_"This will then allow many advances including beyond visual line of sight flights and advances in automated flight"_ Sean, do not confuse Remote ID with electronic conspicuity. RID is not going to increase the safety or capabilities of any drone in a way that aids BVLOS and other automated flight capabilities. The FAA themselves have stated that RID is not designed to deconflict the airspace or provide such abilities. It is solely to allow authorities on the ground to determine who is flying a drone.
RID is the first step to UTM in the eyes of the FAA, that is where I think she was coming from. If you can't track the users of the airspace then you have no hope of adding more traffic.
@@Geeksvana Yep, I've repeatedly warned of this "thin end of the wedge" strategy from regulators. 1. Just register, it's only $5 and this will make drone flying safer by holding folk accountable 2. Just fit this Remote ID to your drone and it will make drone flying safer 3. Just connect to our network remote ID UTM so you can pay for each flight to make the skies safer As is heard so often in the drone world -- it's only a matter of time. Remember that the FAA may seem to have abandoned Network Remote ID but they haven't. In the final rule they say that as a result of feedback they won't be requiring network remote ID "at this time" -- and that's only because the tech companies said "no can do -- yet". It's coming and it all started with "just register, it's only $5 and it'll make everyone safer". None so blind... 😞
This is not just the regulators at work here. The bigger manufactures will be on board for remote ID (once it is worked out) as it eliminates smaller competitors without the resources to develop the tech and deters start-ups. This is a repeat of the experience in the motor vehicle market here in the US. Back in the post-war days, the "Big Three" pushed for all manner of regulatory oversight on proof of concept, testing, materials, specification parameters, etc., as a means to deter the smaller car companies from staying in the market. The "Big Three" had access to the DOT regulators that little guys did not. The end result was my parent's generation had a choice of buying a boring ford, a boring GM product or a boring Chrysler product - none of which were efficient, innovative of even all too safe. The story of Tucker automobiles is being repeated in this new industry.
If a deconflict protocol is to be designed. It should use more generic rf modulation for robust demodulation. Only include flight status and registration number. And hopefully interoperate with ads-b.
From what I understand its illegal for me to fly my fpv drone using goggles through the woods on my private property. I have never found anyone interested in being a spotter, besides they cant see it anyway when I am flying. There is no way I would broadcast my location while flying in this area. We have a lot of hunters and I have heard many say they would love to shoot a drone down. Beleive me if they do they will not be caught in this area. Too much happens here and they never find out who did it. This is all about big shots taking air space that hobbiest had first. For years nothing was considered dangerous and we were flying half scale planes with weed eater engines into the clouds. Our field was right beside the airport here.
Same with us here in Marlborough NZ. We used to fly model aeroplanes and helicopters built ourself no safety regs right next to our domestic runway. The world's gone mad now
The problem is the clowns 🤡 that bought quads, not for the love of flying or FPV, but to hover over Mr Smith's teen daughter... and you know that there were just enough of those "Peeping Tom" types, to give the entire hobby a bad rap. Also, the Clowns that fly into strictly controlled airspace... See also the Seahawks game that was interrupted, or look up various incidents happening at airports. These are the idiots to blame for the new regulations, even though we know it won't stop them. 🙄 But they smacked the Feds in the knee, and we got kicked in the Ass in return.
At the end of the day, there STILL hasn't been as fatal accident involving a hobby drone and an aircraft and I'm talking about anywhere, not just here in the US. in spite of this the FAA has continued to impose new rules and regulations. Good luck enforcing them!
Technically not true. In Sept 2013, a 19 year old was flying a radio controlled heli in NY when it, quite literally, took off the top of his head. He was a very talented acrobatic flyer who misjudged and paid the ultimate price. However... Your point is very valid. Jet airliners are designed to take multiple bird strikes from 20 lb geese. My 250g drone isn't going to do anything to it. And that's part of the problem... the FAA is treating a 251g drone the same way they would treat a 55lb drone. That's really dumb. Meanwhile, there's no tracking on the things that ACTUALLY kill people every single day. (Guns & Automobiles.)
@@Dartheomus I agree with your main point. Your first sentence, however, seems to be completely misreading the comment you replied to. Andrew said "an accident involving a hobby drone and an aircraft". You replied "not true" and described as n incident where someone hurt themselves with their own model helicopter. That's not an accident involving an aircraft and a hobby drone. That's someone hurt themselves with their own toy. Just like people hurt their own thumbs with their own hammers every day. Or any other household object people hurt *themselves* with. Still not a danger to aircraft.
@@senseisecurityschool9337 You are correct. I read the first part and missed the second. Either way, we all agree that the risk hobby drones pose is minimal compared to the MASSIVE waste of tax dollars that will be spent tracking them.
The main problem that the FAA seems to forget about is that if someone is intending on breaking the law, they'll do it. regardless of how much more illegal it is. sure, if every drone ever made came with remoteID and every individual who fly drones goes along with the rules, you are only impacting the people who mean well. just about every innovation in FPV has been through open source hardware and firmware, and you can't effectively regulate something this easy to obtain. It's like marijuana. it's a literal plant, and it takes little to no effort to grow, but it's a schedule 1 drug. States are starting to realize how futile their attempts are at controlling the production and distribution of pot because it's not practical. It does more harm than good adding regulations to recreation. it makes criminals out of enthusiasts and attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Sure, there are outliers. dumb freestyle pilots that shouldn't be flying in public places around people, or in controlled airspace. Those types of people are incredibly problematic. but I'd wager that those people are outliers in the statistics of law abiding fpv pilots, and that these problems won't go away, regardless of how much restriction you add.
There will always be law breakers, but the BVLOS is what nearly every drone pilot wants and this is the direct means to have it and be legal. What more do you want? The air space is controlled by the FAA and is getting rapidly more congested - package delivery is starting as well as the exploding growth of drones. Myself, flying GA as well as 107 drones, want to know where other aircraft (be they GA or Drones) are when I am flying.
At first I was totally against RID. However - if they make BVLOS legal as well as prevent a manned aircraft disaster then I want it. Going to be interesting to see how this all pans out. If it turns out like other government ideas 💡 maybe 🤔 I will once again lose hope and not fly as much if at all.
The argument that lawbreakers operate outside the law and therefore the law is useless, but responsible operators self regulate is not persuasive. A law and the consequences of violation is a deterent to those flyers who may fly improperly. BVLOS is not compatible with AMA rules. The requirements of flights at a field is the starting point of AMA rules. There are some exceptions like dynamic slope soaring, high altitude gliders and free flight which often occurs at locations that are not sanctioned fields. BVLOS is a flight style not compatible with AMA rules and should never have been part of the discussion.
@@jeffs7915 these discussions of "why bother making the rules when criminals will break them", often don't address the nuance or "higher-resolution" of the issue at hand. Many things are made illegal not because they're immoral. This is the real point I believe people like myself and @kenkillian make: it's not like we don't think there should be laws against mass murder simply because murderers will always be murdering... just pointing out that the laws against intermediate activities in a chain of events on something relatively benign are obviously going to be ignored by someone who's willing to commit a much more SERIOUS crime. One reason some people fail to understand the silliness of gun regulations. Many people believe that by restricting firearms operations with regulations, that will reduce murder rates. For example, we all agree murder should be outlawed and is a very serious crime. Therefore, if a person is willing to murder someone; then that same person will not think twice about committing a much less serious "crime"; by taking a gun into a "gun free zone" where it is illegal. No mass shooter, plans to shoot up a school and then notices that the school has a no-gun-zone decal on the door, and turns around and goes home--in fact it's one reason why "no-gun-zones" are preferred targets--no one there to shoot back. A person wanting to use drones to drop bombs on civilians will not be worried about breaking the law regarding RID. In fact, once again, it will benefit their objective to NOT use RID, and any "fear" of being caught not using RID is dwarfed by any fear they may be caught for blowing up a bunch of people.
