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

[fredmdbud]

That's fine. As soon as it picks up passengers, it becomes a "manned" aircraft and needs to operate in the NAS as such (of course, that's only my opinion). And in reality, would you fly in a aircraft without a human pilot on board at the controls?

Sean

I think the relevance to RC flying is that depending on how high this flies, it could well encounter a model plane or drone. Having passengers on board makes it more of a concern to the FAA.

[Valkpilot]

The FAA can make all the rules it wants, but without point-of-sale identification, licencing, and registration, there will still be some yahoo that trudges down to their local Walmart, or goes on-line to Amazon, picks up a multi-rotor they like, and is in the wrong place at the wrong time. And that's not counting folks who kluge up something like the guys at Flite Test. It's just like guns, except we don't have a Constitutional Amendment to protect us.

[CVA59]

I agree Valkpilot............and of course, I am NOT in favor of any of this garbage. However, if they want to corral all the "New" sales, it is very simple. Force ALL the manufacturers of TX's & Rx's to comply or they cannot sell here in the US. Force them all to install the "Remote ID chip-set" in all new transmitters and receivers. Once purchased, the owner would have to go to the FAA website and register all the TX's & Rx's, once they were registered they would receive a code via text or email that has to be entered into the receiver (via the Tx) as part of the binding process. This would then activate the Rx and give the IDIOTS at the FAA complete control over monitoring our movements/flights. There would no longer be a question as to who is flying when or where. Works the same as a car registration, run the license plate number and it gives all the vehicle owners details.

However, the issue for the FAA still remains:
#1 What about all the guys using older equipment that refuse to comply (like me).
#2 To what extent are the rules enforceable from a manpower standpoint.

I seriously doubt the FAA has the resources to go after everyone who is violation. I got it, we'll call them the "FAA Police", LOL. Forget the local police, being a retired police officer, I can tell you first hand, most city officers do not have the time nor desire to go after something as unimportant as a"rogue flyer". The county guys could possibly go after a few here and there. When I was a Deputy Sheriff, I had a lot more time than i did when I was working as a City Officer. So, the FAA is going to be mostly "SOL" on this in one way or another as best I can tell. The only way I can see the FAA controlling us to any extent with these rules is to do it through the sales of new R/C equipment. The FAA cannot even control the manned aircraft pilots, yet, they're under the delusion that they think they will be able to enforce and even round up some of us non-conforming / rogue pilots? Haha, that's funny!

[Valkpilot]

I agree Valkpilot............and of course, I am NOT in favor of any of this garbage. However, if they want to corral all the "New" sales, it is very simple. Force ALL the manufacturers of TX's & Rx's to comply or they cannot sell here in the US. Force them all to install the "Remote ID chip-set" in all new transmitters and receivers. Once purchased, the owner would have to go to the FAA website and register all the TX's & Rx's, once they were registered they would receive a code via text or email that has to be entered into the receiver (via the Tx) as part of the binding process. This would then activate the Rx and give the IDIOTS at the FAA complete control over monitoring our movements/flights. There would no longer be a question as to who is flying when or where. Works the same as a car registration, run the license plate number and it gives all the vehicle owners details.

However, the issue for the FAA still remains:
#1 What about all the guys using older equipment that refuse to comply (like me).
#2 To what extent are the rules enforceable from a manpower standpoint.

I seriously doubt the FAA has the resources to go after everyone who is violation. I got it, we'll call them the "FAA Police", LOL. Forget the local police, being a retired police officer, I can tell you first hand, most city officers do not have the time nor desire to go after something as unimportant as a"rogue flyer". The county guys could possibly go after a few here and there. When I was a Deputy Sheriff, I had a lot more time than i did when I was working as a City Officer. So, the FAA is going to be mostly "SOL" on this in one way or another as best I can tell. The only way I can see the FAA controlling us to any extent with these rules is to do it through the sales of new R/C equipment. The FAA cannot even control the manned aircraft pilots, yet, they're under the delusion that they think they will be able to enforce and even round up some of us non-conforming / rogue pilots? Haha, that's funny!

Have you ever bought an electronic item, a computer program, or even some clothes like a pack of underwear and noticed this thing on the package that looked like calligraphy made out of tin foil? That's an RF chip. What would be the easiest way to implement this ID system would be to sell these with a serial number embedded in it. You buy one of these, go on to the FAA website, and add the number to your account, and just stick it on the outside of your plane , heli, or multi. But that's not truly the aim of the FAA. The exemption was a thorn in the side and a personal affront to the bureaucrats that run such organizations. Since it hindered their "empire building", once it was done away with, they will try to make it all soo difficult, that it will kill the hobby altogether. It's like how the FCC forced everybody to buy new TVs by introducing digital broadcast. It gave the FCC more channels to "sell" and I'm sure somebody got some cheddar from the TV manufacturers,
but did it actually improve the quality of the product? Or an even better comparison would be Pot. Prior to the laws actually outlawing it, it was legal to buy, grow, and sell Pot IF you had the tax stamp. The only problem was the ATF never had them printed.

[CVA59]

Have you ever bought an electronic item, a computer program, or even some clothes like a pack of underwear and noticed this thing on the package that looked like calligraphy made out of tin foil? That's an RF chip. What would be the easiest way to implement this ID system would be to sell these with a serial number embedded in it. You buy one of these, go on to the FAA website, and add the number to your account, and just stick it on the outside of your plane , heli, or multi. But that's not truly the aim of the FAA. The exemption was a thorn in the side and a personal affront to the bureaucrats that run such organizations. Since it hindered their "empire building", once it was done away with, they will try to make it all soo difficult, that it will kill the hobby altogether. It's like how the FCC forced everybody to buy new TVs by introducing digital broadcast. It gave the FCC more channels to "sell" and I'm sure somebody got some cheddar from the TV manufacturers,
but did it actually improve the quality of the product? Or an even better comparison would be Pot. Prior to the laws actually outlawing it, it was legal to buy, grow, and sell Pot IF you had the tax stamp. The only problem was the ATF never had them printed.

AGREED!!!

Same similar thing with the with cell phone industry. No longer produce the old analog phones anymore. Now (for the most part) you are forced to buy the "smartphones". They GOTCHA!

[rpellicciotti]

DRONES, People, or quads if you like, read the wording and you will see that this is for non AMA club fields. They are trying to get control of the rogue fliers and not us.

Not correct. If you read it carefully, it says that existing, fixed flying fields (rc club fields) MAY be granted a waiver. It goes further saying that waivers will only be granted for a 12 month period. After that, NO NEW WAIVERS WILL BE GRANTED. So, if you lose your field and have to move, you are out of business.

One thing that is very important: The FAA doesn't read blogs or forums like this. Commenting here or complaining has zero impact on the problem. You must go to the NPRM comment web site and put your comments and complaints in there.

[CVA59]

One thing that is very important: The FAA doesn't read blogs or forums like this. Commenting here or complaining has zero impact on the problem. You must go to the NPRM comment web site and put your comments and complaints in there.

Correct. However, this is a forum where everyone has the right to post their comments and opinions. "Commenting or complaining" on here still helps to create ideas, thoughts, etc for some. After deliberating over the the comments on here, one can become better educated so that when they do write their letters to the FAA, it will be more effective. One of the best ways for us all you build a case against the FAA is for us all to share our thoughts and comments. I don't think anyone on here believes that the comments expressed on here would have ever been read by the FAA.

[MikeT]

Not correct. If you read it carefully, it says that existing, fixed flying fields (rc club fields) MAY be granted a waiver. It goes further saying that waivers will only be granted for a 12 month period. After that, NO NEW WAIVERS WILL BE GRANTED. So, if you lose your field and have to move, you are out of business.

One thing that is very important: The FAA doesn't read blogs or forums like this. Commenting here or complaining has zero impact on the problem. You must go to the NPRM comment web site and put your comments and complaints in there.

I posted my comments and same to my representatives. Sitting on your hands is never a good thing.
Mike

[Valkpilot]

Sent my comments to the site listed by the AMA.

[F22trainer]

https://aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/january/09/faa-gets-early-earful-on-drone-id

[rpellicciotti]

Correct. However, this is a forum where everyone has the right to post their comments and opinions. "Commenting or complaining" on here still helps to create ideas, thoughts, etc for some. After deliberating over the the comments on here, one can become better educated so that when they do write their letters to the FAA, it will be more effective. One of the best ways for us all you build a case against the FAA is for us all to share our thoughts and comments. I don't think anyone on here believes that the comments expressed on here would have ever been read by the FAA.

Im all for exchange of ideas and encouraging one another. I just wanted to emphasize the importance to entering a comment on the NPRM website. I have had a lot of experience working with the FAA and have testified at public hearings in Washington. What a lot of people don't understand is that even though the AMA has a couple of hundred thousand members, when FAA receives a comment from AMA, they count it as ONE response. It is very important for people to pile on.

