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

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 245 posts

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

#51

Post by clarkmoody »

omni wrote: post #8
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…

I was under the impression that pretty much anything getting sucked into a jet turbine is a major problem, can anyone speak to whether that's true? Birds don't weigh a lot either, but run into one and you could have a major problem on your hands.

5-year old video, but it shows some of the tests jet engines undergo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTKfFxwpbUU

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

#52

Post by tomswartz07 »

wmeredith wrote: post #40
grendelt wrote: post #35

Does this apply to RC planes and helicopters too? Or is this only for the oh-so-scary "drones"?

What's the difference? [serious]

Quadcopters ("drones", ugh) are unable to maintain their altitude if there is a power failure. If one or more of the motors fail, it falls like a brick.

Airplanes, however, are much different in that they could softly and easily glide back to earth after a motor fails.

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

#53

Post by pc86 »

eykanal wrote: post #49
jsprogrammer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think it is relevant to a point. $30 is an incredibly low barrier to entry. It means you're much more likely to have an issue than you would be if the cheapest drone you could buy or make was measured in thousands of dollars instead.

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

#54

Post by tomswartz07 »

Glyptodon wrote: post #47
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.

I wouldn't say 'absurd', I'd consider it very conservative, however.

I think 2.5 miles is plenty, but there could be legitimate reasons that full-size aircraft would be flying near 400 feet near an airport.

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

#55

Post by ctdonath »

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?

An hour's earnings can destroy a decade's earnings. That tends to make some people understandably nervous to the point of lobbying lawmakers to threaten some with serious penalties for toy/hobby activities.

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

#56

Post by delecti »

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 don't imagine there are terribly many rocks getting 100m in the air except by human action.

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

#57

Post by cooper12 »

arbitrage wrote: post #36
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…

Seems to be sort of like the FCC. They generally don't fine you if you're misbehaving, they'll send out warnings first. If you're an absolute massive jerk, on the other hand ... yeah, you're not going to be on anyone's good side, and you can end up pulling some really massive fines.

Does the FAA have a track record of doing the same? You have to consider that most people flying these will be enthusiasts doing it for a hobby and they might not be aware of all the regulations or have the resources to handle such a charge. Having huge default punishments like this has a potential for abuse: Say you record bad cop activity and they find you didn't register, bam they have huge leverage on you. This works out disproportionately for the FAA rather than the average joe who might be bothered by creeps or people being reckless. The only way I can see the FAA try to offset this is if they dutifully educate people about the registration requirement. Even then I still don't see a reason for such a harsh punishment.

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

#58

Post by Glyptodon »

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…

Because your aircraft is going to routinely buzz residential areas at sub-500-feet and is entitled to do so risk free because it costs a lot of money or something?

It's not like drones are risk free - quad copters are like hockey pucks floating in the air and can easily drift or fall.

But that said, considering how many of them are in private hands and what most owners actually do with them, the registration requirements are completely onerous.

You don't register to shoot off a model rocket at the park, you don't register to hit a baseball at the park, and it's accordingly totally not clear why you need to register to fly a small aircraft at the park when it's pretty much going to stay lower than maybe two and half telephone poles.

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

#59

Post by falcolas »

wmeredith wrote: post #40
grendelt wrote: post #35

Does this apply to RC planes and helicopters too? Or is this only for the oh-so-scary "drones"?

What's the difference? [serious]

The number of rotors, and their configuration. Multi-rotor aircraft are a bit more nimble and easy for a newbie to control than an RC helicopter, though a plane is even easier and (typically) slower.

Multirotor - 3+ rotors working to balance the craft, typically use fixed pitch props.

Helicopter - 1-2 main rotors, and optionally one sideways one on the back to counter the torque of main rotors. Typically use a swashplate to change the pitch of the rotors.

Airplane: 1-2 main rotors, pointing forwards, with wings and control surfaces on those wings.

http://flitetest.com - if you're interested in learning more.

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

#60

Post by pc86 »

tomswartz07 wrote: post #52
wmeredith wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference? [serious]

Quadcopters ("drones", ugh) are unable to maintain their altitude if there is a power failure. If one or more of the motors fail, it falls like a brick. Airplanes, however, are much different in that they could softly and easily glide back to earth after a motor fails.

> Airplanes, however, are much different in that they could softly and easily glide back to earth after a motor fails.

Yes, the whole way to the scene of the crash.

I'm with you that these two things should be classified and treated very differently, but let's not pretend that if the power dies on a model airplane there's no danger.

Post reply on HN