FAA registration for model planes

In reply to foxtrapper:

Counter to your counter, they can inspect and if it is not labeled he can be in trouble before he hurts or wrongs someone with it.

I imagine there will be cops asking to see the numbers when they see people flying them.

In reply to Apexcarver:

That sounds nice, take the kids out to the park to play with their drone and have the police stop us to check our papers.

Javelin wrote: Did any of you guys actually READ the rules?!? Holy crap man! Toys are actually specifically excluded, even ones that would otherwise meet the weight requirements. You can fly indoors, in your own yard, or in a public park/field with your toys all you want and NO registration! It has to be 250 grams or more and controllable to 400 feet. You aren't going to get the 400' without being a "serious" drone with real-time video. And even then, it's $5 for *3 years* of registration (and it's per *pilot* not per drone, so you register once for all 327 drones you own and they run the same registration number). Government waste? You tell me it was wasteful to spend a couple grand on a website and a database after I watched a massive local wildfire end up twice as bad because some shiny happy person was flying his professional drone into the firefighter helicopter's way. Man, I think I need a break from here, it's getting to be like the YouTube comments section lately.

Seems like any RC plane over .55lbs needs to be registered, even if you are flying in your back yard and under 400 feet.

I registered. Took 4 minutes and they refund your the $5. No big deal

gearheadmb wrote: In reply to Apexcarver: That sounds nice, take the kids out to the park to play with their drone and have the police stop us to check our papers.

If the park's beside an airport, that seems understandable. The drones are being treated like every other vehicle - boat, (people size) airplane, car, motorcycle, submarine. Once they get to a certain size, they need to be registered.

gearheadmb wrote: In reply to Apexcarver: That sounds nice, take the kids out to the park to play with their drone illegally and have the police stop us to check our papers even though we knew that it had to be registered and it cost nothing.

FTFY

Enyar wrote:

Javelin wrote: Did any of you guys actually READ the rules?!? Holy crap man! Toys are actually specifically excluded, even ones that would otherwise meet the weight requirements. You can fly indoors, in your own yard, or in a public park/field with your toys all you want and NO registration! It has to be 250 grams or more and controllable to 400 feet. You aren't going to get the 400' without being a "serious" drone with real-time video. And even then, it's $5 for *3 years* of registration (and it's per *pilot* not per drone, so you register once for all 327 drones you own and they run the same registration number). Government waste? You tell me it was wasteful to spend a couple grand on a website and a database after I watched a massive local wildfire end up twice as bad because some shiny happy person was flying his professional drone into the firefighter helicopter's way. Man, I think I need a break from here, it's getting to be like the YouTube comments section lately.

Seems like any RC plane over .55lbs needs to be registered, even if you are flying in your back yard and under 400 feet. I registered. Took 4 minutes and they refund your the $5. No big deal

I registered too, on the off chance I get a cooler drone in the next 3 years, but none of my 3 current ones require it, nor will any police officer ask to see my papers on them.

Really people, read the damn rules!

Define irony: Agencey requiring regestering very small aircraft, weighing over.5lbs yet doesn't regester or recognize ultralights as aircraft. Aircraft that weight around 254lbs. Derp.

Appleseed wrote: Define irony: Agencey requiring regestering very small aircraft, weighing over.5lbs yet doesn't regester or recognize ultralights as aircraft. Aircraft that weight around 254lbs. Derp.

That's pretty awesome.

Appleseed wrote: Define irony: Agencey requiring regestering very small aircraft, weighing over.5lbs yet doesn't regester or recognize ultralights as aircraft. Aircraft that weight around 254lbs. Derp.

No derp there, follow the money. The EAA has bought that particular loophole and spends millions defending it every year. If the FAA had their way without Congressional intervention, ultralights would have been dead since before I was born.

Javelin wrote: Did any of you guys actually READ the rules?!? Holy crap man! Toys are actually specifically excluded, even ones that would otherwise meet the weight requirements. You can fly indoors, in your own yard, or in a public park/field with your toys all you want and NO registration! It has to be 250 grams or more and controllable to 400 feet. You aren't going to get the 400' without being a "serious" drone with real-time video. And even then, it's $5 for *3 years* of registration (and it's per *pilot* not per drone, so you register once for all 327 drones you own and they run the same registration number). Government waste? You tell me it was wasteful to spend a couple grand on a website and a database after I watched a massive local wildfire end up twice as bad because some shiny happy person was flying his professional drone into the firefighter helicopter's way. Man, I think I need a break from here, it's getting to be like the YouTube comments section lately.

Any R/C aircraft worth a E36 M3 can reach 400ft, and the engine/battery easily weighs over half a pound in most cases.....

WOW Really Paul? wrote:

Javelin wrote: Did any of you guys actually READ the rules?!? Holy crap man! Toys are actually specifically excluded, even ones that would otherwise meet the weight requirements. You can fly indoors, in your own yard, or in a public park/field with your toys all you want and NO registration! It has to be 250 grams or more and controllable to 400 feet. You aren't going to get the 400' without being a "serious" drone with real-time video. And even then, it's $5 for *3 years* of registration (and it's per *pilot* not per drone, so you register once for all 327 drones you own and they run the same registration number). Government waste? You tell me it was wasteful to spend a couple grand on a website and a database after I watched a massive local wildfire end up twice as bad because some shiny happy person was flying his professional drone into the firefighter helicopter's way. Man, I think I need a break from here, it's getting to be like the YouTube comments section lately.

Any R/C aircraft worth a E36 M3 can reach 400ft, and the engine/battery easily weighs over half a pound in most cases.....

