FAA Remote I.D.

Joined
Jun 2, 2018
Messages
306
Reaction score
115
Location
Western Connecticut
No grandfathering? I guess that makes a bunch of us outlaws. Who in tarnation is going to invest the money and effort to comply with these regs just to fly a plastic toy? Massive government overreach.
 

BigAl07

Administrator
Staff Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
6,944
Reaction score
5,689
Age
49
Location
Western North Carolina
No grandfathering? I guess that makes a bunch of us outlaws. Who in tarnation is going to invest the money and effort to comply with these regs just to fly a plastic toy? Massive government overreach.
Odds are by the time this goes into effect the vast majority of non-compliant aircraft will be replaced and some of them a few times over.
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
No grandfathering? I guess that makes a bunch of us outlaws. Who in tarnation is going to invest the money and effort to comply with these regs just to fly a plastic toy? Massive government overreach.
As of my last read, the people that are going to benefit from this is going to be Amazon and the like. I have not been a part of the internal discussions but from my vantage, remote ID goes hand in hand with BVLOS and big business is going to directly benefit with UAS delivery of goods. The rest of us get to pay for the system and the infrastructure to implement it. I say rest of us; rec fliers have the option of operating from predesignated and approved locations without having to be logged in to the system (I "think" that is a good interpretation). But the days of operating for fun where ever you want are numbered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dronesky

dronesky

Premium Pilot
Joined
Feb 4, 2017
Messages
645
Reaction score
512
Location
Indiana
As of my last read, the people that are going to benefit from this is going to be Amazon and the like. I have not been a part of the internal discussions but from my vantage, remote ID goes hand in hand with BVLOS and big business is going to directly benefit with UAS delivery of goods. The rest of us get to pay for the system and the infrastructure to implement it. I say rest of us; rec fliers have the option of operating from predesignated and approved locations without having to be logged in to the system (I "think" that is a good interpretation). But the days of operating for fun where ever you want are numbered.
According to story the Remote ID will be released by this December nothing as to when it will be in effect but those of us thought we had 2 to 3 years might be in for a surprise
 
  • Like
Reactions: R Martin
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
According to story the Remote ID will be released by this December nothing as to when it will be in effect but those of us thought we had 2 to 3 years might be in for a surprise
They might have the legislation ready to go but the 5G network that all of this depends on is not going to be ready. AT&T just installed the first 5G tower on our property and there are still 15 more to go. That does include the rest of the city; much less the county. Without the 5G network, the throughput bottleneck is going to be a big problem. But last I heard, it's not a real-time system so that might not matter unless it is you who are trying to send data to get airborne and remain so.
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
I find it funny that they point to LAANC. While it may work well I hope the new legislation is more inclusive than LAANC. Of the 13 airports in my area that have controlled airspace, only 4, or 31%, are covered by LAANC. The rest still rely on the paper trail. If remote ID is anything like that success rate then the commercial operators here are well and truly shafted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dronesky
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
23
Age
69
Our birds already know exactly where they are, and so does the RC. The bird itself does not have to report remote ID, so someone is going to create a reasonably priced retro fit for the RC to transmit the ID and gps/telemetry info. there are too many million potential buyers that might be mandated to buy for it to not be a huge opportunity. Or I could be dead wrong.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
23
Age
69
The least expensive way to accomplish this as a retrofit is an app that runs on your phone or tablet. Your phone could be the transmitting device since it already has the telemetry, and is hooked up to your phone network. It can also be used as the connection to your tablet via wifi hotspot and then transmit the wifi signal. Just my 2 cents. If the feds want this implemented, the 5g infrastructure has to be fully in place and would easily carry the signal load, which would actually be very minimal bandwidth.
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
The least expensive way to accomplish this as a retrofit is an app that runs on your phone or tablet. Your phone could be the transmitting device since it already has the telemetry, and is hooked up to your phone network. It can also be used as the connection to your tablet via wifi hotspot and then transmit the wifi signal. Just my 2 cents. If the feds want this implemented, the 5g infrastructure has to be fully in place and would easily carry the signal load, which would actually be very minimal bandwidth.
The NPRM required both the aircraft and the base station to report its location. While a rec pilot might use a personal phone, I would never consider that. One is a privacy issue. The other is a business concern. An easier retrofit would be to require ADS-B on all UASs which I currently have. But the burden on rec pilots would be excessive; especially considering that a lot of people fly aircraft that they payed less than $200.00 for. By comparison, and ADS-B transceiver runs about $2000.00. All of this is beside the point anyway. The NPRM closed for public input a long time ago.
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
Our birds already know exactly where they are, and so does the RC. The bird itself does not have to report remote ID, so someone is going to create a reasonably priced retro fit for the RC to transmit the ID and gps/telemetry info. there are too many million potential buyers that might be mandated to buy for it to not be a huge opportunity. Or I could be dead wrong.
I think when the new regs are revealed you are going to find that your comment is incorrect. It was specifically stated in the NPRM that both aircraft and base station are required to transmit location.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
23
Age
69
You're probably, unfortunately, correct. If it comes out that strict, no grandfathering, no time delay for implementation, then we might end up with a whole bunch of hobbyist rogues. OTOH, would reporting end the need for vlos?
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
You're probably, unfortunately, correct. If it comes out that strict, no grandfathering, no time delay for implementation, then we might end up with a whole bunch of hobbyist rogues. OTOH, would reporting end the need for vlos?
MHO is that this is being placed in effect for Amazon and other big business entities that want to deliver via UAS. BVLOS without a waiver is one of the benefits of the new regs, as is daytime flight(night flight without a waiver) and flight over people (provided that you meet certain criteria). I fly commercially on large land tracts for construction and mapping. Even flying a 200 acres profile, I've always been able to maintain VLOS. If its a problem in a built-up area, I move the base station to a roof.

