FAA To Drone Owners: Get Ready To Register To Fly (networkworld.com) 195
coondoggie writes: While an actual rule could be months away, drones weighing about 9 ounces or more will apparently need to be registered with the Federal Aviation Administration going forward. The registration requirement and other details came form the government’s UAS Task Force which was created by the FAA last month and featured all manner of associates from Google, the Academy of Model Aeronautics and Air Line Pilots Association to Walmart, GoPro and Amazon. “By some estimates, as many as 400,000 new unmanned aircraft will be sold during the holiday season. Pilots with little or no aviation experience will be at the controls of many of these aircraft. Many of these new aviators may not even be aware that their activities in our airspace could be dangerous to other aircraft -- or that they are, in fact, pilots once they start flying their unmanned aircraft,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta in announcing the task force’s results.
What purpose does registration serve? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It's so when your drone does $terroristaction they know were to send the SWAT team.
Not that they'll be verifying these addresses, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
It's so when $terroristaction with a drone happens they know were to send the SWAT team.
Not that they'll be verifying these addresses, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, the new way to "SWAT" people you don't like, have their doors broken down, etc...is to either steal their drone and do something nefarious with it, or likely could be just as easy as finding out your target's serial number, and just etching that onto ANY drone, as that with the emergency reactions to things, likely they will be happy to get an address and break down your front door and shoot your dog, etc...
Re: (Score:2)
I would expect a record number of registrations to Barack Obama and Mickey Mouse.
Re: (Score:3)
So, the new way to "SWAT" people you don't like, have their doors broken down, etc...is to either steal their drone and do something nefarious with it, or likely could be just as easy as finding out your target's serial number, and just etching that onto ANY drone
No, it's much much worse than that. You acquire a drone by any means, you register it to your target through the websystem which provides instant registration, you slap the registration number on the drone and you fly it into a controlled airspace. Done and done.
Re:What purpose does registration serve? (Score:4, Insightful)
1) It will allow them to send you information about your legal obligations and operating restrictions as a drone pilot;
2) It will allow them to identify the owner of a drone if that drone crashes into something and causes damage;
Can somebody please explain to me how "registering your drone" is some kind of unbelievable infringement on your human rights? You have to get licensed to own a gun, drive a car, and you have to register to vote. Why is it such a strange idea that you might, when operating something that could hurt or kill other people, and which almost certainly operates in public spaces, you take affirmative steps to understand the regulations relative to your new hobby?
I bet that almost every one of you cunts whining about registration is also a rabid fan of the idea of draconian gun control measures.
Let's register baseballs too. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll bet you get more damage to property from poorly regulated baseballs thrown by children than drones.
Obviously, baseballs can hurt, and even kill people, and people play with them in public spaces all the time - we really need to get everyone registered properly so we can educate them and hold them responsible for the errant throw.
Re: (Score:2)
People could even throw baseballs across state lines! We'd better have the Feds regulate all throwing of baseballs!
Re: (Score:2)
People could even throw baseballs across state lines! We'd better have the Feds regulate all throwing of baseballs!
Actually in a way they already do.
Or, at least Congress seems quite interested in the steroid use of people who throw/catch/hit baseballs for money.
Strat
Re: What purpose does registration serve? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What if I mount a gun to a quadcopter, and then by legal magic, instead of a "drone", I have a "flying gun"?
Re: (Score:3)
You have to get licensed to own a gun, drive a car, and you have to register to vote.
You do not have to get licensed to own a gun, at least in states that show the slightest respect for the US Constitution. You do not have to get licensed to drive a car, unless you want to drive it in public places (and even then, driving farm equipment on farm-to-market roads doesn't require a license, as that was seen as an undue burden). You don't, in practice, have to register to vote, unless you live somewhere that requires an ID to vote - and most states see an ID as an undue burden.
You don't need a
Re: (Score:2)
See, the gun owners were supposed to be a part of militia and be ready to be conscripted into armies to protect their country. Yet what percentage of gun owners has military training?
Re: (Score:2)
"right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms"
Why do so many people blithely ignore the the next part of the same sentence in the second amendment? Even if you buy the garbage that it applies to the "militia" (any able bodied male between 18 and 45 throughout most of the countries early history) the very next part says that it applies to everyone (IE: People).
Re: (Score:2)
See, the gun owners were supposed to be a part of militia and be ready to be conscripted into armies to protect their country.
A "Well-regulated" militia was, by the parlance of the times (the meaning of well-regulated, that is) one which was working properly, i.e. in the defense of the people. It had nothing to do with rules and regulations. That's a modern connotation. You think you know how to read, but you don't. If you did, you'd take the age of the material into account.
Re:What purpose does registration serve? (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in antiquity, I had to "register" to get a "bikes on trains" permit to carry my bike on the metro. It was a nominal $5 fee (covered the cost of the photograph) and a royal pain to go to the downtown office to get the permit, but the whole point was to educate the permitee about the dos and don'ts of carrying your bike on the metro. Then, whenever somebody it being a bonehead with their bike on the metro, the officials can say either: a) "You need to have a permit to do that, go get it." saving themselves all effort at education on-the-spot, or b) "I see you have a permit, but you obviously didn't pay attention to the training." and possibly revoke the permit on-the-spot, forcing the ex-permitee to jump more hoops to get it reinstated.
Hunting and fishing licenses are a similar game, though their fees are higher, and annual. The presumption is that you will learn what you're supposed to know as a licensee - though, in practice, they're mostly just an annual fee.
Registering drones, like registering handguns, will give some traceability to the bits of electronic junk that get lost in hard to get to locations inside state/national parks, and on other people's private land. It might make some operators a little more careful and a little more aware of the impacts their toy can have. I don't think it's much about keeping them out of the flightpath of commercial airliners, I think it is about making the owners more accountable for less serious bone-headdedness.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Hunting and fishing licenses are also to ensure the proper level/age/gender of animals, or at least close to it, is hunted, for conservation, etc. purposes
.
Re: (Score:2)
Hunting and fishing licenses are also to ensure the proper level/age/gender of animals, or at least close to it, is hunted, for conservation, etc. purposes
No, no they are not. Licenses don't do that. The only thing licenses do is make sure that someone has spent money. Only enforcement does that. Enforcement already happens; they have wardens out all year making sure that people aren't poaching. I live in major hunting country, so there's lots of them here.
Re: (Score:3)
Two words: Registration fees.
Re: (Score:3)
Flying a drone is not a crime or can not be presented as been a reasonably crime like act to induce the showing of photo ID.
So it hard to get the names of the owner unless they walk back to their car (plate number), are followed by law enforcement officials, or have a cell phone on them (StingRay, IMSI-catcher).
Such passive options are now
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking you're probably retarded, because that's the only way I can parse "how me where in the Constitution, or in the Air Commerce Act, the FAA was given authority over all airspace in the U.S." and explain the idiocy of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Buuurrrnnnn!!
Re: (Score:2)
Because the question is stupid! (Score:4, Interesting)
Staying awake during junior high and high school social studies classes would have avoided this incredible lack of knowledge. (If there wasn't the benefit of a proper education then there is a valid excuse for such ignorance.)
It is just as inane to say "Show me where in the constitution it says that police can enforce speed limits!" People really don't need to loudly proclaim their ignorance and supporting their ignorance makes a statement too...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds pretty much in line with the constitution and with what was taught in social studies...
----
BTW - The FAA does regulate baseballs, frisbees, spitwads, polevaulting, and falcons on board an aircraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Congress authority is set out in the constitution. Congress can pass resolutions which become law when signed by the president
Congress can pass laws, But congress cannot transfer any of their own lawmaking authority to an outside entity.
For example, it is not within congress' power to pass a law stating "Whatever Young billy says is the law, is the law."
You can replace 'Young Billy' with any corporation or government department you want, and it's still true --- congress literally does not have the p
Re: (Score:2)
The authority to enact and enforce laws is granted by the enumerated powers of the Constitution.Those are the only powers granted to the federal government by the people. The FAA doesn't have the power to create laws, only enforce them.
