Some of you may have already seen the following video put out by Bruce a few hours ago. I don't know the reliability of the source of the information but if it's true then it could be very worrying for the future of the FPV hobby in the US, and potentially any other countries who decide to follow suit with any US regulations.

Original Article Source: https://www.suasnews.com/2021/09/eno-gui...excellence

Not good if this is true.

F##k the FAA bureaucrats. Their rules don't even seem to be aiming towards a specific goal, just rules for rules sake because that's all bureaucrats know.

This is going to be me and my grandson in the future trying to fly FPV, while getting away from the FAA agents:

“Ain’t noth’n illegal till you get caught”
-Stephen Tickle -

Yeah -  the FAA is nutty beyond belief.  They banned tinywhoops from FPV without a spotter.  And they banned tinywhoops BVLOS no matter what - and the thing is - tinywhoops can't harm a baby.

Also, the FAA tells us what we can and cannot do, under the trees in our own yards.  No full scale craft can fly under my trees - it's non-navigable airspace.  Yet the FAA is concerned with what I do under there.  But it shouldn't be.

The FAA is a rouge political outfit - where safety comes in a distant third.  Remember this outfit that's regulating us - it's the same outfit that let two Boeing MAX's fall out of the sky - not one - but two.  And they're still testing the same way they use to - letting the mfgs do their own testing for a lot of it.  What could possibly go wrong - again?

This FAA shouldn't be governing our skies.  It's lost its way.

You guys, including X-Jet, are targeting the wrong place. It is CONGRESS
that is making the LAW and they are in the process of ironing out the details 
of what THEY will put in the upcoming 2023 FAA Reauthorization Act. You think 
it isn't? Go do some research. When that thing is signed into LAW, it will be 
LAW that the FAA must then follow.

Yet again, the big picture is being missed. This is much bigger than the FAA, 
it involves the DHS, and several other agencies (not Google, by the way) who 
want control of the airspace. DHS wants every UAS (drone) to have Network 
Remote ID and they want the ability to remotely disarm any drone that they,
DHS, deem a threat. This is DHS, NOT the FAA. I used to have a list of 
websites where a lot of this is spelled out. 

The real target should be CONGRESS since they are making the LAW.

First time that I have seen the chart, but at this point it is just conjecture.
Hopefully, it will not make it into the final document. 

Just remember who signed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 into law ...

THIS Guy!



THIS guy's signature immediately repealed the Special Rule for Model Aircraft we were all enjoying for decades until he ended it.

So, when you want to blame someone for killing the hobby ... blame THIS GUY for setting it all in motion.

One guy? Nah, I blame the lot of them. They're all corrupt creeps who don't represent people. They represent their wallets by serving big companies. I'll not be instructed on what's right and wrong by those that accept bribes. We still have things like the Patriot Act where all it takes to break the 4th amendment is claiming suspicion of someone being a terrorist.

It doesn't matter who the President was in 2018, that was going to be signed.

By the way, do you think the current POTUS has read any of the 2023 FAA
Reauthorization ACT? Will He sign it? Sometimes we really show our ignorance.

Do we NOT understand that the FAA Authorization and Re-Authorization LAWS 
effect the ENTIRE Airline industry ??? What?? Are we 6 (years old)??  You think, 
he went through the 2018 FAA Reauthorization act or was even aware of the 
changes to the UAS (drones).

That special rule for model aircraft was no longer needed as ALL unmanned
aircraft were being pulling under the same umbrella as well that it should be.
Model aircraft are NO different. By the way, have you seen the FPV dogfights
between model aircraft? That's right model aircraft are NO different than any
other type of unmanned aircraft.

Get real. At this point, we are just getting silly and slinging mud at anything 
we think we can hit. Evidently, the majority of folks have absolutely NO effing 
idea what goes into all of this.

By the way, has anyone of us ever READ the 2018 FAA Reauthorization act?  
Have we done any research into it?  Do we know the history. Yeah, 2018 was
NOT the first. Maybe read some history. In fact, has ANYONE here read any 
part of the 2023 FAA Reauthorization Act that is currently before Congress.

It really makes us look quite silly when we speak and obviously have NO clue.

Ifly.. I see your point and PARTIALLY agree.. I believe a lot of people in the drone hobby feel as If these regulations are being imposed on them and it’s over regurgitation…
No one will argue why.. it’s just how much.. It’s hard to accept some of these regulations that are so far fetched and accept others.. (experimental aircraft, paragliders, ect..) being effected compared to a small quad / drone (tinywhoops , sub 250)…
Camera drones, and businesses… that makes “sense”.. well, kinda..I can understand if more… I may not have read any of the updates or regulations .. but I can see within what is being imposed .. there are a few MINOR issues that could be simplified..

