Unfortunately, this is not the case. Donkeys can still fly recreationally with no training or qualifications. The rules currently in place are senseless, creating a new unenforceable framework and unnecessary bureaucracy.
Case in point with regards to airspace... A recreational UAS pilot can fly in much of Class E surface airspace without so much as a notification to ATC as long as they are outside of 5 miles. A LICENSED commercial UAS pilot currently needs an airspace authorization that takes up to 90 days and a onerous web form submission justifying the safety protocols they will take. This applies even if you are a commercial manned aircraft pilot.
Explain to me how this makes the NAS safer. It doesn't. The point is to slow adoption and give the bureaucrats more time to evaluate the situation. They know commercial use will drive the volume of UAS in the air. They don't want to tick off the AMA, and can't get around established legislation. So they target commercial users. Why? Because if they can regulate it, they will.
Commercial users have every incentive to be safe (liability, public perception). Hobbyists largely have little to lose. The thought process is backward.
The original point of this thread is whether a UAS pilot should have a manned pilot license. I believe that concept is ridiculous. I am a licensed private pilot. I see no parallel. Understanding the airspace through a part 107 license should be sufficient. Should the test and licensing requirements be tougher? I have no problem with that as long as it isn't more expensive. However, the restrictions on part 107 pilots should be no greater than on unlicensed hobbyists. Sadly that is not the case as it has been implemented.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk