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

I see very little wrong with this simple registration step. As a drone owner, it costs me a minimal charge, doesn't impair my drone's operation with onerous rules. (Some were considering things like geofencing being MANDATORY!) It merely asks me to tag my drone with a number, which isn't a big deal at all.

I'd argue this has been actually a fantastic example of the government working in moderation. They involved drone manufacturers, commercial operators, and hobbyist groups directly in the discussion process, you can see it throughout their documentation. The community was well-invested in this entire process.

They've avoided any sort of crazy burden that would kill the drone industry, but they've offered a clear step to say that they're watching, and put in a basic framework that, while imperfect, gives them a starting point in an investigation.

Guess I'm just old then. When I was learning, most models would barely fly, and then only if you flew them perfectly.

If I'm in a park or public space where it's legal to fly and I'm not a hazard to the public, the police shouldn't come over and ask to inspect my paperwork. The government should not assume I'm breaking the law by default.

If I'm at an airport where it's not legal to fly, it doesn't matter if I have a registration or not, I'm already breaking the law.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that the AMA isn't currently doing a good job. They're goddamn great! :)

> ...[the issue is] that the price point for model aircraft has dropped so substantially that they can't keep up with it anymore...

I'm not entirely sure that that's true. If I'm remembering my prices correctly, you've been able to get started in the hobby for a few hundred dollars for a long while.

My theory: Helicopters are substantially cooler than fixed-wing aircraft, and can be flown in really small spaces. However, they are hard as fuck to fly [0], mechanically complex, comparatively expensive, fragile, and prone to breakage. Now, quadcopters with computer-controlled motors are substantially cheaper and more durable than RC helicopters, and can -crucially- be flown by anyone who has at least half a brain and one hand... just press the "up" lever and away you go! The time investment barrier to entry has dramatically been lowered, making the hobby approachable by every yahoo who lacks the patience to ask "Am I using my toy in a safe and sane manner?". [1]

It's very clear that the AMA hasn't been able to get major retailers to do what the downtown airplane store reliably does. It -IMO- isn't a matter of keeping up with demand, but rather influencing big players (who previously would never have stocked RC aircraft) to help steer newcomers into the preexisting training program.

> ...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.

This seems like an ideal situation: Commercial operators are regulated by the FAA, and are required to register their craft, file flight plans and whatever. Commercial operators should always be subject to some degree of regulation and oversight. Hobbyist operators who are a member of a model aircraft club (or were a member in good standing for $A_WHILE in the past) are obligated to follow FAA, AMA, and club guidelines and are liable for violations of FAA general regulations regarding interactions between model and full-scale aircraft, but are not required to register themselves or their craft with the FAA. Hobbyist operators who aren't and have never been associated with a club? If the danger that the FAA is reacting to is real and not overblown media-driven hysteria, require them to register with the FAA and ID their craft until they can either pass a training course to demonstrate that they're responsible, or they join a local model airplane club and get trained.

Like I said, it's pretty clear that the training provided by model airplane clubs has enabled folks to safely and responsibly regularly fly substantially more dangerous aircraft than most any quadcopter. The training provided by these clubs works.

It's a shame that the FAA seems to feel that it suddenly needs to make folks who are part of a very successful, long-standing nationwide flight training program submit to pilot registration and aircraft identification.

[0] I mean goddamn _fucking_ hard.

[1] Don't get me wrong, here... making the hobby more accessible and lowering barriers to entry is good. Model aviation is fun, largely wholesome, and can be a gateway drug to things like woodworking and aerospace engineering. ;) However, it is -IMO- dreadfully important to leave the "learn how to operate your toy in a way that doesn't endanger yourself and others" barrier intact.

Models (non-FPV) are typically flown until they deplete their power supply, which happens rapidly. For small electric models this is usually 6-8 minutes. Larger electric models and gas (usually nitromethane) models can sometimes stay up for 15 minutes or more, depending on how hard you're hitting the power.

Gas models use a separate battery pack for running the receiver and servos. Electric models usually use the same pack (via "battery eliminator circuit"), but there's a low-voltage cutoff that cuts the motor power off while there's still enough power to run the electronics. There's typically a "soft-cutoff" feature that allows you to restart the motors if you need power to land - you get maybe a 10 second burst of low power or 5 seconds at medium power before the cutoff trips again. It can help to stretch out an approach if you're downwind and not going to make the field.

Either way there is no technical problem with making a power-off landing. Such "deadstick" landings are very standard in the RC world, and most fields will want to see trainee pilots make several of them on a "buddy box" system under the control of an instructor before they will approve you to fly alone. They're no big deal as long as you're being responsible with where you're flying.

Radio range is essentially "as far as you have a line-of-sight". Typical radios will have a range of 1.5-3 miles but you'll lose visual on the aircraft at a fraction of that distance. Some micro-sized parkflyer aircraft have less sensitive receivers, but since they're smaller you'll lose visual at shorter ranges too. Some radios have longer range, particularly amateur radio operators who can operate with greater transmitter power. These are popular with the FPV crowd, but to operate on these bands you must have your callsign and address on the plane.

The long range can actually be a bit of a problem because the signals really will go quite far, and can result in intermittent loss of control if someone else is operating on that frequency. AMA-licensed fields have a pinboard (if you don't have the clothespin with your frequency on it, you can't turn your radio on), and the fields are spaced out far enough to avoid this (typically a minimum of 5 miles). You're supposed to check before you just go fly somewhere, but some people don't. 2.4 GHz spread-spectrum radios are getting very popular nowadays because they're largely immune to these radio hits.