[NSRCA-discussion] UAS registration

[Scott McHarg]

The thought I wrote Dec. 16th:

I think that maybe we, as an organization, could come up with a "paper" to
present to the AMA or the FAA if we so choose to point out some very
obvious facts:

A. The registration process will not work in the manner expected because
those who are doing illegal actions with drones will simply not register as
there is zero way to find that out without inspecting by an agency that
would have to have the manpower to do it.
B.  By registering only the operator, a person knowingly flying where they
shouldn't be will simply take out the registration information when
performing illegal activities.
C.
D.
and so on.

Just a thought on how to try to work with the system.  I understand why
they're doing it but I don't think for one second that this will change the
problem children in the least, especially those who don't know.  Like many
have said, the problem is those that are uneducated about etiquette with
these models.  Before online purchasing became so big (and to the detriment
of local hobby shops), people would go to these local hobby shops and be
directed to the local AMA field where folks began to understand how this
all worked.  Now, they just purchase these things online.  Due to advancing
technology, you no longer have to know how to be a pilot, you simply
program in the waypoints and sit back and watch.  With today's gyro's, the
aircraft is always stable.

The FAA needs to be educated on the how's and why's as well as the operator
in today's society.

It's not really about the numbers.  We all have plenty of numbers in our
life.  The physical number doesn't matter and isn't what people are upset
about.  It's about that number being used by people who do bad things and
about being regulated by another agency that doesn't really understand who
or what we, as modelers, are and do.  This rule has been instituted because
of people flying where they're not supposed to whether it be lack of
education or the simple fact they don't care because there's little chance
of them getting caught.  Police officers will be using this and citing
parts of laws in order to give citations and make arrests but the simple
fact is they're not going to be sitting at AMA fields.  They're going to be
in parks, in downtown areas, by airports, etc.  Those are the people
they're after and we are just caught in the middle which stinks.  We have a
right to be upset that we're caught up but we need to find a way to deal
with this and be positive and certainly pro-active as Jim suggested.
Refusing to click "I accept" gets you nowhere other than in trouble and
fined or out of the hobby.  For me, neither of those are acceptable.

*Scott A. McHarg*
VSCL / CANVASS U.A.S. Research Pilot
Texas A&M University
PPL - ASEL

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 12:45 PM, John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net> wrote:

> What thought are you referring to?
>
> The AMA won't win their argument about numbers. The AMA could propose a
> compromise that FAA provide a block of numbers and that the AMA drop their
> own numbering system and convert to those numbers.
> Unless the AMA can get model aircraft excluded from registration. I did
> propose a different set of UAV categories way back in this thread. It's
> obvious from their publications that the FAA lacks any coherent definitions.
>
> On 12/21/2015 1:27 PM, Scott McHarg wrote:
>
> I find it really interesting that a lot of us have no problem complaining
> but when a thought about putting together a logical, well-founded paper
> written to either the AMA or the FAA is presented, no one comments.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20151222/137792ae/attachment.html>