Sigh. You really are thick. The FAA is a branch of the federal government. The government has the right to make laws to make management of the country possible. An FAA ruling can thus have the force of law, if the federal government says so.
Ignorance is on full display here.
Yes, and your ignorance is being caused by wishful thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, you're aware that those are not the only laws governing the operation, authority, and structure of the FAA, right? In fact, the law in question that gives the FAA the authority to regulate drones is the "FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012," specifically, Title III, Subtitle B, "Unmanned Aircraft Systems," in which Congress specifically directs the FAA as follows:
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, the law in question that gives the FAA the authority to regulate drones is the "FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012," specifically, Title III, Subtitle B, "Unmanned Aircraft Systems," in which Congress specifically directs the FAA as follows:
Do you know what "the national airspace system" referred to there is?
Do you know what the Commerce clause in the Constitution is (which is the ONLY Constitutional authority FAA has)?
Are you asserting that Congress doesn't have any authority to make this law,
No, I'm saying Congress' authority to make this law is limited to "navigable airspace", which is the concept which governs interstate air transportation. The "interstate" part is what gives the FAA its authority.
rather than spouting off generalized inanities that demonstrate your lack of knowledge about aviation. If not, then perhaps you can take your claims that the FAA has "no lawful authority" over you, and shove them up your ass.
It's not a generalization, it's Constitutional law. Read about it some time.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm saying Congress' authority to make this law is limited to "navigable airspace", which is the concept which governs interstate air transportation. The "interstate" part is what gives the FAA its authority.
Congress' authority is to pass laws enabling commerce, securing the nation, etc. The FAA's authority is derived from congress. The "interstate" part just gives the FAA more authority. The authority which the federal government does not accumulate to itself falls to the states. However, aviation is an area over which the feds assert authority, and state laws can't supersede federal laws./p
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I do. Do you? Specifically, Class G airspace - the "uncontrolled" airspace up to 1200 feet, except in the vicinity of an airport, where the ceiling is much lower? Because that's part of the national airspace system, and the rules identifying and controlling it are the responsibility of the FAA. The FAA reauthorization of 2012 grants them the charter of "integrating uav flight" into the national airspace, which includes Class G - therefore, they are well within their legal rights to regulate that space.
That isn't an answer. You're defining something in terms of that something... a completely circular argument which has no meaning. I asked you a question which you haven't answered.
If you need it made more clear, then look this up: what was the Congressional authority under which the 2012 reauthorization was made? Here's a big hint: it's called a "REauthorization"... not a grant of new authority.
Your description of areas around airports are irrelevant, because I mentioned them myself, earlier.
the CONGRESS has constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce
This is
Re: (Score:2)
No, the deal is, if you fly a drone across a state line, it becomes subject to federal regulation. And not before.
Almost but not quite. "Navigable airspace" means commonly-traveled interstate air routes, and associated airspace, like around airports.
And that's reasonable.
But the vast majority of airspace, outside of those commonly traveled routes and altitudes, is completely outside FAA's jurisdiction. That's a basic principle of how our Constitution models Federal authority.
Infringing on the freedom of the press (Score:2, Interesting)
Because I was not a Journalist.
Then they came for the environmental journalist, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not an animal rights activists.
Then they came for the citizen journalism, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not into 1st Amendment audits.
Then they came for my drone—and there was no one left to speak for me.
No more 4k ready drones moving along public property capturing news worthy footage w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The US Constitution is clear on the role of the press, media, journalists been able to work anywhere in the USA in public without any level of government "infringing on the freedom of the press".
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is very clear on the role of a free press.
Inducing a police chat down, demand for papers, photo ID, just for using a tool (a drone) just f
pilots once they start flying their unmanned..... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If your son's RC car is affecting regular traffic then yes.. that makes him a "driver"
Imagine if RC cars were a relatively new thing.. and people started attaching cameras to them and driving them on the freeway around emergency responders.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if RC cars were a relatively new thing.. and people started attaching cameras to them and driving them on the freeway around emergency responders.
