Is FAA registration a big deal ?- newbie question

[ericphotoart]

I can not find a newbie areea on this forum so I apologize for this question here. I try to find as much info as I can before buying Mini Pro 4 so I'm a little confused and not sure about this issue. This "under 249 g " or " doesn't require registration" statements are always mentioned when drones are advertised but the registration for recreational purposes is only $5 valid for 3 years if the drone uses extended batteries. so my question is what are the dissadvatges of FAA registration if any? I see benefits of having larger batteries but maybe I'm wrong too? Slightly more expensive but extended flying time.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Personal opinion?

Wherever you are: regardless of the weight of the drone, it is a good idea to have both it, and you registered (as the operator).

You're right, it is cheap and being registered could well save you a load of headaches if and when you get approached by a police officer.

You'll also feel a lot more comfortable flying knowing that you've got all the legal boxes ticked... you won't need to be fretting or looking over your shoulder - which only succeeds in making you look more suspicious in the eyes of a lot of people who automatically assume what you're doing is questionable (or illegal) based on the fact that if they don't like it: it must be against the law.

The benefits of registration? On my side of the Atlantic: there aren't any, but the Law is the Law.

ADDITIONAL
Take out a good public & private liability insurance policy, over here it isn't mandatory (yet) but the belt & braces school of common sense suggests covering all possible bases JICOE (Just In Case Of Emergency).

 

[GadgetGuy]

I can not find a newbie areea on this forum so I apologize for this question here. I try to find as much info as I can before buying Mini Pro 4 so I'm a little confused and not sure about this issue. This "under 249 g " or " doesn't require registration" statements are always mentioned when drones are advertised but the registration for recreational purposes is only $5 valid for 3 years if the drone uses extended batteries. so my question is what are the dissadvatges of FAA registration if any? I see benefits of having larger batteries but maybe I'm wrong too? Slightly more expensive but extended flying time.

You are completely legal, and not required to broadcast RID, nor register yourself as a pilot with the standard battery in the Mini 4 Pro. No legal hassles from anyone. Plus you save $5, and the only thing you give up is a few minutes of flight time on one battery. Just get the regular Combo with 3 batteries for over an hour of hassle free flying!

 

[Cafguy]

I registered my drones simply because to use them as part 107 its the law. As a recreational pilot only, I dont see the need really unless you have a bird that's overweight. If you are unsure about the weight of your drone at takeoff, then I would go ahead and spend the 5 dollars.
The fine for flying an unregistered drone is .....27,500 bucks! (if someone were ever to check you.......somehow.)
That's alot more than the 5 dollar registration fee.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I registered my drones simply because to use them as part 107 and its the law. As a recreational pilot only, I dont see the need really unless you have a bird that's overweight. If you are unsure about the weight of your drone at takeoff, then I would go ahead and spend the 5 dollars.
The fine for flying an unregistered drone is .....27,500 bucks! (if someone were ever to check you)
That's alot more than the 5 dollar registration fee.

There is no issue with the Mini 4 Pro being over 249g, unless flying with the Plus battery, which would defeat the whole purpose of buying a Mini 4 Pro: no RID, no pilot registration, and good for travel everywhere.

 

[dmiles119]

Here's my 2 cents, but for you, it's free.

Part 107 flying - it's required. You are running a business. This is one of the easiest and cheapest business regulations to meet that you will ever see. There is no excuse for not complying. I was shocked that they didn't crank up the cost and red tape if you are running a business, but let's not give them any ideas.

I understand the kneejerk reaction most of us have when we suddenly become required to register and provide information to the feds for activity that we had been doing for years without the requirement. It actually is an encroachment on freedom. But I guess since we have always had to register our automobiles, buy hunting and fishing licenses, etc. so those don't sting as much. It theoretically would give a tech savvy serial killer who hates drones the means to find out where you live, but every activity requires a risk and in my opinion this one is pretty low.

So I asked myself what's the point of all this. My speculation is that they felt that they needed a way to identify the small percentage of idiots who feel that they are entitled to do whatever they want, whenever they want. Of course these are the same people who would never even consider registering. The rules do not apply to them. They probably have no idea of what RID is, nor do they care. So imagine some jerk is blatantly violating the law, and genuinely being such a menace to aviation that he attracts attention to himself from people who care, and are tasked with doing something about it. He may not have registered, but he did have to buy the drone. Whether he knows it or not, he is broadcasting more than adequate information for the authorities to locate him and put a stop to his nonsense before he hurts someone. That's a good thing.

It may actually deter some would be idiots to modify their behavior or just stop flying altogether. That's a good thing.

Imagine you are out acquiring footage of landscapes or sunsets in your unregistered mini 4. A cop sees it and comes up to you, weighs your drone on a recently calibrated scale that finds that you are 2 grams overweight. The chances of being charged, hauled in to court, and fined 27K are less than zero.

But, say a cop does approach you and you have not been doing anything wrong. If you have that sticker on your drone, and you explain to him that you are fully registered even though it's not required because you are under 249 grams, and you have your trust card, the next thing you are likely to hear is "have a nice day". Let's be honest, to 99% of the public, the mini looks like a toy drone.

So if you decide to go ahead and register, this may take away one of the biggest positives for buying a mini. You may want to think about looking at some of the other incredible options that are out there. But whatever you decide, you may want to pull the trigger before the end of December. There is a real chance that new Chinese drones may not be available to purchase after that. Best of luck to you.

 

[Ptrebor]

I can not find a newbie areea on this forum so I apologize for this question here. I try to find as much info as I can before buying Mini Pro 4 so I'm a little confused and not sure about this issue. This "under 249 g " or " doesn't require registration" statements are always mentioned when drones are advertised but the registration for recreational purposes is only $5 valid for 3 years if the drone uses extended batteries. so my question is what are the dissadvatges of FAA registration if any? I see benefits of having larger batteries but maybe I'm wrong too? Slightly more expensive but extended flying time.

You have to register your drone if it's weight over 250 grams (applies to the large batteries drone)

 

[WilliamDaugherty]

I've always registered all my drones, regardless of the requirement. It's just how my mind works. Legitimacy is always desirable. Since the Mini 3 Pro, I've always used the heavier batteries for longer flight time. The extra 10-12 minutes makes a huge difference in my experience. Today all my birds are registered under Part 107 so I don't ever have to think about "purely recreational" or not, and again: legitimacy. My reasons for buying the Mini3/4/5 have never been about regisration or RID. I use them because they are super-easy to carry in a backpack, and they are stealthy. And in the last few years, I could get waivers for OOP/OOMV easily with the smaller drones.

FYI, Part 107 does not mean "commercial" or "for business" because there are many flights made for things that are not "purely recreational" outside those use cases. There are good threads here that cover this issue. The FAA Drone Hotline is also an excellent resource for these sorts of questions.

 

[hank970]

I've always registered all my drones, regardless of the requirement. It's just how my mind works. Legitimacy is always desirable. Since the Mini 3 Pro, I've always used the heavier batteries for longer flight time. The extra 10-12 minutes makes a huge difference in my experience. Today all my birds are registered under Part 107 so I don't ever have to think about "purely recreational" or not, and again: legitimacy. My reasons for buying the Mini3/4/5 have never been about regisration or RID. I use them because they are super-easy to carry in a backpack, and they are stealthy. And in the last few years, I could get waivers for OOP/OOMV easily with the smaller drones.

FYI, Part 107 does not mean "commercial" or "for business" because there are many flights made for things that are not "purely recreational" outside those use cases. There are good threads here that cover this issue. The FAA Drone Hotline is also an excellent resource for these sorts of questions.

The FAA obviously distinguishes between the commercial and recreational uses of UAVs, with enforcement of the distinction based solely on the intent of the pilot. If a pilot's intent is to use a drone for any purpose other than recreational purposes, then Part 107 requires a Remote Pilot Certificate. If the pilot intends to use the drone for recreational purposes only, then the exception to Part 107 granted by 49 USC 44809 requires a less rigorous Trust Certificate.

