Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 159 posts

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#51

Post by galago »

barefoot wrote: post #5

In case anyone is reading from NBC, would you mind using the term "UAV" or "RPA" over "drone"? When we throw around the word "drone" here on reddit and hacker news I feel like it's okay because many of us know the key differences between what we're flying and the hellfire raining completely terrifying semi-automated flying death machines deployed in war-zones around the world. However, many people who read your artic…

There seems to be an obvious need for a classification system that is clear enough for the general public to understand. I have no personal interest in aircraft, but I understand that model airplanes aren't the same as military drones. It would be useful if there were some clear regulatory standards.

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#52

Post by noobermin »

baddox wrote: post #15
barefoot wrote: post #5

In case anyone is reading from NBC, would you mind using the term "UAV" or "RPA" over "drone"? When we throw around the word "drone" here on reddit and hacker news I feel like it's okay because many of us know the key differences between what we're flying and the hellfire raining completely terrifying semi-automated flying death machines deployed in war-zones around the world. However, many people who read your artic…

> However, many people who read your articles might not be so well informed. Many people have an incorrect and confused understanding of them and to them the word "drone" carries that jumbled mess of an associations. Do you actually know anyone who has made this mistake? I've heard scores of people online claim this, but I've never met anyone who has actually met someone with this confusion. Who reads this article an…

>Do you actually know anyone who has made this mistake?

If it helps, I initially did. That was my initial reaction after reading the headline, that it had something to do with military UAV's. After a second of thought and on clicking the article, I found out it was about private UAV's.

Whenever the word "drone" is brought up, the first image that pops into my head is that "Drone Warrior" cover for the Atlantic. I should note that I am not too familiar with UAV's--other than a small handsized drone a colleague bought me as a present, I have little experience with them. This might be a "hunter's association with the word gun vs. a non-hunters'" sort of thing.

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#53

Post by lotu »

neurotech1 wrote: post #34

One thing about the RPV/Quadcopter debate that is rarely mentioned is the reason why they don't use ADS-B transponders. The FAA requires ADS-B trasponders to have high accuracy GPS, and that pushes the cost to over $2,000 per device. It would be logical for the FAA to relax the GPS requirement slightly, so a cheap GPS module is sufficient to alert nearby aircraft of RPV activity over a certain altitude (eg. 200ft AGL…

That is a fucking sane and logical idea, no wonder no one has mentioned it.

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#54

Post by ctdonath »

Spooky23 wrote: post #32
ctdonath wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is registration supposed to do? Broadly, those who will register are responsible enough to not be a problem, those idiots you want to control won't register, and it all just ends up mostly harassing the wrong people. Have and enforce laws against bad behavior, yes, but stop this "guilty until proven innocent" nonsense.

A similar concept applies to license place on road vehicles. Sometimes some dude drives around without plates or takes an off road vehicle on the road. The police ticket the operator and tow the vehicle in some cases.

Seriously: why?

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#55

Post by paulsutter »

barefoot wrote: post #5

In case anyone is reading from NBC, would you mind using the term "UAV" or "RPA" over "drone"? When we throw around the word "drone" here on reddit and hacker news I feel like it's okay because many of us know the key differences between what we're flying and the hellfire raining completely terrifying semi-automated flying death machines deployed in war-zones around the world. However, many people who read your artic…

Unfortunately the media inadvertently establishes terminology in a permanent and unavoidable way. The word drone is easy to say, widely recognized, and best of all has 20% more drama than the other terms. Drama is the lifeblood of the news business.

More likely they're saying "The term 'drone' is becoming too ordinary, how can we spice it up a bit? The drone menace? drone threat?"

I'm really not kidding.

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#56

Post by sopooneo »

Malstrond wrote: post #49
sopooneo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm delving deep here, but it seems that section primarily states what the FAA will not regulate or "not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding". To my reading, it does not state that operation outside those guidelines necessarily does put a craft under the FAA jurisdiction. I admit I could be reading it completely wrong. But then if you look at this page[1] on the FAAs web site, it says only that operators are…

The section 336 says that the FAA will not "not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding" if certain criteria are matched. For example that the aicraft is a model aircraft. and c) (2) says that a model aicraft is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft". So if you exceed visual line of sight it becomes a normal aircraft, just like every other plane. And they all have to be registere…

That would hold if we assume all things which fly (aside from animals, obviously) are under the jurisdiction of the FAA by default. And then then only certain itemized exceptions (like model aircraft as they define them) are not.

However, I'm not certain that's the case.

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#57

Post by deckerdoes »

saulrh wrote: post #42
discardorama wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that they're not worried about the hobbyists, who are generally more responsible; but the random people getting assembled drones as Xmas gifts.

Maybe there'll be a DIY exception like firearms have?

I'm curious, what kind of firearm is classified as DIY and registration is not required?

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#58

Post by wavefunction »

ctdonath wrote: post #39
objclxt wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you apply the same logic to cars? Because I think all of your points apply equally to cars, but nobody seems to object to the idea of both registering them and requiring a license to drive.

Yes. Make driver education mandatory in public school. A vehicle tag should simply identify the vehicle out of a sea of mixed clones (a la: which blue Mustang?). I actually think the U.S. Founding Fathers would have enumerated a "right to vehicular travel" if they had conceived of license-as-a-privilege restriction on horseless carriages.

>>I actually think the U.S. Founding Fathers

We'll never know though, which makes personal conjecture meaningless. And while the "Founding Fathers" may have had some singular ideas at the time, they were merely people. We could speculate what the authors of the Magna Carta might feel about drones, or the Athenian democrats as well...

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#59

Post by Spooky23 »

ctdonath wrote: post #54
Spooky23 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A similar concept applies to license place on road vehicles. Sometimes some dude drives around without plates or takes an off road vehicle on the road. The police ticket the operator and tow the vehicle in some cases.

Seriously: why?

Pretty easy.

The privilege granted by registration can be linked to other things. So when Mr. Dumbass decides to buy more beer instead of paying for insurance, and subsequently rear ends your car, you are screwed as a motorist. The requirement for registration and insurance tied to a drivers license makes the driving environment work for the vast majority of people.

The same thing applies to drones. When some jackass decides to peep into my daughter's window every day, why should that person be able to act with anonymously and with impunity?

Re: U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered

#60

Post by ctdonath »

krasin wrote: post #40
ctdonath wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Make driver education mandatory in public school. A vehicle tag should simply identify the vehicle out of a sea of mixed clones (a la: which blue Mustang?). I actually think the U.S. Founding Fathers would have enumerated a "right to vehicular travel" if they had conceived of license-as-a-privilege restriction on horseless carriages.

>Yes. Make driver education mandatory in public school. This is not a good time investment for children, given that not all of them will drive. Especially, considering that driverless cars are coming soon.

It's a few hours' training to teach a basic skill most of them will use (along with all the other "not all of them will use it" things they do or should learn). Those who don't formally learn will still likely end up behind a wheel anyway, documented or not - and it's those non-documented ones who are precisely the ones we particularly DO want to ensure are trained one way or another.
Post reply on HN