FAA- Thinking Outloud

[Bill S]

Lots of emotion around the FAA’s Monday registration directive but think about this. What if the FAA just headed off an awful attack on ‘drones’ and technology that could have come about by our US Senate & Congress? For me, “Thank you FAA for taking the lead of a difficult political process right now in the US.

 

[kphantom]

Lots of emotion around the FAA’s Monday registration directive but think about this. What if the FAA just headed off an awful attack on ‘drones’ and technology that could have come about by our US Senate & Congress? For me, “Thank you FAA for taking the lead of a difficult political process right now in the US.

The interesting thing (or maybe dismaying) is that most motivations are about politics (#1), budget (#2) or legal (#3) items. Maybe they did diffuse a political hot potato. I will not say why on here, as it is a public forum, but the outcome is not too onerous yet. Our hobby airspace is not condensed, or new restricting regulations are not enacted. Overall this is a win-win so far. It's easy to be skeptical. But keep the hells dug in for real issues - nothing enacted is limiting responsible hobby flying.

 

[ken ferg]

I disagree! This registration is about enforcement databasing of PEOPLE not drone safety. If this was about safety they would have come up with a tiered program where unlicensed have limited safe access, more experienced could get a license after they proved safe competency and get extended access, and anyone operating outside their allowance would be in violation. It's the system we use for general aviation i.e. no FAA license required for ultralite aircraft, one man balloons, para-gliders,ect. Restricted license for sport pilots. And general lic. for full access. Ham radio also allows limited power and channels for non-licensed operators, greater power and freq. for tech lic. ect... ect... A person flying in an open area under a reasonable height is less of a risk than an eagle or goose which fly higher, fly around air ports, and weigh more than 99% of drones.

So what's next! Should I be required to register my Man-parts so they have a database for rape investigations? Sounds reasonable to you? Well good! Please someone tell me how I attach my registration # on a condom? What! staple it inside? Seriously?!!!.

 

[kphantom]

I disagree! This registration is about enforcement databasing of PEOPLE not drone safety. If this was about safety they would have come up with a tiered program where unlicensed have limited safe access, more experienced could get a license after they proved safe competency and get extended access, and anyone operating outside their allowance would be in violation. It's the system we use for general aviation i.e. no FAA license required for ultralite aircraft, one man balloons, para-gliders,ect. Restricted license for sport pilots. And general lic. for full access. Ham radio also allows limited power and channels for non-licensed operators, greater power and freq. for tech lic. ect... ect... A person flying in an open area under a reasonable height is less of a risk than an eagle or goose which fly higher, fly around air ports, and weigh more than 99% of drones.

So what's next! Should I be required to register my Man-parts so they have a database for rape investigations? Sounds reasonable to you? Well good! Please someone tell me how I attach my registration # on a condom? What! staple it inside? Seriously?!!!.

It does seem bizarre they claim it's about safety and then ask for personal information to put in a database. I think there is another reason not being disclosed.

 

[ianwood]

This topic is covered extensively in the news section. Thread closed.