[CVA59]

Im all for exchange of ideas and encouraging one another. I just wanted to emphasize the importance to entering a comment on the NPRM website. I have had a lot of experience working with the FAA and have testified at public hearings in Washington. What a lot of people don't understand is that even though the AMA has a couple of hundred thousand members, when FAA receives a comment from AMA, they count it as ONE response. It is very important for people to pile on.

No worries and yes sir, I agree totally.

[Pandora1]

Why have the recreational airplane pilots and rc airplane owners been thrown into the same bucket as the real problem, the "DRONE",( the multi prop, no wing (s), box, often flown carelessly or deliberately into dangerous and/or invasive situations with little care or concern.) Before anyone has stroke, I do realise many real drone pilots do not fly that way. But, I surmise that, many must be or we would not be facing this problem.
Are the retailers and manufactures doing anything to assist their customers? If so, where? I see very little comment about these 'Proposed' FAA changes to destroy or greatly endanger our hobby. The only thing I've seen are the comments at the bottom of their ads to "make sure to fly in accordance with the rules".
The January 13, 2020 edict has come and here we are faced with becoming 'Tested, paying' pilots of hobby, toy airplanes. Even a Type 61 certified PPL pilot will have to take an additional test to fly RC.
In addition to testing, pilots will have pay a fee to get a number to take the test, pay a registration fee for EACH aircraft owned, and flown (currently I have about 25) really?)
My home built kits or ARF don't have serial numbers. Can I start with #1? Will each require its own transponder, which will probably weigh more than the plane?

[mshagg]

Are the retailers and manufactures doing anything to assist their customers? If so, where? I see very little comment about these 'Proposed' FAA changes to destroy or greatly endanger our hobby. The only thing I've seen are the comments at the bottom of their ads to "make sure to fly in accordance with the rules".

Arguably the most revolutionary company in the space - for better or for worse - is DJI. Here's their take on it:

https://content.dji.com/we-strongly-...DB1v&pm=custom

- They support remote ID conceptually (unsurprising given many of their products have the capability already)
- They dont support the mode of remote ID as proposed

[MikeT]

Flite Test and Horizon are involved. There's talk of Flite Test becoming a CBO. I'm more concerned about the hobbyist getting involved only 7020 comments to date..

Mike

[OV10]

Flite Test and Horizon are involved. There's talk of Flite Test becoming a CBO. I'm more concerned about the hobbyist getting involved only 7020 comments to date..

Mike

I hear ya on having a concern about the "involved" but the sad reality of it is that is the way a significant number of people behave.
Whether it is this topic or any other including politics. People that don't do their civic duty to vote will be the first "complainers" about the outcomes.
But I can also understand were folks get exasperated time and time again of feeling the effects of "punish the many for the acts of few" and nothing can be done about.

My concern about the exasperation is that it is now more a general sense of apathy which seems to be a standard for the majorities

[Valkpilot]

I hear ya on having a concern about the "involved" but the sad reality of it is that is the way a significant number of people behave.
Whether it is this topic or any other including politics. People that don't do their civic duty to vote will be the first "complainers" about the outcomes.
But I can also understand were folks get exasperated time and time again of feeling the effects of "punish the many for the acts of few" and nothing can be done about.

My concern about the exasperation is that it is now more a general sense of apathy which seems to be a standard for the majorities

The thing is this isn't a LEGISLATIVE issue, where one's elected officials put forth a law and it goes through Congress. It's what people call the "shadow government", where certain entities go about making rules with little or no government oversight. What REALLY needs to happen is all those "Mom and Pop" hobby shops on the AMA list need to band together the way vape shops did when the vaping ban movement threatened to shut them down. Unfortunately, most of them probably have RC aircraft as a minor part of their business, and are diversified enough to take the hit if the rules are approved. Why do you think MRC has started offering tanks and bulldozers.

[Valkpilot]

So let me get this straight. This new rule only apples to planes 250 grams or more. So if it's less than that, it doesn't apply.

[MikeT]

So let me get this straight. This new rule only apples to planes 250 grams or more. So if it's less than that, it doesn't apply.

Right. Anything that fly's ( everything is a drone to them ) and weighs more than that is subject to regulation. Control line and indoor is exempt.

Mike

[OV10]

So let me get this straight. This new rule only apples to planes 250 grams or more. So if it's less than that, it doesn't apply.

If it is approx. 1/2 lb / 8 oz or less then it will be exempt. WOW...…………… talk about the less than 1%