What this is really about (my opinion)

Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
28
Reaction score
8
Age
64
I got this email from Skyward today, who was excited about the future of 5G and drones.

The new drone rules are about money and commercial use of autonomous drones. DJI is all in on it, which is why they supported this and I believe they are going to eventually abandon consumers. How many consumers are going to pay enough to add remote id to their existing or future drones. It's not gonna be free. Prices going up will push the small operators out of the business, which is what the big guys want...0-400 feet.

Here's one quote:
"There’s just one problem. Without a system for universal air traffic management – which would allow air traffic controllers and law enforcement to understand where drones are flying and for what purpose – utilities, telecommunications companies, engineering firms, and freight carriers can’t safely deploy autonomous drones, even if they are connected to 5G.
Last September, I testified before the House Subcommittee on Aviation to help our representatives understand the technical and regulatory updates we need to realize the transformational power of drones. Part of the solution is a requirement for something called remote identification – a “digital license plate” for drones – whether flown for fun or commercially. Remote ID for drones would allow air traffic regulators and law enforcement to identify the pilot or operator of a drone that isn’t complying with regulations.
As a concept, remote ID is like the actual license plates that law enforcement use to identify the owner of a motor vehicle, but it’s most similar to the IP addresses that identify us when we connect to the Internet.
In a Washington Post op-ed last summer, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote, “Without congressional action, the U.S. government will remain unable to identify, track and mitigate weaponized or dangerous drones.”
Congress agreed, and in January the FAA began the process of creating a pilot program with industry partners to test remote ID technologies. The FAA expects to announce remote ID rules later this year."

Homeland security even made it about making the sky safe from the bad guys, even though like guns, only the law-abiding of us will follow the laws....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Basspig
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
258
Reaction score
145
Age
69
Anyone have any idea of the cost of this remote ID? Will it add $10,$50 or $100 to the price of a $1000 drone or does it make that $1000 drone a $2000 drone?
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
28
Reaction score
8
Age
64
Anyone have any idea of the cost of this remote ID? Will it add $10,$50 or $100 to the price of a $1000 drone or does it make that $1000 drone a $2000 drone?
Well, it has to communicate with the system and Verison is pushing hard to make it 5G so I would guess (just a guess) that it would be, at a minimum, an inexpensive cell phone (say $100), then fees to register it with whatever central system they use and a monthly fee $20? I have no inside information, that's only a guess. My guess would be at least $390 per drone for the first year and $240 each year after that...again, only a guess. That's chump change though, for a larger commercial operator. I'm really hoping I'm wrong and simply misreading it, but the money has the political power.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
784
Well, it has to communicate with the system and Verison is pushing hard to make it 5G so I would guess (just a guess) that it would be, at a minimum, an inexpensive cell phone (say $100), then fees to register it with whatever central system they use and a monthly fee $20? I have no inside information, that's only a guess. My guess would be at least $390 per drone for the first year and $240 each year after that...again, only a guess. That's chump change though, for a larger commercial operator. I'm really hoping I'm wrong and simply misreading it, but the money has the political power.
What if there is no cell service?
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
887
Location
Adirondacks, NY, USA
So I'm an evil terrorist about to bomb x building. Does the FAA actually think I will add a remote ID to my drone, so you know I'm on my way to bomb you? I wonder how dumb are these people?
When drones are outlawed, only outlaws will have drones. ;)
 

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
So I'm an evil terrorist about to bomb x building. Does the FAA actually think I will add a remote ID to my drone, so you know I'm on my way to bomb you? I wonder how dumb are these people?

Not as dumb as your comment. Presumably you also think that ADS-B, for example, is purely to catch terrorists?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TheKestrel
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
784
Not as dumb as your comment. Presumably you also think that ADS-B, for example. is purely to catch terrorists?
Must be a fetish of yours to belittle other peoples comments. I am not against the remote IDs. The point is that if you are going to break the law in any way or form, why would you be dumb enough to include the id to be identified. In the end, the government will have to invest in a huge infrastructure to track every single drone out flying and identify those without the remote id as a threat or a drone that simply doesn't fit into the regulations (assuming that the remote id will be required for .55lbs and above).
 

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
Must be a fetish of yours to belittle other peoples comments. I am not against the remote IDs. The point is that if you are going to break the law in any way or form, why would you be dumb enough to include the id to be identified. In the end, the government will have to invest in a huge infrastructure to track every single drone out flying and identify those without the remote id as a threat or a drone that simply doesn't fit into the regulations (assuming that the remote id will be required for .55lbs and above).

It goes with the territory if you post such ridiculous comments. And either you still haven't figured it out or now you are just trolling. These requirements are not just to prevent deliberate law breaking - that argument is the same tired old non sequitur that leads to the conclusion that all laws are pointless because criminals will break them anyway. Why do you think that ADS-B will soon be a requirement? Why do you think cars are required to have license plates?

And yes - if the lower airspace becomes filled with unmanned aircraft then it will take a large investment to put in place some kind of tracking and ID system that deconflicts them with each other and manned aircraft.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
7,844
Reaction score
3,114
Location
Australia
What if there is no cell service?
5G is only one option. You can have ADS-B in a 50gm package.

2318C9E0-FE3F-4188-B83C-D1832381DD46.jpeg

Low power consumption. Wouldn’t be difficult to integrate at the design stage if a sUAV.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
784
It goes with the territory if you post such ridiculous comments. And either you still haven't figured it out or now you are just trolling. These requirements are not just to prevent deliberate law breaking - that argument is the same tired old non sequitur that leads to the conclusion that all laws are pointless because criminals will break them anyway. Why do you think that ADS-B will soon be a requirement? Why do you think cars are required to have license plates?

And yes - if the lower airspace becomes filled with unmanned aircraft then it will take a large investment to put in place some kind of tracking and ID system that deconflicts them with each other and manned aircraft.
I understand where you are coming from. The only part I was arguing is the prevent terrorist approach HS used. I don't have the knowledge and most likely lack the imagination for it, but I don't see how it would help prevent a possible attack. If you do know, please explain it to me, so I don't post ridiculous comments as you said.

My point is, you might find it ridiculous and don't care for it, but there are better ways to going on about it and not just go straight to insulting it.

Edit: I forgot to add. Here is a picture of me that I took, just for you.
TROLL-DOLL.jpg
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
409
Reaction score
246
Age
50
Location
Pennsylvania
Not as dumb as your comment. Presumably you also think that ADS-B, for example. is purely to catch terrorists?

Wow you are definitely pro big government. I wonder what your views are for the 2nd amendment... I only just recently joined this forum and you see you’ve been here a long time so forgive me if I’m wrong....

People can do more damage driving a truck into a crowd of people, then some kid flying a drone at 20’ in his back yard. How is big government going to fix that.

I’ve been flying RC craft over 30 years, haven’t hit 1 manned craft.

Can things go bad? Yes and they do. Manned aircraft crash, sometimes from their own auto pilot systems.

If you over regulate the masses for what the few might do... well kind of makes the land of the free not so free. And the few don’t follow the laws... as a police officer I know!
 

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
I understand where you are coming from. The only part I was arguing is the prevent terrorist approach HS used. I don't have the knowledge and most likely lack the imagination for it, but I don't see how it would help prevent a possible attack. If you do know, please explain it to me, so I don't post ridiculous comments as you said.

My point is, you might find it ridiculous and don't care for it, but there are better ways to going on about it and not just go straight to insulting it.

Edit: I forgot to add. Here is a picture of me that I took, just for you. View attachment 110952

Apologies if my comment seemed harsh, but that complaint is a bit rich coming from someone who posted "I wonder how dumb are these people?". And beyond that it was your obviously absurd assumption that the only reason to track and ID drones is to prevent terrorist attacks. This is an almost perpetual theme on these forums - the assertion that there is no point being able to identify any drone if the terrorists' drones don't have ID. That's an argument for never requiring ID on anyone or anything. And it's only a subset of the even more absurd arguments that specific laws are pointless because criminals just break them anyway. Regular air traffic is a good example - firstly, there are many non-terrorist, safety-related reasons to track air traffic but, in addition, suspect traffic is often ruled out as a thread by identifying and communicating with it. The actual reasons are so obvious and these non sequiturs have been debunked so many times that your photo really is what comes to mind when I read this stuff.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ansia

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
Wow you are definitely pro big government. I wonder what your views are for the 2nd amendment... I only just recently joined this forum and you see you’ve been here a long time so forgive me if I’m wrong....

Welcome to the forum. So you deduced that I'm pro big government because I advocated the benefits of tracking drones in the NAS to deconflict them with other air traffic? Remarkable. As for the 2nd amendment, I don't see the connection to the topic under discussion unless you view drones as weapons and you are worried about them being confiscated. As you know, big government is imminently going to do that, as we have been hearing for the past few decades. You should probably hide all your drones.

People can do more damage driving a truck into a crowd of people, then some kid flying a drone at 20’ in his back yard. How is big government going to fix that.

Thanks for providing such a timely example of what I was just posting about. Are you really arguing that only the most damaging action that you can imagine of should be prohibited? If so then that's a failure of both imagination and logic; I can think of many things worse than driving a truck into a crowd, so we really don't need to be concerned about minor stuff like that, do we?

I’ve been flying RC craft over 30 years, haven’t hit 1 manned craft.

Congratulations. Obviously you should petition to be exempted from all regulation.

Can things go bad? Yes and they do. Manned aircraft crash, sometimes from their own auto pilot systems.

And I'm sure that the relatively low accident rate in aviation has nothing whatsoever to do with extensive regulation of aviation and the aviation industry. Nothing at all. Not possible.