US citizen. I have believed that non-compliance will prevail. I have said that someday someone will be able to TURN OFF Geo-fencing for DJI drones. I recently found out there a company doing just that. I am fairly new to this hobby and I started with an Air 2 and have recently moved to an Air 2s, I also have a Mini 2. To me this is the classic "head in the sand" approach to this. When flying I have been approached many time by people who have questions about drones and I stop and bring the drone close to them and land and answer their questions and they always feel better, I have shown them what's seen from the drone, they were curious and now these people are pro-drone people. But I do believe that non-compliance will be trend going forward
Excellent work Michael! Education of the public is always best coming from a drone operator! Keep up the good work and representing our shared surname...
@@gioman116 OK good to know. I have an Air 2s and a Mini 2 was considering using them to turn off the geo-fencing. Honestly how does it work for you and was it complicated to install. Then what about the updates that come along? I think its great just don't want to mess the birds up
@@miichaelhickey very easy to install & it's simply a NFZ certificate that's on the drone so you never have to worry about it also I just ignore the drone update pop up & make sure you have in the app settings that auto download updates is turn OFF
I have emailed the FAA, in their email responses their wording showed that they’re aware about the lack of compliance that will be happening. I said they should’ve listened to users in the community and they stated that they had a comment section with 50,000 comments which is the most an FAA regulation has ever had. From their wording we as pilots would only need one module if we are not flying part 107 and it could be swapped between drones and I explained to them how that would be next to impossible to implement because each drone has different stack capabilities and that were also increasing risk by affecting flight characteristics of the quad depending on the size of the module. They are well are of the amount that will be non compliant, and most of us have built up a relationship with our local PD departments and we have already discussed with them and they won’t be enforcing it or checking for compliance unless an issue arises. Very poorly done imo, because I know I won’t be complying 🤷🏼♂️ unless it’s for part 107.
One thing that isn't being addressed is the separation of the rules from the hardware. The FAA makes the rules and the requirements as well as sets the deadlines. Then, they wash their hands. It's up to the market to "fix" its problem by that deadline. Well, whoop dee doo. Now we're at the mercy of private industry to create the solution, market it and charge us anything they wish because they can BECAUSE it's a requirement. Seems like a solution that many will not accept nor partake in. What happens when only one manufacturer comes to market? The only one so far has a $300 module. That's more than many new drones cost. I say not until there are sufficient and affordable options that are on the market will I consider complying.
All too often government enact laws in a knee jerk reaction. They want to be perceived as "doing something". Unfortunately all too often these laws become draconian and keep people who would use the technology responsibly, from even attempting to use it at all. On the other hand it does nothing to prevent the people who misuse the technology. Especially with those that specifcally intend to use it nefariously.
Non-compliance is already a casual everyday thing. I bought my drone at least 6 years ago. I did my duty by taking the non-commercial classes, registering my drone and using the "before you fly" app to know if I'm OK where I am and how high I can go. But, I'll be damned if I'm going to spend another $300 to comply with something that is useless except for bean counters. Show me the need for this regulation. Show me all the problems that this solves (not the potential problems, but the real-world ones). And before you go into airports, they already have radar and can monitor the skies. I can't even fly my drone where I live to look at my house's roof for damage after a storm. WHY??? No airplane is going to be flying 60 feet in and around the trees where I live. It's stupid and just unnecessary regulations. A simple rule of "you can fly anywhere at any height within 100 feet of any object or 75 feet over the topmost point" Not even helicopters fly that close or low - (I have a heli pilot's license so know this). No aircraft will be in danger if they use their normal avoidance rules for objects.
They can't find all the flyers who don't comply. I'm nervous about who will be made an example of. When I'm flying, normally it's pretty easy for anyone who hears my drone to see me, since I don't fly far. So finding the pilot is generally pretty easy, but those who fly far, won't tend to comply anyway, so really, RID will just make more problems for anyone who complies, since more people can potentially find the pilot, rather than just a passer by. Very detailed info. Thanks, Sean.
Put simply, non compliance, and a lack of enforcement will kill RID. Where I live, the only LEO we have is our local sheriff's, and he has already stated that we have much bigger problems than" enforcing the federal lunacy of tracking down drone pilots". His office will not be dedicating any resources for these purposes... As a recreational pilot, the faa can put those regs where the sun don't shine.
That and the guys like me just waiting for a protocol to be released so we can make spoofers. Gonna be hard to find someone out of the million other drones that are being broadcast but don’t really exist.
@@glidesfpv Sounds promising. Not only would spoofing cover you if you want to comply (for some unknown reason) but don't want to add a £150 module to your quad but you could even spoof your location miles away so people don't pester you even if you aren't complying.. On top of that, if spoofing becomes common place then it undermines RID, even in law. Which makes it an irrelevance.
@@WitchidWitchid I am a retired cop and I don’t know a single one who would not laugh at this. Either RID will help manned aircraft see drones or it is just a big brother tactic.
Don't confuse Remote ID, a 'safety' measure, with a security function - any less-then-well-intentioned individual who wishes to utilize a drone to conduct some end goal will EITHER not use Remote ID, transmit falsified Remote ID info, or use legit Remote ID data to conduct their behavior... if a terrorist is willing to commit murder, risking prison time or worse, do you think they care about an FAA fine? Criminals either remove their license plates or use a stolen car to commit crimes - somewhat narcissistic of the FAA to think they've outwitted existing human behaviors...
It has nothing to do with public safety or crime prevention, and everything to do with making the skies safe and clear for the smooth rollout of Amazon and others' commercial delivery UAVs.
@@AD-lr2ww How can you say it has nothing to do with Public Safety, then say it's meant to keep the skies safe? The FAA provides the following answer to the question of why do we need Remote ID, "Remote ID helps the FAA, law enforcement, and other federal agencies find the control station when a drone appears to be flying in an unsafe manner or where it is not allowed to fly."... and you were saying? If it has NOTHING to do with public safety or crime prevention, then only require Remote ID compliance from individuals or organizations that seek to conduct BVLOS or more complex operations, period.
@@J4nkyFPV I'm just giving my opinion. Note for whom I stated it makes the skies safe. It wasn't the public. It's ok you don't have to agree with my opinion.
I remember when I was a kid in the 70 's ,my dad bought a cb for the van, and said "" the FCC says we all have to get a ham license to talk on the cb, or face fines "" Nobody did , and you could buy cb's everywhere. The FCC couldn't enforce it, and eventually abandon that rule. Actually I don't think it was abandon, they just conceded there would be no enforcement of fines. R-id will fail
I remember cb radios. The FCC tried to control it. They were able to when cb we're few but once it became popular they gave up. People did not comply and they just gave up. The faa will give up if people will not comply. My goodness this is a hobby.
You posted the question of the FAA educating the public about RID and the regulations. I only found out about RID during my research into which drone to buy. Had I not been performing this research, I would not be aware of it’s existence. I live in the US, in Virginia. Only about two hours away from Washington, DC.
couldn't have said it better myself you have to look to be able to see anything abt remote id, i feel sorry for the parents buying their kids dji's and 5'inchers just to learn they basically wasted that money due to having to give up the safety of their child to being tracked, or spend another $250 on a remote id unit, its legit like they do with sex offenders soon well all have to go door to door and tell everyone we own a drone lmao shits ridiculous.
