Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drone Laws Extend to Include Toy UAVs
Kioskea ^ | 06/30/14 | Nicole Motta

Posted on 06/30/2014 4:26:12 PM PDT by Enlightened1

According to a notice released by the United States Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration last Monday, the new regulations now include Amazon drones and even some toy planes.

Before Monday's notice, the FAA had distinguished model aircraft from small drones according to their usage: commercial or recreational. Hobbyists were free to use model aircraft as they pleased but with these new rules, even toy quadcopters are considered drones and require users to have special permits to operate them. The Hubsan FPV X4 Mini RTF Quadcopter is targeted towards children but this, and other first-person-view model aircraft, will require a permit to fly. Models must be visible at all times, without vision-enhancing devices, which will limit how far children, or adults, can use these devices. Vision-enhancing devices include binoculars, night-vision goggles, powered vision-magnifying devices, and goggles that give users a "first-person view" from the model itself. "Such devices would limit the operator's field of view thereby reducing his or her ability to see and avoid other aircraft in the area," explained the FAA. "Additionally, some of these devices could dramatically increase the distance at which an operator could see the aircraft, rendering the statutory visual-line-of-sight requirements meaningless."

While toy planes may require a permit under the FAA's rules, the agency made it very clear that commercial use of drones is illegal. The FAA did not call out Amazon's drones specifically, but stated that model aircraft, including drones, are not to be used for "payment or commercial purposes." Even if the shipping is free with Amazon drones, it would still be considered commercial use and therefore illegal use. Amazon's vice president of global public policy, Paul Misener, responded saying that this "has no effect on our plans" and that the new regulations were "about hobbyists and model aircrafts, not Amazon."

(Excerpt) Read more at en.kioskea.net ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: amazon; drone; faa; toy; uav

1 posted on 06/30/2014 4:26:12 PM PDT by Enlightened1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

A regulation is not a law and the FAA will get spanked down in court for overreaching again.


2 posted on 06/30/2014 4:28:35 PM PDT by MeganC (Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

This is ridiculous and will not stand.


3 posted on 06/30/2014 4:29:04 PM PDT by Poundstone (A recent Federal retiree and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

I half thought about getting a copter and a Hero 3 for some Youtube stuff. A few months back at a 5k my wife ran, there was a guy with that setup that was apparently hired to do the race on video.


4 posted on 06/30/2014 4:29:36 PM PDT by wally_bert (There are no winners in a game of losers. I'm Tommy Joyce, welcome to the Oriental Lounge.q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

No they won’t.


5 posted on 06/30/2014 4:33:11 PM PDT by biff (WAS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

I can’t believe the AMA (the model aircraft guys, not the doctor guys) will allow this to stand without lobbying congress to clarify the rules.


6 posted on 06/30/2014 4:34:17 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1
I've got a nice gas powered RC helicopter that I've had for about 12 years.

I don't see me applying to the king for permission to fly it.

/johnny

7 posted on 06/30/2014 4:34:23 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1
"While toy planes may require a permit under the FAA's rules, the agency made it very clear that commercial use of drones is illegal."

I know more than one commercial photographer that uses a quad to take aerial photos for profit. I guess tough luck for them, huh?

8 posted on 06/30/2014 4:34:28 PM PDT by FlJoePa ("Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert

I’ve been getting YouTube ads from these guys lately:

http://www.parrot.com/usa/products/

They have one drone setup with built in camera, and a headset for the operator that creates the visual illusion that you’re actually in the thing.

All sorts of different devices on there.


9 posted on 06/30/2014 4:35:25 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
I just won't comply.

I'm already ignoring a bunch of other unconstitutional crap. Just one more to add to the stack.

/johnny

10 posted on 06/30/2014 4:36:32 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

There was a photo drone hovering over the entrance to our church on Saturday evening.

I just assumed it was Jeh Johnson & Co. preparing the roundup of Christians.


11 posted on 06/30/2014 4:39:31 PM PDT by nascarnation (Toxic Baraq Syndrome: hopefully infecting a Dem candidate near you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Well done. Me too. /a Texan


12 posted on 06/30/2014 4:40:48 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1
I didn't think the AMA would take this laying down. In fact, the AMA suggests that the FAA's actions with regards to model aircraft is against the law.
FAA Interpretive Rule addressing “Special Rule for Model Aircraft” Academy of Model Aeronautics response

The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) has reviewed FAA’s recently released Interpretive Rule in which the agency provided its interpretation of the “Special Rule for Model Aircraft” established by Congress as part of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95). The Academy is extremely disappointed and troubled by the approach the FAA has chosen to take in regards to this issue.

As a community-based membership association, the AMA has managed and overseen the nation’s model aircraft activity for the past 77 years and has grown to over 165,000 members in all 50 states, the U.S. territories and at military installations around the world. Over the years the Academy has developed an effective safety program that has achieved an exceptional safety record and has evolved to accommodate new technologies, new modeling disciplines, and a diverse aeromodeling community. AMA’s achievements and ability to manage the model aircraft activity in a safe and harmonious fashion was recognized by Congress in its reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration in 2012. In an effort to protect the aeromodeling community from overreaching and onerous regulation, Congress established the Special Rule for Model Aircraft which exempts this activity from regulation provided it is conducted in accordance with and within the safety programing of a community-based organization, AMA.

