The US Department of Transportation will release a document clarifying and requesting further comment today on the plan to require registration of drones.
The first part of the document reiterates the agency’s reason for moving towards a registration system, citing recent safety concerns and emphasizing the need for enforcement of safety regulations:
“Pilot reports of UAS sightings in 2015 are double the rate of 2014. Pilots have reported seeing drones at altitudes up to 10,000 feet, or as close as half-a-mile from the approach end of a runway. In recent weeks, the presence of multiple UAS in the vicinity of wild fires in the western part of the country prompted firefighters to ground their aircraft on several occasions…
…we must create a culture of accountability and responsibility among all UAS operators. To maintain safety in the NAS, the Department has reconsidered its past practice of exercising discretion with respect to requiring UAS to be registered, consistent with statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 44101-44103, and has determined that registration of all UAS is necessary to enforce personal accountability while operating an aircraft in our skies.”
The report then goes on to state that in addition to a system of registration, markings and ID on every drone “will assist the Department in identifying owners of UAS that are operated in an unsafe manner, so we may continue to educate these users, and when appropriate, take enforcement action.”
After outlining the agency’s actions in convening a task force, the report requests comments from the public on 10 questions, including at what point registration should occur; what means are available for ID of individual products; who should be responsible for the submission of registration information; and whether or not a fee should be included. With a nod to complaints from the drone industry that excessive regulation is damaging potential growth in the sector, the DOT requests input on how a registration process could minimize the burden on manufacturers and encourage growth and innovation in the industry. The final question in the report asks a big question: “Are there additional means beyond aircraft registration to encourage accountability and responsible use of UAS?”
Although the department has made efforts to appear collaborative, the short time frame would seem to preclude significant input from outside the small task force. Public comments are requested to be submitted within 15 days of the document publication, and the convened task force is expected to present recommendations by November 20.
Miriam McNabb is the Editor-in-Chief of DRONELIFE and CEO of JobForDrones, a professional drone services marketplace, and a fascinated observer of the emerging drone industry and the regulatory environment for drones. Miriam has penned over 3,000 articles focused on the commercial drone space and is an international speaker and recognized figure in the industry. Miriam has a degree from the University of Chicago and over 20 years of experience in high tech sales and marketing for new technologies.
For drone industry consulting or writing, Email Miriam.
TWITTER:@spaldingbarker
Subscribe to DroneLife here.
As someone who uses drones in his business my main concern is that the FAA will create a “special” class within the regulations with will be expensive for business like mine to implement drones.
The registration process may not be ideal but it’s a step in the right direction. Regulation will take time to evolve. The implementation process may be getting over worked by the FAA. The usual bureaucratic process. I remember about 4 years back when many people were afraid that the FFA would ban the use of drones in there entirety. Thankfully thats not the case today and they are working toward safe integration into air airspace. At this point is just a waiting game.
Why does an executive branch administrative agency have the authority to collect a tax on drones? What are they going to do with that money, pay off the national debt?
To me there is no difference between flying R/C planes, helicopter or now QuadCopters. All of them are hobbyists toys or fields which they want to play in and innovate. I have been flying R/C planes and Helis for the last 15 years and quadcopters are no different then any other RC flying objects. It uses the same technology, it is still visible and readily available by all types of vendors. Most of them are made of plastic and some metals. The only difference is the difference is gps technology which can provide extra tracking advantage. It is easier to fly in some sense compared to an R/C Helicopter. So, the media and people who do no understand the joy of having a hobby are shaping the picture as if it is something new, and has be be controlled. We are a part of a society where innovations which is rooted in all of us, these toys and hobby leads to more innovation to our young generations as well as old.
Please do not destroy our hobby- this is no different then an R/C helicopter with 4 rotors rather then two. Don’t let the party which does not understand the hobby create the law. If registering plastic quadcopters would make it safer then I am all for it but don’t implement it as a law just for the sake of creating a law.
I have been following with great interest the “DRONE REGISTRATION” debate. I am a current member of the “Academy of Model Aeronautics” (AMA) and have been flying R/C aircraft for over 20 years. I have flown Sailplanes, R/C Gas, Helicopters, and now Quadcopters (Drones if you will). I have always flown responsibly, and would certainly never fly where full scale aircraft fly (I once took Private Flight Training).
I have a hard time understanding why my “HOBBY” Quadcopter would need registration. Besides buying commercial quadcopters (1 foot diameter, less then 1 pound, and flight time 6-8 minutes) – I also build quadcopters from readily available parts (Motors, Speed Controllers, Flight Controllers, Propellers, Batteries). With the advancement of “OFF-THE-SHELF” Flight Controllers, we can add GPS capability. I have the ability to add Telemetry, First Person Video and If I chose, can fly high enough to interfere with Aircraft (Although I never would).
