Thread Tools
Oct 27, 2015, 12:21 PM
Registered User
Thread OP
Discussion

Wonder if they will make larger drones impossible for hobbyists?


Wonder if the FAA will make the larger drones impossible for hobbyists to fly? I can imagine they might be harder to get permission, than commercial drone operators, in the past few years.

I suspect they will have weight limits. Anything over a certain weight, might require more qualification procedures, fees, etc.

Has anyone heard anything at this point? Going to impact a lot of people, going into Christmas. What you buy today, might be illegal in a couple of months.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Oct 27, 2015, 12:34 PM
Surface, Air & Water Rc Toys..
77lbs for Canadian Hobbiest is a pretty BIG multirotor..
Quote:
If your aircraft weighs less than 35 kg and is used for recreational purposes, you don’t need permission to fly, but please read and follow our safety guidelines.
But at the same time they have this "DON'T" recommendation
Quote:
•Closer than 150 metres from people, animals, buildings, structures, or vehicles
So basically anywhere in town you can't or should fly so what's the point of having an 77pound machine.

How big are you thinking?
Oct 27, 2015, 12:42 PM
Registered User
Thread OP
Quote:
How big are you thinking?
Nothing that large. Just thinking about some of the hexacopters that can carry a full sized SLR, like a Canon 5D or 7D. I have a lot of cameras and might try a larger copter with some of my others that can control the zoom remotely. But generally in that size of a vehicle.
Oct 27, 2015, 12:47 PM
Surface, Air & Water Rc Toys..
Hobbyist carrying that kind of equipement??

Quote:
like a Canon 5D or 7D
My provided numbers are for recreational or what I consider hobbyist, I've met folks that do commercial and some of them would not be able to be part of any clubs nor would I be confortable having them flying near me... I assumed by your title you were talking about the everyday hobbyist..
Oct 27, 2015, 12:52 PM
Registered User
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by freechip
Hobbyist carrying that kind of equipement??

My provided numbers are for recreational or what I consider hobbyist, I've met folks that do commercial and some of them would not be able to be part of any clubs nor would I be confortable having them flying near me... I assumed by your title you were talking about the everyday hobbyist..
Yep! I'm more of a photo hobbyist than an RC hobbyist, however they are fun. I've never made a dime on photography or the hobby so I definitely qualify as "hobby".
Oct 27, 2015, 01:06 PM
Registered User
PatR's Avatar
American amateur RC is limited to <55lbs unless having an AMA waiver.you can build an MR that will carry a Red or Arri at less than 55lbs. How large is really needed for "hobby" uses?
Oct 27, 2015, 01:43 PM
Registered User
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatR
How large is really needed for "hobby" uses?
That's not really the point of my question. It's not about need. It's about how much government regulation will be put on the hobby. You can bet they will draw a line somewhere that is inconvenient. I have heard them talk about weights but nothing specific. But you can bet weights, fees, license, registration, approvals and rejections will all be part of their plan.
Oct 27, 2015, 02:15 PM
Registered User
PatR's Avatar
They already pretty much have put limits in place. That 55lb limit is referenced in the part 107 NPRM. Once they enact the rule that will be our limit for the hobby side. Although not specifically targeting MR's you can pretty much bet that will be the direction taken for hobby craft. Bureaucrats like the one size fits all methodology.
Oct 27, 2015, 02:17 PM
Registered User
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatR
They already pretty much have put limits in place. That 55lb limit is referenced in the part 107 NPRM. Once they enact the rule that will be our limit for the hobby side. Although not specifically targeting MR's you can pretty much bet that will be the direction taken for hobby craft. Bureaucrats like the one size fits all methodology.
I wish "common sense" was a term govt. bureaucrats understood. If I fly, on my own property, below my roofline, how is that anyone's business? But the FAA thinks they still have that authority to say what I can to fully within my own property. No friggin common sense. There isn't any justification they could come up with, to say they need to regulate on my property. I could understand, if I was flying at 2000' above it, that they might have some interest. But hell, there are trees all around my property. If I'm below treetop, it's flat impossible to interfere with anything they regulate.
Oct 27, 2015, 09:59 PM
Registered User
It is no longer common sense. A precious few have good sense.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools