Drones have had an exponential growth from amusements to functional equipment used by government, business, and individuals.
The FAA continues to debate on how they can safely introduce UAVs/drones into the national airspace system. While toy and model aircraft pilots
have been largely unrestricted and safe for years, it now feels that they are being treated unfairly by the FAA,
who are mandating registration fees for UAVs/drones that meet a certain weight criterion.
Matt McFarland reported in May 2017 the following:
A Washington, D.C. court ruled Friday that the FAA drone registration rule violates the FAA Modernization and
Reform Act, which Congress passed in 2012. Hobbyist John Taylor argued successfully that he should not
have to register because the act states that the FAA “may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a
Since December 2015, hobbyists with drones weighing between 0.55 pounds and 55 pounds have had to
register drones with the FAA. More than 820,000 operators have registered since then. The process can be
completed online, and there is a $5 application fee.
The FAA said in a statement that it launched registration to ensure drones are operated safely and don’t pose
security or privacy threats. The FAA also said it is considering its options and response.
The FAA now has two potential paths forward, according to Anne Swanson, an attorney at Cooley and aviation
regulation expert. The FAA can appeal to all of the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit,
which is called an en banc review. (The decision was made by a three-judge panel.) (McFarland, 2017, para. 1-
Does this new rule make it safer for the public?
Should the FAA create additional rules on top of this one?
Is the FAA being fair to previously unregulated toy and model aircraft pilots?
rganisation – significantly higher than the other “essential” trade languages such as Mandarin Chinese, only rated useful by 28% of companies. (CBI, 2013). With France being Britain’s third most important export market (where English does not hold L1 status), the commercial benefits of the French language undeniably place it in line with, or in close second to English as a profitable language by UK, European and global businesses. Nations where French is recognised as an L1, such as France, Belgium and Luxembourg, are vital to the UK economy– these three countries alone bring £35 billion through exportation of British products every year. (Office of National Statistics, 2013.) The economic value of the English language is tremendous, and advantageous for both the UK economy and global business. Two-thirds of corporate executives surveyed by the Economist Intelligence Unit reported the most essential language to be of fluent proficiency in is English – followed by Mandarin Chinese and Spanish as the second and third most useful. (Harvard Business Report, 2012). For this reason, it is unlikely that the English language poses a threat to the French language within the economy unless in a European trade context, due to English already being established as a language of global trade. The results of this study support the idea that, to some extent, French is under threat from the global rise of English due to its continuous growth in economic trade deals and business negotiations, in addition to its dominance within the European political system. However, findings in this study suggest that the threat may not be as considerable as initially thought. As a result of recent changes in European politics, and relations between the European Union and the United Kingdom, French holds itself as a language vital to the function within European business and the European commission – something the English language cannot always fulfil. In conclusion, this creates the notion that the English language will not fully eradicate the practicality of the French language, and therefore is not a significant threat.>GET ANSWER