Broad new UAS rules proposed today

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
7,373
Location
North Carolina

Why you should be alarmed, even if you could care less about homebuilt RC...

FAA Announces Drone Remote ID Proposal

There's only 2 letters degree of separation away...

from criminalizing all unpiloted homebuilt aircraft, to criminalizing all piloted homebuilt aircraft.

But then, maybe you're down with being gangsta like me.

I'm totally okay with being a criminal. I've been a freedom fighter since I was born. That girl is a Tomboy... : - ):)

I can tell you one thing for sure, my fighter pilot great grandfather is groaning and rolling over in his grave.
I knew him well enough to know for gosh darn sure, an omnipotent omniscient police state is not what he thought he was fighting for in WW2... :-/
Yes, it does alarm me. My grandfather signed up on the first day of the war, likely for very similar reasons to yours. But trying to go head to head with the government isn't going to do anything useful for us here.

This proposed rule has come about because too many people have broken existing laws doing stupid things. Do more stupid stuff, they will throw more and more laws at us. if people decide to flout a new law, they will just make it harder and harder. Expect background checks, UAS pilot licenses (with tests) etc etc until people stop doing stupid **** with their drones. Please don't be one of those pissing off the law. They can and will conjure a bigger stick than any of us ever wants to ever see.

I have been on the other side of the law. I got off very lightly, but an arrest record is still a monumental PITA for my life. The only reason I didn't get thrown in prison for 5 years was because the target of my action was acting illegally and the body supposed to be regulating them were ignoring a LOT of independant complaints. Think REALLY carefuly before you do something illegal. Gangsta culture is mostly about bullpoop, it's not something a sane person should aspire to.

If you want to do something positive, write a letter to your representative. Tell him/her why this rule is bad and perhaps suggest something that might keep both sides grumbling in agreement. Facts are very good.
 

Himat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
2,865
Location
Norway
This proposed rule has come about because too many people have broken existing laws doing stupid things. Do more stupid stuff, they will throw more and more laws at us. if people decide to flout a new law, they will just make it harder and harder. Expect background checks, UAS pilot licenses (with tests) etc etc until people stop doing stupid **** with their drones. Please don't be one of those pissing off the law. They can and will conjure a bigger stick than any of us ever wants to ever see.
I am not sure that is all about the reason for legislation. Look what is happening outside the USA. There may be some anxiety that the drone plague will come to the USA too. Drone use have been “pioneered” over places like Afghanistan. Then, with the attack on Saudi Arabian oil infrastructure it was clear, the genie is out of the bottle. Now "all" have and uses "drones". Not that there have not been signs before, commercial available “drones” have been reported modified and used as weapons around the world.

It could be that someone with power is afraid enough to want to get rid of all private RC airplanes, multicopters and the like so there is no crowd to hide in for a villain. And to diminish the pool of parts to draw from. Only professional, regulated use will be allowed.
 

gtae07

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
1,886
Location
Savannah, Georgia
It could be that someone with power is afraid enough to want to get rid of all private RC airplanes, multicopters and the like so there is no crowd to hide in for a villain. And to diminish the pool of parts to draw from. Only professional, regulated use will be allowed.
The more I read, the more I think that's the case.

Usually when I see outrage about new FAA regulations etc, I read through them and see that it's not as bad as it first sounded. In this case though, the more I read, the worse it sounds and the more horrified I get.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,683
Location
USA.
At this rate will there be a charge for using the air to breath in the future ?
 

jvliet

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Messages
8
The FAA is under no obligation to consider any of the comments we make to the NPRM; we have seen many times in the past that the FAA considers themselves more expert and more knowledgeable than the airspace users they regulate. The only way we can have any voice in this matter is to immediately write a letter to your elected representatives in Congress and gently point out that this is their fault for removing Section 336 model airplane protections from last year's FAA Reauthorization bill. Congress is the only entity that can force the FAA to create fair and just regulations for all airspace users, and now we must call on Congress to step in and fix the problem they created by giving the FAA free reign.