If you believe that adding a Registration Number to my Home Build Quadcopter would make the National Airspace safer, by all means let met know where the forms are. I would gladly put a registration number on the miniature Quadcopter. No matter what, it is up to the individual to fly responsibly. I may never fly my “DRONE” for commercial purposes, but I am somehow lumped into the same class as someone who might.
The AMA has represented Hobbyists flying Radio Control Aircraft since 1936. From Free-Flight aircraft to Full Radio Control Systems, we have been coexisting with Civilian and Military Aircraft. Just because the advancement in Electronics, Miniaturization of Video Systems and Off-Shore flooding of the Hobby Market with devices with advanced flight parameters, is no reason to label us who enjoy Hobby aspects of the Drone Market to be labelled Criminals.
I support tough sanctions for those who fly near airports, or fly above 500 feet AGL or those who fly in any airspace class where the potential for interference with Civil Aviation is at risk. There also must be some allocation of flight space for those who want to fly drones responsibly. I all I am asking is don’t vilify us who believe this to be a safe hobby, that includes aspect of Electronics, Computers, Aviation, Design and Manufacturing Skills. It is these skills that have helped America lead the world in technological advances.
None of those questions address home made UAS. I’ve got 2 multirotors that I’ve built and I built the occasional fixed wing aircraft out of foam board. Any of these things can be outfitted with Flight Controllers, Cameras and GPS.
So you link to the document but don’t provide the questions or where people can go to comment?
To facilitate the task force’s work, we are requesting information and data from the public in thefollowing areas:
1. What methods are available for identifying individual products? Does every UAS soldhave an individual serial number? Is there another method for identifying individualproducts sold without serial numbers or those built from kits?
2. At what point should registration occur (e.g. point-of-sale or prior-to-operation)? Howshould transfers of ownership be addressed in registration?
3. If registration occurs at point-of-sale, who should be responsible for submission of thedata? What burdens would be placed on vendors of UAS if DOT required registration to occur at point-of-sale? What are the advantages of a point-of-sale approach relativeto a prior-to-operation approach?
4. Consistent with past practice of discretion, should certain UAS be excluded fromregistration based on performance capabilities or other characteristics that could beassociated with safety risk, such as weight, speed, altitude operating limitations,duration of flight? If so, please submit information or data to help support thesuggestions, and whether any other criteria should be considered.
5. How should a registration process be designed to minimize burdens and best protectinnovation and encourage growth in the UAS industry?
6. Should the registration be electronic or web-based? Are there existing tools that couldsupport an electronic registration process?
7. What type of information should be collected during the registration process topositively identify the aircraft owner and aircraft?
8. How should the registration data be stored? Who should have access to the registrationdata? How should the data be used?
9. Should a registration fee be collected and if so, how will the registration fee becollected if registration occurs at point-of-sale? Are there payment services that can beleveraged to assist (e.g. PayPal)?
10. Are there additional means beyond aircraft registration to encourage accountability andresponsible use of UAS?
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:• Federal Rulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions forsubmitting comments.• Fax: 202-493-2251.• Mail: Dockets Management System; U.S. Department of Transportation, DocketsOperations, M-30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Washington,DC 20590-0001.• Hand Delivery: To U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Operations, M-30,Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Washington, DC, 20590-0001,between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Instructions: Include the agency name and docket number FAA-2015-4378 for this document atthe beginning of your comment. Note that all comments received will be posted without changeto Regulations.gov including any personal information provided. If sent by mail,comments must be submitted in duplicate. Persons wishing to receive confirmation of receipt oftheir comments must include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
Do registered vehicles prevent accidents, hooliganism , road rage under age drivers? I’m not convinced the average drone owner is dead set against a registration program. What they feel uneasy about is how far does the bureaucracy strangle the fun out of owning a drown? What is the next step is it flight plans? What about the next step a certification/ licensing process?
Drones are new exciting sources of entertainment for most operators and despite the media sensationalism most operators don’t want to willingly endanger people or break any laws. What they fear and rightly so IMO is how much the legislators will impeed that sense of fun and interesting innovation. You don’t see the FAA putting a strangle hold on murdering ISIS commanders in the Middle East yet some teenager will need to register his Christmas present before he can use it. After that what other hobby killing legislation will be made law?
Laws against drone operators near airports or firefighting operations ok sensible legitimate and useful legislation. Requiring little Johnny to pass through a series of difficult hoops just so he can learn if he likes the sport? Bone headed bureaucracy and that sir is putting it nicely.