the small unmanned aircraft
exclusively as model aircraft.
• $5 to register an individual’s fleet of small unmanned
aircraft.
§ 48.30

Strange the FAA's website states this:

Q. If I own multiple drones, do I have to register them all?
A. No. You may register once and apply the same registration number to all your UAS.

Based on that, it would seem the prudent thing to do would be to get a registration number *NOW* while they're waiving the fee, and then apply that to UAS's you get in the future.

Can ISIS register now to save the $5 and then apply that registration number to all their drones, or does each ISIS member have to register individually?

Registration is most definitely a necessary step to prevent terrorism.

 

[TK]

crustytheclown[/url]":2sblts77]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

 

[rick*d]

Statistical[/url]":3u2ibnpq]

Not gonna happen. The FAA doesn't have the time, money, or people for those kind of spot checks.

Just like the DMV doesn't do spot checks of driver's licenses. Oh but cops do right? A lot is going to depend on where you live but if you live in an area with a large number of reckless drone idiots and politicians demanding cops do something I wouldn't be surprised if a cop asks you to show your registration.

They can ask all they want, but they have no jurisdiction to ask, and unless they're FAA I have no obligation to produce it.

 

[crustytheclown]

TK[/url]":2grj67j8]

crustytheclown[/url]":2grj67j8]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Yeah good point. I actually some of these Nanny-State types advocate banning toy guns because these cops are killing unarmed kids.

The fucking nerve to blame kids for being kids when its cops being horrible cops.

 

[Faanchou]

TK[/url]":3d7viv0q]

crustytheclown[/url]":3d7viv0q]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Right. Because that's at least as likely a scenario as "register a car under someone you don't like and turn it in to a car bomb and drive it into something important." Which we know happens just about every day.

 

[JasePow]

rick*d[/url]":6f9jzqk3]

jtyranski[/url]":6f9jzqk3]

daarong[/url]":6f9jzqk3]

demonbug[/url]":6f9jzqk3]

piratebay329[/url]":6f9jzqk3]Have to pay the government $5 to own a remote control toy airplane or helicopter ? Are those even considered drones? I'm guessing yes.

From the website:

Q. Which unmanned aircraft may register under the new registration requirements?
A. Unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds and more than 0.55 pounds (250 grams) on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft and operated outdoors in the national airspace system must register. These aircraft may register under the new web-based registration system.

Thanks for the info! I was curious - because I had a small indoor toy helicopter a few years ago, and I think Santa is about to bring another one.

Should note, the requirement is also only for outdoor use. Indoor use you can continue as usual.

So if I fly under this roof I'm OK, but if I go outside I face a $27,000 fine? Government logic.

Actually, the reg. calls for registration based on ownership... So, you are required to register, even if it sits in its box in the closet or basement.

 

[Statistical]

Statistical[/url]":2mcdidp7]

Not gonna happen. The FAA doesn't have the time, money, or people for those kind of spot checks.

Just like the DMV doesn't do spot checks of driver's licenses. Oh but cops do right? A lot is going to depend on where you live but if you live in an area with a large number of reckless drone idiots and politicians demanding cops do something I wouldn't be surprised if a cop asks you to show your registration.

They can ask all they want, but they have no jurisdiction to ask, and unless they're FAA I have no obligation to produce it.

Yeah just like how a cop can't ask for your car registration because it is registered with the DMV not the Police Dept. Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

 

[TK]

Faanchou[/url]":14lwxb6o]

TK[/url]":14lwxb6o]

crustytheclown[/url]":14lwxb6o]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Right. Because that's at least as likely a scenario as "register a car under someone you don't like and turn it in to a car bomb and drive it into something important." Which we know happens just about every day.

Because it requires exactly the same amount of sophistication to plug someone's name into an online form as it does to turn up at an office with forged ID docs and build a bomb.

Those two things are not equivalent and you bloody well know it. Stop it.

 

[TK]

Statistical[/url]":iivcz8zp]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

 

[Statistical]

Statistical[/url]":2rwapav1]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

I didn't say it was a good idea. Just pointing out the stupidity of saying only the FAA has jurisdiction and you would need FAA cops walking around to do spot checks.