One thing I want to know, why aren't they talking about Remote ID for bicycles? Why is it that people need to know everything about me when I fly my planes, but when I get on my bike I can be just a face in the crowd?
@@chris2790 I an not on about remote ID, if your drone has a camera, you meed to register it with CAA and pay £9, you also need to pass a test and you get two numbers, one you fit on your drone and one you keep with you, as for FRZ, keep off there land, in some cases you need you keep a distance from there land, if you wanted to fly near, your best thing would to had call them up and just say you will not be fly over and just like to inform them where you would be, CAA contrail the aur space as for FRZ it would depend and would need checking, if they had a helly pad I would be more, this guy is a ass, again would had been funny if they checked if the drone was registered, again camera on drone should be registered, not thet I agree with the BS paying and rules like spotter when flying fpv as everyone is not following that, but if your going to do whet this guy did, keep to the law and if he is registered and did go up 400ft and back down he did not brake any rules along as he did not brake the one for FRM
exactly, rules already exist to keep drones below 400ft, and aircraft above 500ft in most cases. ID should only apply to certain commercial drone ops, and for those operating above 400ft.
Just look at the driving on any freeway, here, in the Los Angeles area -- it's easy to see non-compliance will be the norm. Often seems forgotten that consent of the governed is of critical importance.
I hate the fact that this would require you to log on to the internet before starting the drone. Also hate that the map is available to the Public. I will not upgrade my drones with Remote I.D.
I have been building and flying all types of model aircraft since I was a child and I discovered "control line". Later on I got into RC planes and helicopters. Now Uncle Sam is telling me I had better make sure my models can be tracked and they must be retrofitted so they can tell the world where I am. Sorry bit its not gonna happen here. No way am I going to ground my planes, helicopters, and drones until I put a.spy.system on them to spy on me. What comes next? Are they going to tell me I need a commercial pilots licenae with multiengine ratings, IFR ratings, and 1000 hours of flight time logged just to fly a balsa wood plane rhat I have flown without incident since I was a child.
Just as they have done with GA. They don’t want to have to work on issues that will not get them hired by big corporations in the end. What’s amazing is why the RC community has not tried to work with the EAA or even the gun rights groups or other groups who getting the regular treatment where rules which affect honest people are created and enforced on them while little is actually done about truly dangerous people even when caught.
I have received nothing from the FAA. I wanted to return to the rc aircraft hobby but happened upon something about regulation. Only after my curiosity lead me to look at the regs did I see the RID module req for my 10-20yr old airplanes!!! Flying on private farmlands 20+ miles from the nearest airport I am req to have a transponder now? Last update I’ve seen doesn’t req part 103 ultralights to have ANYTHING but my 5lb balsa airplane does. Furthermore I haven’t found modules to buy and there is less than a year until the deadline date.
Thank you for your perspective on this important topic. I think you’ve raised some very valid challenges in front of the FAA. I agree 100% that my personal safety is my biggest concern and haven’t seen much if any campaign by the FAA to help educate the general public. One thing that has happened in the US in recent years is more drone operators arming themselves. It’s an unfortunate reality but a resolve that many pilots have taken. There’s a lot of work ahead by the industry and regulators to bring this whole idea of remote ID in place by the September 2023 deadline.
I for one will proudly announce that I have NO intention to "comply" given it's current "status". I MAY comply, if they agree to making this "info" ONLY available to "authorities"... But yeah, in this current "state", I have ZERO intent to comply!
Nice video, quick question, they mention the need for Remote id, one of the reasons is because of possible use for nefarious reasons. The elephant in the room is, why does the FAA think the nefarious actors wouldn't build their own, or simply find a quick way to disable the remote ID. We go back to people who break the law, are NOT going to use remote id.
My take on drone regulation is they understand the potential tactical advantages to public drone use. But that ship has sailed and they can never put it back. Look at the USA sending consumer drones to the Ukraine with a wink and a nod then TH-cam triumphantly posting improvised anti personnel uses. Yeah, this is like gun control and it's not ever going to be prevented.
Remote ID might be a good idea, that is showing the location of the drone, it's height, speed and direction of travel. The take off location and the location of the operator should be restricted and only available to authorities
Completely agree. Seems so simple doesn't it? Only allow law enforcement etc to see the main data and I think a lot more people would get on board. Thanks for your comment.
@@Geeksvana I still don't see the point. Law abiding citizens don't need to tattle on their own location because they're not breaking the law, and malicious parties aren't going to tell you their location. It's a pointless system.
True,location of take off an pilot,by public an of law officials, puts drone pilots of all ages age security risks an confirmation an could cost someone's life they some of these crazy Karen's act an what not an could care less if they hurt anyone over a drone,especially if they're not hurting anyone or being a peeping tom or doing anything stupid with there drone
The problem I see is that there are many people who can wander into a shop and buy a drone. They can have no knowledge on how to fly a drone and end up flying it in a high air traffic area and cause some serious loss of life. Remote ID does nothing to prevent that, there should be steps in place to regulate those buying drones to become licensed, just like a car or motorbike. Tests should be in place to make the public aware of the potential dangers of flying a drone, with the exception of sub 250g drones. It's like saying here's a drone capable of going up to 1650ft but you're only allowed to go up to 400ft, you don't need to go that high, and if other commercial flights are above 500ft, then drones should be capped at 400ft. There are ways of keeping us and the public safe, but the fact that anyone can buy a drone with no knowledge on the common sense rules, its ridiculous. There is always going to be idiots out there, having Remote ID info available to the public is dangerous too, the general public have no business knowing where a pilot is stood, its an infringement on data protection. I think only air traffic control or some official body should have that kind of knowledge to ascertain where people are flying, if they go over 400ft for a long period of time will show up on their flight screens, just like in air traffic control towers. If its all about safety, then implement such rules, when official bodies want to take our money and not regulate properly, it seems like they're just profiteering off us and they look like hypocritical capitalists.
Hey Lone Wolf. Yes, the ease of use and relative affordability has opened GPS drones up to anyone and many owners do not even see it as a hobby etc. Some excellent points, thank you for joining the conversation.
@@Geeksvana I know there are so many complex variables when it comes to drones. The reason I'm sure you already know why the FAA and CAA are regulating them, because they ARE so affordable and they have many applications in the real world aswell as serious implications if in the wrong hands. I mean, just look at what Ukraine are using their drones for, it doesn't take a mastermind to figure out how to make IED's. That's why Gatwick now have millions of pounds invested in anti UAV systems. As a guy starting Film Production at University in September, and I obviously use drones on my TH-cam channel, I think I have a great story to create a very compelling documentary about drones. I'd like to include you in it as someone who is very knowledgeable on the subject, its going up on TH-cam when it's finished, but I'd love to include your thoughts and wisdom on this documentary.
The main thing that concerns me with RID is the public being able to track drone operators if they were to make RID Not accessible to the public for obvious security reasons I would probably feel more at ease, but any remote pilot would definitely be at risk ..
You are right. Why would the FAA want the Karens to be able to track all RC operated models ( including fixed wing and helicopters )? How would this improve "air safety" ?
Yep I've already said that the majority of us fpv pilots break the rules every time we fly by not having a spotter. My nephew is a cop, actually detective now, and he says they don't have time to be bothered with drone calls, and with some of the stories he tells me I believe it, he's in a town of only 17,000 not a suburb and you'd swear it was at least 10x that size with all the crazy stuff that goes on.
Sean, thank you for your enlighting comments and suggestion. Your video brings to light just a few of the problems we, as drone pilots, know will happen. Thank you for your balanced and logical presentation. I agree that the FAA has a long way to go to protect drone pilots and a better plan, not going back to fix already known problems. Take Care!
