FAA ,you must now register drones

[Daveroo]

<header class="entry-header" style="color: rgb(55, 55, 55); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24.375px;">FAA announces registration system for drones (http://fireaviation.com/2015/12/14/faa-announces-registration-system-for-drones/)Posted on December 14, 2015 (http://fireaviation.com/2015/12/14/faa-announces-registration-system-for-drones/) by Bill Gabbert (http://fireaviation.com/author/jackson8862/)
(http://fireaviation.com/2015/12/14/faa-announces-registration-system-for-drones/#respond)
</header>Today the Federal Aviation Administration announced a system for registering small drone aircraft, or Unmanned Aerial Systems. Maybe this will reduce the potential for them to interfere with aircraft engaged in close air support over wildfire. A number of times this year all helicopters and aircraft had to be grounded when drones were seen in the air near going fires. At least it will give the FAA the opportunity to contact the law abiding drone pilots who register their aircraft, telling them where they CAN’T fly.
Below is a press release from the FAA:
****
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today announced a streamlined and user-friendly web-based aircraft registration process for owners of small unmanned aircraft (UAS) weighing more than 0.55 pounds (250 grams) and less than 55 pounds (approx. 25 kilograms) including payloads such as on-board cameras.
The Registration Task Force delivered recommendations to FAA Administrator Michael Huerta and Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx on November 21. The rule incorporates many of the task force recommendations.
“Make no mistake: unmanned aircraft enthusiast are aviators, and with that title comes a great deal of responsibility,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “Registration gives us an opportunity to work with these users to operate their unmanned aircraft safely. I’m excited to welcome these new aviators into the culture of safety and responsibility that defines American innovation.”
Registration is a statutory requirement that applies to all aircraft. Under this rule, any owner of a small UAS who has previously operated an unmanned aircraft exclusively as a model aircraft prior to December 21, 2015, must register no later than February 19, 2016. Owners of any other UAS purchased for use as a model aircraft after December 21, 2015 must register before the first flight outdoors. Owners may use either the paper-based process or the new streamlined, web-based system. Owners using the new streamlined web-based system must be at least 13 years old to register.
Owners may register through a web-based system at www.faa.gov/uas/registration
Registrants will need to provide their name, home address and e-mail address. Upon completion of the registration process, the web application will generate a Certificate of Aircraft Registration/Proof of Ownership that will include a unique identification number for the UAS owner, which must be marked on the aircraft.
Owners using the model aircraft for hobby or recreation will only have to register once and may use the same identification number for all of their model UAS. The registration is valid for three years.
The normal registration fee is $5, but in an effort to encourage as many people as possible to register quickly, the FAA is waiving this fee for the first 30 days (from Dec. 21, 2015 to Jan 20, 2016).
“We expect hundreds of thousands of model unmanned aircraft will be purchased this holiday season,” said FAA Administrator Huerta. “Registration gives us the opportunity to educate these new airspace users before they fly so they know the airspace rules and understand they are accountable to the public for flying responsibly.”
The online registration system does not yet support registration of small UAS used for any purpose other than hobby or recreation – for example, using an unmanned aircraft in connection with a business. The FAA is developing enhancements that will allow such online registrations by spring of 2016.

[Allen]

Horse, open barn door=too late.

[Naismith]

My mind drifts back to CB radio. People were a real pain in the butt using it. It was all the rage, then the government (UK) licensed it. Killed it stone dead. With luck this may be the same for these drones.

[Tako_Kichi]

My mind drifts back to CB radio. People were a real pain in the butt using it. It was all the rage, then the government (UK) licensed it. Killed it stone dead. With luck this may be the same for these drones.
LOL...ain't that the truth! I had an illegal CB in the UK and got a legal one when they came out. A year later I took my Ham Radio exam and then got to play with real radios. I still have all my VHF/UHF radios in boxes (unused these days) but I sold all my HF stuff (apart from all my morse keys) years ago.

[n4gix]

Like the FCC is unable to enforce licensing requirements for huge swaths of spectrum covered by CB, FRS, GMRS and MURS, the FAA will be totally unable to enforce this "drone registration" scheme.

Unlike the UK, here in the U.S. CB started as a formally licensed service, and remained so for over a decade. Having realized that they simply did not have the resources to enforce the formal license scheme, they changed the language to make is "licensed by rule", which is a fancy way of saying "we give up!"

On the other hand, having a formal registration scheme as a force of law will enable more stringent penalties when offenders are caught using an unlicensed drone.

[TuFun]

Penalties:

The mandatory registration applies only recreational drones, with commercial use of drones still banned unless the operator has been granted an exemption (http://www.gizmag.com/faa-commercial-drone-flight/36704/) from the FAA. Civil penalties for non-registration can carry up to a $27,500 fine, while criminal penalties go as high as $250,000 and up to three years in prison.

[modelr]

As a member of the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) and an R/C pilot since 1981, I do not see this as a safety issue, but as a government agency's massive overstepping of it's authority, as both houses of Congress had specifically told them to NOT include model aircraft and their pilots in their ruling. But they ignored Congress and went directly after the hobbiest, because they knew that the lawbreakers who have already performed the alleged infractions which were claimed to have occurred would never be caught anyway, as they would not mark their "drones " in the first place. The hobbiest is a soft target who is not the problem, but is a good source of revenue.

The AMA has filed suit and asked for expidited review, telling it's members to hold off on registering until the due date, or an injunction ruling, whichever comes first. Especially since it's members already have registered and paid dues for the privilege of flying already, and our aircraft already have markings required to identify the owner.

This will make no impact on the problem in any way, shape or form.

[hairyspin]

Seems like a legal drone's response, not an intelligent one. Stable door, indeed.

[KellyB]

As a member of the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) and an R/C pilot since 1981, I do not see this as a safety issue, but as a government agency's massive overstepping of it's authority, as both houses of Congress had specifically told them to NOT include model aircraft and their pilots in their ruling. But they ignored Congress and went directly after the hobbiest, because they knew that the lawbreakers who have already performed the alleged infractions which were claimed to have occurred would never be caught anyway, as they would not mark their "drones " in the first place. The hobbiest is a soft target who is not the problem, but is a good source of revenue.

The AMA has filed suit and asked for expidited review, telling it's members to hold off on registering until the due date, or an injunction ruling, whichever comes first. Especially since it's members already have registered and paid dues for the privilege of flying already, and our aircraft already have markings required to identify the owner.

This will make no impact on the problem in any way, shape or form.

I don't understand: How have you registered and paid dues? Is this a fed reg? If so, then I should think you'd be ok.
I don't hear any concern for the real world airline pilots reporting the nearby presence of these drones in controlled airspace. Like the idiots with the laser pointers, the air will be full of drones operated by people who probably can't spell aeronautical properly and whose regard for others is extremely limited.
I'm no fan of the government's attempts at regulation of anything, normally, but when an airbus crashes on landing because some child-minded idiot thought it was fun to fly with the big boys, there may be an outright ban imposed. So caution, folks. If you poke that pile of Stuff in DC too hard, bad gasses emanate.

[modelr]

I don't understand: How have you registered and paid dues? Is this a fed reg? If so, then I should think you'd be ok.
I don't hear any concern for the real world airline pilots reporting the nearby presence of these drones in controlled airspace. Like the idiots with the laser pointers, the air will be full of drones operated by people who probably can't spell aeronautical properly and whose regard for others is extremely limited.
I'm no fan of the government's attempts at regulation of anything, normally, but when an airbus crashes on landing because some child-minded idiot thought it was fun to fly with the big boys, there may be an outright ban imposed. So caution, folks. If you poke that pile of Stuff in DC too hard, bad gasses emanate.

First of all, the registration and dues are paid to the AMA, for our insurance and other things associated with the national group, including government advocacy. The US Congress made it clear to the FAA this was enough, but the FAA decided otherwise. Our aircraft are already required to carry personal identification on/in them when flown, the FAA now wants more. The ones who will/do fly irresponsibly, will NOT follow those rules anyway. But that has never stopped a bureaucrat, bent on control of everything.

Reports of/by the real world pilots have been found to be mostly false, or incorrect, after investigation. Most have been found to actually be birds, others have been found to be MILITARY DRONES!! The ones we have heard about at newsworthy sites have been found to be operated by news crews. These are not presently being covered under the registration program, nor are any others used for BUSINESS purposes! Why not? These are all TECHNICALLY illegal, but are given waivers, except for the manufacturers in the hobby, who, under this ruling, are actually being made illegal!


http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2015/12/17/hold-off-on-registering-model-aircraft/

[KellyB]

DonH: I truly get your frustration with the FAA. The three letter agencies down in Foggy Bottom are a government unto themselves, apparently without any necessity to accede to the will of the Congress or anyone else.

I really hope your organization can find someone in the FAA who is capable of some sort of consecutive thought to un ****** this shotgun style approach to a specific problem. I am a member of BoatUS, a similar sort of organization for the recreational boater, and years ago when it was decided in Congress to assess a "User fee" for the Coast Guard they lobbied hard and got it shot down. Interestingly, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, when summoned before the Congress to "discuss" this "fee" asked what portion of the revenues would accrue to the Coast Guard. He was told, none: It would go into the general fund. He then said that it was not a fee but a tax, and indicated that he had neither the standing nor the manpower to collect taxes, politely bid them good day, and left. I asked the Coast Guard locally how to pay the fee, and was told there was no mechanism, nor would they be looking for boats without stickers or prosecuting failure to pay the tax.

FootNote: I called my representatives and told them that I would happily pay the $50.00 directly to the Coast Guard as a small thanks for all they do, but that I truly balked at this poor excuse just to gather more money for whatever.

Good luck in the fight.