 

[boardsurfer]

Lambenttelos[/url]":9tab2l1o]So I have built my first drone from scratch and am wondering what exactly I am registering. If I swap out components or take half of them and build a new drone where does the registration go? I'm guessing it just depends on the frame with the ID sticker when I fly it, but why wouldn't I just use the same ID on any drone I had and just pay the $5 one time.

I guess this law is probably a mad scramble to help with all the people buying drones at Best Buy for christmas, but I really wish there was more clarity here for me.

What you described is how it is supposed to work. You register yourself, not your devices. Put your number on any and all of them.

 

[rick*d]

Statistical[/url]":lre0g0bq]

Statistical[/url]":lre0g0bq]

Not gonna happen. The FAA doesn't have the time, money, or people for those kind of spot checks.

Just like the DMV doesn't do spot checks of driver's licenses. Oh but cops do right? A lot is going to depend on where you live but if you live in an area with a large number of reckless drone idiots and politicians demanding cops do something I wouldn't be surprised if a cop asks you to show your registration.

They can ask all they want, but they have no jurisdiction to ask, and unless they're FAA I have no obligation to produce it.

Yeah just like how a cop can't ask for your car registration because it is registered with the DMV not the Police Dept. Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

That's sorta my point - you shouldn't be flying within jurisdiction of any city, unless you're in a designated flying area like in a park - but I know of none in the city of Seattle, for example. The closest flying area is in Marymoor Park, which is a county park, not a city park, and you're not allowed to fly there if you haven't paid the AMA tax, which is why I fly in my back yard. My outside-city-limits back yard on my 5 acre lot. Tell me again why I should register?

 

[ChickenHawk]

It really bothers me, as a responsible airspace user, how many irresponsible airspace users this entire comment thread proves there are.

Don't want to follow the rules? Get out of the sky. Aviation is not a place for those who do not understand there is a time for fun, and a time to be responsible.

 

[azazel1024]

Rommel102[/url]":1x9234uy]

q5ajzvtd[/url]":1x9234uy]

Rommel102[/url]":1x9234uy]

williane[/url]":1x9234uy]

JumpNDesign[/url]":1x9234uy]This should of been free, instead they are turning it into a money grab that's justified by, but we gave you fair warning you'd have to pay. Smh.

Because those webservers and people who have to handle claims pay for themselves right?

This is what taxes are for.

Why should the general taxpayer be on the hook for something that's a niche interest? A $5 fee is pretty damn modest and reasonable for this.

This is like a toll. In theory, the tolls collected go towards whatever bridge, tunnel, or road they are placed on and once they pay off the cost of construction those tolls are eliminated or at least reduced to cover maintenance only. However, that is virtually never the case. The tolls become a revenue stream, and government is loathe to give up any revenue stream. So you end up paying tolls 30 years past when the bridge or whatnot was paid off.

What is the $5 paying for here? We have no clue. The OP mentions webservers and people to "handle claims". The Feds estimate 700k drone sales this year, more than double the previous year. So lets baseline at a million drones to register. I could put together a fully functional webserver to handle 1 million one time registrations with a simple search tool for a few hundred bucks a month. Let's add on typical government bloat and say one thousand, no lets even make it ten thousand a month. That's $120k/yr. Let's throw a few high paid and super qualified support personal in at $250k/year. And for giggles we'll say that there is some nebulous "miscellaneous" costs that run ridiculously high and get us to a $1 million/yr total cost (which is not unlikely given this is a government regulatory body).

Those one million registrations will generate $5 million in revenue, or five times of the crazy high total annual operating budget. And the registration is only good for 3 years.

I suspect if you had 100% compliance we'd see registrations over 2 million next year alone as this captures such a significant portion of the toy market. By 2024 the drone industry is projected to be an $11 billion industry.. You can do your own extrapolation of hypothetical registration revenue, but it will be exponentially higher than whatever the costs are to run a simple registration database.

So, like I said, rather than support a revenue grab I'd rather they just appropriate from the cash they already take from me.

