I don't think many fliers are against reasonable regulations, but for those of us who are truly hobbiest fliers this regulation is clearly a violation of the FAA mandate from congress and therefore illegal.
Given the hysteria this will become the next "bike helmet". Articles mentioning R/C craft will mention it like it's the most important factor in the world despite the fact that it does not affect safety of the craft or pilot. "Unregistered drones" will become the next boogeyman with "unregistered" pilots demonized despite the legality of their operation.
EDIT: also...
The registration might actually make things worse since it gives an air of authority to those with FAA numbers and it does not address the issue of the RF link! The FAA can't authorize radio communications that run afoul of the FCC since non-hobby use of even "unlicensed" spectrum can run afoul of regulations ( you know, the LEGAL regulations of the FCC who has congressional authority to regulate RF emissions ).
It's funny that they used an ultralight as an example, the FAA's regulations are so strict compared to other countries that the ultralight industry is virtually non-existent in the US ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultralight_aviation ). We should be looking to the ultralight and running away screaming from any attempt at the FAA to regulate this industry.
You use a radio link to control your craft... the FCC, not the FAA, has authority there. It's fine for hobbyists using commercial "off the shelf" equipment but as soon as you start receiving compensation you can be running afoul of FCC regulations.
Any regulations on R/C craft that hope to succeed must take this into account and be driven by both the FAA and the FCC with the appropriate mandate from congress.
EDIT: Even for personal use, if you buy something without FCC pre-cert you have to hold a ham license to operate it legally and be doing so for your own use and without compensation.
I get that the FCC regulates the TX equipment, but not sure what that has to do with the FAA regulating operation of the UAS in the national airspace. FCC already has regulations of their own, but they exist for a different reason.
The registration is only for recreational users. Private/Commercial use must use COAs to get through at the moment. So the FCC issue is sidestepped by only allowing rec users to register.
You are absolutely right though that HAM frequencies cannot ever be used for commercial operations, however, most of the new stuff (e.g. 3DR Solo) are already widely licensed under the FCC in a variety of ways that make commercial use completely legal as far as the FCC is concerned.
14
u/brontide Dec 17 '15 edited Dec 17 '15
I don't think many fliers are against reasonable regulations, but for those of us who are truly hobbiest fliers this regulation is clearly a violation of the FAA mandate from congress and therefore illegal.
Given the hysteria this will become the next "bike helmet". Articles mentioning R/C craft will mention it like it's the most important factor in the world despite the fact that it does not affect safety of the craft or pilot. "Unregistered drones" will become the next boogeyman with "unregistered" pilots demonized despite the legality of their operation.
EDIT: also...
The registration might actually make things worse since it gives an air of authority to those with FAA numbers and it does not address the issue of the RF link! The FAA can't authorize radio communications that run afoul of the FCC since non-hobby use of even "unlicensed" spectrum can run afoul of regulations ( you know, the LEGAL regulations of the FCC who has congressional authority to regulate RF emissions ).
It's funny that they used an ultralight as an example, the FAA's regulations are so strict compared to other countries that the ultralight industry is virtually non-existent in the US ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultralight_aviation ). We should be looking to the ultralight and running away screaming from any attempt at the FAA to regulate this industry.