The R's were all about smaller government and less regulation, right? So why would they make hobby flyers register their toys? Do a cost-benefit analysis test... millions of hours of wasted time in registering the toys, putting "Official" stickers on them so they can be tracked, an entirely new registration section in the FAA, to keep track of all the information. And the benefit is.......what? They have already registered more than 550,000 drones. The entire US aircraft registration is just slightly over 200,000, and that includes thousands of aircraft that will never again leave the ground or taxi under their own power. So when is enough, 1 Million drones? 5 Million?, 25 Million?

And, I will wager that if they required every aircraft owner to pay $5 to register their aircraft every few years, the outcry would be deafening. It's OK for the hobbyist, but how about you?

Air Force 1 having to change course violently to avoid a toy? That couldn't get near Andrews in any case let alone lined up in the approach path, 400 feet AGL. And, I would suspect that any terrorist worth his membership card in the International Brotherhood of Terrorists wouldn't register his lethal drone in any case.... and probably wouldn't use a DJI for that matter.

Maybe the FAA could do something that would be more useful... how about tattooing a registration number to the butt of all the birds near airports, making them register with the FAA, take a test on how to avoid aircraft and then testing them every year to make sure they haven't forgotten any of their instructions? Oh, and they definitely should have a vet's examination every year to make sure they are safe to fly and safe to be around airplanes, which they will need to carry with them every time they leave the ground.

I don't own a drone, have no real interest in owning one, so while I have no dog in this fight, the whole thing to me sounds stupid and a gigantic waste of time, effort and money.

It's like the FDA requiring registration of Legos. Drones can fly and kids can consume plastic blocks. Thank God for government oversight to keep us safe!

I would suggest Congress defines what is what. Line of sight, always in control, maximum height allowed above the ground, etc. You all can figure it out but with tens of thousands of these things being sold, would be a good idea to keep them from running rampant through neighborhood skies. Although they probably are more of a fad and down the road will be like RC's where you have clubs and places to fly them.

I'm not saying register the hobby ones, just a definition of what is commercial and what is not.

This is the way it is supposed to work. Govt borocrates cant heavy hand their way to new regulations. We do have the third branch to protect us. Restores my faith jn the system. Just a little bit.

Now if all drones will be required to renew registration every 3 years, imagine how long it will take to get the process done then. It already takes 3 + months to renew a registration on a real aircraft.

Does a multi-rotor that has the ability to return to the departure point autonomously become an unmanned aircraft at the point that feature is activated, or would it be considered a model aircraft at all times? The product information page for the DJI Phantom 3 Standard states: "Built-in GPS records your Phantom's takeoff point and remembers as you fly. Then at your command, or if the control signal is ever lost, your Phantom comes back to you instantly."

Both the FAA and the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act, section 331(8), define unmanned aircraft as an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft. The FAA and FMRA section 336 also both define a model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft that is capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere, flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft, and flown only for hobby or recreational purposes. It clearly sounds like a distinction without a difference.

The FAA rule codified in 14 CFR Part 48, Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft, was FAA’s answer to establish laws and regulations governing the use of unmanned aerial systems. However, section 336 of the FMRA forbid rules regulating model aircraft. The FAA tried to use tortuous logic to justify their rules, and ultimately lost the case.

In its written opinion, the court stated, “In short, the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act provides that the FAA ‘may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft,’ yet the FAA’s 2015 Registration Rule is a ‘rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.’ Statutory interpretation does not get much simpler. The Registration Rule is unlawful as applied to model aircraft.”

Here are a few links so you can read the information for yourself and make an informed opinion of the ruling:

https://www.faa.gov/uas/faqs/
https://jrupprechtlaw.com/drone-registration-lawsuit
http://www.wolfenstock.com/ TaylorvFAA/TaylorFAAOpinion.pdf

Seems that the FAA should work with the AMA in a similar manner they currently work with the USPA (U.S. Parachute Association).

I'll be happy as long as I don't have add Mode-C & ADS-B!!

Hey I know this is all about the regulations that are trying to be past but I wanted to show you guys this.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/technology/article/Drone-class-puts-UH-students-in-remote-control-11186465.php?cmpid=gsa-chron-result

The point that all the media misses is that drones are not being registered, drone operators are. Also, that the registration applied to any person who intended to operate any sort of remotely operated model (including gliders) the met the weight requirement and not just to the multirotor devices that most people refer to as "drones".