You've obviously never worked for a government agency or done an IT project in a large business or government agency. One does. It simply stand up an IT system with just an employee or two. Supposing they even in-housed this, I'd guesstimate (since I do have that experience) it probably took them somewhere between 30-45 employees in different parts of the agency, from policy writers/experts, legal and actual IT to put together said website. Let's figure an average of a GS12 step 5 with benefits (because that is what is used for determining full time equivalent employee costs) and you get about 3.6-5.4 million to stand up the system. That is likely a low end cost as it doesn't include other things that might have gone in to it. Then hardware costs. Then you have all those who do register in the grace window which will be free. Financial transaction processing fees for the government and ongoing maintenance is probably a 4-8 employee endeavor at a minimum.

It could easily suck up all that money and more. Then you have oversight costs so that eternal entities can query against the data. Requests from congress to know what is in the data. GAO audit costs occasionally. And so on.

Let's not include the fact that if a contractor built, let alone is maintaining the system, for the FAA you can probably add 30-200% to the costs (fact of life, contractors rarely build it cheaper, but they do occasionally build it better).

 

[Faanchou]

TK[/url]":er7s1vj3]

Faanchou[/url]":er7s1vj3]

TK[/url]":er7s1vj3]

crustytheclown[/url]":er7s1vj3]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Right. Because that's at least as likely a scenario as "register a car under someone you don't like and turn it in to a car bomb and drive it into something important." Which we know happens just about every day.

Because it requires exactly the same amount of sophistication to plug someone's name into an online form as it does to turn up at an office with forged ID docs and build a bomb.

Those two things are not equivalent and you bloody well know it. Stop it.

Ah. So the registration only takes a name, no authentication required. Silly me, I thought they were actually registering the owners.

 

[TK]

ChickenHawk[/url]":yw738n8m]It really bothers me, as a responsible airspace user, how many irresponsible airspace users this entire comment thread proves there are.

Don't want to follow the rules? Get out of the sky. Aviation is not a place for those who do not understand there is a time for fun, and a time to be responsible.

If by "irresponsible", you mean "refusal to sign up for something that will only ever be used to harm them". What a time we live in, when basic rational thinking is "irresponsible".

 

[Rommel102]

TK[/url]":2kfarbb2]

Statistical[/url]":2kfarbb2]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

"License and Registration"

"Here you go Officer"

"Do you know why I pulled you down?"

"No Officer."

"Well you are flying that drone with a busted navigation light"

"Oh, I didn't even realize..."

"So that will be a $50 fine with 2 points on your license."

"Really Officer, I had no idea that..."

"I'm going to do you a favor and just give you a ticket for improper landing. It's $300 but with no points."

"Umm...."

 

[Danellicus]

TK[/url]":15xgn29w]And if you think that idiocy is worth a $25K fine and prison time you're nuts.

Pour l'encourager les autres.

 

[TK]

Faanchou[/url]":3vm52u7t]

TK[/url]":3vm52u7t]

Faanchou[/url]":3vm52u7t]

TK[/url]":3vm52u7t]

crustytheclown[/url]":3vm52u7t]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Right. Because that's at least as likely a scenario as "register a car under someone you don't like and turn it in to a car bomb and drive it into something important." Which we know happens just about every day.

Because it requires exactly the same amount of sophistication to plug someone's name into an online form as it does to turn up at an office with forged ID docs and build a bomb.

Those two things are not equivalent and you bloody well know it. Stop it.

Ah. So the registration only takes a name, no authentication required. Silly me, I thought they were actually registering the owners.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but from the site:

Q. What information will I be required to provide on the FAA UAS Registration website?

A. You must provide your complete name, physical address, mailing address, and an email address. The email address will be used as your login ID when you set up your account.

There is no ID confirmation in this process.

Ah wait, a bit further down:

Q. The website said registration is free. Why am I being charged $5?

A. The credit card transaction helps authenticate the user. You will see a credit for the $5 shortly after the charge appears.

Okay, so the bar has been raised well above "any kiddie with an axe to grind". That's addressed at least.

 

[cerberusTI]

TK[/url]":3cysb9d7]

Statistical[/url]":3cysb9d7]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

Much like they do not pull over random vehicles to check registration, you are unlikely to see the police try to check every drone.

If you operate it in a manner some find questionable... they may ask some questions and possibly take some action.

 

[ChickenHawk]

TK[/url]":2f57y4xn]

ChickenHawk[/url]":2f57y4xn]It really bothers me, as a responsible airspace user, how many irresponsible airspace users this entire comment thread proves there are.

Don't want to follow the rules? Get out of the sky. Aviation is not a place for those who do not understand there is a time for fun, and a time to be responsible.

If by "irresponsible", you mean "refusal to sign up for something that will only ever be used to harm them". What a time we live in, when basic rational thinking is "irresponsible".

If you are truly a responsible airspace user, it won't harm you.

If you are doing something wrong, then I guess your definition is correct, you are irresponsible and it may harm you when your mess needs to be cleaned up after.

 

[cerberusTI]

Faanchou[/url]":1sb2cymk]

TK[/url]":1sb2cymk]

Faanchou[/url]":1sb2cymk]

TK[/url]":1sb2cymk]

crustytheclown[/url]":1sb2cymk]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

Yet another thing that the "legislate everything" brigade didn't bother to consider. But hey we *must* regulate all those kids and their toys. Someone important might get bumped into!

Right. Because that's at least as likely a scenario as "register a car under someone you don't like and turn it in to a car bomb and drive it into something important." Which we know happens just about every day.

Because it requires exactly the same amount of sophistication to plug someone's name into an online form as it does to turn up at an office with forged ID docs and build a bomb.

Those two things are not equivalent and you bloody well know it. Stop it.

Ah. So the registration only takes a name, no authentication required. Silly me, I thought they were actually registering the owners.

I imagine that the reason for the $5 fee being refunded as opposed to waived is so that they have a credit card receipt. Maybe prepaid cards work, but they are easy to reject.

 

[Rommel102]

azazel1024[/url]":3ef8hysk]

Rommel102[/url]":3ef8hysk]

q5ajzvtd[/url]":3ef8hysk]

Rommel102[/url]":3ef8hysk]

williane[/url]":3ef8hysk]

JumpNDesign[/url]":3ef8hysk]This should of been free, instead they are turning it into a money grab that's justified by, but we gave you fair warning you'd have to pay. Smh.

Because those webservers and people who have to handle claims pay for themselves right?

This is what taxes are for.

Why should the general taxpayer be on the hook for something that's a niche interest? A $5 fee is pretty damn modest and reasonable for this.

This is like a toll. In theory, the tolls collected go towards whatever bridge, tunnel, or road they are placed on and once they pay off the cost of construction those tolls are eliminated or at least reduced to cover maintenance only. However, that is virtually never the case. The tolls become a revenue stream, and government is loathe to give up any revenue stream. So you end up paying tolls 30 years past when the bridge or whatnot was paid off.

What is the $5 paying for here? We have no clue. The OP mentions webservers and people to "handle claims". The Feds estimate 700k drone sales this year, more than double the previous year. So lets baseline at a million drones to register. I could put together a fully functional webserver to handle 1 million one time registrations with a simple search tool for a few hundred bucks a month. Let's add on typical government bloat and say one thousand, no lets even make it ten thousand a month. That's $120k/yr. Let's throw a few high paid and super qualified support personal in at $250k/year. And for giggles we'll say that there is some nebulous "miscellaneous" costs that run ridiculously high and get us to a $1 million/yr total cost (which is not unlikely given this is a government regulatory body).

Those one million registrations will generate $5 million in revenue, or five times of the crazy high total annual operating budget. And the registration is only good for 3 years.

I suspect if you had 100% compliance we'd see registrations over 2 million next year alone as this captures such a significant portion of the toy market. By 2024 the drone industry is projected to be an $11 billion industry.. You can do your own extrapolation of hypothetical registration revenue, but it will be exponentially higher than whatever the costs are to run a simple registration database.

So, like I said, rather than support a revenue grab I'd rather they just appropriate from the cash they already take from me.

