Oh great... is this true? (registration)
- Thread starter MadMonkey
- Start date
Webheadfred
Air Traffic Controller
The Agency is very inept. Believe me, I work for them. The governing authority is so scared they'll lose control of things as they move way faster that those cubical dwellers can keep up with. A lawsuit by anyone 'damaged' by this is inevitable. Also, I'm looking in to the requirement to have a pilot's license. As an air traffic controller, I think the requirement is ridiculous; but that's never stops the government.
Old Man
Active Member
We're still stuck flying light aircraft with engines designed in the 1940's using ignition systems from earlier than that. That's beyond inept, and in part why general aviation has been on such a steep decline. The cost of certifying, maintaining, and reproducing ancient technology is one of the things keeping the cost per flight hour so high. I'm old but not a technological dinosaur. Not completely anyway
BogotaMatt
Big Kahuna @ AirLulo
Hmmm well today flying on my way back from Carthagena in my beloved Cirrus, that familiar Inspire sight at 7500' on a VFR route. Now, you hit it with a wing nothing happens other than a de-ice strip dented. It goes trough the prop, you might have to pull the chute. Something has to be done to either educate or punish this type of people, sorry. And one way is to somehow make them traceable... I'm an ex-airline captain, current GA pilot and airplane owner and professional drone operator. Colombia has just passed one of the most restrictive drone regulation in the world, and that's because of various close shaves with airliners, GA planes and reckless operating.
Last edited by a moderator:
Old Man
Active Member
I won't deny something needs to be done, but I doubt registration will provide much in the way of preventative medicine. Holding someone accountable is always good but it's something done after the fact. I'd rather see something that would prevent the need for after action accountability. Someone that died or was severely injured via a MR incident probably isn't going to be all that receptive to an apology or settlement, which certainly would not reverse the previous harm done.
Carapau
Tek care, lambs ont road, MRF Moderator
Accountability is far from something done after the fact, that's only half of the story. The consequences of behing held to account may accur post event but knowing that you will be held to account if things go awry means you are more likely to act appropriatley beforehand.
As an example and given that there is a political theme to this thread. Politician are accountable to their electorate. Do they just crack on until the vote and hope that they have been held accountable by the electorate and thus voted out? Heck no, they spend every minute trying to shape things so that they are not voted out.
As an example and given that there is a political theme to this thread. Politician are accountable to their electorate. Do they just crack on until the vote and hope that they have been held accountable by the electorate and thus voted out? Heck no, they spend every minute trying to shape things so that they are not voted out.
ProfEngr
Member
Carapau, I'll have to disagree with you there. My take on Congress Critters, et al is that they pay superficial lip-service to their constituents, but when the chips are down it's all about what they can do to increase their power and control. There is no accountability. The last election proved it.
As to registration, just how do they expect to enforce the act itself? And after an incident (we hope one never occurs reg'd or not), if the craft is not registered, how do they intend to hold the owner accountable? There are just too many variables for an inept agency to manage.
The ill-educated and just plain foolish users out there are going to get multirotors relegated to the same status as skateboards/rollerblades. I remember when those were actually fun and no one really cared where they were used. Used to blade the local park regularly 15yrs ago and never had an incident. Never needed a rule book, certification, or training on how or where to operate. We knew not to tear up the grass, harass other people, or blade in a manor that could cause us to crash into or injure others. Common Sense; it's a dying concept.
As to registration, just how do they expect to enforce the act itself? And after an incident (we hope one never occurs reg'd or not), if the craft is not registered, how do they intend to hold the owner accountable? There are just too many variables for an inept agency to manage.
The ill-educated and just plain foolish users out there are going to get multirotors relegated to the same status as skateboards/rollerblades. I remember when those were actually fun and no one really cared where they were used. Used to blade the local park regularly 15yrs ago and never had an incident. Never needed a rule book, certification, or training on how or where to operate. We knew not to tear up the grass, harass other people, or blade in a manor that could cause us to crash into or injure others. Common Sense; it's a dying concept.
dazzab
Member
Are you also against the registration of cars? Comparing a multirotor that has the capability to interfere with manned aircraft to a skateboard is a bit of a stretch wouldn't you say? The issue here is that people want to operate dangerous machines as toys in public spaces. First time you get hit with one of these I guarantee you that you'll be all for registration, restricted use, training and insurance.
Old Man
Active Member
I'm all for registration, licensing, and training for commercial users. Such would set a minimum standard of professionalism and assist in assuring some pros would not push the edges of the aircraft's flight envelope and the operators abilities to get a job done at the expense of public safety. Much the same reasons commercial flight standards were enacted for full scale. Design and operational restrictions for amateur level operations would make more sense than across the board registration. Installing a baro sensor that limits altitude to a preset pressure delta between launch and max flight altitude would handle most of the conflict concerns with full scale. Set that at ~250' and it would clear most everything except multi-story buildings in the city, where an amateur shouldn't be flying anyway. Add in a signal strength sensor for the Tx/Rx that would auto trigger RTH at a certain level and much of the BLOS problems might be resolved. They should come home before the signal is lost. If not GPS equipped they could be set up to land when the signal weakened.
Something along those lines should have been done some time ago but uncaring manufacturers have made it a point to advertise their products referencing the longest flight distances possible with full knowledge what they were proposing could not be safe and that loss of signal at longer distances was often likely. Lightbridge is a perfect example. Phantom is another. DJI makes it a point to make BLOS functionality one of the features in their advertising, which in turn causes some to think such operations must be OK because the manufacturers provide that capability. Use secondary licensing for long distance equipment, which isn't supposed to be utilized without a HAM license anyway, while noting that BLOS ops of sUAS is not legal in many places to begin with.
Additionally, incorporate the Part 107 NPRM into the FARs immediately and enforce them.
Points being if training is combined with equipment limitations/restrictions that prevent amateurs from getting there from here many of the problems, perceived or real, disappear.
Something along those lines should have been done some time ago but uncaring manufacturers have made it a point to advertise their products referencing the longest flight distances possible with full knowledge what they were proposing could not be safe and that loss of signal at longer distances was often likely. Lightbridge is a perfect example. Phantom is another. DJI makes it a point to make BLOS functionality one of the features in their advertising, which in turn causes some to think such operations must be OK because the manufacturers provide that capability. Use secondary licensing for long distance equipment, which isn't supposed to be utilized without a HAM license anyway, while noting that BLOS ops of sUAS is not legal in many places to begin with.
Additionally, incorporate the Part 107 NPRM into the FARs immediately and enforce them.
Points being if training is combined with equipment limitations/restrictions that prevent amateurs from getting there from here many of the problems, perceived or real, disappear.
I think a lot of people need to grow up, and learn to take care of themselves, and not rely on some outside force to solve their problems. If somebody does something to you that you don't like, man up and take care of it, or whimp out, and shut up. "I'm gonna tell my BIG brother on you, and he will come and beat you up" Just what we need, more gobment, rules and regulations, lawyers, judges, on and on. Some people are just wussies. Go cry to your Mama.
Last edited by a moderator:
fltundra
Member
Most multis won't make it back too home if farther then say a mile with a dead tx batt or other issue at 4 m/s RTH, takes at least 7 min to fly that mile back not counting any head wind. Most will drop out of the sky long before they make it home.
fltundra
Member
All multis will have to be registered or face fines. Including DIY. Mentioned it will happen in next few months.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dezy
Member
Article I read said a taskforce assembled has until November 20 to come up with a plan.
The wait continues.....
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/19/faa-private-drones-registration-safety-concerns
The wait continues.....
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/19/faa-private-drones-registration-safety-concerns
fltundra
Member
They have already knocked on my door, neighbor had no grounds to stand on. Offered the Officer a look at gps logs and video, but they declined and said have a nice day. Being i am already a licensed pilot, it's not an issue with me at all registering. Government already has all the info they need.
econfly
Member
I'm not a pilot, and I don't want government knocking on my door. I understand that many (most?) want government to protect them from all manner of risks -- real or imagined -- and feel comfortable handing government authority over private life in the process. I'm not one of those people. I don't trust government, I don't like bureaucrats and law enforcement having authority over my life, and I very much dislike being treated like a child or a fool. I respect others, never fly over property without permission, and always operate safely. So why should I be subjected to this ridiculous registration scheme?
There it is. This is nothing but a big brother attempt to teach me a lesson: The lesson being, primarily, that I should recognize the authority and power of big brother. Or else. The "else" is we will all face more regulation and control when this registration scheme fails. And it will fail. So, who's ready to sign up for the ever tightening control and intrusions for the sake of flying their drone? Not me.
There it is. This is nothing but a big brother attempt to teach me a lesson: The lesson being, primarily, that I should recognize the authority and power of big brother. Or else. The "else" is we will all face more regulation and control when this registration scheme fails. And it will fail. So, who's ready to sign up for the ever tightening control and intrusions for the sake of flying their drone? Not me.
fltundra
Member
Because your flying in FAA controlled airspace. Be serious, if your not breaking any rules you have absolutely nothing to worry about. This is just going to weed out all the bad apples.