I think the issue here is that like any technology drones can be put to good use (hobbyists doing hobby things) and bad use (spying though your bedroom window for example). So its up to the collective us, through our government, to decide where the edges are in this argument. IMHO any drone that’s capable of flying higher than 20 feet or further than say 50 feet from the operator should at least be required to be registered and carry markings of some sort. Now as to whether there should be a fee associated with the registration and whether this fee should be paid again after a period of time, these are valid items to discuss. But I think the collective benefit that comes from registration of medium-size drones outweighs the inconvenience of registration.

Be careful who you want to regulate what. Should the FAA regulate bullets and rifles? It can easily be proven than they are more of a threat to aircraft than a three ounce plastic toy. It.s a slippery slope. Should the Department of Motor Vehicles regulate rocks? They have done damage to thousands of cars with some resulting in fatalities. You say no? Tell that to the family of a child who was killed when a rock hit her mommy's car causing her to loose control.

Refer to 14 CFR Part 107. Autonomous operation is not covered, and the DJI Phantom series standard mode of operation is not autonomous. That's a safety backup mode.

Imagine what would happen if Air Force 1 had to change course violently to avoid a drone while on approach to Washington. I wonder if the Federal Court Judges would be asked to " reconsider ".

If a drone is sucked into a jetliner engine and downs the jetliner or takes down a small airplane with a family, some of the commenters below may have a change of heart. While registration does not guarantee safety, it does increase awareness of the responsibility to follow the laws.

People have a big Misconception about Drones vs Model Aircraft. For some reason the Government has put RC in the middle of what Drones really are.

Definition: A ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyond line of sight!

RC A/C cannot do that. My RC A/C are not Drones, they are "Model Aircraft". I am a member of the AMA and I fly at Sanctioned fields and on a rare occasion at a part for a smaller one, or indoor gymnasium for my Very Small micro planes. I control them all and they never leave my sight.

The Big industry today advertising Drones is stupid and false advertising: They should appropriately be labeled as a Quadcopter, or Multi Rotor of which I have 2. several of my RC aircraft have camera's. They are flown safely in accordance to AMA Public Recommendations.

The Court is right no this. I have never registered with the FAA for my RC A/C and wont... Aircraft that are flown for very long distances and can navigate and accomplish it's mission without an operator staying on top of it's entire flight is a drone. If I sit my RC Transmitter down, go take a break and then come back, my plane would have already crashed by this time. I am glad to see that a court made the correct decision.

this is so logical, so well considered, so rational, because every gun totting person who believes in no regulations at all for their misinterpretation of the 2nd admendment, now can go all in with unregulated drone rights expression, flying in formation with airliners on approaches and departures, near heliports, and wherever their whimsy takes them. I think I may resume long walks instead of flights to nearby cities. How far does this appeals court have their heads up their asses to bring such stupidity into view?

Five will get you ten that none of those justices fly GA.

CAn I shoot the damn thing down if it's over my property???

SORRY THIS JUDGEMENT IS A HUGE MISTAKE WHICH WILL KILL PEOPLE ON THE GROUND AS WELL AS IN THE AIR!!!

I live in Kentucky. Yes I know all the hayseed, gun lover's etc. issues. I DEAL WITH THEM EVERYDAY!!

Having said that, I wish to point out A PRIVACY ISSUE THE COURTS STILL SEEM TO HAVE MISSED!!!!

Last summer, during sun bathing season, a home owner who has a 10' tall privacy fence around his property shot down a drone.

That drone had hovered above his in-ground pool and spent lots of time looking at, and obviously filming the homeowner's two teenage daughters who were working on their tans in very revealing outfits. The home owner hit that drone with a .12 gauge shotgun blast, which obviously took it out.

Had that been the end of the story, we'd all have said, "Yes that makes sense."

Sadly this homeowner had to confront two armed men who threatened his life and his house for shooting down their drone! Since the home owner was prepared to protect his home with a semi-automatic weapon of his own which out-gunned them, the drone owners left that day.

However, they filed a federal lawsuit against the homeowner for shooting down their drone above his in-ground pool!!

Based on what has happened here in Kentucky, the drone gunfights will continue and probably nearly as bad as the illegal drug gunfights very soon!!

This old Marine who has never owned a weapon after I killed hundreds of men with my military provided weapons is hugely concerned that DRONES ARE A LIFE OR DEATH THREAT TO EVERYONE WHO IS NEAR ENOUGH TO THOSE DRONES TO BE AT RISK!!!!