You've obviously never worked for a government agency or done an IT project in a large business or government agency. One does. It simply stand up an IT system with just an employee or two. Supposing they even in-housed this, I'd guesstimate (since I do have that experience) it probably took them somewhere between 30-45 employees in different parts of the agency, from policy writers/experts, legal and actual IT to put together said website. Let's figure an average of a GS12 step 5 with benefits (because that is what is used for determining full time equivalent employee costs) and you get about 3.6-5.4 million to stand up the system. That is likely a low end cost as it doesn't include other things that might have gone in to it. Then hardware costs. Then you have all those who do register in the grace window which will be free. Financial transaction processing fees for the government and ongoing maintenance is probably a 4-8 employee endeavor at a minimum.

It could easily suck up all that money and more. Then you have oversight costs so that eternal entities can query against the data. Requests from congress to know what is in the data. GAO audit costs occasionally. And so on.

Let's not include the fact that if a contractor built, let alone is maintaining the system, for the FAA you can probably add 30-200% to the costs (fact of life, contractors rarely build it cheaper, but they do occasionally build it better).

Thank you for proving my point. I very specifically pointed out what I could do, and then added a ridiculous amount of bloat to it, to provide a fully functioning and working registration and lookup system.

I never doubted that the official version would be enormously large and bloatalicious.

 

[Brodifacoum]

crustytheclown[/url]":32yd5tun]Additionally, this is a great way to set someone up. Register a UAS under someone you don't like and smash the UAS into somewhere important. Leave the remote at their home for good measure.

While I agree that this could be done, it is not a good idea. If you get caught doing it you would be facing a lot of charges, and I am not talking about the FAA.

I down-voted you because your post made think I was reading something posted on b/.

 

[TK]

Statistical[/url]":1z7xastn]

Statistical[/url]":1z7xastn]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

I didn't say it was a good idea. Just pointing out the stupidity of saying only the FAA has jurisdiction and you would need FAA cops walking around to do spot checks.

I wonder how many "this isn't a good idea"s we need to pile up before proponents of this law understand how bloody useless it is...

 

[ChickenHawk]

Rommel102[/url]":1qml6it6]

TK[/url]":1qml6it6]

Statistical[/url]":1qml6it6]Local city can certainly pass an ordinance requiring you to provide FAA registration to Police Officer if asked when flying a drone within jurisdiction of the city.

Great, as if we needed to give cops more reasons to harass innocent people.

"License and Registration"

"Here you go Officer"

"Do you know why I pulled you down?"

"No Officer."

"Well you are flying that drone with a busted navigation light"

"Oh, I didn't even realize..."

"So that will be a $50 fine with 2 points on your license."

"Really Officer, I had no idea that..."

"I'm going to do you a favor and just give you a ticket for improper landing. It's $300 but with no points."

"Umm...."

If you're going to make a slippery slope falacy, don't be foolish enough to make one that's easily disproven. By he fact is manned aircraft had had to comply with rules like these for ages, and despite aviators obviously having big pockets, we don't have cops sitting next to runways watching for infractions.

 

[ranthog]

The regulations aren't why we can't have nice things. The regulations are because we can't have nice things.

The only reason why RC planes were never regulated is because it was a very small group of relatively well behaved and educated enthusiasts. Even if there were bad actors the small number of operators mean there were very few chances for incidents.

The reason why we're starting to see regulations is because the hobby has become very accessible and drone flyers greatly out number old RC groups. I think it is fair to say the average drone pilot knows less than his RC counter part and the rate of bad actors due to ignorance or other factors is probably much higher. Even if the rate of bad actors was equivalent to the RC pilots, there are so many more drone pilots that it can become a major issue.

Obviously registration isn't going to fix all the woes, but it is a decent good first step. And one that obviously isn't going to do major harm to the hobby. I think the regulations need some educational components, but it would be much harder to do that without putting up serious burdens on operators.

 

[TK]

We'll see about that. This is the camel's nose in the tent - government regulation only ever goes one direction.

 

[Zak]

Is this just for drones or RC helicopters as well?

 

[ChickenHawk]

TK[/url]":1jnn2wvb]We'll see about that. This is the camel's nose in the tent - government regulation only ever goes one direction.

Given recent trends to deregulate things like banking (leading to the recent crash) I presume you mean "down" as the one direction.