N410DC

As many of us assumed, the task force recommends that:

• Registration will be free (well, no more than $0.001).
• Pilots will be able to get a single registration number for all sUAVs. Only one registration is needed, whether you own 1 or 10,000 aircraft
• 250g and lighter aircraft are exempt
• Registration only requires submission of pilot's name/address. Data will be kept private, and (unlike full scale "N" numbers,) will not available to the public.
• Only aircraft flown outdoors need to be registered.
• The registration or serial number number must be affixed to each aircraft, and must be readable, but only upon "close inspection." Thus, printing a registration number on a label, using 8 point font, is fine, since the registration number does not need to be viable from a distance. It looks like the number will need to be on the exterior of the aircraft, though.

Here are the things that I was a little surprised to see:

• Pilots must be at least age 13 to register. Parents would have register sUAVs for any pilot under age 13.
• Pilots can optionally submit the serial number of the aircraft and can use this number for identification, as long as the SN is clearly readable on the exterior of the aircraft. Very few model aircraft will meet this requirement; pretty much just store-bought RTF aircraft. Furthermore, I don't see why a pilot would take the extra steps to register a single sUAV individually, when he can just affix his registration number to the sUAV, just as does for all his other aircraft. I suppose a few people who own only one sUAV (e.g. no one who is reading this) will chose this option.

Of course, these are just recommendations. The FAA can still decide what they will accept and what will be thrown out. In particular, the task force made no recommendation about the penalties for non-compliance, aside from saying that the current $25,000 fine might be a little steep for a 13 year old who bought a toy at wal-mart, and forgot to register it.

N410DC

This is indeed silly. Looks like the task force was very much opposed to any type of registration fee. However, it seems that there may be some law that requires the FAA to charge a registration fee. They therefore recommend the 1/000 of a penny fee, just in case the FAA decides that this fee is necessary. The cost would assumingly be rounded down to $0.00??

I agree. Allowing the use of one's AMA number makes a lot more sense that allowing pilots to register a serial number for sUAVs, for the very small number of sUAVs that even have a serial number.

Sport_Pilot

Sorry Dup post.

F-16 viperman

It says You can have the number inside a compartment, as long as it's accessible without tools. Just make sure it's registered and You'll have nothing to worry about. If a demand is made to prove it's registered, make sure YOU remove the hatch. Don't let the TOOL demanding proof do it.LOL

Sport_Pilot

It is a right as are most hobbies per the 9th Amendment. However, that does not mean that there cannot be some regulation, nor that the right cannot be taken from us.

mike1974

My Feedback: (1)

There may be 1 million "drones" sold this year, but how many are really going to cause any kind of a true safety issue. Probably not many. And how many of those will be registered? Probably not many. If being part of the AMA means I am "registered" I am fine with that. I just won't go out and do an additional registration. I already have my info on all my aircraft, including my fpv foam glider that I fly non-los. Not sure what additional registration will get them in my case. I wish they would provide a "legal" way to fly non-los. I would be all over that!!

N410DC

Wow. Very, very well said!

Then again, if you crash, and law enforcement finds it before you do, you had better hope that the hatch becomes dislodged in the crash, since the "tool" will not be smart enough to find the registration number.

ira d

I think many of the people that are flying what we refer to as drones are not AMA members, I think the best thing to do is go with the permit system that being each individual would have a permit number that they would
display on their model in other words one # used all models they own.

Sport_Pilot

And on top of that the one of millions that eventually does cause a true safety issue will not be registered. Either because they will not know about registering, or because they don't care.

Even with informed here more than half SAY that they will not register. Of course that is before we know what the fine will be. LOL

Sport_Pilot

In which case how would the "tool" would know it was his model? Er sUAV.

mike1974

My Feedback: (1)

LOL!! I am already registered. I have an AMA number and my info (more than what registration will supposedly require) is on all my aircraft.

N410DC

Agreed. Pretty much 100% of the American population now knows that it's illegal to fly sUAVs in certain areas. If someone plans to use a drone to count nose hairs in the cockpit of a 747 at 10,000 feet, he will not put a registration number on the drone, or will remove any identification number that is already affixed. He might even affix someone else's registration number to the drone, to keep the heat off his back. Crooks have been filing the serial number off guns, and stealing license pates for decades. The same tactics can be used with sUAVs, especially since the FAA will apparently not be linking registration numbers to specific aircraft.

This new mandate will keep honest people honest, but it might not do much to alleviate the problems that prompted this action in the first place.

Sport_Pilot

I think maybe you mean't to say 10%. There isn't even 100% that know these aircraft exist!

F-16 viperman

As Joe walsh would say, "But seriously folks", Are'nt all CBO's marginalized now, not even being mentioned in the recommendations? I would assume now, since the registry will now be the governing authority, and will probably adopt most of AMA's safety code, and I'm pretty sure it's not copyrighted, won't that make AMA simply a insurance provider? and if that is true, if I have other insurance equal to that of AMA, how could I be turned away from a ama chartered field if it is on public land? Is'nt that anti-trust insurance monopolizing? Just asking if anybody knows off-hand.

mike1974

My Feedback: (1)

Interesting thoughts. I have homeowners, so that is my primary insurance. I ONLY have AMA because our club requires it. Other then that I would not have AMA. Not hating on the AMA.

F-16 viperman

Not a AMA hater either. been a member almost 50 years. Turbine waiver holder for 13 of those years. Just want to Know where we're all going.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

The club treasurer shouldn't need to spend personal time validating a bunch of different insurance policies, researching fine print limitations, etc.
The insurance via AMA is universally accepted with a proven track record and it is dirt cheap.
All the club treasurer needs to see is a current AMA card and he can get on with his life.

F-16 viperman

Not answering My question. Could'nt that be considered Anti-trust For AMA to require the club to only accept Their insurance?

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I wonder if this registration/number will be required now to enter AMA events?

F-16 viperman

You know it.

Sport_Pilot

Just wait till $0.001 inflates to $1000. You think the AMA is expensive? Wait till Uncle Sam gets into your wallet.

rcmiket

I didn't read that anywhere in the "recommendations". Just one question did this pan out as you thought it would? It ain't written in stone yet but it's getting close.

Mike

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Where do you come up with this stuff? Did you see any one group mentioned in here in terms of their input? Was one group mentioned more than others...or was no specific group mentioned? LoL

rcmiket

Maybe the same place you came up with they were only going to register multi rotors. I don't think we (the AMA ) had much of a input either,
I just read read Dave's response to the recommendations. Would have been nice to get that across to the members of the committee. I'm sure it will show up in your mailbox soon but if you can;t wait it's on the AMA site.
This whole thing stinks. Plan B might not have worked either but Plan A never had a chance.

Mike

rgburrill

I you read it cllosely it says that IF THE FAA HAS TO IMPOSE A FEE then it should be $.001, effectively preventing a fee.