Remember Captain Sully? Landed a plane on the Hudson River because of a bird. A multi-million dollar piece of equipment that was disabled by a bird. What about hardening planes so that a bird can't destroy them. Or possibly a UAV. Why should a farmer checking his irrigation system or a kid flying a toy drone add another transmitter / receiver pair, processing power, extra weight and power draw to get shorter flight times and poorer performance? These systems do not need to be part of the air traffic management systems because most of the country is rural. In cities things are a bit different we would not want to throw off those flight navigation systems (they aren't that sensitive and if they are then they need to be fixed. If the idea of cameras bother you then why isn't satellite part of the discussion? Simply pull the curtains. The real problem is stated at the beginning. A few sea birds can cause a jumbo jet to come crashing down therefore detection of rogue UAV around an airport can have the same effect therefore the UAV sighting real or imagined can shut down an airport. Toy and hobbiest drones don't need Friend or Foe detection, traffic management, flight plans, ADSB or any other flight system to circle a few trees and the FAA wants to move towards that exactly. They have much bigger fish to fry like coordination of updating past present and future air traffic control systems for both ground and air so that they continue moving traffic safely. Last time I checked there were air and ground systems that had not fully implemented decades old safety systems like ADSB and most smaller aircraft will never be. If you fly a toy or a small plane in Montana to check your cattle heards you should not be forced to follow the same rules as commercial passenger aircraft and that is where the FAA is trying to take us.
Well if you are an FAA licensed drone pilot and complying with their rules shouldn't the FAA provide you with an armed air marshall for your security when you fly?
As always Geeks, well thought out presentation and makes perfect sense. There's the kicker though, the regulating body here has left common sense behind and has sold the hobbyist and 107 pilot alike out to the corporate entities. Could we have a good safe system similar to UTM, of course we could, and it would be the best for everyone. Over on this side of the pond though, guess we're going the other way. As a 107, I don't really get a choice on compliance, what I do have, is one in the chamber with 15 friends that follow really closely behind. We'll see how it goes!
Sure you still have options: Make sure to use a sub 250g drone that would not require "registration" for 44809, and make sure to bring a 107 registered unit with you too. IF or when it comes up "yes, I just completed a 107 op with that drone over there" or "yes, I have a 107 op coming up later today that I'm going to complete with that drone over there", and "right now, I am conducting a 44809 flight"... Easy Peasy..!
I personally, usually, have no less than 200 rounds on or near my person! Doesn't mean I actually want to use it though! I could see this actually putting me MORE at risk of "having to" so, I'd rather simply NOT COMPLY with this RID BS..! IJS And if you're "violating" one thing, why not violate another. Which is actually why I've stopped studying for my 107, thinking, if I'm going to "violate" RID then I may as well also operate "commercially" without a 107 - EFF the man..! PS) I used to "illegally" carry my sidearm (IL resident) for MANY MANY MANY moons before they FINALLY "legalized" it ;) Basically, NO "bad law" should EVER be followed ;)
@@sparcsapphiredge3087 As with most uneducated people you totally do not understand the system. As with gun control, they are not going to show up at your house with a bunch of agents. You will receive a summons to appear, and if you do not show, an arrest warrant will be issued. Next step is swat team will take you out. (don't think they are intimidated by your 200 rounds!)
Yep I agree,if I can for now on,I will have a buddy accompany me as a spotter an as muscle also my gaurd, 17 friends thst follow closely as well,got protect yourself no matter what your doing,hell there's been a shooting at Walmart even,shift manager did it then turned gun on himself I don't believe my neighbors have a problem with my drone,as long as I don't fly over there house,now they may occasionally ask me when home to fly my drone over as I'm walking over an let them check it out,one of my neighbors has one but it's a toy grade folding one from Walmart that he asks me about operating sometimes an I try explaining the new goofy drone laws an regulations an about drone registration,you can't really call it a hobby anymore to enjoy it with dumb shit now I understand some people doing stuff with there drones,like flying around white house or flying contraband in jail,I've seen it on the news,but don't punish everyone for it,make those responsible pay for there crimes most of this stuff is common sense stuff,have to be safe an smart how an where you fly an not be high or drinking alcohol while operating drone,just like operating a car
The FAA does not enforce its current Drone regulations how do they intend to enforce new ones? Further more they offer little to no support to drone pilots conducting legal flights and fined, have their gear confiscated, or worse when their drone is shot out of the air..
Hey Rob! Great to see you. I actually had this precise thought last night whilst watching TNL. There is ZERO enforcement to support drone pilots in the US. The recent chap who had his Mavic shot down is a perfect example. Excellent point, thank you.
Five years of flying drones under my belt, I've never damaged any property, public or private. In these five years I have been harassed many times and every time the harassment increased the risk level of flying. I have had harassers antagonize&distract me into crashing. Every time I have been confronted I have ceded ground and gone elsewhere. I know that I am not the problem when it comes to drone safety, public ignorance is to blame. My worry is that harassers/Karens with access to the location of drone pilots will drive up the number of crashes. Thus creating a vicious cycle where the very thing this Remote ID law is supposed to remedy actually drives confrontations between pilots and the public resulting in less safety for everybody. I am buying up drones before 2023. I will continue to fly safely, but I refuse to comply.
Im more worried about getting robbed. Thieves are definitely more likely to find drone pilots and rob them than Karens are to harrass you. Both are bad dont get me wrong. But I dont want my life threatened
You are spot on on the system will be a failure. There are going to a huge group that simply don't comply, there will be a significant market for devices (or hacks) that mis-transmit user and/or drone location data and cheap arduino like wifi transmitters are easy to make that will be used to flood the airwaves with straight up wifi noise/fake data.
Yep, the "word on the street" is just don't comply. They should just cut out 400 ft to 500 ft for the commercial (delivery) drones; give them their own space.
here's why your hypothesis is flawed, it is based on the presumption that the FAA is being truthful with regards to their publicly stated motivation for model aircraft remote id and all the other requirements/restrictions that are being implemented. You are correct with your prediction about the high level of non-compliance, at least for a while, but that won't last long and the reason is, unlike other FAA regulations which are enforced by the US government, they are implementing these laws with the full intent of them being enforced by local law enforcement, you don't live in the US so the reality that our criminal justice system as been transformed into a for profit enterprise isn't something that you have factored into your supposition. As to why remote isn't going to be what fails, because the real goal is to cause the hobby to fail, the big corporations want hobbyist out of the sky and are spending a lot of money to make sure they get their way....
What RID really "should" be is, literally a "digital license plate". RID should be NOTHING more than "broadcasting" your "license plate" (FAA registration number), and THAT'S IT. NOTHING more NOTHING less. Just like with cars, civilians CANNOT "look up" a license plate on a motor vehicle. Likewise civilians should NOT be able to garner ANY information from your FAA registration number either. THIS should be (just like tags for cars) RESERVED for the FAA and/or law enforcement ONLY... THAT is a version of "RID" that I think I'd be okay with. Because granted I am still "newer" to this "hobby" - I have wondered why the registration stickers, besides if/when a drone "falls" nobody is EVER going to actually see that (not like the N number on a manned AC)... So digitally broadcasting the AC's "REG NUMBER" - I think I'd be okay with.
You can't check who's driving a car here. But you can check who owns it and everyone who has ever owned that car using just the license plate. As a private person.
I suppose an argument would be that those not using it will be more obvious amongst a backdrop of compliant hobby and commercial operators. The issue there of course is compliance!
