BREAKING!!! U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

If the
Oh, right. If I promise to only fly within the FAA guidelines, I won't have to register?? LOL!

The cutoff for toys will likely be below the Phantom threshold. Expect to see registration required for any model aircraft with a gross takeoff weight of one pound or more. Any model aircraft.
With 1 lb many of what we consider "toys" will be encompassed. Hopefully it stretches out to at least 2 lbs but only time will tell.
 
If the

With 1 lb many of what we consider "toys" will be encompassed. Hopefully it stretches out to at least 2 lbs but only time will tell.

What ever the "weight" criteria is, you know a plethora of add-on or in this case add off folks will come up with lighter components to take you under the threshold and negate registration.
If they use a single line of delineation, unlikely, but if they do, the drones 1 gram under the line will sell like hotcakes....
 
Hopefully it's a bit more refined than just AUW.
A prime factor of risk for airborne and ground collisions is the kinetic energy (i.e., velocity and mass) and the frangibility of a UAS vehicle.
 
Oh, right. If I promise to only fly within the FAA guidelines, I won't have to register?? LOL!

The cutoff for toys will likely be below the Phantom threshold. Expect to see registration required for any model aircraft with a gross takeoff weight of one pound or more. Any model aircraft.
Do you have a citation for this, or is it a personal assumption?
 
Do you have a citation for this, or is it a personal assumption?
For once, I have nothing.
But there is no way the FAA is going to give the Phantom class of drone a pass on registration because it's the most common model and it could easily be the drone described in many of the "Drone Sightings" in the FAA database.
 
For once, I have nothing.
But there is no way the FAA is going to give the Phantom class of drone a pass on registration because it's the most common model and it could easily be the drone described in many of the "Drone Sightings" in the FAA database.
I'm sure they want every Phantom registered - that is my assumption.

I was wondering more specifically what you knew when you said "any model?"
Were you inferring that all models (fixed wing, park flyers, etc.) are to be included?
Or did you mean all models of the Phantom line?
 
Last edited:
Agree with Steve, especially after once again seeing a Phantom as an exhibit at another congressional hearing. Phantoms will not get a pass from registration. This breakpoint of register or not will be a major, or perhaps minor, wrestling point for the announced members of the task force. You may also see another point of contention established with the "traditional" build-to-fly and ready-to-fly hobbyists. The traditionals flying LOS and no FPV, no GPS and no autonomous flight versus the "new age" ready-to-fly with all the latest tech. You see this divide already being discussed as a possible registration factor.
 
Last edited:
My opinion just based on watching the FAA activities for the past 20 years and knowing who some of the members of the task force are, there will likely be no exception for traditional hobby aircraft. But I can see the task force giving the AMA the opportunity to be a registrar for their members. (And then watch the AMA membership skyrocket).

By the way, this is not "The Obama Administration" doing this. This is the DOT and the FAA wanting to cover their collective *** irregardless of who is the current president. It's what any bureaucracy does. If the billion to one accident happens, they don't want to be standing in front of the bank of news microphones unable to say they didn't precog the accident and do something to alter the future. (Yes, I've been watching "Minority Report").
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pulsar747n
As with all 'regulations', once the final details are released, DJI will alter the phantom so it's not covered, then the gov't will change the guidelines. Rinse and repeat.

Again, completely meaningless regulation that will not prevent anything, but will create criminals out of people trying to be law abiding citizens, because of the confusion surrounding what is or isn't covered.
 
As with all 'regulations', once the final details are released, DJI will alter the phantom so it's not covered, then the gov't will change the guidelines. Rinse and repeat.

Again, completely meaningless regulation that will not prevent anything, but will create criminals out of people trying to be law abiding citizens, because of the confusion surrounding what is or isn't covered.
As I said above, my guess is that the registration threshold will be one pound. The Parrot AR Drone 2 is a smidge under one pound and can easily get up to 5,000 ft. So, while I don't expect it, I would not be surprised to see the threshold at 300g, or less.
 
The gov. Does,nt even have money balance the bugdet so how are they going come up with the cash to regulate drones ?
The program will explode in there face.
 