States AMA President Bob Brown, “The FAA interpretive rule effectively negates Congress’ intentions, and is contrary to the law. Section 336(a) of the Public Law states that, ‘the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft…’, this interpretive rule specifically addresses model aircraft, effectively establishes rules that model aircraft were not previously subject to and is in direct violation of the congressional mandate in the 2012 FAA reauthorization bill.”

The interpretive rule reflects the FAA’s disregard for and its unfamiliarity with the makeup of the modeling community. Nearly 20% of the AMA membership is 19 years old or younger and an even greater percentage is retirees over the age of 65. FAA’s intention to impose a strict regulatory approach to the operation of model aircraft in the hands of our youth and elderly members threatens to destroy a wholesome and enriching activity enjoyed by a vast cross-section of our society.

“AMA cannot support this rule.” said AMA Executive Director Dave Mathewson. “It is at best ill-conceived and at worst intentionally punitive and retaliatory. The Academy strongly requests the FAA reconsider this action. The AMA will pursue all available recourse to dissuade enactment of this rule.”

Founded in 1936, the Academy of Model Aeronautics continues to be devoted to the safe and responsible operation of model aircraft. With its nearly 2,400 clubs across the country, it serves as the nation’s collective voice for the aeromodeling community. Headquartered in Muncie IN, AMA is a membership organization representing those who fly model aircraft for recreation and educational purposes.


13 posted on 06/30/2014 4:44:02 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

completely unenforceable


14 posted on 06/30/2014 4:45:39 PM PDT by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

A couple of simple rules will make this all go away:

1) Operator / owner of a RC craft assumes full liability for any damage

2) All flying RC must include identification including Owner’s name, address, and phone number (can be on paper inside the drone)

3) limit the transmit power of the controller to X watts. This will limit the range of the craft

4) RC craft must be directly piloted at all times.

5) No craft to be operated within 2 miles of an airport

6) No craft to be operated above 65 db measured at 1 meter


15 posted on 06/30/2014 4:47:12 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Number 6 is unrealistic, even for electric aircraft.


16 posted on 06/30/2014 4:51:37 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
How about NO.

Don't add rules that haven't been needed since the 1930s.

Some people just want to make rules....

/johnny

17 posted on 06/30/2014 4:53:36 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Unless your heli is set up with FPV there isn't much in this to affect you. The Hubsan is a tiny quad with FPV you can hold in one hand, mostly for indoor use. Ridiculous it is covered by the new rules.
18 posted on 06/30/2014 4:59:00 PM PDT by steve86 ( Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
5) No craft to be operated within 2 miles of an airport

This would be absurd. My micro helis (~300 grams) will continue to operate a lot closer than that to an airport, but within a few yards of me as always.

19 posted on 06/30/2014 5:01:09 PM PDT by steve86 ( Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: steve86
That's not the way I read it.

"While toy planes may require a permit under the FAA's rules"

FAA can pound sand on their rules concerning model aircraft.

/johnny

20 posted on 06/30/2014 5:02:05 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Each of those rules has a specific reason.

1) establishes liability for damage
2) allows for identification of the owner in the event of a failure or damage
3) limits the range of the craft by physics and not some ambiguous “line of sight”
4) under the pilot’s control means that the pilot needs to be close and able to maneuver / land the craft to prevent accidents.
5) Avoids collision with aircraft
6) Ok, 65 db might be a little low but I don’t want a jet engine buzzing my house.


21 posted on 06/30/2014 5:04:11 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Where are those people who thought my idea of privatizing the FAA like the IEEE was stupid....

I told you this would get worse, and look... Here it is.

When your Department has no legal, Constitutional right to exist... Crap like this happens. Every time.


22 posted on 06/30/2014 5:05:38 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (Tri nornar eg bir. Binde til rota...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve86

Ok, give me an alternative that prevents a drone from threatening the flight path (and lives) of civilian aviation. How about 500 feet?


23 posted on 06/30/2014 5:06:55 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
You just like making rules. Funny how they weren't needed for almost a century.

How about the feds don't make rules concerning model aircraft, in accordance with Section 336(a) of the Public Law?

/johnny

24 posted on 06/30/2014 5:10:37 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
How about no new rule? Reckless endangerment already covers threatening civilian aviation.

New rules are just for the control freaks.

/johnny

25 posted on 06/30/2014 5:13:21 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Now we know why the FAA needs SWAT gear.
Midnight no-knock raids on model airplane hobbyists.


26 posted on 06/30/2014 5:15:08 PM PDT by BuffaloJack (Unarmed people cannot defend themselves. America is no longer a Free Country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Surveillance Balloons, bows n arrows, camera boomerangs and Trained camera-carrying falcons and eagles are exempt under this BS crap.


