Unfortunately we know that only a small percentage of this is about safety. The rest is about control, taxing and and keeping useless burocracy and wasted manpower on easy and irrelevant subjects. 
At the end we will have to pay some kind of fee, like some other outdoor activities, like fishing or hunting and let's hope that's the worst case cenario. The remote id cenario is completely non-sense. Besides there are so many easy and safe ways to garantee that you are flying safely without complicating so much. 
This other cenario of training and taking classes to fly... it's even more non-sense, imo. For really powerful and big crafts, for commercial purposes or for flying over people and property for filming industry or advertising, I can see some "professional" category that should obey some rules and procedures but not for the typical fpv racer or freestyler that will fly mostly gates, near trees, rocks or abandon buildings.

Of course there is some worldwide agenda on the background and the hobbyists are just a niche group of people. Most will not comply because most know how to fly safely and see all the BS in this subject. The other type of guys, the ones that just grab a DJI and don't have minimal piloting skills will "wrecklessly" fly, because in fact it's easy to do that with these stable and controlled crafts. I'm not trying to say that this applies to everyone buying DJI of course.

I think that what will dictate people complying will be the fines and the chance of getting gear confiscated, and that is always the wrong way to apply a law, because if you don't feel that it makes sense, you always will try to get around it.

This is one reason that I am trying to stay "small"; under the radar, more "stealthy". If you can't be heard or seen, nobody knows you are there...so...no problem. Thing is, if nobody is upset and doesn't report that "thing" {drone} in the sky, no one will really care. I try not to fly around people and generally fly pretty high (30 to 80 meters). After all, I just fly "toys", right? 

(13-Aug-2020, 12:33 AM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: ...good news for people who decided not to bother registering because it means they have a valid reason for just pleading ignorance in the (very) rare occurrence that they're unfortunate enough get caught.

Sadly, pleading ignorance of the law is not a valid defence.

(16-Aug-2020, 05:32 PM)unseen Wrote: Sadly, pleading ignorance of the law is not a valid defence.

UNSEEN?
You are back?!
Good to see you again!

(16-Aug-2020, 05:32 PM)unseen Wrote: Sadly, pleading ignorance of the law is not a valid defence.

I guess the point I'm making is that people need to make sure they fly safely in an isolated area and where they aren't going to attract any undesired attention, and therefore they won't then have to explain themselves or plead ignorance.

Most FPV pilots who fly alone do so without a spotter, so they're already breaking the law which means they're already in trouble if they get caught. So being registered or not is then irrelevant because you already broke the law. In fact, being registered in that scenario is probably worse because part of passing the competency test is to demonstrate and sign up to the fact that you understand all the rules, including the BVLOS rules.

Well, I do agree with Snow. Most FPV pilots already break the line of sight rule and very likely the "spotter" rule; everyone who flies long range certainly is not following either one. I also agree that practicing safety is of paramount importance. Basically, stay away from people. {and stay out of sight}.

Without getting into a discussion regarding the various aspects and opinions on laws and regulations, if you get caught doing something that might be wrong, then there might be consequences. Furthermore, with any law, regulation, ordinance, whatever, there is always the concept of enforcement. Who will enforce, how will it be enforced, how will enforcement know if there are any violations, and how "flexible" might they be. How it will be enforced will be determined by those enforcing it. If the local police are supposed to enforce it, how high is it on the priority list.

I do agree that ignorance of the law is no excuse {at least that's what they say}, but if it is your first offence at flying a small, "toy", drone; then pleading ignorant might get you just a warning. It doesn't hurt to plead ignorance.     I am not condoning it...just sayin'.    Again, the decision is up to ... first the enforcing officer, then the judge, not the regulating agency.

Did you know: If you are stopped for speeding {in a car} and ask for a warning, the officer will give you a warning instead of a "fine" ticket about 75% of the time.       If you don't just ask, you just never know.     

So, if you fly a drone that is quiet and hard to see where no one is around {no one to disturb}; then what are the odds that anyone will even notice, much less be concerned enough to call someone. Yeah, normal people really are ignorant about drone laws; most really don't care.

So, it comes down to how much you want to risk to fly your "toy" drone. 

At this point, I am going to work hard to keep "out of the way", to disturb NO one, and just play with my "toy".   

Final decision pending ...  

As we all know there is a part of most conversations, that Officers of the Law refer to as The Attitude Test, it is best to be meek and polite, or normal for most people, in order to pass the
test and wait for the Officer to suggest the outcome.
 

I recall an example of a massive fail, when I was at an airport waiting for my luggage, when a large man went over to the waiting Customs Officers and shouted at them in complete ignorance of their roll, that instead of just standing around they could help shift the luggage.


Back to the main subject, how about in the coming future if the powers that be, bring in a total ban, given the excuse, say caused by a rogue person causing a major incident with a Drone.