The courts might reasonably conclude that commercial and business pursuits involve either a profit motive or, at the very least, a cashless quid pro quo -- in today's parlance, a mutually beneficial deal. Like the courts, I'd imagine that we all have a sense of what "commercial" and "business" mean.

Are there any uses that are neither commercial nor recreational? The oft-mentioned inspections of one's own roof or gutters, perhaps? Who's to say that such activity isn't recreational? Not the FAA.

Curiously, 49 USC 44809 does not define "recreational" -- a strange and serious omission, in my estimation. The term is thus open to broad interpretation, and interpretations are likely to be as varied as the leisure interests of each of us. Accordingly, I contend that anything I do for enjoyment and not for profit is recreational. The FAA isn't in a position to disagree, because it's neglected to publish a definition of "recreational" to the contrary.

 

[WilliamDaugherty]

The FAA obviously distinguishes between the commercial and recreational uses of UAVs, with enforcement of the distinction based solely on the intent of the pilot. If a pilot's intent is to use a drone for any purpose other than recreational purposes, then Part 107 requires a Remote Pilot Certificate. If the pilot intends to use the drone for recreational purposes only, then the exception to Part 107 granted by 49 USC 44809 requires a less rigorous Trust Certificate.

The courts might reasonably conclude that commercial and business pursuits involve either a profit motive or, at the very least, a cashless quid pro quo -- in today's parlance, a mutually beneficial deal. Like the courts, I'd imagine that we all have a sense of what "commercial" and "business" mean.

Are there any uses that are neither commercial nor recreational? The oft-mentioned inspections of one's own roof or gutters, perhaps? Who's to say that such activity isn't recreational? Not the FAA.

Curiously, 49 USC 44809 does not define "recreational" -- a strange and serious omission, in my estimation. The term is thus open to broad interpretation, and interpretations are likely to be as varied as the leisure interests of each of us. Accordingly, I contend that anything I do for enjoyment and not for profit is recreational. The FAA isn't in a position to disagree, because it's neglected to publish a definition of "recreational" to the contrary.

The modifier "purely" is most relevant. Just having a recreational component is not sufficient. Interestingly enough, the FAA staffers I've spoken with over the years are more than willing to explain their understanding of "purely recreational". They have been remarkably consistent. All that aside, having the Part 107 makes it all moot.

 

[mavic3usa]

Accordingly, I contend that anything I do for enjoyment and not for profit is recreational. The FAA isn't in a position to disagree, because it's neglected to publish a definition of "recreational" to the contrary.

Agreed with the tiny caveat for me:

I contend that anything I do for enjoyment (otherwise known as fun) and not for profit is recreational. When you throw in the part about profit, that's where the naysayers get stuck with the "commercial" label they are inappropriately attaching to part 107. As you said, part 107 = commercial; part 107 is everything and there's an exception to part 107: if you fly strictly for recreational purposes. Part 107 is the default. Everyone who flys a drone in the NAS needs part 107 unless....

You are making my case for me; years ago I argued about how the FAA rules are confusing and unclear and the majority of the community at the time differed with me and claimed everything is clear and straightforward and unambiguous and you just need to reach out to the FAA if you are unsure. I think the group simply disagreed with my rationale which was this is intentionally vague for the benefit of selective enforcement and so they don't get dragged into court to lockdown their sloppy verbiage.

The modifier "purely" is most relevant. Just having a recreational component is not sufficient. Interestingly enough, the FAA staffers I've spoken with over the years are more than willing to explain their understanding of "purely recreational". They have been remarkably consistent. All that aside, having the Part 107 makes it all moot.

I would also focus on the word "strictly" because it's not enough to only desire to fly recreationally sometimes and sometimes not. If you do, you need part 107. To me, that covers the intent when you take off and then somewhere along the way, you decide you want to go inspect roof tops.

