AMA says, "Wait to register"
12-20-2015, 03:45 PM
#101
Here is an example of the idiots in the government and what we are dealing with. This is not about RC, but it is an example of the government making laws and having no clue at what they are talking about. She states a clip and then high capacity magazines. Two different things and a barrel shroud is not a thing that goes over your shoulder. These people are making and sign for laws they have no clue about what it is.
https://youtu.be/ospNRk2uM3U
Also, the FAA is not making you register you aircraft, but instead will issue one number you will put on all your aircraft. This is nothing more than pilot registration.
Now, they have stated that all your information will be accessible to the public. For this reason I will not register and basically we will be treated like a sex offender.
Lets say some idiots that bought a quad for his kid for Christmas losses control and it and it fly's a couple of blocks and lands on some big road rage dude's new corvette. Now the pissed off dude looks at the database, sees your name and that you live close by.
Next, the dude is pounding on your front door wanting to kick your ass. So, is the FAA thinking of you and your families safety when this happens? The FAA has not thought of the implications and that they could be responsible for someone be assaulted.
I think the FAA is opening themselves up to law suits and does not realize it.
Just me two cents.
https://youtu.be/ospNRk2uM3U
Also, the FAA is not making you register you aircraft, but instead will issue one number you will put on all your aircraft. This is nothing more than pilot registration.
Now, they have stated that all your information will be accessible to the public. For this reason I will not register and basically we will be treated like a sex offender.
Lets say some idiots that bought a quad for his kid for Christmas losses control and it and it fly's a couple of blocks and lands on some big road rage dude's new corvette. Now the pissed off dude looks at the database, sees your name and that you live close by.
Next, the dude is pounding on your front door wanting to kick your ass. So, is the FAA thinking of you and your families safety when this happens? The FAA has not thought of the implications and that they could be responsible for someone be assaulted.
I think the FAA is opening themselves up to law suits and does not realize it.
Just me two cents.
be at least 6 mo so the FAA can do more to get the word out.
12-20-2015, 05:38 PM
#103
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Telford, PA
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did not read all of the rules but I understand that even Control line have to be registered. WHY!!? Also I drive truck for a living I wonder if this will go the same way the CB licence did. A decade or more ago you had to have a licence and Reg. number and there where specific rules on how it was supposed to be used, CB's became so common place that it could not be enforced and was eventually droped. Just some random thoughts.
12-20-2015, 05:50 PM
#104
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Hudson Valley. New York. USA
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by porcia83
The government won't be running the website (thank god). That task has already been outsourced and a vendor will be doing that. Fingers crossed it's a competent one.
Last edited by BrightGarden; 12-20-2015 at 05:54 PM.
12-20-2015, 05:54 PM
#105
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Marseilles, IL
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RC Ken is correct , the wrong place to challenge tyranny is being on the loud end of the law's guns . The weird language of "owned before Dec 21" scares the Hell outta me cause I NEVER keep the receipts for my hobby purchases (after i assure their working status) and so how can I prove I owned my plane(s) before Dec 21 once it's January and some FAA guy wants to see my registration for such a "new" looking plane ? (ok , gotta admit , I'm kinda fanatical about the whole cleanliness thing and my planes all look pretty much new) .... So tell me , how many of you who keep your planes nice DO have receipts for them ? Good Grief a paper trail of all those receipts showing how much they cost could be a scary thing for a spouse to find , "You paid HOW much for that plane !?!?" , yep , gonna take some serious gold and maybe a diamond or two to get ya outta THAT mess ....
Anyway , I feel the AMA has only done half the job here , the rest being the removal of # 550 FPV . It's sad for the camera flyers but the bottom line here is that the FAA needs some means to distinguish model aircraft from drones . It's the ability to fly beyond line of sight that spooks the FAA and right now there is NO distinction between drones and model aircraft , AMA wise , cause # 550 FPV can fly BLOS any time the pilot chooses to do so .
I don't "Hate" drones nor their flyers ! I just don't believe they are model aircraft , they are tools to accomplish a mission other than just the flying itself . They have the ability to fly BLOS , we don't . There are enough differences between the flight modes that our model aircraft organization really has no place trying to incorporate them into our ranks , since they are NOT "models of aircraft" . And please , note my use of "aircraft" , I have no problem with your quad or octocopter if it's being flown LOS in the traditional model aircraft manner ! Just as I DO have a problem with your Multiplex Easystar outfitted with FPV gear going for a flight over your neighborhood , out of your direct line of sight , flying a drone MISSION in other words . Remember that word , mission , cause it's that , the mission of flying BLOS , that separates drones from model aircraft and not any physical attributes of the actual airframe itself . Got a camera or GPS ? to allow BLOS ? It's a drone . No equipment that could allow for BLOS ? It's a model aircraft .
I sure hope the AMA EC gets their heads on straight about this , eliminates any craft capable of BLOS from the ranks , and hunkers down to protect US who do fly "Model Aircraft" ! Till the BLOS ability is gone , I fear we have truly already lost as the FAA is not going to allow drone ops to be cloaked under the guise of being a model aircraft , and the AMA should have known better right from the start ......
Anyway , I feel the AMA has only done half the job here , the rest being the removal of # 550 FPV . It's sad for the camera flyers but the bottom line here is that the FAA needs some means to distinguish model aircraft from drones . It's the ability to fly beyond line of sight that spooks the FAA and right now there is NO distinction between drones and model aircraft , AMA wise , cause # 550 FPV can fly BLOS any time the pilot chooses to do so .
I don't "Hate" drones nor their flyers ! I just don't believe they are model aircraft , they are tools to accomplish a mission other than just the flying itself . They have the ability to fly BLOS , we don't . There are enough differences between the flight modes that our model aircraft organization really has no place trying to incorporate them into our ranks , since they are NOT "models of aircraft" . And please , note my use of "aircraft" , I have no problem with your quad or octocopter if it's being flown LOS in the traditional model aircraft manner ! Just as I DO have a problem with your Multiplex Easystar outfitted with FPV gear going for a flight over your neighborhood , out of your direct line of sight , flying a drone MISSION in other words . Remember that word , mission , cause it's that , the mission of flying BLOS , that separates drones from model aircraft and not any physical attributes of the actual airframe itself . Got a camera or GPS ? to allow BLOS ? It's a drone . No equipment that could allow for BLOS ? It's a model aircraft .
I sure hope the AMA EC gets their heads on straight about this , eliminates any craft capable of BLOS from the ranks , and hunkers down to protect US who do fly "Model Aircraft" ! Till the BLOS ability is gone , I fear we have truly already lost as the FAA is not going to allow drone ops to be cloaked under the guise of being a model aircraft , and the AMA should have known better right from the start ......
Actually, the "Loud end of the law's guns" are the only CRITICAL place to challenge tyranny. Tyrants depend on their subjects not being willing to pay the ultimate cost to challenge them. As one poster has said, sure glad you weren't in Boston in the late 18th century, or we all would be under England rule. Just sayin'...
12-20-2015, 06:33 PM
#106
Unluckily if you have a own an airplane, pilots license, A&P license, or any other FAA license, your info is publicly available. That part will not disappear. Before ID fraud was big, SSNs use to be available.
12-20-2015, 06:59 PM
#109
How many enimeies U have at your field. Besides the FAA doesn't give a crap about U and the AMA guys that fly at designated fields. It's all about trying to make the Droners responsible for their actions. Almost all law enforcement is "After the Fact" Other than Terrorism, U can't be prosecuted for non-compliance before the fact. They don't have to catch U the first or second time or maybe ever. The FAA only has to make a few examples by conviction and everyone but the real hard core DUMMMY will register and comply. What Prey tell is so difficult about getting a FREE number and putting i in your R/C TOY. Other than being one of the DUMMYS. If Registration doesn't work and is rejected by most I fear the FAA/DOT will require a special License to fly R/C Toys in the NAS.
12-20-2015, 07:18 PM
#110
It just boggles the Mind that anyone would fight getting a FREE Number from the FEDs and placing in ON/IN your R/C TOY. It satisfies the FAA and cost's U nothing. U pay for Plates for your car and many in the USA must be inspected every year. Don't forget the License U must have in your Possession to drive your car. The FAA can require ALL R/C Toys to be licensed and the Pilot too. Just as they already do if U Fly for anything but FUN or EDUCATION. Mark My words. That's the Next step if too many People refuse to register them selves as R/C TOY Flyers in the NAS. Just saying "
Fly and don't comply we'll all suffer the FAA's Dieir". They can even offer a say $1000 reward for info leading to a conviction for Flying with out Registration. Think that might take care of having to monitor everyone every where all the time.
Fly and don't comply we'll all suffer the FAA's Dieir". They can even offer a say $1000 reward for info leading to a conviction for Flying with out Registration. Think that might take care of having to monitor everyone every where all the time.
12-20-2015, 07:25 PM
#111
Actually, the "Loud end of the law's guns" are the only CRITICAL place to challenge tyranny. Tyrants depend on their subjects not being willing to pay the ultimate cost to challenge them. As one poster has said, sure glad you weren't in Boston in the late 18th century, or we all would be under England rule. Just sayin'...
Good grief can ANY of you discuss this without the personal attack BS ? I'm sure glad YOUR not in Boston NOW !
See how this works ? Feel good , does it , to post BS to some stranger you don't know , when you take a post out of context ?