Congress and the FAA should just cut to the chase and enforce everyone to install an ADS-B transponder on their tiny whoops. We all know that is what they would do if they had half a chance. Maybe it will be the next step. Remote ID first just to get their foot in the door then full blown ADS-B later on down the line.

Please explain why paramotor pilots are still seemingly able to fly without doing a test, without a license, and without having to follow any specific regulations? Maybe there are some now and I just missed them. If there are, can someone please post a link to them.

Hi Rob,

The part that "we" can't accept is that all unmanned aircraft are the same 
regardless of size or the perception of harm or safety AND that unmanned 
aircraft are inherently different than a manned aircraft. Unmanned aircraft
are different because you can do things with them that you would never
think of doing with a human pilot on board. THAT, makes them potentially
much more dangerous and more of a challenge to deal with regardless of
size or configuration. 

We think small means not harmful. Well go watch the slaughterbot videos.
Small does not equate to harmless or even safe. Now, go take a look at
how drones (yeah, our freestyle type drones) are being used in war. Now,
consider the projection of 10s or 100s of millions of drones in the USA.
Now, what. The "hobby" aspect of this is less than a drop in the bucket
to the number, type, size, and capabilities of drones in just the next
decade or so. 

I've been in this game for 6 years now and have done a ton of research 
during the past 2 or 3 years regarding the laws, the regulations, the history,
and still, the only regulation that I find a little irritating is the Visual Line Of
Sight thing. Everything else, yes, everything else actually seems to be pretty
reasonable; even Remote ID. I have worked it all out and discovered that I
can easily and legitimately work within the recreational regulations. 

Yes, I hear all the cries or rather rants about government overreach, undue
regulation, and so on; but is it really? Those who cry about it NEVER seem
to be able to articulate specifically how or why they consider it to be overreach. 
I seen the silliest rants such as "Not in line with the Bill of Rights" yet, nothing
to indicate why. Just empty, hot air. Most folks shoot from the hip without even 
knowing what the target should be.

We just better hope that nobody uses a small drone for any type of attack
on...well, you know. If that happens, they will shut down the whole damn
thing and do it with the public's blessings. Believe that. Go ahead, call 
that government overreach and see how far it gets you.

I am just hoping that CONGESS doesn't mess with the recreational exemption
in this next rev of the LAW. If we can scathe through that, then we will have 
5 years. After that, well...it all depends on what happens during those 5 years.

In the end, we might just be collateral damage. 

Thing is, good luck stopping it.

Later, iFly 

Trump signed it, but didn’t know what he was doing, so he gets a pass ??!!??

Not the best defense - FAIL!

I, and most others seated in reality, will never accept that garbage.

Ok QuadFlyer,

You Tell Me, how many presidents read the entire context of every bill 
that they sign? Get real. Presidents are provided an overview of the 
bill.  

But let's say that he DID read every word. You gripe about getting rid of 
the special rule for model aircraft and melding it into the broader drone 
category which actually makes PERFECT sense. It should be that way.

You want to blame someone. When there is NO blame to be had. 


Controlling our Airspace in the Age of Drones | Homeland Security (dhs.gov)

… not going to debate.. no need, not the place..
Where I have issues is from personal experience ..the “over regulations” I speak of are YES.. size, weight.. to start..
Example.. if most don’t know, my wife is a middle school science teacher.. she uses Tinyhawks in her class.. Young kids flying FPV indoors..They can NOT take them outside and fly.. due to “regulations”.
Now, if u have never felt with any Board of Education politics… its worst than “city hall”…
They will cut ties with any “liability” anything that would cause them to actually make a competent decision .. I have been doing my research in the possibility of getting the school grounds as a FRIA so they can fly outside without pushback..
These flights can’t be described as “recreational” because they are under the umbrella of my wife’s responsibility, the school uses her program in “offered programs”.. so in turn it can be deemed “beneficial”
Yes.. they could fly outdoors, and NEVER hear anything from anyone regarding it.. but I’m NOT about to gamble my wife’s career on it.. would you.? Easier to just keep the kids inside..
Convince me, change my mind… these tinyhawks should be regulated the same as a inspire, or a larger UAS .. maybe they should.. but there should be some exceptions… unfortunately this is still in its infancy and honestly, people need to be better educated in regards to What they imposing regulations on..