If you over regulate the masses for what the few might do... well kind of makes the land of the free not so free. And the few don’t follow the laws... as a police officer I know!

And there it is - the inevitable ab absurdo conclusion - laws are stupid because only the criminals will break them. Are you really LE?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKestrel
D

Deleted member 29014

Guest
I got this email from Skyward today, who was excited about the future of 5G and drones.

The new drone rules are about money and commercial use of autonomous drones. DJI is all in on it, which is why they supported this and I believe they are going to eventually abandon consumers. How many consumers are going to pay enough to add remote id to their existing or future drones. It's not gonna be free. Prices going up will push the small operators out of the business, which is what the big guys want...0-400 feet.

Here's one quote:
"There’s just one problem. Without a system for universal air traffic management – which would allow air traffic controllers and law enforcement to understand where drones are flying and for what purpose – utilities, telecommunications companies, engineering firms, and freight carriers can’t safely deploy autonomous drones, even if they are connected to 5G.
Last September, I testified before the House Subcommittee on Aviation to help our representatives understand the technical and regulatory updates we need to realize the transformational power of drones. Part of the solution is a requirement for something called remote identification – a “digital license plate” for drones – whether flown for fun or commercially. Remote ID for drones would allow air traffic regulators and law enforcement to identify the pilot or operator of a drone that isn’t complying with regulations.
As a concept, remote ID is like the actual license plates that law enforcement use to identify the owner of a motor vehicle, but it’s most similar to the IP addresses that identify us when we connect to the Internet.
In a Washington Post op-ed last summer, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote, “Without congressional action, the U.S. government will remain unable to identify, track and mitigate weaponized or dangerous drones.”
Congress agreed, and in January the FAA began the process of creating a pilot program with industry partners to test remote ID technologies. The FAA expects to announce remote ID rules later this year."

Homeland security even made it about making the sky safe from the bad guys, even though like guns, only the law-abiding of us will follow the laws....
I do not stay awake at night attempting to read the FAA's crystal ball, too busy growing my business. What happens , happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKestrel
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
784
Apologies if my comment seemed harsh, but that complaint is a bit rich coming from someone who posted "I wonder how dumb are these people?". And beyond that it was your obviously absurd assumption that the only reason to track and ID drones is to prevent terrorist attacks. This is an almost perpetual theme on these forums - the assertion that there is no point being able to identify any drone if the terrorists' drones don't have ID. That's an argument for never requiring ID on anyone or anything. And it's only a subset of the even more absurd arguments that specific laws are pointless because criminals just break them anyway. Regular air traffic is a good example - firstly, there are many non-terrorist, safety-related reasons to track air traffic but, in addition, suspect traffic is often ruled out as a thread by identifying and communicating with it. The actual reasons are so obvious and these non sequiturs have been debunked so many times that your photo really is what comes to mind when I read this stuff.
After re-rereading my post, you are right. I approached my rant the wrong way. It is not my assumption that the only reason for tracking drones is for terrorist attack. Like I said previously, it was the one I chose to comment on, continuing the last line OP stated. I have no argument on the other points, since they seem fair and just. At this point we are speculating on how it will happen. Guess we will have to wait and see what really happens.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
409
Reaction score
246
Age
50
Location
Pennsylvania
I’ve been in law enforcement for almost 29 years. I’m exempted from 107 but took it to see how effective it is... plus I need it for my part time job.

If the police think the law is overbearing, the general public probably should too.

The general drone flying public I see have no idea about the law and I’m supposed to notify the FAA???

I’m not arguing with you, just telling you my opinion. If you like big laws, the more power to you.

What do you do for a living if I might ask?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Basspig
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
258
Reaction score
145
Age
69
Based on what I've read the primary motivation behind developing this ID system is traffic management for commercial use of drone rather than national security or law enforcement. I have to imagine that the system would have to have certain airspace set aside for commercial use only. I'm not sure how that would work and what infringements on the use of airspace by hobbies or those doing commercial work not tied into that system would be put in place. This is definitely a subject anyone flying drones as a hobby or on a small scale commercially needs to keep their eye on.
 

sar104

Dic mihi solum facta, domina.
Premium Pilot
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Los Alamos, NM.
I’ve been in law enforcement for almost 29 years. I’m exempted from 107 but took it to see how effective it is... plus I need it for my part time job.

If the police think the law is overbearing, the general public probably should too.

The general drone flying public I see have no idea about the law and I’m supposed to notify the FAA???

I’m not arguing with you, just telling you my opinion. If you like big laws, the more power to you.

What do you do for a living if I might ask?

I notice that you didn't address a single point that I made in any of my previous posts, and so I'm not going to bother addressing yours. For what it's worth, which is very little on an internet forum, I'm a physicist and a state search and rescue Incident Commander.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NRJ and TheKestrel

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
142,181
Messages
1,461,235
Members
103,963
Latest member
rodinaldo