New proposed FAA rule requiring remote identification for SUAVs over .55 lbs

[mshagg]

MikeT Agreed! It could have been much worse. All of the comments sent in during the "comment period" along with AMA's efforts, made a difference for sure.

This is what they want people to believe. The initial rules were clearly an ambit claim given the technology to achieve what they were proposing essentially doesn't exist. So they walk out the rules they actually want now and call it a compromise.

Governments bought and paid for by corporate interests. Business as usual really (not a swipe at my American brethren by the way. Our govt is paid for by mining interests, at least commercial drone operations are innovative lol).

[Wild Man]

Have you all forgotten that, WE THE PEOPLE can protest and maybe petition this INSANITY. I for one do not agree on any of this CRAP yes, that is what I said Gov BS that has gone overboard with to many rules and regulations. We fly in class G airspace, and have been flying safely for over 40 years and I am an AMA INTRO Pilot and have had the Intro Pilot Classification from the beginning. I can see the end of a great Hobby disappearing fast. As for right now until it is final I will fly where and when I want SAFELY of coarse

[Gringotuerto]

Don't know about you guys, but I think the police have far better things to do with their time!

Grossman56

True. I worked on Remote ID for a while, including a UAS IPP project. One police department was very active in this, using drones for checking out a situation before officers arrived. I asked them if they would want to participate in testing broadcast ID range, since I thought they would be key stakeholders. They said - not really. The reason was, a "report of nuisance drone" was not going to make it on their priority list for spending resources even on the slowest of days. Nobody hurt, nobody in danger...not a priority.

[Twowingtj]

MikeT Agreed! It could have been much worse. All of the comments sent in during the "comment period" along with AMA's efforts, made a difference for sure.

[MikeT]

LOL. Bottom line here is this could have been much worse.

Mike

[Beeg]

I’m thinking of setting up some barrage balloons on my property in case Jeff Bezos tries to violate my airspace..

[Narly]

Dear FAA, AMA, FCC, BATF, etc: I hereby give notice that the airspace over my private property (40 acres) from ground level to 400' AGL is My Airspace and Not National Airspace.
So Bleep Bleep Bleepers !!

[skillett]

Don't know about you guys, but I think the police have far better things to do with their time!

Grossman56

Agree 100 percent with you. But, the fact remains that we are the one being punished for doing it correctly and to the law. Those making the laws should have to come out of their airconditioned office and troll the airports in the heat, rain, snow, and mosquitoes. They're making the rules so let them enforce.

[fredmdbud]

That sure sounds like fingerpointing to
me.

[MikeT]

If there is any finger-pointing to be done, it should be at companies like Amazon looking to use commercial drones. They were hell-bent on no exceptions for recreational planes/drones - in their view, everyone should be subject to the same rules and requirements. And they got it. And they were quite celebratory about it.

Who's pointing fingers? It it what it is. I think we're years away from this becoming a issue. I wish the AMA would have put more effort into protecting Sec.336 over courting the "droners". I'm more concerned about the remote ID over commercial drone delivery.

Mike

[fredmdbud]

If there is any finger-pointing to be done, it should be at companies like Amazon looking to use commercial drones. They were hell-bent on no exceptions for recreational planes/drones - in their view, everyone should be subject to the same rules and requirements. And they got it. And they were quite celebratory about it.

[Valkpilot]

Don't know about you guys, but I think the police have far better things to do with their time!

Grossman56

That is of course those departments that haven't been "defunded".

[MikeT]

Ok, the point was that there is money to be had and that is going to be the end result, Where there is money involved it will happen.

Ron

If the whole plan was a "money grab" than why did they not put that into effect on day one? The money ( if there's actually any too be made) will be had from the commercial end not the recreational user. Private aviation N numbers are still only 5 bucks ( if you want a "special number" 10 bucks) seems like they go after them also for the money.
Mike

[RRHandy]

Ok, the point was that there is money to be had and that is going to be the end result, Where there is money involved it will happen.

Ron

[MikeT]

Under the current reg. But the last proposal there is the provision for just what I stated, that is one of the reasons I wrote a very long letter in response when it was opened for the 50,000 letters we wrote against it.

Ron

I'm more concerned about right now than what might be. We're talking years before we know anything on what the final rule may be.

Mike

[RRHandy]

Under the current reg. But the last proposal there is the provision for just what I stated, that is one of the reasons I wrote a very long letter in response when it was opened for the 50,000 letters we wrote against it.

Ron

[MikeT]

And to add to what you said, they see the money in the per plane registry at $5., right now I'm at 81 x 5 = 405 x every 5 years x the 250,000 of us.

Unless it's being flown under part 107 it's still only 5 bucks for recreational;l pilots. Recreational flyers your registering yourself not each air-frame.

Mike

[MikeT]

Don't know about you guys, but I think the police have far better things to do with their time!

Grossman56

Ya think?
Mike

[RRHandy]

And that was how it was here. But in America, bureaucrats aren't happy unless they can control EVERYTHING in their purview. So what the FAA did was put a provision in a prime funding bill that did away with it. Since there were things that were needed in the bill, and there are so many few of us in relation to the people that the REST of the bill would help, the RC Aviation community got thrown under the bus.

And to add to what you said, they see the money in the per plane registry at $5., right now I'm at 81 x 5 = 405 x every 5 years x the 250,000 of us.

[Valkpilot]

The Canadian Federal Minister of Transport granted exemption in 2018 for "aircraft modelers" to carry on in the same fashion they have for 70 years; creating rules and safety requirements for flying RC planes and creating flying clubs and "self governance" so as to remove the public from harm's way and to enjoy the hobby as was intended. Isn't that enough!? The FAA and the US Feds need realizing that not everyone is guilty of "irresponsible drone operation" that has caused this menusha in the first place...They understand the concept of "other people"...

And that was how it was here. But in America, bureaucrats aren't happy unless they can control EVERYTHING in their purview. So what the FAA did was put a provision in a prime funding bill that did away with it. Since there were things that were needed in the bill, and there are so many few of us in relation to the people that the REST of the bill would help, the RC Aviation community got thrown under the bus.