And...I share the concern that commercial drones operating in USA airspace could be weaponized; did you know that roughly 80% of commercial drones sold in the USA are manufactured by DJI, a Chinese company? What if all these Chinese drones had an electronic backdoor that allowed someone other than the operator to take control? Scary... the answer to that would be to raise public awareness by encouraging a Hollywood studio to make a major movie of drones being hacked and running amok, first silently stalking and then attacking helpless citizens until the hero steps in and saves the day!!
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Memphis, TN
Checklist for legal terrorist drone

1. Buy legal drone with ID
2. Fly drone in suspicious way
3. Run from scene
4. Make law enforcement look for them

Don’t want to be illegal if being a terrorist.
 

Himat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
2,865
Location
Norway
EASA did also pass new UAS regulations that come in force during 2020. The big difference from the FAA proposal is that it was specified that when the member countries implement the EASA UAS regulative as national laws, model organized airplane activity should be allowed to continue as before. That is, members of national model airplane clubs, associations and the like are allowed to continue as before.

Commercial operators, non-organized model airplane operators and manufacturers/sellers of “toy” drones have to comply. “Toy drones” heavier than 250g are still in the shops, so exactly what the restrictions are I have not got around to read about.
 
Last edited:

choppergirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
1,671
Location
Choppergirl's Flying Circus ★★☠★★ AIR-WAR.ORG
Current world events as of January 7, 2020 are not helping the homebuilt aviation hobby one bit....
Declaring no fly zones everywhere for non-commercial big bus passenger hauling aircraft is next :-/
You know the justification your hobby is going to get toasted next?
The revenge bent guys that flew airplanes into the WTC trained in Florida in a little private planes...

My friend from AZ sent me a map today of all the patch work quilt no-fly zones covering his county just because of the news story of the desert sighting of all those non-indentifying quadcopters (and why should they identify, who cares? I don't know 99%+ of who's in the cars that pass me on the road).
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,683
Location
USA.
" I don't know 99%+ of who's in the cars that pass me on the road.

Unless some thinking is changed, that is in the near future right after ANY aircraft that leaves the ground.
After all it's for your safety.
 

choppergirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
1,671
Location
Choppergirl's Flying Circus ★★☠★★ AIR-WAR.ORG
The FAA has no obligation to listen to anything we say, and coversely and reciprocally, we have no obligation to listen to anything they say*. I didn't sign anything that says I would obey any laws regarding use of the air, sorry. Obey who you want to obey, I myself am going to run with "slash ignore the FAA". I think they did a pretty great job back in the day coming up with some level headed guilde lines and rules to make public and private aviation safe (as long as the pilot has the ultimate authority in any situation to decide the best course of action, i.e., I'm siding with Captain Sulivan aka Sully on this one), but when it comes to flexing their established muscle today, as a tool of big corporate interests (think Amazon drone deliveries), or military interests (No homebrew drones to compete with Darpa created computer controlled swarming drones), the FAA is way of kilter.

The more quadcopter videos I watch, and I've been binge watching them daily for the last month or two (ZOMG I'm in love with flying again :) esp. these beast/xclass quads), the more I see that OMG, I just missed the Golden Age of Quadcopters... but only by a few years, not by a few decades, like the Golden Age of Hang Gliders and Ultralights back in the 1980's in my Berger-Burr's Encyclopedia of Ultralights.

And it's not too late for me to catch the tail end, maybe even be on the springboard to even bigger developments. And I didn't entirely miss it - at the time the scene was exploding, I was inside a video game flying very quadcopter like vehicles... and hacking them to be faster, wilder, more fun. A real quadcopter compared to what I designed back in the day, is a Tazmanian Devil in the air, a whirlwind, and I was like wow, this is Formula 1 in the air.


