Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

101–110 of 245 posts

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

#101
post #7

Somehow this really angers me.

So now people have to register toys they own.... The anger you are feeling is the screws being tightened a little tighter. Everything nowadays is regulated, controlled and monitored, we in the west are not free, especially in "the land of the free" And some beuracrat(s) at FAA just guaranteed themselves job security for long time

Not everything. Only consumer things. Corporate things are allowed to do whatever as long as the shareholders are happy.

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

#102
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…

If the drone pilot is flying outside of controlled airspace (e.g. airport, major event, etc) and below 1,000 feet, and somehow an aircraft and drone collide then it is the aircraft pilot's fault. It is illegal to fly below 1,000 feet except in an emergency or in controlled airspace. If your "dad" is routinely flying low enough over urban areas so that drones are a legitimate concern then they're likely also routinely…

The minimum altitude is only 500ft when not over congested areas, and helicopters are exempt from minimum altitudes entirely.

Your insurance quip is rather ridiculous, unless they've come out with a whole new class of life insurance.

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

#103
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…

If the drone pilot is flying outside of controlled airspace (e.g. airport, major event, etc) and below 1,000 feet, and somehow an aircraft and drone collide then it is the aircraft pilot's fault. It is illegal to fly below 1,000 feet except in an emergency or in controlled airspace. If your "dad" is routinely flying low enough over urban areas so that drones are a legitimate concern then they're likely also routinely…

> It is illegal to fly below 1,000 feet except in an emergency or in controlled airspace.

Not if you're flying a helicopter, which does not have a height restriction.

Also, if an airplane pilot is flying below 1000' AGL, not only do they have a large, highly visible tail number that will identify them... they're also putting their own life at risk.

On the flip side, there are clearly some quadcopter pilots that fly above the 400' limit, even though the FAA has asked operators not to. There was an incident in the news just a few weeks ago: http://kron4.com/2015/12/06/california-highway-patrol-helico...

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

#104
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…

The last time I saw the topic of drones and aircraft collisions on the front page (maybe a week ago), the entire comment thread was filled with people downplaying the dangers, casting doubt on whether it even mattered, saying a three-pound (!) drone wouldn't do any actual damage on impact, etc.

I find the community attitude here to be completely insane. Regulation isn't necessarily the answer, but the general theme here seems to be "regulation isn't the answer, because there's no risk of collision, and a small aircraft colliding with a 3lb drone at 150MPH won't suffer any damage anyway."

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

#105
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm following your argument, you're saying, "drones are currently not that powerful, so they should be viewed as a toy." The problem is, that argument is destined to become false. Drones are only getting more and more capable. Intelligent legislation works not only for the current scenario but also future ones. Additionally, there are many stories regarding how current drone operators either ignore common sense re…

No results found for "airline drone near miss" Ok, that's a bit pedantic - search for "airliner drone near miss". But what are we talking about re: "near miss" here? The phrase itself defines as no actual impact. How many actual problems are we talking about here, vs "close but no harm done"? I'm just trying to bracket the issue.

Google turned up 137,000 results for me for "airline drone near miss." Are you sure you're using it properly?

Many of the hits describe the specific near misses, thus answering your question.

But the question about how many actual problems we are talking about is missing the point. Drones are at an inflection point. People have been flying them for decades as a hobby (they were called "radio control airplanes" back then) without issue, but they're set to become far more popular, far more available, and far easier to use really rapidly. The question is not so much how many problems there are today, but what it'll look like in five or ten years, and how we can get ahead of any potential problems now.

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

#106
post #9

The article does not link to the FAA's website. Here's the link to the actual FAA page: https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/ It appears that registration opens on 21 Dec, 2015. Further, if registration is done before January 20, 2016 the $5 registration fee will be refunded.

So now, model airplane hobbyists who've been doing the same thing for decades can be penalized with "fines of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment for up to three years," if they don't realize they have to register their balsa wood RC airplanes.

Rules change. That's why you have organizations like the AMA, who can educate their members. (And you need to be an AMA member to use many of the model aircraft fields, anyway.)

And even ignoring that, this topic has been on the national news quite a bit recently.

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

#108
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terminal velocity of a 250g aircraft is much slower than terminal velocity of a 250g rock.

A 250g helicopter with stopped rotors isn't that different from a rock.

Depends on whether or not the rotors autorotate.

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

#109
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…

"drones are a very serious problem for airplanes" Can we get an elaboration on this? I understand pilots being very skittish about things moving anywhere too close (as in "if I can perceive it, it's too close"), but is there a brighter line between "objectively problematic" vs "hysterically paranoid"? I assume the Parrot Bebop drone I want is over 250g, and don't see the reasoning for registration when I'm not stupid…

When flying, spotting anything from a higher elevation is very difficult - you essentially have to track the differential velocity of the bird / plane with respect to the ground. That's the reason why generally, the right of way in air goes to the airplane with higher elevation.

Adding additional things to spot in the air, especially slow moving objects like drones, demands focus and divert attention away from flying. Other airplanes in the air are fine to spot because they move quickly, and in unrestricted airspace, generally communicate on a universal radio channel. Drones have none of these capabilities and are essentially high flying birds to avoid.

In non-urban spaces, airspace above 500ft is always a potential manned aircraft flight path.

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

#110
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 does registration solve the problem of people flying in airspace though? It sounds to me like this would only be used after the fact to find out who was responsible.

If the drone is registered in your name, people will be more careful to make sure they don't break any laws. Some of the same reasons we register cars and have license plates. People tend to act shitty when they know they won't be held accountable.
Post reply on HN