There are already laws in place to punish anyone doing such a thing. Just like there already are for flying model airplanes in the way of real aircraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now, personal drones are getting to a point where people ARE getting in the way of real aircraft, registration would make it easier for law enforcement to track a drone to it's owner instead of having to create some elaborate investigation into who owns the device.
Not even counting how drones are starting to be used a little more prolifically for businesses.
All this talk about "gub'mint confiscation" seems like runoff from gun nut types.
Re: (Score:2)
And anyone who uses words like "gub'mint" seems like a moron nut type.
Weight? Really? (Score:3)
Weight is pretty much the most clueless measurement to use.
You could build something really big, put helium balloons inside it and have it sit on a scale and still weigh less than 9 oz.
Any of Physical size, maximum range, maximum speed, maximum altitude, any of those would have been much less clueless.
Re: (Score:2)
(empty) weight has worked for aircraf for a long t (Score:4, Informative)
Weight is an extremely important and controlling parameter for aircraft. It has worked well as an important parameter for classification. For example, the smaller two classes of manned aircraft are called Ultralight and Light Sport Aircraft.
"Maximum" speed, range, and altitude are less useful because they are highly variable under different conditions and impossible to test for a true maximum. Maximum design ratings are used, but weight it the major criterion, the criterion that the classes are named after.
The FAA also regulates lighter-than-air craft such as hot air balloons and blimps. It turns out that by using the EMPTY weight of the craft, you totally avoid the issue of filling it with helium balloons- and the trick of having the gas tank only 1/4 full when it's weighed. They are all measured empty, and it's the empty weight the classifications are based on.
ISO 80000 weight unaffacted by atmospheric buoyanc (Score:2)
Weight does not vary by drag or buoyancy.
ISO 800000, which defines mass and weight, defines weight as Fg= mg. g is a locally constant value, NOT a property of object. g is ~ 9.8 m/s/s on earth. Weight is mass times g. To avoid any confusion, ISO 800000 explicitly states that atmospheric buoyancy is excluded for weight, that weight is the -local- g times the mass of the -object- . (Not the other way around, a -location- has gravity, an -object- has mass. Multiply the two to get weight.)
Also, as mentioned the
Re: (Score:2)
Translate please! (Score:2)
I have questions!
Registration is mandatory prior to operation of a UAS in the NAS not at point of sale.
UAS = Unmanned Aircraft Systems AKA "RC aircraft"
NAS = ???
Persons must be 13 years of age to register.
I don't think you have to be 13 years or older to purchase or operate one, so this seems like a loophole.
Make registering worthwhile (Score:2)
If the Govt. encouraged drone-flying then it would have a cadre of skilled operators who took their hobby seriously enough to want to see it well regulated and free from idiots. That way a basically unenforceable law costing millions to police would be mostly self-policed by people with decent civic values... As well as cutting edge skills and technology. Hey what's that you say Sooty? 'Nerds being sociable?' Yes, why not.
In the UK plane spotters were once seen as some sort of terror threat but then
As a quadcopter pilot... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So that's your justification for them including 9-ounce balsa wood model airplanes in this process? really?
Right, that is exactly what I said. Are you perchance a blood relation of my wife?
Re: (Score:2)
Autonomous, self-piloting, drones can be more dangerous than a car if flown improperly.
Citation required.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't understand why people think autonomous operating modes are the problem aside from people just assume the publicized crashes must involved that mode.
Because with autonomous mode the quad can navigate beyond line of sight. Stupid rises exponentially with distance.
Additionally, RC pilots know their skill level, and have experience battling winds, updrafts, etc. You and I know the limits of the craft, or at least, when they are approaching the limits and in what weather not to launch. Drone users get right up against the limits of the vehicle's capability then crash, with no warning to either the standers-by nor the "operator". They have no idea that the
Re: (Score:2)
So can baseballs. I'd insult your general attitude, but you're going to find out that regulation will mean that your days of calling yourself a "pilot" outside of your living room will soon be over.
If a sudden surge of people throwing hundreds of thousands of baseballs, constantly, in major cities were to happen then in fact I would expect the government to regulate baseballs. And that is exactly what is happening with autonomous flying craft.
