Back to Squawk list

Court ruling nullifies US requirement that hobbyists register drones

Submitted
A federal appeals court on Friday struck down a regulation requiring the public to register drones. The US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found that the Federal Aviation Administration did not have the authority to regulate so-called "model aircraft." If it stands, the decision means that the public does not have to abide by the FAA requirement established in 2015. The ruling is not yet enforceable, however, as the court gave the FAA seven days (PDF) to consider… (arstechnica.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


upchucked
The R's were all about smaller government and less regulation, right? So why would they make hobby flyers register their toys? Do a cost-benefit analysis test... millions of hours of wasted time in registering the toys, putting "Official" stickers on them so they can be tracked, an entirely new registration section in the FAA, to keep track of all the information. And the benefit is.......what? They have already registered more than 550,000 drones. The entire US aircraft registration is just slightly over 200,000, and that includes thousands of aircraft that will never again leave the ground or taxi under their own power. So when is enough, 1 Million drones? 5 Million?, 25 Million?

And, I will wager that if they required every aircraft owner to pay $5 to register their aircraft every few years, the outcry would be deafening. It's OK for the hobbyist, but how about you?

Air Force 1 having to change course violently to avoid a toy? That couldn't get near Andrews in any case let alone lined up in the approach path, 400 feet AGL. And, I would suspect that any terrorist worth his membership card in the International Brotherhood of Terrorists wouldn't register his lethal drone in any case.... and probably wouldn't use a DJI for that matter.

Maybe the FAA could do something that would be more useful... how about tattooing a registration number to the butt of all the birds near airports, making them register with the FAA, take a test on how to avoid aircraft and then testing them every year to make sure they haven't forgotten any of their instructions? Oh, and they definitely should have a vet's examination every year to make sure they are safe to fly and safe to be around airplanes, which they will need to carry with them every time they leave the ground.

I don't own a drone, have no real interest in owning one, so while I have no dog in this fight, the whole thing to me sounds stupid and a gigantic waste of time, effort and money.
renb
Ren Babcock 1
I would suggest Congress defines what is what. Line of sight, always in control, maximum height allowed above the ground, etc. You all can figure it out but with tens of thousands of these things being sold, would be a good idea to keep them from running rampant through neighborhood skies. Although they probably are more of a fad and down the road will be like RC's where you have clubs and places to fly them.

I'm not saying register the hobby ones, just a definition of what is commercial and what is not.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Personally I disagree.... We have enough liberal laws coming out of congress and so many only cost the tax payer money and do nothing except infringe on our rights... The FCC exceeded their authority and I do not want to see congress have the chance to do the same.
N5827P
N5827P 1
If a drone is sucked into a jetliner engine and downs the jetliner or takes down a small airplane with a family, some of the commenters below may have a change of heart. While registration does not guarantee safety, it does increase awareness of the responsibility to follow the laws.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
Are there any single engine jetliners in service???
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
No! Only single engine Turbo Jets are Fighters. There are single engine Turbo Prop's that could technically fall into category, but they are a very small part!
sparkie624
sparkie624 -2
That is crazy talk.... There is no way that a simple drone could destroy or damage a Jet Airliner or small plane...
patpylot
this is so logical, so well considered, so rational, because every gun totting person who believes in no regulations at all for their misinterpretation of the 2nd admendment, now can go all in with unregulated drone rights expression, flying in formation with airliners on approaches and departures, near heliports, and wherever their whimsy takes them. I think I may resume long walks instead of flights to nearby cities. How far does this appeals court have their heads up their asses to bring such stupidity into view?
bizprop
What does the 2nd amendment have to do with this subject? Poor choice of comparisons. While we are on the subject. Key word in the 2nd amendment is "infringed". Suggest you look at the definition of this word.
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 2
1. Federal legislation from 2012 saud the FAA has no authority to regulate model aircraft. It's a law, so call your congressman about that heads up asses thing, not the appeals court.

2. Why would anyone use a $900 drone when they could use a 42 cent bullet instead? They might be nuts, but they aren't that nuts.

jpcooper
Imagine what would happen if Air Force 1 had to change course violently to avoid a drone while on approach to Washington. I wonder if the Federal Court Judges would be asked to " reconsider ".
RECOR10
RECOR10 4
Does not matter. The fact is a drone can NOT be tracked from WalMart to a terrorist. A cell phone can. So, some jamoke can go to WalMart, pick up a drone, pay cash (better, pay a homeless person to buy it). Then strap some C4 and BB's to it and have a blast. How would anyone ever find them?
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 3
DC is a no drone zone. Registering doesn't mean protection from wrong-doing...
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Yeap.... It would hit it, bounce out, and the Drone would be destroyed... AF1 would not get a scratch, even if the "RC" drone went though the engine fan!
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
People have a big Misconception about Drones vs Model Aircraft. For some reason the Government has put RC in the middle of what Drones really are.

Definition: A ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyond line of sight!

RC A/C cannot do that. My RC A/C are not Drones, they are "Model Aircraft". I am a member of the AMA and I fly at Sanctioned fields and on a rare occasion at a part for a smaller one, or indoor gymnasium for my Very Small micro planes. I control them all and they never leave my sight.

The Big industry today advertising Drones is stupid and false advertising: They should appropriately be labeled as a Quadcopter, or Multi Rotor of which I have 2. several of my RC aircraft have camera's. They are flown safely in accordance to AMA Public Recommendations.

The Court is right no this. I have never registered with the FAA for my RC A/C and wont... Aircraft that are flown for very long distances and can navigate and accomplish it's mission without an operator staying on top of it's entire flight is a drone. If I sit my RC Transmitter down, go take a break and then come back, my plane would have already crashed by this time. I am glad to see that a court made the correct decision.
sunshyne
I too am an AMA pilot and I agree with you as well. My issue too was the blanket coverage the govt threw us under. 99% of commercial "drones" are not even real drones and don't have any real cargo capacity. This was fear mongering at its best.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!