Yes ! if your the type to lay down in front of a tank like in the Chinese pro demoracy uprising , Feel Free ! Go enjoy getting squished or shot . The SMART money is on getting involved to change things you don't like by working WITHIN the system , and THEN and ONLY then if the system is found to be unworkable THEN you stage your revolution . Now personally , BEFORE I go taking up arms against the FAA , I think I'll let the legal case play out , and save the guns blazin option till ALL other options have run out . You mr. big brave keyboard warrior , on the other hand , by all means feel free to go become the first example to be made of the new registration requirement . Who knows , maybe the registration will weed out irrational folks who jump off the cliff at a moment's notice , maybe not the type we want piloting ANYTHING , eh ?
I got your Boston right here , punk ......just sayin ......
12-20-2015, 08:25 PM
#113
12-20-2015, 09:40 PM
#116
My Feedback: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hartland,
WI
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Gawd. No wonder this is happening. Have you guys seen the inputs the FAA received?
Look here - I was able to make it halfway through. Paste this in your browser.
federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/16/2015-31750/registration-and-marking-requirements-for-small-unmanned-aircraft#h-26
We are a nothing. Just collateral damage. I like what the Green Vegans put in as a recommended action - incredible:
"Green Vegans stated that FAA must provide test data on the collision impact of a 55 pound UAS, traveling at various speeds, on both humans and birds. The advocacy group argued that the public cannot make informed comments on the proposed weight limitation without such data. The commenter also noted that such data would be provided by a National Environmental Protection Act Environmental Impact Statement, which the group stated FAA must do."
There were companies lobbying for a ten pound restriction. Back to the 60's for us.
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
So, since a kite is tethered ... do I need to register to fly it if it weighs more than .55 pounds?
Look here - I was able to make it halfway through. Paste this in your browser.
federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/16/2015-31750/registration-and-marking-requirements-for-small-unmanned-aircraft#h-26
We are a nothing. Just collateral damage. I like what the Green Vegans put in as a recommended action - incredible:
"Green Vegans stated that FAA must provide test data on the collision impact of a 55 pound UAS, traveling at various speeds, on both humans and birds. The advocacy group argued that the public cannot make informed comments on the proposed weight limitation without such data. The commenter also noted that such data would be provided by a National Environmental Protection Act Environmental Impact Statement, which the group stated FAA must do."
There were companies lobbying for a ten pound restriction. Back to the 60's for us.
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
So, since a kite is tethered ... do I need to register to fly it if it weighs more than .55 pounds?
12-20-2015, 10:04 PM
#118
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
My Gawd. No wonder this is happening. Have you guys seen the inputs the FAA received?
Look here - I was able to make it halfway through. Paste this in your browser.
federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/16/2015-31750/registration-and-marking-requirements-for-small-unmanned-aircraft#h-26
We are a nothing. Just collateral damage. I like what the Green Vegans put in as a recommended action - incredible:
"Green Vegans stated that FAA must provide test data on the collision impact of a 55 pound UAS, traveling at various speeds, on both humans and birds. The advocacy group argued that the public cannot make informed comments on the proposed weight limitation without such data. The commenter also noted that such data would be provided by a National Environmental Protection Act Environmental Impact Statement, which the group stated FAA must do."
There were companies lobbying for a ten pound restriction. Back to the 60's for us.
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
So, since a kite is tethered ... do I need to register to fly it if it weighs more than .55 pounds?
Look here - I was able to make it halfway through. Paste this in your browser.
federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/16/2015-31750/registration-and-marking-requirements-for-small-unmanned-aircraft#h-26
We are a nothing. Just collateral damage. I like what the Green Vegans put in as a recommended action - incredible:
"Green Vegans stated that FAA must provide test data on the collision impact of a 55 pound UAS, traveling at various speeds, on both humans and birds. The advocacy group argued that the public cannot make informed comments on the proposed weight limitation without such data. The commenter also noted that such data would be provided by a National Environmental Protection Act Environmental Impact Statement, which the group stated FAA must do."
There were companies lobbying for a ten pound restriction. Back to the 60's for us.
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
So, since a kite is tethered ... do I need to register to fly it if it weighs more than .55 pounds?
12-20-2015, 10:19 PM
#119
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
The FAA Small UAS registry is expected to go live during the day on December 21.
You didn't think they would put an exact time on there didja? Perhaps they read all those brilliant comments from folks who said everyone should try at the same time to crash their systems. Real smart eh? I'm really loving the suggestions from folks that they call and bother some of the staffers (usually the ones who have the misfortunes of you know, being a receptionist or operator), and berating them. Then there's the one where they want you to file complaints against specific FAA employees. Brilliant stuff eh? Next up, they will order 200 pizzas and have them delivered COD to the FAA. Yuk Yuk!