Now replace baseballs with stones. In your city, what would the police do to people who throw stones at other people constantly?
Exactly what part do you register? (Score:3)
So, we generally work by the fiction that a "gun" is the lower receiver, and that is the part that is what we register.
Exactly what part of the drone are you going to serialize and register? The wings? The engine? The fuselage? Will you need to de-register when it breaks? Re-register it after it's repaired?
At what point will the government decide to have us "register" all of the home made cakes we bake in our ovens? The parts and technology for a cake are just as common and available as the parts and technology for a drone...
Re:Exactly what part do you register? (Score:4, Informative)
Its all about the person and connecting them to any and all drones in use. A demand for photo ID does the rest.
Re: (Score:2)
that's nice, I'm putting your registration number on my drone and then going to do naughty, naught things
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so let's just register people, and insist they inscribe their social security number onto everything they own - cars, guns, drones, clothes, computers, cell phones, baseballs, cakes, or anything else you could possibly misuse or cause damage with...this couldn't possibly get creepy, and then we'll have one universal identifier for each individual.
Maybe, just maybe, those people without those identifiers can be deported immediately, because obviously nobody would be able to actually *forge* any sort of
Re: (Score:2)
8 oz... (Score:2)
Place your blame for this appropriately (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As to the Whitehouse, mount some of the new laser's the navy has developed on the Whitehouse. If a drone enters proscribed airspace around the house it goes poof. Prisons? That's why guards have shotguns, free skeet practice. Backyards are a little challenging. Shotguns is also my initial answer but discharging firearms is often p
FAA told AMA to eat shit basically (Score:2)
Even though the federal law says that the FAA cannot regulated model aircraft under federal law. Utter BS the law says they cannot regulate a model aircraft under 54 LBS, that is flown under 400 AGL and operated with VLOS of the operator. The AMA self limits themselves to 15lbs.
Official response from the AMA. http://amablog.modelaircraft.o... [modelaircraft.org]
This will be DOA when a lawsuit gets filed by the AMA.
I crashed more than one 1k aircraft on landing, do you think I won
I have several drones and I support this (Score:3)
First, the requirement is not onerous. There are no serious licensing requirements.
Second, having drones to be traceable is a good thing - if somebody crashes them into your window then you'd definitely want to find who did it. And never mind that a crashed drone can sometimes catch fire (mine did) from a ruptured battery (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] as an example).
Third, there is some honey here - FAA plans to review restrictions on flying inside the national parks once the registration system is up and running.
Re: (Score:2)
Federal law specifically says the FAA cannot regulate model aircraft under certain conditions.
FAA is trying to regulate model aircraft under the conditions set forth by law.
FAA is breaking the law, too bad we cannot take the administrators and send them to jail until they post bail.
Re: I have several drones and I support this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you provide a link to this law (and it must be a federal law)?
FAA is bound by Section 336 Special Rule For Model Aircraft from enacting new regulations regarding model aircraft which fall within the parameters described in Section 336.
On the other hand, a model aircraft operated pursuant to the terms of section 336 would potentially be excepted from a UAS aircraft certification rule, for example, because of the limitation on future rulemaking specifically âoeregarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft.â Public Law 112-95, s
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
>> drone registration Federal website works at least as well as the site for Obamacare when it first came online
Question 1) How much money did you make in 2015?
Question 2) Send it in.
Re: (Score:3)
...that the drone registration Federal website works at least as well as the site for Obamacare when it first came online....
I wonder, will all drones be grounded till the US Federal Drone Registration website is actually up and running enough to accept peoples' input?
Unless it has to interact with multiple state and federal systems with diverse data formats running on equipment and software that is decades old, and no longer supported, and connecting all of that to the more modern systems of third party private sector companies whose vested interest is in seeing all all fail... then it should be fairly smooth sailing....
Re: (Score:2)
I"m willing to bet that indeed it will come at least CLOSE to having all of those parameters you mentioned.
I can't imagine that it won't in some if n
Re:I hope... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
If the government wants to do that, it is certainly within their authority.
Re: (Score:2)
The important point is: what's a drone? That is: how much autonomous control is required?
