New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19 • Hacker News Board

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#41

Post by lyondhill » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:49 PM UTC

omni wrote: post #16

cooper12 wrote: post #10

> Failure to register can result in a hefty penalty, including civil fines of up to $27,500 and criminal penalties of up to $250,000 and three years in prison. > "The goal is not to be punitive but to get people into compliance," FAA Deputy Administrator Michael Whitaker said. These two sentences don't seem to mesh for me. Even if they don't plan to actually prosecute any violators (yet), just the threat of that is r…

I think the idea is that you can achieve compliance through fear of punitive action without ever actually having to punish anyone (in an ideal world). Before law: "I'll just fly my drone around this airport, it's not like I'll get caught or anything." After law: "Crap, now if anything happens this is gonna get traced right back to me and my life is gonna be ruined, maybe I shouldn't fly around this airport like a mor…

That line of reasoning seems to be in line with the ATF's firearm laws. I am not sure it solves the problem, if someone is planning to commit a crime they will use a unregistered drone just like gun crimes.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#42

Post by afarrell » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:50 PM UTC

nqzero wrote: post #25

loeber wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose a 250g drone fails mid-air, hypothetically at a height of 100m, and falls freely. At terminal velocity, it's a lethal projectile. Have no illusions about the damage that can be done by small things falling from a great height, or travelling at a high speed in general. The 250g weight is entirely reasonable -- I would actually claim that it is quite generous.

guess we should start regulating rocks that weigh more than 250g too then ...

I'm pretty sure that regularly throwing half-pound rocks high in the air is already regulated.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#43

Post by jsprogrammer » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:51 PM UTC

eykanal wrote: post #39

The comments here really surprise me. My dad's a pilot, and I've heard from him firsthand how drones are a very serious problem for airplanes. Comments like "this is just one more example of tracking" or "I can't believe I have to do this even if it's only for my house" seem to be said out of anger rather than from serious consideration of the issues with drones. Your $30 drone can very easily cause someone else's $1…

How is the dollar value of the aircraft relevant here?

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#44

Post by panglott » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:51 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #5

What surprises me is is the minimum weight requirement: 250 grams. That's well below a weight that could reasonably be considered a danger to aircraft or people. Just for comparison purposes, a McDonald's Big Mac weighs 215-240 grams without wrapper, so with a wrapper if you turned a Big Mac into a drone, it would likely require registration. The real question is, what is their endgame here? Just send out notificatio…

Yep. Also, most of the cheap quadcopters don't list their weight, although the cheapest nano quadcopters will be well below the limit. This one is less than 12 g: http://www.gizmag.com/review-estes-proto-x-nano-quadcopter/2...

A half-pound is not very big.

Edited to note that the FAA FAQ has a PDF about most items in the toy category; they say that most devices under $100 are under the weight limit. https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/media/UAS_Weights_... However, all drones with cameras that it lists do require registration.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#45

Post by 33W » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:51 PM UTC

pricechild wrote: post #12

Someone1234 wrote: post #5

What surprises me is is the minimum weight requirement: 250 grams. That's well below a weight that could reasonably be considered a danger to aircraft or people. Just for comparison purposes, a McDonald's Big Mac weighs 215-240 grams without wrapper, so with a wrapper if you turned a Big Mac into a drone, it would likely require registration. The real question is, what is their endgame here? Just send out notificatio…

A burger wrapper caught on a real helicopter's rotor can induce scary vibrations & some loss of lift. Keep the burger & wrapper please.

Time to register burger wrappers!

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#46

Post by pc86 » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

asift wrote: post #31

Someone1234 wrote: post #5

What surprises me is is the minimum weight requirement: 250 grams. That's well below a weight that could reasonably be considered a danger to aircraft or people. Just for comparison purposes, a McDonald's Big Mac weighs 215-240 grams without wrapper, so with a wrapper if you turned a Big Mac into a drone, it would likely require registration. The real question is, what is their endgame here? Just send out notificatio…

>What surprises me is is the minimum weight requirement: 250 grams Why does this surprise you? If the assumption is that the FAA is altruistic organization that seeks nothing but the public benefit, I suppose I can see how this is surprising. But if we take a more realistic assumption of what the FAA is--a governmental bureaucracy full of self-interested individuals who pursue their own interests (greater authority,…

Serious question: what is the incentive for the FAA to create regulations for the sake of creating them (or to creating overly conservative ones to the point of impacting industry)? I could understand a new or very small regulatory body, but the FAA isn't going anywhere.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#47

Post by Glyptodon » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

tibbon wrote: post #34

As someone who enjoys flying drones, I don't mind registration- I just want clarity. Recently I was going out with some friends to the Boston Harbor Islands. I wanted to take a small Parrot AR drone out there, to fly around 25 feet in the air, to capture some group photos and check out some neat angles of military ruins. Yet, I find things like this ( https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=1... )…

The 5 mile limit for airports is absurd.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#48

Post by Someone1234 » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

nqzero wrote: post #25

loeber wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose a 250g drone fails mid-air, hypothetically at a height of 100m, and falls freely. At terminal velocity, it's a lethal projectile. Have no illusions about the damage that can be done by small things falling from a great height, or travelling at a high speed in general. The 250g weight is entirely reasonable -- I would actually claim that it is quite generous.

guess we should start regulating rocks that weigh more than 250g too then ...

Technically we already do, but indirectly.

In order to get a 250g rock up high enough to reach it's terminal velocity before hitting the earth again, you'd need some kind of launcher (e.g. catapult, trebuchet, Slingshot, etc) which are regulated. For example, New York made Slingshot a Class-4 misdemeanor.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#49

Post by eykanal » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:54 PM UTC

jsprogrammer wrote: post #43

eykanal wrote: post #39

The comments here really surprise me. My dad's a pilot, and I've heard from him firsthand how drones are a very serious problem for airplanes. Comments like "this is just one more example of tracking" or "I can't believe I have to do this even if it's only for my house" seem to be said out of anger rather than from serious consideration of the issues with drones. Your $30 drone can very easily cause someone else's $1…

How is the dollar value of the aircraft relevant here?

It's not. I was trying to point out that it's more important to think about who else is in the the sandbox rather than how much you paid to get in.

Re: New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Feb 19

#50

Post by omni » Mon, Dec 14, 2015, 4:55 PM UTC

lyondhill wrote: post #41

omni wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that you can achieve compliance through fear of punitive action without ever actually having to punish anyone (in an ideal world). Before law: "I'll just fly my drone around this airport, it's not like I'll get caught or anything." After law: "Crap, now if anything happens this is gonna get traced right back to me and my life is gonna be ruined, maybe I shouldn't fly around this airport like a mor…

That line of reasoning seems to be in line with the ATF's firearm laws. I am not sure it solves the problem, if someone is planning to commit a crime they will use a unregistered drone just like gun crimes.

The target isn't people intentionally trying to down planes with drones, it's people ignorantly flying in restricted airspace without actually meaning to do any harm to anyone.