27 posted on 06/30/2014 5:16:58 PM PDT by bunkerhill7 ("The Second Amendment has no limits n firepower"-NY State Senator Kathleen A. Marchione.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

And a century ago, the population did not have cell phones or computers or a host of other technology. A century ago we did not have jets carrying hundreds of passengers. Aviation rules have made air travel one of the safest means of transportation.


28 posted on 06/30/2014 5:27:53 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
So how about the FAA NOT make a rule about model aircraft, in accordance with existing law?

Almost a century ago, we did have electricity, and back in the '30s, the beginnings of the model aircraft hobby.

Tesla had model boats that were radio controlled back in 1898. His patent was awarded patent No. 613,809.

/johnny

29 posted on 06/30/2014 5:47:13 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Aviation rules have made air travel one of the safest means of transportation.

Not so. The fear of scum sucking carpetbagger lawyers and paying damages is what has driven air safety.


30 posted on 06/30/2014 5:50:38 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (Surgeon General Warning: Operation of Government Motors vehicles may be hazardous to your health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
I really get sick of so called conservatives that have a knee jerk reaction of 'pass a law' or 'make a regulation' on everything.

We have plenty of laws already.

/johnny

31 posted on 06/30/2014 5:52:31 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

There are designated flight zones around airports for incoming and outgoing flights. They are sometimes called inverted wedding cakes from their shape — the closer to the airport the lower they are, in steps not continuously. Keep the model aircraft out of those and you should be OK. (One shouldn’t even fly a kite in those zones.)


32 posted on 06/30/2014 6:01:06 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Fk em! I’m going to buy a drone(quad copter) tomorrow just because of this stupid govt. overstep


33 posted on 06/30/2014 6:07:09 PM PDT by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Far, far too many. You cannot support the Constitution and support all of the laws made in spite of it’s explicit limits...


34 posted on 06/30/2014 6:14:27 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (Tri nornar eg bir. Binde til rota...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowest_safe_altitude

FAA definition

In the United States in particular, the Federal Aviation Administration calls this concept the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA), and specifically defines it as follows in § 119 of Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR):

” Anywhere: an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground;
Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
Over Open Water or Sparsely Populated Areas: an altitude allowing for a linear distance greater than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure;”

In other words, keep your quadcopter or model airplane outside of airport control zones and below 500 feet AGL (above ground level) and IF the manned aircraft is operating legally, he will not hit you.

Positive separation - simple problem, simple solution. (Unless you are a kleptocratic bureaucrat looking for new kingdoms to annex)


35 posted on 06/30/2014 6:48:49 PM PDT by BwanaNdege ( "For those who have fought for it, Life bears a savor the protected will never know")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
1. AMA members already have liability insurance coverage.

2. Under AMA rules, all model aircraft are to be identified
with the owner's name address phone number and AMA
number. In the case of a scale model, this info can be
on a plate or label inside the model.

3. Every R/C transmitter I ever heard of is already limited
to 750mW or 3/4 of a watt.

4. never felt the need for a autopilot myself.

5. Already a FAA rule about this. No flying within 3 miles
without notifying the tower or airport operator. Our
club has been at the same location for 42 years within
3 miles of a county airport. They know we are there and
we know they are there, and govern ourselves accordingly.

6. AMA already has sound level recommendations.

I've been flying R/C model airplanes since 1985 and have
been a instructor pilot (R/C fixed wing) since 1987. In
charge of the training program for new R/C pilots at our club
for the last 10 years.

Just curious, what do you fly?

36 posted on 06/30/2014 7:21:20 PM PDT by doublecansiter (without cartridge, load in nine times, LOAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: doublecansiter

I have flown but do not do so now (not enough time). I respect the AMA. If everyone followed their rules, well like I said, much of this issue would go away.


37 posted on 06/30/2014 7:52:12 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Know just where you’re coming from. I try to get one weekend
day and one weekday evening thru the week. Don’t always
work out though.


38 posted on 06/30/2014 8:27:10 PM PDT by doublecansiter (without cartridge, load in nine times, LOAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

I predict this rule will be as successful as the FCC requiring a radio license for CB radios in the 1970s. Their edict was universally IGNORED by the masses. Finally, the FCC just gave up and rescinded the stupid rule.


39 posted on 06/30/2014 10:11:41 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

As with gun-free zones, drone-free zones will be ignored by terrorists and malicious nut-cases like those who point laser-pointers at pilots!

I have been advocating education of the public to be vigilant as to suspicious activity around airports and public events and near VIP elected or military “high value” “soft” targets.

The public needs to engage in, you guessed it, “profiling” of folks in the neighborhood who might have been radicalized in the local(religious establishment promoting religious “stuggle”) and begun experimenting with model drones...perhaps crashing model drones into things or going on flight simulators like the Maylasian pilot did and simulating drone interceptions with airliners either in IFR landing patterns or in the V1-VR rotation zone on take-off on runways...stuff like that.

See the blog:

http://runwaykillzone.com/


40 posted on 07/01/2014 9:06:20 AM PDT by Seizethecarp (Defend aircraft from "runway kill zone" mini-drone helicopter swarm attacks: www.runwaykillzone.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson