FAA Request for Information (RFI) about recreational sUAS test.

https://faaco.faa.gov/index.cfm/atta...ownload/102747

Interesting......especially the part about the FAA not expecting to incur any cost for test administration, data record keeping, government privacy regulations, etc., etc., etc. but rather that testing designees will incorporate this service (and all the costs associated with it) into their existing platforms, mobile applications, curriculums, and/or membership benefits.
So at a time when government regulations are supposed to be 'reduced/eliminated' under the current occupant of the White House we have a government agency proposing to impose new regulations and costs
What the frick is wrong with this picture folks?

The testing was part of Section 349 passed into law by Congress. This is just the next step in implementing the testing requirement. The nature, content, and cost of the test remains to be seen. But I am willing to bet that what the AMA has said in private to several people that the AMA will administer it and it will be a very simple test is likely not what we are going to see.

Proposed question

“ is it stupid to regulate model aircraft, other than multicopters”

Answer

“Yes”

End of test....easy!

Originally Posted by DCash

Proposed question

“ is it stupid to regulate model aircraft, other than multicopters”

Answer

“Yes”

End of test....easy!

I can pass that test....Yes

While I don’t agree how the AMA handled this Situation.......I am not falling for this rhetoric from the doomsday crowd......the only person/people that we need to listen to and follow is advice directly from the AMA .

Originally Posted by Justwantafly

While I don’t agree how the AMA handled this Situation.......I am not falling for this rhetoric from the doomsday crowd......the only person/people that we need to listen to and follow is advice directly from the AMA .

+1

Originally Posted by Justwantafly

While I don’t agree how the AMA handled this Situation.......I am not falling for this rhetoric from the doomsday crowd......the only person/people that we need to listen to and follow is advice directly from the AMA .

Myself, I think the better organization to pay attention to is the FAA. After all, they make and enforce the rules, so it seems they hold all the cards. Not doomsday, just practical assessment of the situation.

Originally Posted by Judge

The testing was part of Section 349 passed into law by Congress. This is just the next step in implementing the testing requirement. The nature, content, and cost of the test remains to be seen. But I am willing to bet that what the AMA has said in private to several people that the AMA will administer it and it will be a very simple test is likely not what we are going to see.

I'm not disputing the requirement....but based on all the other WAY WAY WAY MORE important things in our lives that are being 'less regulated' to our detriment (food inpsections, aircraft approval, and on and on and on) this is just plain ole chicken sheetz stuff.
I still love the fact that ALL the cost will be shouldered by folks in this arena....perhaps we should apply this logic to ALL those who need regulation and see how they react hmm?

Here would be my input to the FAA....

Make the test the same as for Ultralight pilots!

Operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements or to have airman or medical certificates.

Ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to have registration markings.

Originally Posted by JuStOnE

Here would be my input to the FAA....

Make the test the same as for Ultralight pilots!

Operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements or to have airman or medical certificates.

Ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to have registration markings.

If unlicensed operator of unregistered ULTRALIGHT crashes ... What is the risk of injury to that unlicensed operator? Likely. Death? Possible.

If the operator of an unmanned sUAS crashes ... What is the risk of injury to the operator of the sUAS? Negligible. Death? Negligible.


Major difference ... and the basis for the difference in the regulatory approach.

Yep....our government at work....here to help....LOL

My two cents!

Originally Posted by JuStOnE

Ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to have registration markings[/B].

All this mess comes out of sUAS and model airplanes being classified as "aircraft". The Part 103 folks were very smart when they were able to get the FAA to their stuff a "vehicle". FAA regulates aircraft, vehicles not so much.

Originally Posted by Judge

All this mess comes out of sUAS and model airplanes being classified as "aircraft". The Part 103 folks were very smart when they were able to get the FAA to their stuff a "vehicle". FAA regulates aircraft, vehicles not so much.

Yep....sad though. In my years of full scale, I don't think I ever encounter anything from the FAA that didn't involve hassle and BS.