@@Geeksvana Only if they are detected, and not transmitting makes a drone considerably harder to detect. Further, if they somehow were detected the sorts of things that would really qualify as bad acts in this domain are short duration activities such as taking down delivery drones, cargo drops over prisons, or piloted munitions employment that are going to be over before anybody can A) spot the quiet drone B) confirm it really is running dark C) determine the control method D) triangulate the control signal (if it has one) and then E) get law enforcement to that location. The one thing it may do is cause the FAA to put pressure on local police to hassle pilots when they come across them, and this will be regardless of sub250g because local cops don't know anything about either drones or grams.
I would disagree with that. Every drone by the very nature of the controller and drone setup is transmitting. CUAS systems can currently track a pilot location from 25 miles away.
@@Geeksvana exactly mate & the triangulation is instant also, even if you turn on and off it’s logged instantly 👍 I’ve not long left the military and it’s been like that for a while, What I will say is from speaking to friends still working in signals is that although it’s all there to see it’s only used in a Legal purpose if someone has been involved in a crime so there is something to charge them with ( for now 😅 ) I can’t and won’t say what I have seen but believe me when I say even when you turn on your TX16 it’s picked up ( in the U.K. anyway ) I smile every time I switch on knowing it and also that those watching don’t care about it, why? Because if you’re not near somewhere you shouldn’t be they couldn’t give a flying F! 😅 how this is going to change I don’t know but I’m happy for them to see it ( not like I have a choice) just not some random drone hater with an agenda 😱👍
Bit of a 'rebellious' video title Sean!!😲⚠️😊 Glad you're now opening your eyes and questioning these sometimes over bearing, disproportionate rules and regs that just aren't practical or give any benefit or make anything safer than they already are! Welcome to the club.....⚠️😲😁👍
Thank you, I think this is one of the best responses to the issues remote ID (in the USA) looks to bring. I wonder if there’d be anywhere near the same issues with it, if it was simply proposed to broadcast the drone’s ID like flight tracker & only allowing the relevant authorities a link to the drone pilot? Great video, well done. Thank you.
I agree about non-compliance due to the general public being able to find the remote pilot. I also agree that this rule will ignite the self-built segment as people find ways to avoid compliance. I also think another trend will materialize: the explosion of the sub-250 gram segment which will be exempt from remote ID. That's an easy way to avoid the nasty parts of the rule. I believe it is telling that the two largest drone manufacturing companies have recently introduced sub-250's which have capabilities that could only have been dreamed of a short time ago. By Sept of 2023 I would bet that there will be sub-250 gram drones that will be fully adequate for hobby and even some professional applications.
Were kinda already there.... Problem is dji and autel are they only real quality makers I have a nano+.... its not that great.very mid....autels best quads are MUCH bigger then even DJIs
For commercial flying I can at least grasp the need for some control and regulation in open public areas. A giant feature film camera rig flying over populated areas should definitely be subject to some regulation and monitoring. Its just good sense. But to apply this to people flying on private property is stupid and a self defeating overreach. And its all far simpler than the explanation given here (I've come to understand that people in other countries don't fully grasp how freedoms work here in the US). Private property laws are fundamental. The first time FAA tries to enforce this on private property they're going to submarine the whole thing. They simply don't have the authority to control 'airspace' 2 feet above the grass in your backyard. That's a constitutional issue. They can put it on paper and posture until the cows come home. But in court this would all be nullified in 2 seconds. Assuming they could even enforce any of it, which they definitely can't. They can't come on your property without a search warrant. And they have no probable cause for that search warrant if you are not complying with RID and feeding them what is basically a confession. So by virtue of not following the regs, they are rendered toothless and worthless. So what's the point? Its just a stupid dog and pony show by bureaucrats trying to justify their jobs and bilk bribes from DJI and Amazon.
I would think it is very hard to defend how you are allowed to kick a football 30 feet up into the air, even in restricted airspace, but you can't fly a drone 2 feet off the ground in your own backyard, even in non-restricted airspace. I imagine they would say 'yes, but you _could_ bring your drone up higher than that, and a football will always fall back down'. Yes, but that's like closing a street down for all traffic because while most cars stop at the traffic light, some people _could_ ignore the red light and keep on driving. It isn't about what you _could_ do, it's about what you _actually_ do. People with nefarious intentions will always disregard the rules, setting stricter rules will not change that. And people that are happy to comply if it means they can fly over their own backyard up to 30 feet high will stay within those bounds. And no, there's no privacy issue with the neighbours there, because I can see into their garden from that altitude out my window, it doesn't matter if that's seen through a drone or not. Besides, the same principle applies. It doesn't matter that you _could_ watch your neighbours, it matters whether or not you _actually_ watch your neighbours.
Not only do I hope you are wrong, but think that you are wrong. I have been a GA pilot for over 42 years (as well as an RC and Drone pilot for many years. There were people that said the same about ADS-B when originally mandated. Requirements dates were extended due to unavailability of transponders and installers. But in most everybody's opinion ADS-B has been the best thing that has happened to GA flying in many years. Having said that. The requirements for Drones is NOT ADS-B! It is far less powerful and far less informative. However it is the Cornerstone of "Beyond Visual Line of Sight" (FAA words not mine). All Drone operators want BVLOS and this is the direct path to obtaining it.
I hope the same thing Ken. However, the sheer number of vocal operators who claim that they will not comply is a genuine concern. However, the atmosphere might be very different by the end of next year!
Do they require remote id or a license for ultralight aircraft? Not that I’m aware of.. then why should I have to install the remote id on my sub 250g drone that I bought without it? Now I have over $1g into a drone that’s trying to force me to install demote I’d every time I fly now. Are we all acting like you can’t just home build one without remote I’d? There’s no way for them to regulate the parts to stop it. There probably needs to be some solution to this, but trying to implement things without having it all ironed out doesn’t give me good feelings. I don’t know why we can’t just altitude limit and geofence, this has been working as far as I know.
@@Brandonthesnifferofall Yes, an ultra light must be certified and registered prior to sale (see FAA Part 91 Experimental) and if the ultralight has an electrical system (not exempt) and is going to fly in Mode C airspace it is required to have an ADS-B out (not in) transponder as are all other GA aircraft ( not military). Like your automobile, yes, you can drive all over your own private property, but having a drivers license and license plate is advised if you stray off it. Insurance is another issue. As a commercial pilot, I need insurance to get work, and without proper license and registration - there is no insurance. Back to your Ultralight example; yes you can fly without insurance; would I advise it: Absolutely not! Also, if your Ultralight is kept at a public airport, you will be required to have insurance. Also most Ultralight pilots have a Sport Certificate which is required if you have a passenger. (FAA Part 103)
@@FunFlyingPilot § 103.7 Certification and registration. (a) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to certification of aircraft or their parts or equipment, ultralight vehicles and their component parts and equipment are not required to meet the airworthiness certification standards specified for aircraft or to have certificates of airworthiness. (b) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to airman certification, operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements to operate those vehicles or to have airman or medical certificates. (c) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to registration and marking of aircraft, ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to bear markings of any type.
@@Brandonthesnifferofall I stand corrected. Good job looking that up. The only ultralights that I was aware of exceeded 254 lbs and must be inspected and fell under the experimental designation. However as I said don’t carry a passenger without at least a Sport license.
I've been flying model airplanes for over 50 years we fly around in a circle line of sight How come the government is not making a stipulation between a drone and a fixed wing model airplane
After a hundred years of education we have apparently failed to convince the general populace of the “good use case” for vaccination with a sizeable minority of the population prepared to take action, sometimes violent action to force their viewpoint on the majority of the population …. But the public is going to be educated as to the benefits of drones to the point that drone pilots will be safe? In the words of Arnold Rimmer “Wrong, Wrong, Wrong absolutely brimming over with wrongability”
Once Remote ID is required, I will either stop flying entirely, or find a way around having to use it, whether above-board or not. Alternately, I will OPEN CARRY.
flying fpv gives me much more situation awareness and ability to properly locate my craft away from potential hazards, keeping people and property safe, much more than a LOS spotter
I fly with one other person an dwe often spot for each other. At least when we're not trying to troubleshoot in the field after a crash. We'll give each other a heads-ups if walkers, bicycle riders, or dog walkers come around. Out here in SoCal, you can't get away from people. Even in some wooded areas, there are the occasional mountain bikes and hikers. But we've never been hassled. Some are genuinely curious.
We see a lot of manned aircraft still flying without ADS-B with no repercussions. Do we really think the authorities will have the will or resources to police drone hobbyists?
There are no repercussions because we don't have to have ADS-B on manned aircraft in class E and G airspace. They actually rather not have transponders in that airspace because it will completely saturate the FIC radar. They simply turn us off on their radar screen.
@@Nkkdxn45j I think I'd prefer to risk being made an example of rather than letting the government put overbearing laws on me that dictate I lose one of my few sources of fun. Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. I won't crawl under their boot.
I strongly suspect that non-compliance will be an issue. I do not fly drones. However, the existence of the rule disclosing the operator's location inspired me to think of ways around it. The motivation for someone who flies drones will be much greater. No one wants to be doxed.
The ones responsible for this regulation might be more sensitive to the problems if they were required to broadcast their physical locations to their entire city whenever they participated in their favorite hobbies.
The FAA said in that clip that they are aware of the pilot safety issues and that they will work to educate the public to prevent this. 1. I have had quite a few issues with the public in places that we are encouraged to fly RC aircraft in two privately owned parks in my area;e is a section of each pack set out for this. I had many crazy people confront me, two instances where I was physically attacked and one where a guy pulled out a gun threatening me. Since then these parks have added security. 2. The FAA went through a lot of trouble and expense in 2018 through 2020 and even into 2021 to make as many people as possible hate and fear drones and the RC hobby. 3. So now imagine Remote ID and now anyone, specially these psycho people, can find any drone pilot at any time. How many of us RC pilots will have to die before the FAA pulls their heads out of their you know whats? The FAA is a giant circle jerk with each one of them with their head up another's rear end. 4. No one in the FAA has ever flown anything RC. They are absolutely clueless about everything RC, including ground vehicles. 5. The FAA only sees dollar signs with the concept of drone deliveries. When it comes to that, the FAA are complete hypocrites. All the restrictions put on RC pilots of where we can fly are completely thrown out the window for drone delivery. They have zero concern for safety of the people or property when it comes to drone delivery. Bottom line, the FAA wants to eliminate the RC hobby for drone delivery. Drone delivery will not work at all. Between the expense, the safety of the public, the complaints that everyone will be filing with the nuisance of drones flying all over neighborhoods day and night, the drone failures that will cause crashes, property damage and serious injury to people. Imagine a curious kid or a family pet running up to a delivery drone and being hit by it. The FAA doesn't give a Flying A$$ or a Rat F**k about the people, only $$$$$$$$$$$$.
Very interesting views. You do say at the end that this will probably cause a resergence of home / kit build, the implication being it avoids the need for remote ID in the US? It doesn't, I think. Ignoring FRIAs, I believe anyone who flies under part 107 (eg as part of a business, posting on TH-cam even if not deliberately monetised etc), or 250g and above, is subject to remote ID, because it is anyone who has to register. That seems to mean that a ready built craft of any sort over 250g purchased after mid-Sept must have standard remote ID built in - not sure if there are any apart from prospectively DJI. A home / kit built (depending on the level of 'kit') over 250g can use an external broadcast module and has a further year's grace. But, it is simply weight and purpose of flight that is the decider, not how it was built. That only determines the type of remote ID you can get away with. RCModelReviews seems to think that part 107 flights must always be with standard as opposed to external broadcast remote ID, but I didn't see that in the rules - maybe I'm wrong. So, except for sub 250g 100% recreational, there are no exceptions long term, and if I was a betting man, I'd say this will encroach further sub 250g given time. Also, the idea that ANY post online is 'in furtherance of a business' seems especially mad and authoritarian. I would have thought that might be challengeable - but who wants to go to court? To me though, it's not the privacy issue, it's the fundamental premise that all airspace users are treated under the same regulatory framework is where it all starts to go wrong. Me flying a small FPV quad is NOT the same as an F16, a real Piper Club or an Airbus, and there is no logical reason why we should be treated the same. A football or golf ball also use the same airspace. I recall an instance where a FPV craft receiver failed and the craft instantly failsafed and crashed (no one around - we check for that). But, in theory, that would now require me to report it to the CAA. Damn silly. I don't see how the UK UTA trial can possibly succeed and be scalable. To make it financially worthwhile, delivery drones need to go everywhere, not just down little corridors - 'the last five miles'. That would require infrastructure countrywide, akin to the mobile mast infrastructure. I don't think that is cheap? In the end, this type of regulation will probably cause me to dump it all. Hobbies have to be fun, this is becoming less so. Probably the intention, whatever the regulators say.
If you think im going to broadcast my location at 5am doing sunrise photography with thousands of dollars of gear your absolutely nuts... I have already had one robbery attempt and a successful robbery. Had someone sneak up and steal my phone while flying. It fails from a security stand point. Privacy and personal security come first. Just take a look at our country. Its a mess. Not only no but hell no.
You say, a drone in the wrong hands is a danger. What I want to add is a plane or a helicopter in the wrong hands is also a danger so I don't see the problem. It's just a way to impose more rules on us and destroy the hobby.
You guys have all good points. I wanted to also mentioned that someone planning something with bad intentions may consider a drone alot easier than traying a plane, helicopter etc... is just too many ways to get caught or tracked ahead of their plans or even after. With a drone you don't even have to be present, specially with a home made FPV drone of any size. And since they don't care anyway they will just violate all the rules anyway. Is like giving a thef the choice of a hard car to steal or an easy target. Which one would they most likely go for? I'm a beginner myself with DJI mini and I do like to hear both sides of the argument and hopefuly at the end some resonable agreement will come up were all parties involved agreed upon.
I wonder how long it will be until it is illegal to fly any drone without a remote ID regardless of how or where it is being flown. That the concern I have.
I am 72 years old and have flown rc planes for about 45 years. I have been an AMA member for years so I thought I would try to comply and register with the FAA. After going on their website all I see is drone registration. They say nothing about rc planes and their questions make no sense at all. The hobby is getting to be no fun now that the government has gotten involved and I have come to the conclusion it"s time to quit flying and just run my rc boats. Even the AMA seems to be of no help to us anymore.
With all these new regulations forthcoming and all the confrontations that come along with drone flying is exactly why I'm staying completely away from flying a drone.... it takes the fun out of it and frankly just isn't worth the agitation just to go to a park and fly on a nice day
What if I just happen to leave the remote ID on and drive around town close to government buildings or airports? Will this trigger collision warnings or initiate closers?
I will build my own drones and many others will follow, bypassing the system. Remote ID is dangerous to drone pilots & The FAA does not care. - EveryDayDrones
Interesting what you were saying about the need for security. If they are wanting to liken it to commercial aviation then surely see the start point will be sufficient. See where it too off from and where it is now and if there is something happening then the appropriate resources can be despatched by the appropriate authorities. No need to allow public access to location. Or make location private EXCEPT to authorities (Police, FAA etc)
Hi Mark. Hope you are well. Correct, the US does not have the same data protection. Although the version of Remote ID proposed in EASA regs is actually pretty similar but would not permit public access.
What makes Remote ID so dangerous is all the hate built up by bad drone pilots. Some guy is going to be annoyed by kids with toy drones and look for a solution. He will find some RID app and then some poor guy operating with RID is going to get blamed for the others bad behavior. Who knows how bad the interaction will be after all that anger has built up.
Gee how could anything go wrong? Let's take a look at general aviation in the U.S.. all the way up til the 1980's General aviation was robust. All across America there were little private airports with communities attached. But the government got more involved the faa got bigger and general aviation started getting smaller, aircraft had to change because of fuels and more and larger controlled areas began appearing. Now, general aviation is such a has been that its a shadow of the 1970's. So faa participation in regulating and controlling model aircraft will only result in hardships and perhaps death of the hobby. Some of the damage to the hobby is self induced but as with the fcc mandate taking away our frequencies in days gone by to leave your Kraft sport series illegal or useless at controlled flying sites, that caused you to leave the hobby because you couldn't afford a new radio, remote ID will make flying too expensive for some older flyers and many new ones. Flitetest has done an amazing job lowering costs and that allowed new pilots to enter the hobby. Faa rules will fix that little problem...
Remote ID for Amazon delivery and any other commercial heavy lifting drone NOT needed for hobby toy drones I’m sorry but this is just a cash grab and biggest law flexing BS I have ever seen
As it stands today, I don’t understand how the FAA expects Remote ID to function- technically. First, the language the FAA used to describe the “methods” by which manufacturers will broadcast this Remote ID data is “for example: WiFi or Bluetooth”. Bluetooth has a range of 30 feet. The range of a mobile WiFi hotspot is also: 30 feet. Does FAA expect that in order for a curious citizen to gather identification of a suspicious drone they see up above the neighborhood , they must go hunting across backyards and private properties until they are within 30’ of a potential drone pilot and then attempt to somehow pair to an indifferent person’s BlueTooth or WiFi hotspot? This has not been thought-through. Lately, the FAA has further clarified that Remote ID will not put the burden of costs on the operator for any extra cell data transmission. Also, the open receiving of the signals will not require specialized equipment. So no requirement for the operator to transmit to the internet. What in our civilization is left that satisfies these criteria? How has DJI already made some of their current drones Remote ID-ready? I have seen NOWHERE where ANYONE, either governmental or content creator, has explained the nuts and bolts how this will all fall into place by September next year.
If you build a drone and don't fit it with RID capabilities, who would actually know and police that? As for RID 'transponders', who would manufacture, certify and maintain them? Would there be periodic regulation to have the RID system checked for correct operation and accuracy? How much would that cost? You can't just broadcast anything into the airwaves without it being certified, especially if laws are being built around it's use. How much would that cost to the user? I agree that larger commercial drones, UAV's, etc should be monitored, but to apply this across the board is insane, just from managing that regulation point-of-view. From the security PoV, WHY would the information be made available to the public? What actual purpose does that serve other than to fuel conflict! Surely position of the operator is only required if the drone if flown outside the regulation limits and committing an offence.
Yeah I definitely agree, I dont imagine many people complying. For the most part people already don't comply with drone regulation and for the most part no one really gets in trouble for it (very often).. I imagine a lot of people are probably already thinking that a fine sometime down the road will just be part of the cost of the hobby, even before RID. For a lot of people this is just going to be the 5th law that theyre breaking when they fly.
And I'm almost sure the FAA didn't think about people that would otherwise be complaint, into full non compliance over this (RID)! Example: I have actually been studying for my 107, but for me this RID crap will be the straw that breaks the camels back (unless they change something about the privacy of it)! So, I have CEASED studying for my 107 because I figure, if I am going to "disobey" RID, then why should I even bother with a 107. Surely it does NOT mean that I will not fly "commercially", just means I will be "in violation" (oh well, what's "one more" "violation"!?)... Some humans clearly just don't think (many of which work at the FAA and/or in gubbamint)!!!!!!!!!
I think you're missing something here. You won't have the choice to comply with RID. From this date forward, all drones and aircraft sold in the US wil have RID built-in, turned on, and broadcasting. Wouldn't it be easier to just register it and not have any worries about getting busted and paying a fine? Personally, I don't have a problem with it at all. I'll still have fun flying and it can broadcast AM radio for all I care!
@@Kevin-ib4gv oh no i fully understand that, I fully understand that any drone i buy in the future will come with remote ID and that there is nothing i can do to stop that. When I wrote that comment I was more thinking of FPV drones, which I would build myself even it it werent for RID. and TBH all i do with fpv drones is take them to the park. And when I am flying a FPV drone early in the morning I definitely don't want to broadcast "Hey this is where i am standing wearing goggles". I might change my mind though, i think ill wait to see how often people actually get caught once it is all being enforced.
@@TheNosnawS I get it. I think the FAA will give the community some time to get used to RID but after a while they will impose some huge fines on unregistered/non-compliant drones just to make headlines and get others to register.
I have seen ZERO advertisements or info campaigns from the FAA concerning drone operations. (In fact, I’ve never seen ANY informational promotions about ANYTHING from the FAA.) At this point, I’m very skeptical.
Wide-spread peaceful non-compliance. That's my prediction. Park flyers are going to continue flying in parks. Hobbyists will continue flying in the back yards and local school fields. It'll be generations before there are options for existing UMX planes that will work, and there are millions of them already out there. This whole thing is a solution in need of a problem, and screams of big business pushing their agenda to try and commercialize what has traditionally been the hobbyist's airspace.
Glad I live in an open carry state, so as you can imagine I never have a problem... As for Remote ID while I can see both sides and still maintain it's regulation without representation, FPV being a prime example..
Be safe my drone pilots. But..this is about gov't regulation. How many birds have crashed into planes vs drones? They better get those birds in compliance, too.
Just give the hobby a 300 foot ceiling, anything below this ceiling does not need RID. How simple is that solution? Anything flying over 400 ft. Needs ID.
How can I find a find drones with Remote ID? What would I use to track drones and find operators? Is it a phone APP, a standalone tracker? No one seems to know.
Here we are in the US with remote ID coming in Sept and those people who own a drone that does not have built in RID capability need to purchase a module to make the drone RID compliant. So far, I've seen modules on the market costing between $150-$200 US Dollars plus some of them add hefty amount of extra weight to the drone, particularly sub 250 gram drones. Why doesn't the FAA attempt to regulate the cost of these modules?
Unless you are flying Part 107 you don't need remote ID on a sub 250 drone. As of a few weeks ago, RID modules are scarce and only a few models are available. I can't see everybody who bought an over 250 gram drone shelling out another $250 for something they don't want and will likely never be questioned about. I prefer the small drones and only one has RID built it, I have no intentions of buying the modules or registering any other drones.
I'm confused as to how the infrastructure will work. With RID, my drone needs to get permission from the FAA before taking off. The FAA says we can use WIFI or bluetooth, and the FAA specifically said we DON'T need an internet connection for RID to work. So... with the VERY limited range of WIFI/BT, exactly how will we be getting permission from the FAA? The logistics make no sense to me.
