250g Limit... where is the science?

[zenith.hjx]

It's interesting to see Americans are still bothered by 250g rule.In China, it just the opposite, lot's of people think 250g rule is a protect to aeromodel,because when someone in city park says 'you are flying illeaglely',you can say,'oh ,I am under 250g and it is micro drone,don't need licence'.Also there's much more people in park ,we just fly coreless motor micro models,they are harmless and only 50~100g.
However in some place you even can't fly a 30g aircraft, without any explanation...so under 250g is not much a problem in city.

 

[quorneng]

You could say the same sort of thing about many laws.
Do speed limits prevent speeding? Do drug laws prevent drug addiction?
In nearly all cases laws do reduce law breaking but never eliminate it.

 

[FishbonesAir]

So, where is the science. I dont think it exists.

Sergeant, the fundamental flaw here is the assumption that logic or science had anything to do with this.

I suspect 250g was picked, because Europe picked that first. There's your hard science. Someone in the EU said "a quarter kilo isn't too dangerous" and here we are.

A quick look at current top FAA leadership will show, I believe, 3 people with actual aviation knowledge? The rest are pencil pushers. Closer investigation shows that a frightening number of top slots are "acting".

The FAA is a revolving door in critical leadership positions, and then those positions get filled with idiots that have never held the controls, much less made an approach as left seat.

They don't even know about regular aircraft, except what hits their desk from underlings. Drones and UAVs? They know nothing!

 

[bisco]

i think they assessed the potential capabilities of quads, and had to make a weight limit decision somewhere

 

[FishbonesAir]

It's interesting to see Americans are still bothered by 250g rule.In China, it just the opposite, lot's of people think 250g rule is a protect to aeromodel,because when someone in city park says 'you are flying illeaglely',you can say,'oh ,I am under 250g and it is micro drone,don't need licence'.Also there's much more people in park ,we just fly coreless motor micro models,they are harmless and only 50~100g.
However in some place you even can't fly a 30g aircraft, without any explanation...so under 250g is not much a problem in city.

This is a nice external perspective on things. Also good way to do some park flying, and shoo away angry Karen's.
"Sorry love, rules allow under 250 grams and this is only 100!"

 

[Flying Monkey fab]

Sergeant, the fundamental flaw here is the assumption that logic or science had anything to do with this.

I suspect 250g was picked, because Europe picked that first. There's your hard science. Someone in the EU said "a quarter kilo isn't too dangerous" and here we are.

A quick look at current top FAA leadership will show, I believe, 3 people with actual aviation knowledge? The rest are pencil pushers. Closer investigation shows that a frightening number of top slots are "acting".

The FAA is a revolving door in critical leadership positions, and then those positions get filled with idiots that have never held the controls, much less made an approach as left seat.

They don't even know about regular aircraft, except what hits their desk from underlings. Drones and UAVs? They know nothing!

I'm afraid that this is an all too accurate assessment.

 

[Piotrsko]

Yes but wouldn't the EU equivalent have the same staffing issues we here in 'Murica have?

I suspect they looked at the available weight range and said " that wont do a lot of damage" for their selection criteria.

 

[Fred Pena]

It's not about safety. It has laways been about selling out the airspace..... Safety was used as an excuse that would get those with no clue to demand legistlation.

Totally agree!

 

[synjin]

This will be a sticky point for some, but the FAA is just made up of people. It's not a faceless giant. Most of those people are just trying to do their jobs. The policies they're putting in place are rooted in the last FAA reauthorization: drone definition, weight limit, remote ID. I think, whether I like it or not, the folks at the FAA are trying to follow the law that Congress put into place.

Now when I read the law I was't real happy about it, as I was just a couple of years into foam board planes. And, I agree that much of what was put into place was arbitrary, based on fear of drones (I dislike the term drone), corporate greed, and folks (the AMA) wanting to protect their patch. It was also probably convenient to get input from the AMA, commercial drone companies, and concerned citizen groups rather than from all of us backyard/park/vacant lot fliers. Those other folks are easy to accommodate. The AMA wants to fly at their fields, the commercial folks want to go where the jobs are, and the delivery folks want clear skies so they don't lose money making their deliveries.

A lot of regulation is a reaction to the thoughtless or selfish actions of some individuals. You might want to drive fast. I, on the other hand, don't want you to run the kids on my neighborhood street down. Therefore, speed limits, which are a constraint of your liberty. Speed limit signs are a reminder, but you are at liberty to ignore them...and face the consequences (See due process of law in the Constitution). The same goes for the remote ID regulation. Some idiots were a nuisance, some folks were pissed about it, and that gave the AMA and the commercial folks an in to either save their flying space or gab flying space for "The good of the public."

You can go maverick and not comply. You can buy a RID module and comply. And/or, you can help to get our elected officials to change the weight limit to something more reasonable. Turns out my congressional representative is on one of the committees involved in the FAA reauthorization this summer. Hopefully I can get her to consider our point of view.

Keep flying, everyone. We're all in this together. I'm pullin' for ya'!

 

[Flying Monkey fab]

t the FAA is just made up of people

Sure it is, but so was the SS.

 

[synjin]

Comparing the FAA to the SS is over the top.

It goes back to Congress, and we have the opportunity to work with our elected officials to try to get a more favorable outcome for the hobby. We can grouse about Big Brother, or we can use that energy to work for what we want. We the People need to assert our power, and there are avenues for that. In this case, the pen is going to be mightier than the sword. The FTCA is working towards this, and if we work towards that same goal we are more likely to get what we want. Raise your voice strongly, resolutely, and eloquently. That's what I'm going to do.

Will it work? I don't know. Will I keep trying? Yes.

 

[Flying Monkey fab]

Comparing the FAA to the SS is over the top.

Perhaps but a) it made my point and b) the only comparison I made was that both are made of people.

They may not be directly malevolent but I I've come to realize over a lot of years that there is no real difference between malevolent action and willful incompetence.
I've been working with the FAA on and off for 40 years now. They were competent enough 20 years ago but now not so much.
By all means keep trying to work within the system, just don't be naive to the point of being crushed when you realize what is going on.

 

[synjin]

Perhaps but a) it made my point and b) the only comparison I made was that both are made of people.

Yeah...but the subtext imagery is of jack-booted brownshirts. Naive or not, I certainly hope our country hasn't gone that far (and I don't think it has...yet).

Oh, I know that the Powers of Business think our 400' is a gold mine that they want to strip, and, IDed or not, delivery drones (should they come to pass) represent a far greater risk to the public then we ever will. And, it's not like I'm going to stop flying at the local park where I've been flying. And because I dig flying low cost airframes that I've put together from scratch, I'm not buying a $100+ RID module. That's just ridiculous. But, up to the signing of the new FAA reauthorization, I going to try to help my Representative understand that the 250g limit is based on old, and not very sound, science.