400 ft? Sure. But my p51 weighs considerably less than that www.parkzone.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=PKZU2480

Joey

Appleseed wrote: Define irony: Agencey requiring regestering very small aircraft, weighing over.5lbs yet doesn't regester or recognize ultralights as aircraft. Aircraft that weight around 254lbs. Derp.

When you fly your ultralight into a birthday party for disabled kids it's going to be pretty obvious who's ultralight it is. Not so much with a drone.

This is exactly how land gets closed to off road vehicles. People get access to land... Everyone is happy while nice people take to the established trails. Along comes yahoo who goes off trail many times... And land gets closed. (insert race track or AutoX venue instead of land).

In reply to Fueled by Caffeine:

So, a rule breaker comes along and breaks some rules. Rather than punishing the rule breaker with the rules we already have, the government makes more rules for the rule breaker to ignore.

Yeah, that makes sense. Stupid laws for a stupid people.

Edited.

This will allow the rule breaker to be identified and punished. At least, that's the theory.

Toyman01 wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: So, a rule breaker comes along and breaks some rules. Rather than punishing the rule breaker with the rules we already have, the government makes more rules for the rule breaker to ignore. Yeah, that makes sense. Stupid laws for a stupid people. Edited.

I didn't say it was right... just that it happens.

Toyman01 wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: So, a rule breaker comes along and breaks some rules. Rather than punishing the rule breaker with the rules we already have, the government makes more rules for the rule breaker to ignore. Yeah, that makes sense. Stupid laws for a stupid people. Edited.

So how do they find out who the rule breaker is to punish them? Oh yeah, registering your "toy" so we know who is being the a-hole. Pretty simple.

In reply to The Hoff:

My point being, people that don't follow the rules, aren't going to register them in the first place. You still won't know who the guilty party is.

Much like certain other items that are used to break rules.

Javelin wrote:

Appleseed wrote: Define irony: Agencey requiring regestering very small aircraft, weighing over.5lbs yet doesn't regester or recognize ultralights as aircraft. Aircraft that weight around 254lbs. Derp.

No derp there, follow the money. The EAA has bought that particular loophole and spends millions defending it every year. If the FAA had their way without Congressional intervention, ultralights would have been dead since before I was born.

John Moody will disagree with you.

Toyman01 wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: So, a rule breaker comes along and breaks some rules. Rather than punishing the rule breaker with the rules we already have, the government makes more rules for the rule breaker to ignore. Yeah, that makes sense. Stupid laws for a stupid people. Edited.

This post contains the most common sense in this thread. +1 good sir, +1

Toyman01 wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: So, a rule breaker comes along and breaks some rules. Rather than punishing the rule breaker with the rules we already have, the government makes more rules for the rule breaker to ignore. Yeah, that makes sense. Stupid laws for a stupid people. Edited.

So here's the funny part. All these rules of operation have been on the books since 2012. They just had no registration so it was impossible to trace them. Nor do I think most people knew about these rules. If they now register then they will know and not act like idiots.

The rules as written were unenforceable. At least they have a chance now.

Just checking in to make sure we are all being excellent to each other. Even when we disagree on an issue we all bring different backgrounds and perspectives to the table.

(I've flown free flight, control line and RC fixed wing forever. AMA # 45026 since 1968 or so)

No one cared about us until stabilized, first person view multi-copters became popular. Like 3D printers suddenly made it possible to "make things" irrespective of people who have lathes and mills, stabilized multis made it possible for anyone to fly a UAV. So the large, long-range video platforms with first person view control (in other words, the pilot can control the UAV beyond their line of sight)could now go effectively anywhere. Should they be regulated? In my opinion, yes. Unskilled, uninsured people are operating them and flying into restricted airspace.

The club field where I flew (racing has effective put a hold on my RC activities) has a 300' paved runway and on a nice weekend day there are multiple club members who require trailers to transport their 40% scale 200cc gas planes and jet aircraft. The helicopter side has people who've been flying real time or on a sim or working on their aircraft every minute they're not at work or asleep for decades. There are club members who've been in the hobby for 70 years.

100% of flight operations are line of sight. Everyone has to be an AMA member and club member. You have to have been certified by the club training program to be granted permission to fly, and have to follow the AMA and club safety code.

I'd offer that anything capable of FPV control or over say, 1 kilogram should be registered. But the old club dudes with their fabric-covered 10' Piper Cubs? C'mon, man. They're not the drones you're looking for.

Javelin wrote: Did any of you guys actually READ the rules?!? Holy crap man! ... Really people, read the damn rules!

Not sure why you're getting so worked up. Glad to see you did finally figure out that just because it's a toy it's not excluded. Same with flying it in your own back yard.

I agree with several of the other posters about the lack of differentiation of the craft. There's a world of difference between a camera equipped quadracopter and an rc plane, as well a model rocket. But the rules (past present and as proposed) totally fail to differentiate between them.

The 5 mile rule is going to be the bugger, not the 400' elevation. The rules don't specify large commercial airports, they just say airports. So this includes all the podunk airports on record, including farm fields with nothing more than a wind sock, and perhaps even model airplane club fields. Heck, it could potentially even include the launch sites of model rocketry clubs.

If you get a blue light special coming along to check your legal compliance, not sure how you're going to prove you actually contacted the airports in the 5 mile radius to notify them of your flight intent, or their granting you permission (not that permission is inherently required under all of the rules).

This stuff does matter. I live a mile away from the border of a regional airport. Never an issue as I fly the little airplanes in my back field. Would even go over nearer the airport as there's a nice large grass field I would fly the plane in. Now...dunno. I'm fairly sure someone would call it in to report the "danger". Can't say I want to deal with any Barney Fife types.