Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

New marking rule - Effective 25 February

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

New marking rule - Effective 25 February

Old 02-13-2019, 07:46 AM
  #1  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default New marking rule - Effective 25 February

Effective 25 February 2019 (note 1):

" 48.205 Display and location of unique identifier.(c) The unique identifier must be legibly displayed on an external surface of the small unmanned aircraft. (emphasis added)"

Note 1: https://www.regulations.gov/document...DOC_0001-17702
Old 02-13-2019, 08:47 AM
  #2  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

As small as legible, black for dark finish and white for light finish. Located on the fuselage right under the horizontal stab. Most people will never notice it there.

How Ya doing Frank? Coming home anytime soon?
Old 02-13-2019, 09:03 AM
  #3  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
As small as legible, black for dark finish and white for light finish. Located on the fuselage right under the horizontal stab. Most people will never notice it there.

How Ya doing Frank? Coming home anytime soon?
Doing fine. Home now. Have some stateside training later in the month, then back to "the -stan"
Old 02-13-2019, 09:48 AM
  #4  
do335a
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
As small as legible, black for dark finish and white for light finish. Located on the fuselage right under the horizontal stab. Most people will never notice it there.
Don't count on that:

 48.205 Display and location of unique identifier.

* * * * *

(c) The unique identifier must be legibly displayed on an external surface of the small unmanned aircraft.
Issued under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 41703, 44101-44103, in Washington, DC, on December 21, 2018.Daniel K. Elwell,Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-00765 Filed 2-12-19; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Re-read that part about "legibly displayed". There is no way that black on black or white on white would qualify. neither would anything of almost zero contrast.
Old 02-13-2019, 11:16 AM
  #5  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,238
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

This is a stupid law it requires all to reveal their number to everyone but it won't help anything. Does the FAA actually think if someone intends ill will with their model they will put
their number number on it.

Last edited by ira d; 02-13-2019 at 11:21 AM.
Old 02-14-2019, 05:34 AM
  #6  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by do335a View Post
Don't count on that:
 48.205 Display and location of unique identifier.

* * * * *

(c) The unique identifier must be legibly displayed on an external surface of the small unmanned aircraft.
Issued under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 41703, 44101-44103, in Washington, DC, on December 21, 2018.Daniel K. Elwell,Acting Administrator.



[FR Doc. 2019-00765 Filed 2-12-19; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

Re-read that part about "legibly displayed". There is no way that black on black or white on white would qualify. neither would anything of almost zero contrast.
Come on!. I DID say as small as LEGIBLE. And I did not say black on black. But black on brown or green?

You can brush on yours across the top of your wing if you so desire. But I intend to comply while displaying my middle finger!

Last edited by BarracudaHockey; 02-14-2019 at 08:14 AM.
Old 02-14-2019, 05:36 AM
  #7  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d View Post
This is a stupid law it requires all to reveal their number to everyone but it won't help anything. Does the FAA actually think if someone intends ill will with their model they will put
their number number on it.
Agreed! The only bad guys this one will catch are the really, really stupid ones!
Old 02-14-2019, 08:14 AM
  #8  
ETpilot
 
ETpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: East Texas
Posts: 1,199
Received 23 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

I read or saw a news report.

Bank robber hands note to teller wanting the money. Teller says she cannot give out money without proper ID. Robber gives up his ID. Could happen here too.

BTW, full scale aircraft have to display a data plate. Usually placed on fuselage under horizontal stabilizer. That is where mine is; full scale and model airplanes.
Old 02-14-2019, 07:54 PM
  #9  
tailskid
My Feedback: (34)
 
tailskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tolleson, AZ
Posts: 9,551
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

I wouldn't mind putting that stupid number BUT it is so L. O. N. G.
Old 02-17-2019, 07:57 AM
  #10  
H5487
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Guys,

DOC_0001-17702 is little more than a "feel good" action by the government. Even the dumbest fed is aware that our little balsawood planes are incapable of being modified into bonafide terrorist weapons but the public is scared to death of rampant terrorism eventually coming to the U.S. and is pressurizing the government to do something...ANYTHING!!!, to keep that from happening! As near as I can tell, no one has come up with a foolproof antiterrorism solution yet but putting tracking numbers on model airplanes might make the public feel better for awhile.

Of course, there are some RC'ers out there who aren't exactly helping the hobby either. It seems like almost every daily newscast these days includes a story of some butthead doing something stupid with an RC model somewhere!!!