They may then, bring in a compensation scheme for existing owners to hand in their equipment, using the registration scheme.
So if you are registered you get contacted, if you are not, you do not. 

Another problem with registration is that you risk being vilified because you are "on the list". Just look at that poor couple who got hauled in over the Gatwick incident and had their names plastered all over the media when they had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Before all of the hoo-ha surrounding the Gatwick incident that helped to turn the whole country (and some of the rest of the world) against drones, I used to leave my house proud to show my 5" quad hanging off the back of my backpack with props fitted ready to just unclip and fly when I got to my flying destination. Now I hide it inside my backpack with props off (becasue it's too big to fit in with them on) so people just think I'm an innocent hiker going for a walk, and then I just make my way to my flying destination by stealth. I think that trying to stay under the radar is probably the most sensible course of action in the current climate.

(16-Aug-2020, 06:55 PM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: I guess the point I'm making is that people need to make sure they fly safely in an isolated area and where they aren't going to attract any undesired attention, and therefore they won't then have to explain themselves or plead ignorance.

Most FPV pilots who fly alone do so without a spotter, so they're already breaking the law which means they're already in trouble if they get caught. So being registered or not is then irrelevant because you already broke the law. In fact, being registered in that scenario is probably worse because part of passing the competency test is to demonstrate and sign up to the fact that you understand all the rules, including the BVLOS rules.

Same in my country. I can register - the registration is free and it´s not related to the quad but to the name of the pilot. BUT I must have visual contact of my drone all the time and it´s impossible in FPV. Registration is required for the quads with 250 grams or more.

People also forget you technically need a HAM license.

I know the fun just never stops lol.

(17-Aug-2020, 12:18 AM)the.ronin Wrote: People also forget you technically need a HAM license.

I know the fun just never stops lol.

Yeah, I read something about that, but didn't think much about it. My perception is that you only need the HAM license for certain frequencies or certain power levels.    On the other hand, I never really looked into it.     
Wonder how many drone pilots really obey HAM laws or have a HAM license   

The Gatwick incident really brought drones out into the limelight in the wrong manner. Anyway, it is a good argument for NOT registering. Does anyone here REALLY think that every kid is going to register his "toy" drone whether it be a "tiny whoop" or open prop    Yes, they do fly them outside. My grandson has already lost two of them outside. Yeah, he is not registered. Plus, his parents are definitely "ignorant" regarding drone laws. Trust me, parents don't go checking drone laws before buying their kid a drone, even if it is a large one. After all, it is still just a toy.

There is a level of absurdity about registration for small "toy" drones...say...under 250 grams    

Just a thought, has anyone tried to visually keep track of a GEPRC Phantom {just an example} that is flying around at an altitude of more than 30 meters? Yeah, my wife can't even keep track of it. One time, a few people were at the field and couldn't even see it. So...how does that work for LOS     
How can you LOS something you or your spotter can NOT track or can't even see     Never mind long range 

Could it be that most, if not all, drone pilots are already outside of one law or another    So, the question is not whether you obey all laws, but more like what you consider reasonable to "bend" a little and how likely are you to get into trouble for it.  

Now consider...do you REALLY want to register     

Maybe you do   ... if you use drones commercially 

Pretty much if you use 5.8, you need a HAM license. This is FCC jurisdiction though not FAA.

Honestly, the beginner license called the Technician License is a breeze. I passed it after taking practice tests for 3 days. It costs barely anything and renews indefinitely for free. Winning lol.

(16-Aug-2020, 06:47 PM)Oscar Wrote: UNSEEN?
You are back?!
Good to see you again!

Thanks Oscar, it's nice to be back and to see the forum active and in good health!

(17-Aug-2020, 07:14 PM)the.ronin Wrote: Pretty much if you use 5.8, you need a HAM license. This is FCC jurisdiction though not FAA.

Honestly, the beginner license called the Technician License is a breeze. I passed it after taking practice tests for 3 days. It costs barely anything and renews indefinitely for free. Winning lol.

The same rules apply in Europe. If you want more than 25dBm, you need a HAM license.

But anyway, the NO FPV rule means that everyone who registers and still flies FPV is just doing themselves and the rest of the hobby a disservice by legitimising the requirement to register. It seems somewhat counterproductive to 'register because the law says you must' and then continue to break the law by flying FPV as iFly4Rotors rightly points out.

That nonsense at Gatwick is shameful. There was never any evidence presented of there actually being anything there, be it a multirotor or fixed wing craft, yet the police wasted huge amounts of money and treated two completely innocent people like murderers just because one of their neighbours had a beef with them and decided that dobbing them in to the police was a good way to mess them around. In the end, they were compensated for the wrongful arrest and detention, but I'm sure they would rather not have been arrested in the first place. Of course, the chief constable responsible suffered no consequences for the waste of taxpayer money and his force's officers behaving in a way that is far from acceptable for a policeman to behave at any time.

every quad registred as a single model in my taranis ;-)