My point being that the average Joe flying a UAS does not need BVR flight in most cases (not all). But a package delivery service does. And the average Joe is going to be an impediment to BVR flight without knowing where each one of us are at any given moment. Hence, the NPRM. It's not really being done for us; its being done to us. But there are a few carrots to placate most of us. We get to pay AT&T or T-Mobile more money for a system to track us. And you get to fly over people if you have the hardware in place to minimize the risk to bystanders (Parazero for the Phantom).
 

BigAl07

Administrator
Staff Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
6,944
Reaction score
5,689
Age
49
Location
Western North Carolina
The NPRM required both the aircraft and the base station to report its location. While a rec pilot might use a personal phone, I would never consider that. One is a privacy issue. The other is a business concern. An easier retrofit would be to require ADS-B on all UASs which I currently have. But the burden on rec pilots would be excessive; especially considering that a lot of people fly aircraft that they payed less than $200.00 for. By comparison, and ADS-B transceiver runs about $2000.00. All of this is beside the point anyway. The NPRM closed for public input a long time ago.

With all due respect BOTH the AIRCRAFT and CONTROL Station units don't have to actively report/broadcast. The Control Station location and Aircraft information (Lat/Long and Alt) have to be transmitted but that can be done via the transmission from the aircraft only. The MIN requirement is for the AIRCRAFT to broadcast via RF to be able to fly under the Standard Remote ID section. If able then both units would/should broadcast but it Internet not available etc only the Aircraft has to broadcast to meet the MIN requirement.

Here's an interesting and very well digested breakdown of the NPRM as it was when submission window closed:
 
  • Like
Reactions: R Martin
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
With all due respect BOTH the AIRCRAFT and CONTROL Station units don't have to actively report/broadcast. The Control Station location and Aircraft information (Lat/Long and Alt) have to be transmitted but that can be done via the transmission from the aircraft only. The MIN requirement is for the AIRCRAFT to broadcast via RF to be able to fly under the Standard Remote ID section. If able then both units would/should broadcast but it Internet not available etc only the Aircraft has to broadcast to meet the MIN requirement.

Here's an interesting and very well digested breakdown of the NPRM as it was when submission window closed:
Thanks for the clarification. You're still my hero.

-rm
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
23
Age
69
So if I was to upgrade from P4P to P4Pv2 now, is it already compliant with the proposal? Are all of DJI's current models being sold with compliant ability, or what?
 

BigAl07

Administrator
Staff Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
6,944
Reaction score
5,689
Age
49
Location
Western North Carolina
So if I was to upgrade from P4P to P4Pv2 now, is it already compliant with the proposal? Are all of DJI's current models being sold with compliant ability, or what?

@R Martin is spot on. Until the REGS go into effect there is nothing that is compliant. Until everything is finalized and codified we don't even know for sure what the final requirements will be.

It's still roughly 3 years away from being able to be "LIVE" and that might be overly optimistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: R Martin
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
61
Age
61
Location
Denton, TX
@R Martin is spot on. Until the REGS go into effect there is nothing that is compliant. Until everything is finalized and codified we don't even know for sure what the final requirements will be.

It's still roughly 3 years away from being able to be "LIVE" and that might be overly optimistic.
Is that the latest word Al?
 

BigAl07

Administrator
Staff Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
6,944
Reaction score
5,689
Age
49
Location
Western North Carolina
Is that the latest word Al?
It was as of April/May of this year. The outside firm is going through the submissions trying to get them into sensible buckets. Then they will be processed and who knows what will come down the pipes from that.

The way NPRM goes... if they have to make several "significant" revisions each one could significantly delay the final ruling because each one gets a Comment Period followed by a Review Period. Who knows . . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: R Martin

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
138,992
Messages
1,434,599
Members
100,929
Latest member
NicholasOliv