Harv
Old 02-17-2019, 08:46 AM
  #11  
Stickslammer
 
Stickslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default


Just a few characters more than a regular N number. I`ll just get out my handy little P Touch label machine and run a few off. Back when I bought this it was about $120.00. Now you can get them for less than half that.
Old 02-17-2019, 08:51 AM
  #12  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by H5487 View Post
Guys,

DOC_0001-17702 is little more than a "feel good" action by the government. Even the dumbest fed is aware that our little balsawood planes are incapable of being modified into bonafide terrorist weapons (emphasis added) but the public is scared to death of rampant terrorism eventually coming to the U.S. and is pressurizing the government to do something...ANYTHING!!!, to keep that from happening! As near as I can tell, no one has come up with a foolproof antiterrorism solution yet but putting tracking numbers on model airplanes might make the public feel better for awhile.

Of course, there are some RC'ers out there who aren't exactly helping the hobby either. It seems like almost every daily newscast these days includes a story of some butthead doing something stupid with an RC model somewhere!!!

Harv
From May 2017 letter from DHS to FAA:

"In April 2014, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arrested a 27 year old Moroccan national who had entered the United States on a student visa seven years previously. According to the criminal complaint, the subject expressed a desire to attack a federal building in Connecticut using a 'remote-controlled hobby-type airplane' (emphasis added) to deliver an IED. In another case, a 2011 FBI indictment detailed the arrest of a 26 year old U.S. person, who was a physics graduate and student from Massachusetts, in an undercover operation for plotting to build small explosives-laden remote-controlled aircraft (emphasis added) to attack several targets in the National Capital Region. The subject was subsequently sentenced to 17 years in prison. Since 2014, FPS has investigated 123 incidents at federal facilities involving unmanned aircraft (emphasis added), which sometimes required evacuations and bomb squad response."
Old 02-17-2019, 08:52 AM
  #13  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Looks like I will be sending over a list for Callie.
Old 02-17-2019, 09:29 AM
  #14  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Double post

Last edited by speedracerntrixie; 02-17-2019 at 09:32 AM.
Old 02-17-2019, 04:08 PM
  #15  
H5606
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: TN
Posts: 908
Received 37 Likes on 36 Posts
Default

I'm an AMA member because I belong to an AMA chartered club.

Times have changed; there was a time we would have liked to have recovered lost models...

At the risk of having fingers pointed my way, I honestly believe I share the silent thoughts of a majority that would not want to share a unique identifier on their models.
Last time I had a fly-a-way was due to stupidity assisted by impairment and flying in a place I shouldn't have been; I was tempting fate by flying into and out of a low cloud layer. Now-a-days, genuine fly-a-ways are very unlikely but I set model failsafe to crash as expeditiously as possible like I'm sure many do anyway. I certainly wouldn't want to be bothered by the worry of a lost fly-a-way even if it landed unscathed. Would you?

Why would you want anyone - say a local farmer to discover your model in his field then report this find to FAA authorities and have them show up at your door because of a unique identifier?
Old 02-18-2019, 05:43 AM
  #16  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by H5606 View Post
I'm an AMA member because I belong to an AMA chartered club.

Times have changed; there was a time we would have liked to have recovered lost models...

At the risk of having fingers pointed my way, I honestly believe I share the silent thoughts of a majority that would not want to share a unique identifier on their models.
Last time I had a fly-a-way was due to stupidity assisted by impairment and flying in a place I shouldn't have been; I was tempting fate by flying into and out of a low cloud layer. Now-a-days, genuine fly-a-ways are very unlikely but I set model failsafe to crash as expeditiously as possible like I'm sure many do anyway. I certainly wouldn't want to be bothered by the worry of a lost fly-a-way even if it landed unscathed. Would you?

Why would you want anyone - say a local farmer to discover your model in his field then report this find to FAA authorities and have them show up at your door because of a unique identifier?
So you have a fly away. What's the big deal? If you fly it WILL happen. They key is to communicate it to the authorities. Let the local county police know, in case someone reports it. And notify the local FAA office. Being up front like that will remove all suspicion and might even get your model back. Having a unique number on it is no big deal. 99.9% of all Americans would have no clue how to find out any more info on you from that number.

