WHY does the US legislation differentiate between amateurs and commercial pilots?

[Classic flyer]

I believe it’s because of the tens of thousands of innocent people who have been injured, maimed, and even killed by the reckless unlicensed drone operators that have not passed the Part 107 test!

Where did tens of thousands of people get killed/maimed by drones regardless of a 107 cert

 

[Lady Rover]

I think he was in sarkasm mode.

Thanks everyone. Interesting answers.

Especially the one mentioning hobbyist lobbies.

Where did tens of thousands of people get killed/maimed by drones regardless of a 107 cert

 

[sar104]

Tax revenue is the govt cash cow...show us where the gov't dosent get a percentage of the fees... they don't do it for free

The tests are administered by private testing centers, and they keep the entire $150 fee. The FAA doesn't do the testing for free - they don't do it at all and they don't get a percentage. The administrative part of the process is paid for out of tax dollars, so unless you are arguing that tax rates have increased to pay for sUAS pilot certification, then that hasn't provided any additional revenue either.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

The reason there are 2 different sets of rules is because lobbyists got involved back in 2010 and in 2012 the US Congress (well before the FAA is involved) mandated that no new rules (other than ones that directly affect safety of the NAS) can be created against HOBBY operations.

Wow that is interesting, and clears up my curiosity about rule discrepancy.

So, 2010 / 2012, this was way back in the infancy of drones as we know them (Phantom was 2013 release ?).
Were these lobbyists from the fixed wing model fraternity ?
Or was it lobbyists with involvement in drone / quad development that got in and protected it's future interests ?

(You may or may not know for sure, just thought I'd ask.)

 

[Classic flyer]

The tests are administered by private testing centers, and they keep the entire $150 fee. The FAA doesn't do the testing for free - they don't do it at all and they don't get a percentage. The administrative part of the process is paid for out of tax dollars, so unless you are arguing that tax rates have increased to pay for sUAS pilot certification, then that hasn't provided any additional revenue either.

Well sir it seems as though the only thing we can agree on is to disagree and that's fine...enjoy the day...be smart fly safe

 

[scoble08]

I believe it’s because of the tens of thousands of innocent people who have been injured, maimed, and even killed by the reckless unlicensed drone operators that have not passed the Part 107 test!

Proof?

 

[Paulf10]

Where did tens of thousands of people get killed/maimed by drones regardless of a 107 cert

My apologies sir. I honestly thought that the sarcasm would be obvious.

 

[BigAl07]

The tests are administered by private testing centers, and they keep the entire $150 fee. The FAA doesn't do the testing for free - they don't do it at all and they don't get a percentage. The administrative part of the process is paid for out of tax dollars, so unless you are arguing that tax rates have increased to pay for sUAS pilot certification, then that hasn't provided any additional revenue either.

^^^^ Words of wisdom!!! Well said sir.

Wow that is interesting, and clears up my curiosity about rule discrepancy.

So, 2010 / 2012, this was way back in the infancy of drones as we know them (Phantom was 2013 release ?).
Were these lobbyists from the fixed wing model fraternity ?
Or was it lobbyists with involvement in drone / quad development that got in and protected it's future interests ?

(You may or may not know for sure, just thought I'd ask.)

Oh I was involved in this industry back then as well. The R/C Industry (not just fixed wing because R/C Heli were big then too) is who "funded" the push. Unfortunately those in charge didn't realize just how BIG of an animal this new technology was going to be and the "quick and easy" rules created a mess of regulations that are still being sorted out to this very day. The rule was requested in order to "protect" the hobbyists who were flying under AMA guidelines at the local flying fields.

Had the US Congress not created that set of stipulations you can bet your bottom dollar today's UAS regulations would be much clearer although for hobby operations it would be much stricter.

 

[Paulf10]

Proof?

Does no one have a sense humor?

 

[sar104]

Well sir it seems as though the only thing we can agree on is to disagree and that's fine...enjoy the day...be smart fly safe

Are you asserting that anything I wrote there is actually incorrect, or are you just at odds with reality in general?