You don't need a honking big airplane any more to get a first person view of flying, and you don't even need to be in a cockpit risking your neck and guzzling gas to do it. Flying quadcopters really is cheap aircraft for the masses. They aren't entirely cheap, but the prices --> down. So why on earth would you want to quash it. You know what will happen? China and Europe will zoom right pass you technologically, in that area of grassroots hobbiest/enthusiast driven research and development, and not blink an eye.

As far as quadcopter people doing "dumb ****" to invite draconian regulation - I just haven't seen it yet, anywhere. I'm not saying its impossible, it's totally possible, esp. with bigger, heavier, and faster machines with spinning propellor blades of whirling death (just like the front nose of an airplane)... the general "unskilled at flying yet" public doesn't dabble in those big, heavy, and/or fast machines yet because they are $$$ and bleeding edge and you have to build them yourselves... I just don't see it in the videos I watch yet. Any stupid quad video crash fail videos are of new people to the hobby crashing off the shelf consumer toys or something they dove into without practicing in a simulator.

All the "dumb ****" see that makes the news is a) private planes crashing (into houses, is that a new thing now?) and catching fire... I can only guess it's aging pilots which is sad... b) military aircraft and military drone strikes wholesale and openly outright killing people.... which... if anything should be illegal, that should be. Why isn't the FAA regulating that away? Those are the real threats to public safety on the ground. Say goodbye to Stuka Dive Bombers, A-10 Warthogs, General Dynamics Predator Drones, B-52 Bombers, Spooky Gunships and the like. You want to outlaw any dangerous flying machines, take aim at the military types.

Unless private citizens can wield the same kind of power. You know, if the government can own guns, so can you too, to keep them in check and a balance of power. Only instead of guns, weaponized aircraft. Tit for tat. A gun is no longer going to keep any rogue government in check, when they wild and fly things that spew lead like Apache gunships or Hueys with chainguns on them. But I digress, hobbiest aren't even doing that, any more than homebuilt aircraft people are. We just want to fly. On the cheap. And have fun doing it. :)

A friend offered me a free 503 with a gorgeous redrive the other day - and I'm like, I'll take it, *but* my ultralight airplanes are in a holding pattern at the moment. They sit in the shop collecting dust, quietly waiting for some day when I'm interest in them again... because right now, they now seem like an anachronism to me and... obsolete. I don't need an 18ftx30ft behemoth to get above the trees, and I don't want to go back to that by seeing a chilling downward effect on one hella cool blooming hobby. I can't setup a 500ft long public airfield in our pecan orchard, but a quadcopter race course - with gates - totally doable! Maybe even doable by next spring. And that's exciting.

So yeah... nix on all these new rules the FAA is are trying to brainstorm or run down someone's throat. They are out of their friggin ever loving mind. When you actually see these hobby planes and quads in person, the large majority of them are no bigger than a coffee table picture book, and not a whole lot of threat to anyone, as most have battery run times under 3.5 minutes. Three minutes in the air is not a whole lot of time... you can zoom around some trees in a park or backyard and get your toy stuck in a tree, and that's about it for the big majority of people. You're then either walking, or throwing sticks into the tree to get it down. Far from being deadly threats, just about all of them are 3 minutes... LIPO Limited.


*(remember 55mph interstate speeds that everyone started to ignore and gradually drive faster and faster, so the Highway Department kept having to incrementally raise the speeds to make it seem like everyone was still complying? At 65mph, 75mph, 85mph, everyone was breaking the law... and if you're fine doing that, what other rules do you start pushing the envelope on? )
 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Memphis, TN
Part of the problem is no one comments. Not to a percentage that is important. If 50,000 comments were made, they wound start thinking hard. When they get 50, it’s an automatic pass.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,683
Location
USA.
There is now a shortage of pilots in the airlines and in the military. IF this is passed as written, it could be a threat to our national security in the future. A huge percentage of the commercial and military pilots become interested in aviation as a child. They started building model airplanes, flying RC and then went on to flight instruction for their rating if possible. That part of the conduit will be taken away. So , there is going to be less and less pilots, military manned and unmanned pilots for the demand.

I will be flying 50 years this year. As much as I love aviation and its been my life since I was 5 years old. Flying is the only thing I ever wanted to do. In todays world, it would hurt very much, but I would walk away from it.
I tried to join the military in the spring of 1959. I told the recruiters that If I could fly anything, I would join. I had just started wearing glasses, and at the time you had to have 20-20 uncorrected vision to fly for the military or airlines. It broke my heart, I wouldn't go to an airport until I was ask to help in the ground crew of a sail plane club almost 10 years latter. In 1965, a friend of mine that I flew RC with told me about a 1956 Cessna 172 that was for sale. We went and looked at it, but both of us just couldn't afford it together. Broken both of our hearts. Only time in the almost 10 years that I went to an airport.
In 1992, I was looking for a Cessna 172 to restore. Found a project in Greenville , Tn were the fuselage was in a chicken house and wings and engine in a wood work shop and everything else in boxes. After buying it and trucking it home. Gave the log books a better look, it was the same 1956 Cessna 172 that we had looked at in PA in 1965. That airplane was special to me and I flew it for several years.
(Made in Nov, 1955 and was the 271 made ).
 

Attachments

Last edited:

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
10,489
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Part of the problem is no one comments. Not to a percentage that is important. If 50,000 comments were made, they wound start thinking hard. When they get 50, it’s an automatic pass.
My personal experience with other federal agencies wrt input on rule making (EPA) and requesting variances (EPA, DOE, COE, NRC, FERC), is that the quality of the argument is what matters.


BJC
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Memphis, TN
True it needs to be quality. But I believe there is a petition number at which no matter how dumb the request, it has to be considered.

Pops, in ninth grade I got glasses. I had been feed old information about vision and flying, from all the old hands and my dad. He had glasses and could not fly or do subs at the time, so for years I stayed away from full size aviation. I stopped model building and flying about five years after too. Ten years later looking for a career change and decided to go be an A&P. I decided that at least I could be around airplanes. Of course I learned that I could have been flying all the time.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,683
Location
USA.
True it needs to be quality. But I believe there is a petition number at which no matter how dumb the request, it has to be considered.

Pops, in ninth grade I got glasses. I had been feed old information about vision and flying, from all the old hands and my dad. He had glasses and could not fly or do subs at the time, so for years I stayed away from full size aviation. I stopped model building and flying about five years after too. Ten years later looking for a career change and decided to go be an A&P. I decided that at least I could be around airplanes. Of course I learned that I could have been flying all the time.
Back in 1958 you couldn't fly Military or for the Airline if you didn't have 20-20 uncorrected vision. Holdover from WW-2. It changed latter. Don't know your age but I guess its several years younger than I am.

Back to the thread-- Why not just band cameras from RC and Drones except for commercial use. Leave the 400' altitude limit and line of site for both. Cameras in drones are also an attack on peoples privacy.
 
Last edited:

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,259
Location
Fresno, California
Actually, they are required by law to consider public input in most cases of rule making. They are not required to agree, which is good because most proposed rules receive comments of support as well as opposition.

BJC
I remember attending some of the NPRM public hearings in the 80’s concerning major airspace changes (I don’t recall the specific issue, but one of the affected airspaces was the Ontario ONT TRSA). All of these meetings were well attended and some were convention-sized. In every meeting, there was absolutely NO show of support. Speaking out loudly against the change was all of the GA pilots, all of the commercial and professional pilots, all of the related pilot unions and organizations (including AOPA and EAA), airline reps, airport managers and/or owners, individual Air Traffic Controllers, ATC professional organizations, airline representatives, the military, and even some of the regional FAA staff. The proposed rule was adopted and implemented as published.
 
Last edited:
2
Group Builder
Top