You're in MD. I recall an incident with NVRC many years ago where a big Telemaster style model did a fly away. It started a free flight type of climbing circle. But the wind drifted it across Dulles. Communications with the Tower and ATC kept a potential crisis all on the up and up. To my knowledge there was no disruption to full size traffic as a result. So just be up front with the local authorities and all will be fine.

Or you could find another hobby!
Old 02-18-2019, 08:57 AM
  #17  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 26,205
Received 261 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

Is that like not using a license plate so you don't get red light camera tickets?
Old 02-18-2019, 03:53 PM
  #18  
LouieB
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The old "were do I put my registration sticker" problem. According to the section "I. Executive Summary", the battery compartment is OK if it is easily accessible without using a tool.

To grant flexibility to the diverse types of small unmanned aircraft commercially available, the FAA required that the registration number marking be readily accessible and maintained in a condition that is readable and legible upon close visual inspection. The IFR further explained that markings in an enclosed compartment, such as a battery compartment, will be considered readily accessible if they can be accessed without the use of tools.


I had asked the FAA a few days before the shut down this very question and the FAA responded just recently with:
Thank you for contacting the FAA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Support Center. Currently, internal marking of the aircraft is considered acceptable.Sincerely,PaulPLH


Of course the above would be acceptable if accessible without using a tool.

Last edited by LouieB; 02-18-2019 at 04:02 PM.
Old 02-18-2019, 04:01 PM
  #19  
LouieB
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by H5606 View Post
I'm an AMA member because I belong to an AMA chartered club.

Times have changed; there was a time we would have liked to have recovered lost models...

At the risk of having fingers pointed my way, I honestly believe I share the silent thoughts of a majority that would not want to share a unique identifier on their models.
Last time I had a fly-a-way was due to stupidity assisted by impairment and flying in a place I shouldn't have been; I was tempting fate by flying into and out of a low cloud layer. Now-a-days, genuine fly-a-ways are very unlikely but I set model failsafe to crash as expeditiously as possible like I'm sure many do anyway. I certainly wouldn't want to be bothered by the worry of a lost fly-a-way even if it landed unscathed. Would you?

Why would you want anyone - say a local farmer to discover your model in his field then report this find to FAA authorities and have them show up at your door because of a unique identifier?
The problem is not the farmer reporting the plane to the FAA ... a fly-a-way is not inherently illegal of itself. The bigger issue is did the plane do any damage and are you covered? The law is to have the sticker and not having the sticker gives your home owners insurance company an 'out' because you are flying illegally. So now, the claim
falls back to the AMA secondary insurance which may or may not cover the claim. That is yet, as far as I know, to be determined whether AMA insurance will cover an
incident where the aircraft was not registered or, registered and not labeled.

I asked my home owners ( Erie ) if they covered and there answer was if the plane is not registered and is being flown as a hobby it is very likely they will not cover the claim. They would likely consider it an illegal incident and not cover it. It would be up to the agent at the time. Any commercial flights and certainly they would not cover the incident.

Just as important is that not all home owner policy's will cover the RC plane. Erie happens to consider it a model so it comes under the H.O. policy. Other companies may consider the RC plane an 'aircraft' and in that case the H.O. policy probably would not cover the incident. Best to check with one's insurance agent to make certain if their H.O. covers R.C.

Last edited by LouieB; 02-18-2019 at 04:07 PM.
Old 02-18-2019, 06:48 PM
  #20  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by LouieB View Post
The problem is not the farmer reporting the plane to the FAA ... a fly-a-way is not inherently illegal of itself. The bigger issue is did the plane do any damage and are you covered? The law is to have the sticker and not having the sticker gives your home owners insurance company an 'out' because you are flying illegally. So now, the claim
falls back to the AMA secondary insurance which may or may not cover the claim. That is yet, as far as I know, to be determined whether AMA insurance will cover an
incident where the aircraft was not registered or, registered and not labeled.

I asked my home owners ( Erie ) if they covered and there answer was if the plane is not registered and is being flown as a hobby it is very likely they will not cover the claim. They would likely consider it an illegal incident and not cover it. It would be up to the agent at the time. Any commercial flights and certainly they would not cover the incident.

Just as important is that not all home owner policy's will cover the RC plane. Erie happens to consider it a model so it comes under the H.O. policy. Other companies may consider the RC plane an 'aircraft' and in that case the H.O. policy probably would not cover the incident. Best to check with one's insurance agent to make certain if their H.O. covers R.C.
For what it's worth, USAA will also cover recreational sUAS, flown at the home or somewhere else. I never asked the "what if it's not registered," only because I'm a rule follower and will always comply with the registration.
Old 02-19-2019, 03:14 AM
  #21  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

State Farm says they'll cover me for recreational flying. The question of registration never came up but I assume they would require it.

I also make sure I coordinate with the local airport (2.5 miles away) and I have written permission to overfly any adjacent properties. Whether I actually overfly them or not. Takes a little foot work at first but people are much more appreciative and willing to help when you do this. Except maybe in California....

But also make sure the type of flying fits the local environment. You're typically not going to fly a 200 mph jet at the edge of a subdivision. And if you're stupid enough to do so, I hope they lock you up!
Old 02-19-2019, 05:05 AM
  #22  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 26,205
Received 261 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LouieB View Post
The old "were do I put my registration sticker" problem. According to the section "I. Executive Summary", the battery compartment is OK if it is easily accessible without using a tool.

To grant flexibility to the diverse types of small unmanned aircraft commercially available, the FAA required that the registration number marking be readily accessible and maintained in a condition that is readable and legible upon close visual inspection. The IFR further explained that markings in an enclosed compartment, such as a battery compartment, will be considered readily accessible if they can be accessed without the use of tools.


I had asked the FAA a few days before the shut down this very question and the FAA responded just recently with:
Thank you for contacting the FAA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Support Center. Currently, internal marking of the aircraft is considered acceptable.Sincerely,PaulPLH


Of course the above would be acceptable if accessible without using a tool.
It has to be external now. Not inside and accessible, it has to be externally visible. They don't spell out where, color, font size etc but the idea is a first responder can look at your crashed drone with say binocolars and see its registered and not call out a bomb squad.

https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93045
Old 02-19-2019, 05:07 AM
  #23  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 26,205
Received 261 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LouieB View Post
The problem is not the farmer reporting the plane to the FAA ... a fly-a-way is not inherently illegal of itself. The bigger issue is did the plane do any damage and are you covered? The law is to have the sticker and not having the sticker gives your home owners insurance company an 'out' because you are flying illegally. So now, the claim
falls back to the AMA secondary insurance which may or may not cover the claim. That is yet, as far as I know, to be determined whether AMA insurance will cover an
incident where the aircraft was not registered or, registered and not labeled.

I asked my home owners ( Erie ) if they covered and there answer was if the plane is not registered and is being flown as a hobby it is very likely they will not cover the claim. They would likely consider it an illegal incident and not cover it. It would be up to the agent at the time. Any commercial flights and certainly they would not cover the incident.

Just as important is that not all home owner policy's will cover the RC plane. Erie happens to consider it a model so it comes under the H.O. policy. Other companies may consider the RC plane an 'aircraft' and in that case the H.O. policy probably would not cover the incident. Best to check with one's insurance agent to make certain if their H.O. covers R.C.
AMA has stated several times, that registration is NOT a requirement of your insurance, Clubs and CD's are not being tasked with verifying it, its between you and the feds, the analogy is that would be like them checking your car tags are current when you show up at the field.

BTW, what happens when you blow a light and hit a car, or cause a wreck driving DUI? Your car insurance still pays. They might drop you after, but they pay the claim.
Old 02-19-2019, 06:02 AM
  #24  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,292
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
AMA has stated several times, that registration is NOT a requirement of your insurance, Clubs and CD's are not being tasked with verifying it, its between you and the feds, the analogy is that would be like them checking your car tags are current when you show up at the field.

BTW, what happens when you blow a light and hit a car, or cause a wreck driving DUI? Your car insurance still pays. They might drop you after, but they pay the claim.
Except the major difference is that AMA is supposed to be one of the stakeholders who do the right thing when nobody is looking. Just imagine if the airlines took the same attitude as AMA - that it's not their job to verify maintenance record keeping, or not their job to ensure crews get appropriate rest? Checking cars is one, thing, that's not an aviation safety related function. But making sure an AVIATION group is following AVIATION rules, including registration, is directly related to AVIATION safety writ large.

In taking a hands-off attitude like that, AMA is doing nothing but proving to the other aviation safety stakeholders why their "safety management system" is a joke. No self enforcement. Yeah, that just screams credibility!
Old 02-19-2019, 06:10 AM
  #25  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 26,205
Received 261 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

They have encouraged people to comply with federal law.

As for the rest of your post, hyperbole

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.