 

[Cafguy]

Are there any uses that are neither commercial nor recreational? The oft-mentioned inspections of one's own roof or gutters, perhaps? Who's to say that such activity isn't recreational? Not the FAA.

You cannot "Provide a service" as a recreational pilot and inspecting your roof can be a very grey area. Lets say for example...You decide to fix your roof yourself one day and before doing so you use your drone to inspect the defects needeing repair.....you are good (as long as you follow the same rules as a part 107 pilot would have to follow, including RID.).. NOW, If you decide one day to inspect your roof with your drone and you video a problem spot and show that video to a roofing contractor for a bid, then you cannot do that without a 107 certificate...You would be "Providing a service" to the contractor under the definition of the rule.

 

[hank970]

Agreed with the tiny caveat for me:

I contend that anything I do for enjoyment (otherwise known as fun) and not for profit is recreational. When you throw in the part about profit, that's where the naysayers get stuck with the "commercial" label they are inappropriately attaching to part 107. As you said, part 107 = commercial; part 107 is everything and there's an exception to part 107: if you fly strictly for recreational purposes. Part 107 is the default. Everyone who flys a drone in the NAS needs part 107 unless....

You are making my case for me; years ago I argued about how the FAA rules are confusing and unclear and the majority of the community at the time differed with me and claimed everything is clear and straightforward and unambiguous and you just need to reach out to the FAA if you are unsure. I think the group simply disagreed with my rationale which was this is intentionally vague for the benefit of selective enforcement and so they don't get dragged into court to lockdown their sloppy verbiage.


I would also focus on the word "strictly" because it's not enough to only desire to fly recreationally sometimes and sometimes not. If you do, you need part 107. To me, that covers the intent when you take off and then somewhere along the way, you decide you want to go inspect roof tops.

I agree that some of the rules are poorly written and leave much to the imagination. Others show inconsistency. For example, the controlled airspace around airports at ground level is defined as encompassing a radius of five nautical miles, whereas strobes on drones flying after dark must be visible for three statute miles. Why not settle on a uniform standard to define distances? Why even distinguish between recreational and non-recreational flying? If a drone falls out of the sky and endangers someone on the ground, or if a drone intrudes upon the flight path of a low-flying helicopter, does the intent of the drone pilot or the activity he or she is engaged in matter? The potentials for harm are identical.

I also contend that much of the subject matter knowledge required for Part 107 certification is not germane to drone flight. For example, because drone flights are VLOS, pilots can easily judge local flying conditions without understanding weather dynamics and cloud types, etc. Too windy? Don't fly. Too foggy? Don't fly. It isn't as if a drone pilot has to understand what varying weather conditions he or she might expect to encounter on a cross-country flight to a distant destination. Do I need to consult a Sectional chart and understand the intricacies of its legend to realize there's a tall transmission tower or other obstruction nearby? Why do drone pilots need to know about stuff like taxiway markings and etiquette. aircraft load factors, the particulars of the Bernoulli Principle, or the stratification of airspace classifications at altitudes far beyond their reach? Whether flying for fun or profit, we're stuck down here at <400 feet AGL (yes, there are exceptions) in Class G airspace, not at 35,000 feet MSL in Class A airspace or even at 5000 feet MSL in Class E airspace. Phonetic alphabet? Radio frequencies for refueling services at airports? Blah, blah, blah. It's just needless mind clutter.

I do not agree that the regulations were purposely written to confuse or to enable selective enforcement. Other than registering craft with the FAA, I've never had any interaction with the agency, but from accounts I've read about others' experiences, it doesn't try to entrap folks or drag them into court for the joy of it. Rather, it's my understanding that the FAA responds to minor infractions with rather gentle warnings which promote compliance. Conversely, if they drop the hammer on some miscreant whose drone collides with a tanker over a wildlands fire, then I'm good with that.

 

[Cafguy]

I think learning to read sectionals can come in VERY handy, But In agree with what you are saying.

 

[Bad Santa]

At least in the short term, there's absolutely nobody checking to see if your drone is registered if you're otherwise flying legally.