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

141–150 of 245 posts

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

#141

Post by thescriptkiddie »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #140
sliverstorm wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gather many drone operators have flagrantly violated the 500 foot flight ceiling. Perhaps it's more of an issue now because in the days of RC planes operated line-of-sight, you inherently had a tougher time flying high & far than today with live video feed and long range controls.

It also used to be a requirement that you knew how to fly the aircraft, which wasn't much easier than flying a real airplane, and in the case of R/C helicopters was actual harder than flying a full-sized manned helicopter. With the latest multicopters and even some of the electric fixed-wing craft, any moron can keep the thing in the air. Hence the current wave of trouble.

Fixed-wing models have been idiot-proof for a long time. You can buy a beginner's kit at any hobby store, and they're much easier to fly than a multirotor. I don't think accessibility is responsible for the recent popularity of multirotors, I think they're just more interesting because they're unlike anything full-sized.

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

#142

Post by InclinedPlane »

thescriptkiddie wrote: post #129

Damn, I thought the model clubs won this debate 50 years ago. What's the excuse this time? Terrorists making remote controlled bombs? Creeps taking aerial photographs? Kids having fun outside instead of doing their homework? Bloggers keep bringing up interference with air traffic, but that's completely irrelevant. Models are required by law to stay under 500 feet, and civil aviation is required to stay above. Even if…

Birds are not made of metal and drones absolutely can be vastly more dangerous to aircraft than a bird. Besides which, bird strikes absolutely can be devastating to aircraft and they've caused numerous crashes and many fatalities. Millions of dollars a year is spent keeping birds away from airports.

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

#143

Post by lsaferite »

tomswartz07 wrote: post #86
pc86 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You're correct. Having no power in a model airplane is definitely an issue. My main point being, however, it's arguably far easier to manuver an airplane after motor failure than a drone/quadcopter.

So, assuming you are a safe flier of quadcopters, you are NOT flying over people to start with. Quadcopters fail fairly straight down when they fall. RC Airplanes can continue flying after engine failure and possibly cross over people. Of course, both are a danger for fly-aways which would concern me a whole lot more than an engine failure.

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

#144

Post by dang »

warfangle wrote: post #107

"Regulation bad! Disruption good! BRB defecating in the sandbox." - HN groupthink

Please don't comment like this here, but rather express your view substantively.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10733394 and marked it off-topic.

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

#145

Post by Buttons840 »

yc1010 wrote: post #7
Glyptodon wrote: post #3

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

I got some family members some $25 dollar quadcopters for Christmas. Nobody in my family is especially interested in RC's of any kind, but for $25 bucks I thought it would be a fun and unexpected gift, and it was a quick impulse buy by me from Amazon.

My Christmas morning just went from "here's a fun little gift, lets try it out" to "first we have to figure out the government bureaucracy and register this thing or face $300,000 in fines and 3 years in jail, merry Christmas everyone!" Honestly, I'll probably just return them and get something else.

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

#146

Post by bjt2n3904 »

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…

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 like a moron."

People willing to break one aspect of the law are generally willing to break other parts as well.

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

#147

Post by bjt2n3904 »

1024core wrote: post #93

Is there any verification of the registration? Here's a hypothetical situation: a guy with a drone has a pesky neighbor he doesn't get along with. So he "registers" his drone in the neighbor's name; takes it to a nearby airport and lets it fly around over there and crash. Now the neighbor's in trouble, and has to defend himself from these hefty fines.

I'd go one step further. What's preventing someone from flying a drone without registration?

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

#148

Post by bargl »

simoncion wrote: post #126
bargl wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a drone is flying within a certain distance from an airport (5 miles I think) or above 400 feet they are breaking regulations... The problem is that if a pilot breaks the rule that have a tail number and might very well die. If a done does there is no tracking number and the pilot is safe at home.

> If a done does there is no tracking number and the pilot is safe at home. Thing is, model aircraft hobbyists have been -for the most part- safely and responsibly flying RC aircraft for nearly a hundred years. These fliers haven't had any FAA registration requirement, and have not been required to put identifying information in their aircraft. The Academy of Model Aeronautics has been around -and doing great good- s…

My wife works in this field, and the AMA has done a great job so far. The issue isn't that they aren't doing a good job it's that the price point for model aircraft has dropped so substantially that they can't keep up with it anymore, and commercial drone operations is finally practical. It was AMA who kept these regulations at bay, but the increasing amount of people who are misusing them and Amazon, Google, etc. that want to create drone flight paths has forced the governments hand.

While I tend to side with the less regulations side of things, I can also see how there is a gap in the regulations here.

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

#149

Post by bdamm »

kayfox wrote: post #128
mikeash wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 h…

I don't think the dangers need to be downplayed. The incidence does need to be looked at. I think we blame drones for all sorts of things that are not drones these days.

There are already many cases on the books of drones flying into approach paths of airliners in many airports, including several into JFK. Just last week there was a case of a police helicopter that had a very close call with a drone (the helicopter pilot did execute collision avoidance, and police on the ground tracked the drone operator.) Incidence is there and rising.

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

#150

Post by thescriptkiddie »

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]

A drone is not a model aircraft, it is a full-sized aircraft without a provision for a human pilot. They're mostly used by the military (for target practice, aerial surveillance, etc) but more recently they have been put to use for weather research, etc. Drones must already be registered with the FAA. This article does not concern them.
Post reply on HN