 

[PhantomFandom]

Are you asserting that anything I wrote there is actually incorrect, or are you just at odds with reality in general?

Good morning @sar104

Unfortunately we see this all too often. People take a stance without any proof of their assertions. Then when they are proven wrong, they "agree to disagree" instead of validating their POV or admitting that they were wrong.

 

[Classic flyer]

Good morning @sar104

Unfortunately we see this all too often. People take a stance without any proof of their assertions. Then when they are proven wrong, they "agree to disagree" instead of validating their POV or admitting that they were wrong.

Where is the proof that they don't receive any tax revenue...the gov't runs entirely on tax generated revenue...and no I'm not suggesting that taxes have increased to support drone s in any way shape or form...again enjoy the day

 

[sar104]

Where is the proof that they don't receive any tax revenue...the gov't runs entirely on tax generated revenue...and no I'm not suggesting that taxes have increased to support drone s in any way shape or form...again enjoy the day

I specifically pointed out that the FAA expenses are covered by tax revenue. You asserted that this is a cash cow because the FAA gets a percentage of the fee, not because they get tax revenue. If you agree that the FAA only gets tax revenue to cover this, and taxes haven't been raised to do that, then how is it a cash cow?

 

[sar104]

Good morning @sar104

Unfortunately we see this all too often. People take a stance without any proof of their assertions. Then when they are proven wrong, they "agree to disagree" instead of validating their POV or admitting that they were wrong.

I know - I sometimes can't resist pointing it out though.

 

[Classic flyer]

T

I know - I sometimes can't resist pointing it out though.

Tax revenue is the only cash cow the gov't has and the FAA budget is taken from that and any revenue generated from taxes/fees at airports , registrations, testing etc. is part of that budget

 

[sar104]

Tax revenue is the only cash cow the gov't has and the FAA budget is taken from that and any revenue generated from taxes/fees at airports , registrations, testing etc. is part of that budget

Agreed. But what does that have to do with your original, incorrect assertion that testing is a cash cow for the FAA because they get a percentage of the fees. And if tax revenue hasn't increased to fund the extra FAA administrative costs - then what is left of your argument that any of this is a cash cow for the FAA?

 

[Classic flyer]

Agreed. But what does that have to do with your original, incorrect assertion that testing is a cash cow for the FAA because they get a percentage of the fees. And if tax revenue hasn't increased to fund the extra FAA administrative costs - then what is left of your argument that any of this is a cash cow for the FAA?

My assertion was that ALL tax generated revenue is a cash cow for the gov't of which the FAAs budget is a big part of...I can't make it any clearer than that, sorry if you can't understand my point...that being said this subject is finished for me...enjoy the day...be smat fly safe

 

[sar104]

My assertion was that ALL tax generated revenue is a cash cow for the gov't of which the FAAs budget is a big part of...I can't make it any clearer than that, sorry if you can't understand my point...that being said this subject is finished for me...enjoy the day...be smat fly safe

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense, and is not at all what you asserted originally. The problem is not in understanding your point - the problem is that your point keeps changing and is still wrong. Do you somehow imagine that this is not completely obvious to anyone reading these posts?

 

[Classic flyer]

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense, and is not at all what you asserted originally. The problem is not in understanding your point - the problem is that your point keeps changing and is still wrong. Do you somehow imagine that this is not completely obvious to anyone reading these posts?

Let's say the gov't gets .10 cents per each $1.00 for each $150 fee, that's $15.00 per test times the number of test taken... that comes out to a pretty good cash flow... that's what I mean by a cash cow for the FAA

 

[sar104]

Let's say the gov't gets .10 cents per each $1.00 for each $150 fee, that's $15.00 per test times the number of test taken... that comes out to a pretty good cash flow... that's what I mean by a cash cow for the FAA

So now you are back to that again? The government doesn't get a percentage of the test fee. The $150 is kept by the testing centers.