Model Aircraft registration overturned

BlkWgn

BlkWgn

Adventurist
Senior Staff
Founding Member
From Forbes:

In a stunning David versus Goliath case, John A. Taylor, a model aircraft enthusiast and insurance lawyer, beat the Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Justice in a case challenging the legality of a December 2015 FAA rule requiring model aircraft to register like manned aircraft. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the FAA's registration rule, as it applies to model aircraft, "directly violates [a] clear statutory prohibition."

From the article, this covers unmanned aircraft that is capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere, flown within visual line of sight and flown for hobby or recreational purposes. To me that would cover most drones and how they are used on the trail.

As a licenced drone pilot, I am curious to here @Chad 's input on this.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngo...ration-rule-for-model-aircraft/?c=0&s=NewTech
 
I don't see "model aircraft" - once the purview of children and history buffs/flight enthusiasts, and drones - which are really becoming all about photography- as being the same. That's just me.

I too am interested to see how this plays out.
 
bob91yj said:
^^^^Not to stir the pot too much, but that sounds like a gun argument...when is it an assault rifle and not a hunting rifle? When is it a drone and not a toy?
Click to expand...

Totally agree. It's a deep rabbit hole for sure.

Like model rocketry. At what point does the toy qualify as a weapon?

In today's litigious, risk averse PC nanny state I'll be amazed if any of these hobbies remains legal in 20 years without heavy regulation, the kind that makes it so expensive that kids and hobbyists can't afford it anymore.
 
I'm feeling quite thankful that Taylor prevailed in this case. Discussing this could quickly turn into a thesis on everything that goes into this issue, so in the interest of not doing that, here's the 60-second backstory for those who don't know.

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act (FMRA) of 2012, Section 336 states that the FAA couldn't create any new 'band-aid' rules while they were working on the final drone rules that came out last September and that we commonly call Part 107. What did the FAA do? They made a bunch of rules (based on their INTERPRETATION of the FMRA, clearly violating Sections 333 and 336), like model aircraft registration.

If you look at this from the FAA's position, it's pretty easy to see how they felt like they needed to be seen doing something. With drones starting to sell like hotcakes, the FAA who is responsible for our National Airspace System needed to address all the people freaking out about drones. They (the FAA) argued that this registration system would provide accountability, and way to track down whodunnit should a drone be used for something evil. (Because all criminals and evil-does would make sure to register their drones before doing their evil.) This argument has about as many holes in it as the steel scraps we pick up in Anza-Borrego, but the worst part was this:

When you 'registered' with the FAA you were in effect registering YOURSELF and not your aircraft. You had one registration number that you would apply to all of your 'aircraft' and all of this unique ID information was saved in a database that is PUBLICLY available. Even the UID info for a minor (aged) pilot could be found with just a few clicks. I'm sure I don't have to spell out how bad of an idea this was. While the FAA does have the power to register aircraft, which works just like our vehicles where each one gets its own unique license plate, there is NO STATUE that gives any agency the power to register people, and that's what I believe Taylor argued.

I'm assuming that this is the 'statutory prohibition' that the linked article is referencing. I still haven't time to read the full briefs.

Drones are an interesting technology, and just like any new technology, they can be used for good or for evil. I'm thankful that Taylor prevailed, because I've always felt that the 'traditional' model aircraft hobbyists got pulled into this mess when the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) has enjoyed an outstanding safety record, and has build a great community culture of safety and responsibility.

I'd also echo Dave's sentiment that I think it's really sad that we have to do so much to protect people from themselves, and everyone is so bloody sue-happy. #murica.

I will add as a positive closing note, that I only saw one drone attempt to fly at OXW this year (new venue is very much a no fly zone w/o FAA waiver). In 2016 there were a TON of drones flying over the crowd (there's codified law that forbids that w/o waiver) everyone from Mr. Clay Croft to a bunch of kids with best buy drones were ripping around. So MAYBE people are getting a clue?
 
Drones were forbidden at King of the Hammer's this year due to low flying helicopters shooting video. It seemed to me that everyone cooperated.

I got a drone for Christmas, it's not an expensive one, but it does have a camera. All I've been able to do with it so far is crash!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom