[1morehobby]

Just curious about this community's view on the FAA registration.

[TheOtherCliff]

I won't answer because I don't trust the government to stay out of things that aren't there business. 

My intent is to see what the AMA can do before I do anything.  Some portions of the regulation are illegal (e.g. releasing a minor's personal information to the public).  Some portions of the regulation put me in danger if I sign up (e.g. any crazy that gets upset over seeing someone fly a quad can find quads and quad owners to shoot at ... and to shoot at (both people and quads) is not an exaggeration).

[Thrasher]

I got this email,
this is for AMA members, i'm pretty sure non AMA members should register, but wait.

-----------------------------------------

Dear AMA Members,

Yesterday, the AMA Executive Council unanimously approved an action plan to relieve and further protect our members from unnecessary and burdensome regulations. This plan addresses the recently announced interim rule requiring federal registration of all model aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) weighing between 0.55 and 55 pounds.

AMA has long used a similar registration system with our members, which we pointed out during the task force deliberations and in private conversations with the FAA. As you are aware, AMA's safety program instructs all members to place his or her AMA number or name and address on or within their model aircraft, effectively accomplishing the safety and accountability objectives of the interim rule. AMA has also argued that the new registration rule runs counter to Congress' intent in Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, otherwise known as the "Special Rule for Model Aircraft."

The Council is considering all legal and political remedies to address this issue. We believe that resolution to the unnecessary federal registration rule for our members rests with AMA's petition before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. This petition, filed in August 2014, asks the court to review the FAA's interpretation of the "Special Rule for Model Aircraft." The central issue is whether the FAA has the authority to expand the definition of aircraft to include model aircraft; thus, allowing the agency to establish new standards and operating criteria to which model aircraft operators have never been subject to in the past. 

In promulgating its interim rule for registration earlier this week, the FAA repeatedly stated that model aircraft are aircraft, despite the fact that litigation is pending on this very question. The Council believes the FAA's reliance on its interpretation of Section 336 for legal authority to compel our members to register warrants the Court's immediate attention to AMA's petition.   

While we continue to believe that registration makes sense at some threshold and for flyers operating outside of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes, we also strongly believe our members are not the problem and should not have to bear the burden of additional regulations.  Safety has been the cornerstone of our organization for 80 years and AMA's members strive to be a part of the solution. 

As we proceed with this process, we suggest AMA members hold off on registering their model aircraft with the FAA until advised by the AMA or until February 19, the FAA's legal deadline for registering existing model aircraft. 

Holding off on registration will allow AMA time to fully consider all possible options. On a parallel track, it also allows AMA to complete ongoing conversations with the FAA about how best to streamline the registration process for our members. 

In the near future, we will also be asking our members to make their voices heard by submitting comments to the FAA's interim rule on registration. We will follow-up soon with more detailed information on how to do this.

Thank you for your continued support of AMA. We will provide you with more updates as they become available. 

Kind regards,


 

The AMA Executive Council

Bob Brown, AMA President
Gary Fitch, AMA Executive Vice President
Andy Argenio, AMA Vice President, District I
Eric Williams, AMA Vice President, District II
Mark Radcliff, AMA Vice President, District III
Jay Marsh, AMA Vice President, District IV
Kris Dixon, AMA Vice President, District V
Randy Cameron, AMA Vice President, District VI
Tim Jesky, AMA Vice President, District VII
Mark Johnston, AMA Vice President, District VIII
Jim Tiller, AMA Vice President, District IX
Lawrence Tougas, AMA Vice President, District X
Chuck Bower, AMA Vice President, District XI

[mishadude]

It's interesting the AMA is advising everyone to wait, hoping their petition will be addressed. If the court of appeals hasn't looked at it since it was filled 16 months ago, they're not likely to address it by the registration deadline. They seem like a good organization which promotes safety and responsible flying, but that doesn't exempt their members from following federal regulations. If the AMA relieves their members of the $5 (every 3 years) registration burden by using $5 from each member's yearly club dues to pay it, problem solved. I'll bet my $5 registration fee they won't.

[kn4ud]

I will have to agree. I feel that the AMA is telling its members wrong. In my opinion , it is best to register with the FAA than get caught by FAA and fined. The AMA is not going to pay your fine. their filing 16 months ago has gone nowhere and it is not likely to.

[rotary65]

The AMA's approach is part of a strategic response to what they perverts to be significant encroachment on the enjoyment of the traditional hobby by the broad regulatory moves by the FAA. Certainly compliance would not likely result in the changes AMA seeks to protect the interests of its members, and this resistance if done with broad solidarity will demand attention.  In this sense,  it is valid.