12-20-2015, 10:41 PM
#120
My Feedback: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hartland,
WI
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Porcia -
Totally agree - we are arrogant as a group if we think that the AMA had any real clout here. Their efforts probably saved us from more draconian rules, but there is no way that this registration process was going to be stopped by AMA. Not with the efforts of apparently more people than I ever imagined having something to say to the FAA about small unmanned vehicles. If you read the register ... our comments are in fact discussed, sometimes even down to what an individual RC guy said ... and it looks to me like the FAA acknowledged the size of our population ... but with all that, we fit into a relatively small space in the overall commentary.
As far as the folks that blame the AMA ... well, I'm a club officer, and I've been "elected" for several years with no opposition. It isn't because I do such a great job. It is because it is far easier to complain than it is to do something, and run for office. Same thing here in this forum. Those that want to lynch the AMA, go for it, as long as I see your name on the ballot next renewal.
By no means am I suggesting we should roll over on this - we need to continue to try to keep this rational with the FAA. They probably figure we are the only ones that actually know what we are talking about, given what I see in the register.
Totally agree - we are arrogant as a group if we think that the AMA had any real clout here. Their efforts probably saved us from more draconian rules, but there is no way that this registration process was going to be stopped by AMA. Not with the efforts of apparently more people than I ever imagined having something to say to the FAA about small unmanned vehicles. If you read the register ... our comments are in fact discussed, sometimes even down to what an individual RC guy said ... and it looks to me like the FAA acknowledged the size of our population ... but with all that, we fit into a relatively small space in the overall commentary.
As far as the folks that blame the AMA ... well, I'm a club officer, and I've been "elected" for several years with no opposition. It isn't because I do such a great job. It is because it is far easier to complain than it is to do something, and run for office. Same thing here in this forum. Those that want to lynch the AMA, go for it, as long as I see your name on the ballot next renewal.
By no means am I suggesting we should roll over on this - we need to continue to try to keep this rational with the FAA. They probably figure we are the only ones that actually know what we are talking about, given what I see in the register.
12-20-2015, 11:53 PM
#121
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Hudson Valley. New York. USA
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
...
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
After reading this nonsense ... it could have been much, much worse. There are a LOT of people out there that have it in for us. I would suggest that the "Don't Tread On Me" and the "Let's Accept This as Inevitable" crowds stop crapping on one another - we have to stick together. Reading the register makes me realize that the FAA is dealing with a large number of agendas here.
What motivates me, and you can see the new thread I started in the Clubhouse to organize all the information I am reading and hearing, is that I HAVE lived through this. It is the American way to undo such ridiculous rulings as this, I accept the challenge and will help anyone who has more clout than I do in overcoming this ruling.
The FAA has criminalized all RC flying in the public's eye and is setting up to have the public be its rabid watchdogs. Now, if someone just doesn't like you flying and calls law enforcement, you are simply doomed.
Somewhere within all this I do think the AMA can recover if it hunkers down and "gets stuff done."
Two natural occurrences that might mitigate the severity of the ruling in the future are 1) the multicopter rage turns out to be a fad, the hullabaloo goes away and over time AMA is able to reclaim its legitimacy, or 2) multirotors takes off and just like CB radios in the 70's (as some have pointed out), the registration and enforcement overwhelms authorities and the AMA is able to reclaim its legitimacy.
One last thing - did anyone see the size of the budgets that are proposed for running this - numbers in the dozens to hundreds of millions of dollars are proposed. More money, more power for the FAA. Get that budget!!!
Night out, PGregory.
12-21-2015, 03:36 AM
#123
Actually, the "Loud end of the law's guns" are the only CRITICAL place to challenge tyranny. Tyrants depend on their subjects not being willing to pay the ultimate cost to challenge them. As one poster has said, sure glad you weren't in Boston in the late 18th century, or we all would be under England rule. Just sayin'...
Really hound ? Really ? I was the first with a personal insult ???? What do you call this guy Dale calling me a damn wimp cause I'm not quite yet ready to take up pitchforks and torches against the FAA , ????? Are you for real , or are you SO blind that anyone who don't love your lousy stinkin drones is automatically the big bad bully , even when some A hole slams ME first ?????
Last edited by init4fun; 12-21-2015 at 07:49 AM.
12-21-2015, 03:41 AM
#124
My Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Beverly Hills, FL
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Website supposed to open 'sometime during the day' on 12/21. The credit card is part of the verification process and understanding was that you were always going to be charged the $5 fee but it would be immediately refunded (gov't talk for maybe sometime bye and bye). Just like some gas companies do when you stick your credit card in it immediately puts a small charge ($1) thru to make certain you're legit and the card is valid, then it authorizes the transaction.
12-21-2015, 03:44 AM
#125
The FAA has criminalized all RC flying in the public's eye and is setting up to have the public be its rabid watchdogs. Now, if someone just doesn't like you flying and calls law enforcement, you are simply doomed.