Re: (Score:3)
Basically the quadcopter people have ruined RC aircraft for the fixed-wing and scale-model helicopter folks. I will admit that given the developments in camera, storage, and battery technology it may have been inevitable, but it was the quadcopter crowd that really embraced high quality video while flying into the personal space of others and loiter on a large scale.
Re:I hope... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This happens with every technology when the barrier to entry is significantly lowered. I'm sure early automobile enthusiasts felt the same way about the Model-T ruining their happy-go-lucky days of driving without licenses.
It was quite dangerous to be near anyone driving at the time. Most did not know how to drive, obviously did not start with the benefit of being an automobile passenger for 15 years, and they tended to think of it as a carriage without the horses and drove them accordingly. Comedy and injury ensued. So probably about the same as drones.
Re: (Score:2)
Makes one wonder why they didn't ban them.... and blamed the pedestrians who got hit [youtube.com]....
quads brought noobs. (Score:4, Interesting)
I first joined AMA 30 years ago. I've flown fixed wing, helicopters, and rockets. I've also climbed into something slightly larger and flown it. My next purchase will probably be a quad. I don't think that owning a quad will make me become stupid. The craft is not the problem.
The AMA used to work with manufacturers and retailers to have a very strong presence- every $12 kit included AMA information in the package. The AMA managed to reach a high enough percentage of purchasers that most were well-behaved.
Quads brought a ton of new people into the hobby and the existing community hasn't reached them effectively. Part of that is probably because models (other than rockets) used to be harder to fly, so newbies NEEDED an experienced pilot to train them. Clueless newbies who wouldn't learn from others quickly destroyed their new toys.
On the other hand, rockets could be flown without training, yet AMA dis a good job of getting the message of responsibility out to rocketers. How can this (large) new generation of flyers be reached and educated? Blaming it on the number of props won't do the trick, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
What does the American Medical Association have to do with toy helicopters?
Re: (Score:2)
[Ignoring the lame "toy" bait]
Nothing, but maybe the Academy of Model Aeronautics just possibly might. Just how many of all possible TLAs do you really believe are not overloaded?
Re: (Score:2)
My point was that he should have spelled out that name. I have no idea what group he was referring to.
Re:quads brought noobs. (Score:5, Insightful)
Quads brought a ton of new people into the hobby and the existing community hasn't reached them effectively. Part of that is probably because models (other than rockets) used to be harder to fly, so newbies NEEDED an experienced pilot to train them. Clueless newbies who wouldn't learn from others quickly destroyed their new toys.
I've got a secret for you- your hobby is experiencing its own Eternal September [wikipedia.org], and you never will reach those clueless newbies unless regulation forces them to actually apprentice with someone experienced. You could even look upon it as two separate hobbies- the older hobby for scale-model aircraft or scale-model-type aircraft that requires a significant degree of skill to participate in without constantly spending large sums of money to replace destroyed equipment, and another hobby for the inexperienced that only want a casual hobby, or want to use the equipment as a means for some greater hobby that can benefit from it.
Re: (Score:2)
I came here to say Eternal September as well. Thank you.
For those of us that remember the Internet before 1993, this is history repeating itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The AMA managed to reach a high enough percentage of purchasers that most were well-behaved.
There's two parts to this. One part is the amount of reckless flying that is introduced by bringing quads down in price, and the other part is the realisation that we are now living in a different world.
I can't buy little magnetic toys, I can't buy lawn darts, I can't buy a chemistry set which contain any kind of acids, I can't buy cyanide at the pharmacy, I can't even buy a decent pain killer anymore. Part of the problem is idiots, but not just idiot end users; idiots in congress who are trying to singleha
Re: (Score:2)
The important point is: what's a drone?
That's probably not important at all. I am willing to bet your next paycheck that the word "drone" will be mentioned parenthetically in the requirements, if it's mentioned at all. The FAA Rulemaking Committee's summary cited in TFA refers to them by the TLA, "UAS" (unmanned aircraft system).
Re: (Score:2)
How about a kayaker to a cargo ship captain?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)