By Christmas? I'll believe it when I see it. If the government can move fast on this, why not more pressing issues?
With people treating drone flying like the wild west it is bound to happen.

Besides, you could always build your own as I have done in the past.

(PS - You guys were seconds apart but you win)
They will have it done by Christmas. All they need to do is eliminate any requirement for input from the people. I can see how it will work.... The police see a person flying a drone/model, and they ask that person to produce their registration. No registration ?? ticketed and fined and harassed right on the spot. More police interference. Yup, just what we need the the good old USA.
 
In typical 21st Century style, these new laws (they are laws) are being passed not by Congress, but by unelected bureaucrats. Only Congress has the power to create taxes. If the FAA requires money, it's more proof that we bow to civil servants.
 
They will have it done by Christmas. All they need to do is eliminate any requirement for input from the people.
The Federal Aviation Administration has the right under federal law to issue emergency regulations related to air safety. But an emergency has to exist first. Just because an rogue drone might cause an accident is not an emergency and smacks of "Minority Report". I am not opposed to ensuring that people fly responsibly, including taking responsibly if their drone causes a problem. But this rush to judgement through an emergency SFAR to register all drones and model aircraft is simply a hysterical solution to an imagined problem. But that's what bureaucracies do - make regulations to appear to be doing something.

The normal approach to rulemaking is notice, comment, and then publishing the rule. Publishing a direct final rule which skips the notice step appears to violate the Administrative Procedures Act (APA); however, the APA allows the FAA to issue a direct final rule (also called a Special Federal Aviation Regulation, SFAR) without any notice when the FAA has good cause. 5 USC §553(b)(3)(B) in the APA says:
"(B) when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest."

The FAA explains that it issues direct final rules in two situations defined in 14 C.F.R. § 11.29:
"(a) We may issue a final rule without first requesting public comment if, for good cause, we find that an NPRM is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. We place that finding and a brief statement of the reasons for it in the final rule. For example, we may issue a final rule in response to a safety emergency.
(b) If an NPRM would be unnecessary because we do not expect to receive adverse comment, we may issue a direct final rule."


In typical 21st Century style, these new laws (they are laws) are being passed not by Congress, but by unelected bureaucrats. Only Congress has the power to create taxes. If the FAA requires money, it's more proof that we bow to civil servants.
Congress makes laws and Federal departments and agencies make rules and regulations to comply with those laws. Registering model aircraft has absolutely nothing to do with money. If you think the agency charges fees to raise funds, then you do not understand how the US economic system works. Further, the fees collected would amount to couch lint in a $9 billion budget. 31 USC § 9701 – “Fees and charges for Government services and things of value” says the fees should consider “the value of the service or thing to the recipient”. Model aircraft registration is of no value to the recipient and is only an illogical response to the public hysteria over something that's never happened. In my opinion there should be no fee to the model aircraft owner for a service that contains no benefit or value to the recipient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brad Pierce
Taxes and fees don't just exist to fund government functions. Many exist to modify, change, or encourage behaviors. The tax tables encourage people to be married, have children, and own homes. "Sin" taxes try to discourage people from smoking and drinking. Fees can also be used to modify behavior. For example, a "parade permit" and fee can be required to hold a demonstration, thus preventing spontaneous demonstrations.

Sometimes government agencies issue regulations and require fees for the same reason a dog licks its balls: because it can.
 
Sometimes government agencies issue regulations and require fees for the same reason a dog licks its balls: because it can.
Clint headshake.gif
 
Taxes and fees don't just exist to fund government functions. Many exist to modify, change, or encourage behaviors. The tax tables encourage people to be married, have children, and own homes. "Sin" taxes try to discourage people from smoking and drinking. Fees can also be used to modify behavior. For example, a "parade permit" and fee can be required to hold a demonstration, thus preventing spontaneous demonstrations.........
You cannot legislate morality and/or behavior. So it's safe to say most are there to bring in revenue for the taxing authority.
 
Couch lint.
You've never met a tax you didn't like, have you?! :p

BTW....................... got an e-mail from AMA today. They're trying to get their members exempt from registering. But they're "for" registering for non-members. Like was guessed at earlier, they seem willing to throw most flyers under the bus.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,935
Latest member
Pauos31