[hwh]

While I'm against this registration other problems concern me more. Last year the secretary of interior sent a letter to all National Park superintendents ordering them to issue orders to close their parks to all types of model aircraft and UAVs except in existing organized flying fields used by groups like the AMA. For instance, at Lake Mead NRA in Nevada in a large park that takes well over an hour to drive across there's one small "model airfield" at the south end of the lake.  On the bright side, you don't have to worry about violating any FAA rule on keeping the aircraft in visual line of sight, the field and the surrounding area you're allowed to fly in are so small it's less than a tenth of line of sight.     And even worse, the field was setup originally for the old style RC aircraft where their primary concern was an open area with no obstructions to fly in.  The field is just flat desert and a little piece jutting out over the edge of the lake. A totally uninteresting place to fly.

Since the BLM (which manages most other public owned land) is also part of the Department of Interior, if they haven't already they'll probably apply the rules to the land they manage too.  That would ban flying in most of the open desert in the south-western US.

[TheOtherCliff]

(USA: My own opinions and certainly not necessarily that of any other LP member.)

When I first heard about the National Parks making RC off limits across the board, my first response was "Then you will never get my help in search and rescue, fires, videos to help showcase the park, visits, etc."  And my father was a park ranger all his life.  I loved the parks.

I feel that concerned RC flier citizens should start a petition that make the statement that they will not consider helping, working for, or visiting any park as long as the ban is in effect.

I think the AMA is paying for itself now.  I don't use museums, but I do need protection from the FAA's illegal policies.

I think the AMA is doing the right thing to advise waiting.  The FAA/DOT rules as they stand are illegal (e.g. publish the personal info of minors to anyone with an internet connection) and furthermore go against recent, specific congressional mandates for the FAA to keep its fingers out of RC.  That is the issue that has been postponed in courts but now would seem to require courts to address the issues before February.  I recall that the issue has now been broadened to make sure it includes all the FAA thorns.  A simple stay of the proposed FAA guidelines till this case is seen seems like a reasonable possibility.

I certainly won't be giving my info to sate the FAA's multiply illegal guidelines until the FAA answers and corrects the issues before it in court, to make those guidelines legal; just like a soldier can't be forced to commit war crimes against the Geneva Convention.  And that doesn't mean they get to change the definition of some word to reverse the meaning of a law as sometimes now happens in the USA to e.g. avoid inconvenient things like Habeas Corpus.  As an aside, the government even refuses to clarify how their interpretation of law (what words they changed the meaning of to allow a clearly written law to be completely reversed) allows them to do such things in e.g. the FISA courts.

Sorry for the political soap box. 

[Thrasher]

and the latest email from AMA, looks like yer AMa number is yer registration number...
-----------------

Dear Members,

As you know, we have been working with our legal counsel and the FAA to find a solution for our members on the registration rule. To date, FAA has agreed in principle to several proposed initiatives that will help ease this process for our members. Specifically, they are:

•AMA and the FAA are working to streamline the registration process for AMA members whereby those who register with the FAA will be able to use their AMA number as the primary identification on their model aircraft, as opposed to adding a new federal registration number.
 
•In addition, AMA members' federal registration will automatically renew provided membership remains active and current. We are working with FAA in negotiating the renewal fee, but in any case it is envisioned the renewal process will be provided as a member benefit.
 
•In the future, federal registration will automatically be accomplished upon joining the AMA, eliminating the need to register with both AMA and the FAA.


These initiatives are a step in the right direction. However, we want to emphasize that this is not the end of our efforts to protect AMA members from this overreaching regulation. We are continuing to explore all legal and political options available, but these conversations may take time and a definitive solution is unlikely before the February 19 registration deadline.

Currently, registration is free of charge until January 19. If you would like to take advantage of this free period, you may want to register before that day. But please note that you have until February 19 to register in order to avoid violating the federal rule. 

We also want to encourage our members to submit comments to the FAA about the registration rule. It is critical that all AMA members are heard loud and clear on this issue. The deadline for submitting comments is Friday, January 15. Additional instruction is available here.

Thank you for your patience as we work to find the best path forward on registration. We are committed to doing everything possible to protect our hobby and ensure that future generations have the opportunity to fly.

Sincerely,

AMA

[mishadude]

Well I'll be darned, I owe someone my 5$ registration fee. If the AMA doesn't raise everyone's dues to offset the cost of federal registration, I'll throw in four broken hq 5x3x3 props and a librepilot sticker. (Do we have stickers yet?). Hopefully they'll keep fighting the good fight.

