Hacker News Reader

Comment by djrogers | Hacker News Reader

This was a given from the moment the ink dried on the regulation - it's a clear violation of the actual law that gives the FCC it's powers and authority.

It may or may not be a good idea for the legislature to change those laws so that the FCC (or another agency) can regulate hobby drones and model aircraft, but unless and until that happens this is dead in the water.

View on HN

> This was a given from the moment the ink dried on the regulation - it's a clear violation of the actual law that gives the FCC it's powers and authority.

Had the FCC been the agency involved, I'd agree that this would be a clear and obvious violation.

To be clear for those that might miss it. It's the FAA that was regulating drones over 0.55 pounds, not the FCC.

Somehow they govern mobile phone use aboard airplanes, however...

Yes, because mobile phones are communication devices and use regulated RF spectrum.

The FAA is free to (and does) make their own additional regulations concerning mobile phone use on aircraft.

Why don't they "regulate" mobile phone use while driving? On the subway? At the grocery store? In the waiting room at the doctor's office?

Because all of that would be outside the scope of the statutes? Precisely. So is the regulation of mobile phone use while in flight.

> it's a clear violation of the actual law that gives the FAA it's powers and authority

Please cite the relevant law; few of us here are experts on the matter, and it's far from being clear that forcing people to register is a violation of anything.

I'd have to register an aircraft if I wanted to fly it in most cases, and I'd have to register myself (get a pilot's license) - so it is not clear that FAA's authority ends when the aircraft is small and its pilot is on the ground.

>I'd have to register an aircraft if I wanted to fly it in most cases, and I'd have to register myself (get a pilot's license)

There are entire classes of aircraft (ultra-lights most prominently) that require no license or registration to fly.

The relevant law here comes from The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, which prevented the FAA from imposing any new regulations on model aircrafts. The FAA classifies drones as model aircrafts, ergo they can't make you register them.

The 2015 rule requiring registration was clear overreach by the FAA, made even more ridiculous because it was labeled an "emergency action"

Thanks! The article did mention the Act of 2012, but what was missing was the classification of drones as model aircraft.

The question is, what is a "drone"? A drone is synonymous with UAS, and unmanned aircraft system, to the FAA. Clearly, UAS the size of Predator are not "model aircraft".

Are the drones above 0.5KG still classified as model aircraft? What's to stop FAA to re-classify any UAS as NOT model aircraft?

I am not a lawyer, but there is not a lot of wiggle room for the FAA to somehow define drones differently. The definitions are pretty clearly spelled out for all but the most obtuse interpretations - drones, when flown by hobbyists in visual line of sight, are a type of model aircraft. Now, the vlos clause can be a bit problematic for fpv fliers, but otherwise it's pretty ironclad. Here is the actual text from the law defining model aircraft:

MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is— (1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere; (2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and (3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

... and lest anyone think there is any wiggle room in defining an unmanned aircraft - from a few pages earlier:

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.—The term ‘‘unmanned aircraft’’ means an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.

Presumably, if people were flying model aircrafts/ultra-lights with the frequency with which drones are being flown, the Reform Act 2012 would be retooled? This is all a little confusing.

>it's a clear violation of the actual law that gives the FCC

Your typo has confused the hell out of people here, you might want to replace it with FAA unless you really did mean FCC :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com