News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by ChuckMcM on Monday December 14, 2015 @05:58PM (#10734645)
I remember a great quote, "If you can get them to ask the wrong questions, then the answers don't matter."

Model airplanes have been a threat to airplanes since they became popular in 1915. Yes, 100 years ago. So why regulate them beyond the existing regulations now? A better question is "What changed?"

Anyone who owns a quad copter of the type they show on various stories about this, knows they are a pain in the ass to fly in high wind environments. Even with 9DOF IMU assisted station keeping a stiff wind will blow them around.

So why now? Why haven't people complained about 1:10 scale jets they fly around at RC plane meetups? Those things are fast and can fly straight through a gust of wind.

This program isn't about "danger to aircraft", this program is entirely about identifying the owner of a R/C model and being able to jail/fine people who don't agree to link their model to their identity. That ownership link is essential in prosecuting the right person when their model photographs something that someone else doesn't want photographed, whether it is a celebrity sunbathing topless in their back yard or police officers beating down protestors. Its about identifying the owner of one of these devices when they are used in the commission of a crime, whether it is unlicensed surveillance or simple burglary. Its about identifying the owner of the R/C model that just crashed into your sports car and scratched the paint.

None if the prosecutions can be cost effective if the perpetrator can argue that it is plausibly not their R/C model. And having hundreds of identical models sold? Sure anyone could have been flying that particular unit as it buzzed your beach house.

This program is about tying people's identities to the R/C models they operate so that they can be prosecuted when they do something that someone else doesn't like with them. It is couched in terms of "safety of aircraft" because that is a narrative that the general public can get their head around, however the risk to aircraft is already "priced into" the existing regulations.

Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by yuhong on Monday December 14, 2015 @07:45PM (#10735172)
To be honest, some of the bad things are really that dangerous, like jet engine damage. And while not as dangerous no one for example likes drones with cameras peeking into windows for a long time either and broken glass is even worse. Encouraging accountability like this is a good idea.
Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by ChuckMcM on Monday December 14, 2015 @07:56PM (#10735233)
Yes, they are that dangerous, and that is why FAA regulations already make it illegal to fly a model airplane around an airport. When Moffett field was an active Navy Base you couldn't fly your kite at Shoreline without getting hassled by the MPs.

Those regulations have been around for a long time and have been effective at keeping planes safe. When people violate them, they do selective enforcement to remind folks the regulations are there. A good example of regulation that succeeds in its goal.

Adding the forced identification thing is the red herring here.

Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by rebootthesystem on Tuesday December 15, 2015 @01:19AM (#10736269)
While I agree with a good deal of your argument I think a LOT has changed.

I have been flying all manner of R/C planes and helicopters for about thirty years. I have planes that will do 120 MPH with the motor off, weigh in the order of 8 lbs and have a wingspan of 2.4 meters. I have helicopters with 10,000 W power (peak) systems that come in at over 10 lbs. I used to have model turbine jets that could rip across the sky at nearly 200 MPH.

What's the difference?

The difference is that for as long as I can remember no model airplane hobbyist would even think about the idea of flying one of their aircraft anywhere near full scale aircraft, airports, around fire-fighting aircraft, over crowds, around buildings or at altitudes that could represent danger to full scale aircraft.

That is the difference. And it is huge.

The other is the American Modelers Association (modelaircraft.org). I have been a member for over 30 years. Which, among other things, also means I carry a one million dollar insurance policy covering any damage I may cause while flying my aircraft. My teenage son is an AMA member, he too is covered by a one million dollar policy.

In order for this insurance policy to provide coverage the modeler has to abide by AMA rules, which, among other things, requires you to fly at AMA sanctioned club locations. Clubs, just like the one where I fly, are located such that model aircraft activity will not pose danger to people an property. Clubs have rules beyond those of the AMA. We have safety officers, etc.

Oh, yes, the AMA requires you to label your aircraft with your AMA member number, your name and contact information. In other words, you are accountable for what you do.

You also needed training and skill to fly. At most clubs you can't just buy a plane and go flying, you have to be certified by the club instructor or established members or trained and then certified.

In other words, flying R/C aircraft has always had a degree of professionalism, care, consideration, responsibility and enough procedures and rules to not put anyone in danger.

What has changed, then, is that any moron can now buy a flying device that can be flown with almost no skill. As you indicated, it is hard to fly some of these models in windy or gusty situations. And that's not necessarily because of the model. I fly gliders in 50 MPH winds all the time. I fly my R/C helicopters in gusty Santa Ana conditions all the time. There's a dedication to training and skill building that comes with the hobby. Joe Quadcopter couldn't give a shit. He just wants to fly it over the beach and take pictures. He has zero interest in becoming a good pilot.

The manufacturers could not give a crap about how they are used, therefore, they do not educate their customers at all. And, of course, either out of ignorance or lack of caring, Mr. Joe Moron thinks nothing of taking his brand new DJI quadcopter up to 1,000 feet right above a park full of kids, neighborhood homes or the local news helicopter because, well, it's cool, it has a "return home" feature and it is perfectly safe, physics be damned.

So, yeah, if you ask me, those morons need to be identified and they need to be made responsible for their actions. Here's what's going to suck: These morons are the very people who will absolutely, positively NOT register and absolutely, positively NOT have any ID or registration number on the machines they fly. People like me, who have enjoyed the hobby for decades without placing anyone or anything at risk are the ones who end-up paying the price for the morons.

What I find really ironic is that this is EXACTLY, to the letter, the same scenario we have with guns. Law abiding citizens never hurt a sole. Criminals and crazies do. And everyone ends-up paying for it with the exception of those who truly need to be kept away from them.

I am not necessarily bothered by the registration. I am already 100% identified in every single one of my aircraft. If I crash one anywhere, whoever picks it up will have my AMA membership number, name and phone number. So, registering with the FAA is not a big deal. What pisses me of is that, just like guns, this is going to do exactly ZERO to stop the crazies, morons and criminals. Zero.

Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by euyyn on Monday December 14, 2015 @06:54PM (#10734896)
I don't see why can't one attach a camera to an RC plane. You didn't answer "what changed / why now".
Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by ChuckMcM on Monday December 14, 2015 @07:51PM (#10735201)
They could (and have), POV cameras in R/C planes have been a thing for a while now. It was just more expensive and so people didn't do it without consideration. It was more complicated to fly an R/C helicopter. (search for 'learn to fly an R/C helicopter' some time :-) ).

Now however you can put a camera on a quad-copter (or buy one with one) on an image stabilized mount, and take HD movies of areas you couldn't get too before. That has really irked / woken up some people. All without any training and only a bit of practice. That is what changed that people have asked the FAA to "fix."

Re:New U.S. FAA rule requires drone owners to register by Fe... by simoncion on Monday December 14, 2015 @10:47PM (#10735792)
> It was more complicated to fly an R/C helicopter.

God yes. This is so true. Learning to fly an R/C heli is such a huge time investment. Repairing your R/C heli when you jam parts of it into the ground wasn't cheap, either.