[RayRegan]

Model Aircraft have been around for a long, long time, but in my lifetime they have never been seen as much of a threat. It seems to me that these regulations are a result of an over reaching government and an irresponsible media. When the general public hears the word "Drone" they think of the Predator Drone or the Global Hawk Drone that were used to take out bad guys in the middle east. For some reason this is the same word they choose to describe multirotor aircraft. I know that multirotor aircraft have become increasingly popular, affordable, and available over the last 5 years or so, but the media is dramatically exaggerating the potential threats to privacy and/or public safety. Last I checked commercially available multirotor aircraft cannot fly at 30,000 feet or achieve speeds over 300 mph. So during take off or landing would be the only time that they could affect commercial aviation. The rule about not flying a model aircraft within 5 miles of an airport is already on the books, so why do we need anything else? If someone wants to look into your windows or your property they only need a $10 pair of binoculars. Everyone has a camera on their phone these days anyway so how much privacy do we think we have?  Also, of course the government is going to charge a fee for the registration. Another way to collect money. The biggest problem with all of this is the same as guns or anything else that can be dangerous when used for harm or in an unsafe way. The bad guys don't follow laws! So those who want to violate privacy or do harm will not register their aircraft and the whole exercise is useless. I think we will all have to wait for a new administration to be elected and hope that they see these and other regulations as a harmful and unnecessary way to limit freedom, slow technological development, and a shameless way to collect more money from taxpayers while providing a false sense of security to the general public.         

[TheOtherCliff]

AMA already scheduled a fee increase (before your post ).  I bought a two year this time to lock in the old rate for one more year.

Politics and crude humor ahead.   Opinions are my own and in no way are tied to anyone or thing else here.

I agree the overblown thing about RC UAVs being drones and spying on you.  Way overblown.  It makes you wonder if selfie sticks should be regulated because someone can use one to see in a window better.  Heaven forbid that you should set a timer on your camera and throw it up in the air or tie it to a tethered balloon or take a picture from a bus window.  That should be regulated too.  A camera in the air is against the law somewhere, I forget where they wrote a stupid law without actually waking any brain cells up, dropping your camera is actually a crime, but they promise not to prosecute you for that.

The "danger to full scale aircraft" issue is already handled by current law.  We don't need more regulation, just enforcement of current law.  Maybe next year we will have to register to walk on the side walk in public, because, you know, that is what some burglars and terrorists do in their burgling and terror activities.

Unlike many of the things that are wrong in America right now, I don't believe that this particular issue has anything to do with the normal government (Democrat or Republican etc.).  It has to do with kingly men set in their ways, who write kingly edicts at the FAA.  It terrifies them that they might not have absolute control of every cubic inch of airspace and that someone may fart and cause an airplane motor to burp somewhere.  Congress passed a law in 2012 that said that the FAA will not interfere with model aircraft and the FAA chooses to interpret that there is no such thing as a model aircraft, just like several different executive branches (both red and blue) have chosen to interpret up as down so they can disobey our laws, and refuse to even state their secret interpretation because they know it won't hold water in public opinion or court.

We don't have to register firearms in some places, so it is safer to allow someone to shoot guns carelessly than to fly RC aircraft carelessly?  Don't get me wrong, I think that the government forcefully requiring gun registration is a bad idea from founding fathers perspective.  The founding fathers didn't trust government either...

No AMA, I don't give you permission to give my personal information to the government.  If you are going to do that, then refund my 2 year membership payment and scrub this AMA member of 40 some years from your books.

The FAA has gone too far.  It is attempting to illegally (remember the 2012 law that says it can't touch model aircraft?) over regulate and also to cause the USA to fall farther behind the rest of the world in development of UAVs.  Five or ten years from now, autonomous UAVs will be doing all kinds of helpful things, less so in the USA.

[RayRegan]

I agree with all of that!

[kn4ud]

I agree that AMA is having to fight a battle. I also agree the feds are overstepping their bounds and just being paranoid. I see (myself included) that alot of of people being concerned about the government having all this personal information but just think about it between NSA, IRS and FBI the government already have this information. This gathering of information has been going on for years. LOL, I know from all the props and parts I have purchased over the web and passed through customs they probably know what I have. They probably think the way I order 250 racer props this guy is no problem he is going to crash before he can commit a act of terror. I feel that the government looks at all of us who fly models are terror suspects. I am sure I am on their list because I like my models and I like my guns too. I've people who have came up to me while I was flying at a walking park with intent of telling me I could not fly there ( It is actually private property ) but after watching and looking at videos from the gopro had a total different opinion and some have asked if I would help them to learn to fly. For the most part I feel the public have been made paranoid about our hobby by news media and our own government.

[gitit20]

I just did it so its free and over with.