The presentation I saw from FAA sells the idea that registration and RID would guarantee that nothing threatening or "nefarious" was afoot. My little foam RC airplane has to remain within about 300 feet of me or I lose sight of the plane and instantly lose the airplane. If you see my RC plane, then I am the guy standing within 300 feet of it and holding a box with an antenna sticking out of it. I only fly in clear weather (so I can see my airplane) so I don't need to understand the FAA weather forcasting format. If I have to subscribe to a $75 a month service that connects all RID data to a central server then I can not afford to be in this hobby. The $185 fee just to take the FAA written test cost more than my little airplane. If the FAA thinks they should control the airspace within 50 feet of the ground between my house and my barn they can stuff it.
I would suggest regardless of faa regulations, pilots should keep protection with them , no one will protect you like you will. In Tn. Legal citizens can now carry, I do. And would suggest others do the same.
Ken heron recently this is 3 months after the video come out has a remote ID box to attach to a drone and it only shows the position of the drone there's no remote ID controller operator location
Different systems. The Dronetag box is not specifically a Remote ID receiver. It picks up the transmission data already being sent by every drone. Once the RID deadline passes the data will be included, as is the law. (Sadly).
Okay first of all one main thing, people don't realize what is is doing for Aviation. Especially autonomous flight. As a we the Drone Pilots require more and more technology and response from the equipment we purchase. This is advancing regular flight non-fpv also autonomous flight, Plus Aviation. Unfortunately as we go on this cost the regular drone pilot more money for advanced technology. This should not be. The ones that break the law should pay for what they do. And I lost should be stiffer against the law Breakers not the hobbyist and drone Pilots. It'll come to a point where you will need 2,000 plus dollars to fly a drone. Which will kill a hobby. I can remember when as an AMA pilot on Sundays I take my plane and a trainer out to the park. It was Markham Park in Fort Lauderdale at home with gas and Battery and fly my time. The rest of my time out of the park I let the kids learn how to fly the trainers. Besides building my own aircraft and flying them, best time I had was when the parents brought the kids down to the park and fly the trainers I had two trainers. They had a thousand patches on them but they were still stable and good. Two things I loved was building my own aircraft, and flying them. But the best part was teaching the kids out of the fly. The problem was when the parents ask me how much does it cost for me to get my kid a plane in radio. The parents disappeared but the kids came back. LOL teaching the kids was great. Building my own aircraft that flew was great. What I told the parents is if you don't have the money to buy an aircraft call me Saturday morning. And I'll let you know if I have a plan they can fly. I both parts applying building patching and getting the kids in here. Today I don't know with everything changing can't be done anymore I don't think. Not even with a tip jar. I remember one parent showing up with three kids they were very late and I had to tell them I'm out of methane. She goes what's up what's the fuel because how much is it cost can we buy some now I go Saturday at 3:00 guys how much does it cost I said about 45 bucks a gallon. You said okay I'll go get it. And she did. That's how important it was to the kids.
Thank you for your efforts researching and reporting on the issues relating to our hobby. Is project skyway still an option/being considered in the UK or do you think we'll just follow suit as per US with RID?
I got a drone to help me shoot photos and videos for my real estate business, but I'm very much thinking of just getting some 30-foot to 60-foot camera masts and avoiding this nonsense. Maybe I'd use other means of getting a camera aloft? I could use kites, balloons, maybe even a potato launcher.
might not be a bad idea, look into spiderbeam poles, they are heavy duty collapsible fiberglass masts for ham radio antennas, you can get them from like 10ft up to 80 ft
I have a sub 250 drone. I'm scared to death to fly it. Confrontation is a real fear regulations and avoiding mistakes, I have tried to educate myself to be a safe pilot and I will continue. Remote ID is a good idea with maybe certain data open to the public with personal data for Homeland security or local law enforcement only...
_"This will then allow many advances including beyond visual line of sight flights and advances in automated flight"_ Sean, do not confuse Remote ID with electronic conspicuity. RID is not going to increase the safety or capabilities of any drone in a way that aids BVLOS and other automated flight capabilities. The FAA themselves have stated that RID is not designed to deconflict the airspace or provide such abilities. It is solely to allow authorities on the ground to determine who is flying a drone.
RID is the first step to UTM in the eyes of the FAA, that is where I think she was coming from. If you can't track the users of the airspace then you have no hope of adding more traffic.
@@Geeksvana Yep, I've repeatedly warned of this "thin end of the wedge" strategy from regulators.
1. Just register, it's only $5 and this will make drone flying safer by holding folk accountable
2. Just fit this Remote ID to your drone and it will make drone flying safer
3. Just connect to our network remote ID UTM so you can pay for each flight to make the skies safer
As is heard so often in the drone world -- it's only a matter of time. Remember that the FAA may seem to have abandoned Network Remote ID but they haven't. In the final rule they say that as a result of feedback they won't be requiring network remote ID "at this time" -- and that's only because the tech companies said "no can do -- yet".
It's coming and it all started with "just register, it's only $5 and it'll make everyone safer".
None so blind... 😞
This is not just the regulators at work here. The bigger manufactures will be on board for remote ID (once it is worked out) as it eliminates smaller competitors without the resources to develop the tech and deters start-ups. This is a repeat of the experience in the motor vehicle market here in the US. Back in the post-war days, the "Big Three" pushed for all manner of regulatory oversight on proof of concept, testing, materials, specification parameters, etc., as a means to deter the smaller car companies from staying in the market. The "Big Three" had access to the DOT regulators that little guys did not. The end result was my parent's generation had a choice of buying a boring ford, a boring GM product or a boring Chrysler product - none of which were efficient, innovative of even all too safe. The story of Tucker automobiles is being repeated in this new industry.
I couldn’t agree more! 1984 & Big Brother, flying my KK Junior 60 with single channel macgregor rc in the 60s seems a very long time ago.
If a deconflict protocol is to be designed. It should use more generic rf modulation for robust demodulation. Only include flight status and registration number. And hopefully interoperate with ads-b.
From what I understand its illegal for me to fly my fpv drone using goggles through the woods on my private property. I have never found anyone interested in being a spotter, besides they cant see it anyway when I am flying. There is no way I would broadcast my location while flying in this area. We have a lot of hunters and I have heard many say they would love to shoot a drone down. Beleive me if they do they will not be caught in this area. Too much happens here and they never find out who did it. This is all about big shots taking air space that hobbiest had first. For years nothing was considered dangerous and we were flying half scale planes with weed eater engines into the clouds. Our field was right beside the airport here.
Mate you are absolutely spot on 👍🤝
Same with us here in Marlborough NZ. We used to fly model aeroplanes and helicopters built ourself no safety regs right next to our domestic runway. The world's gone mad now
Next time someone says they would love to shoot down a drone. You can say "I guess you are looking to be charged with a federal crime as well".
The problem is the clowns 🤡 that bought quads, not for the love of flying or FPV, but to hover over Mr Smith's teen daughter... and you know that there were just enough of those "Peeping Tom" types, to give the entire hobby a bad rap. Also, the Clowns that fly into strictly controlled airspace... See also the Seahawks game that was interrupted, or look up various incidents happening at airports.
These are the idiots to blame for the new regulations, even though we know it won't stop them. 🙄
But they smacked the Feds in the knee, and we got kicked in the Ass in return.
free men don't ask permission.
At the end of the day, there STILL hasn't been as fatal accident involving a hobby drone and an aircraft and I'm talking about anywhere, not just here in the US. in spite of this the FAA has continued to impose new rules and regulations. Good luck enforcing them!
Facts
Technically not true. In Sept 2013, a 19 year old was flying a radio controlled heli in NY when it, quite literally, took off the top of his head. He was a very talented acrobatic flyer who misjudged and paid the ultimate price. However... Your point is very valid. Jet airliners are designed to take multiple bird strikes from 20 lb geese. My 250g drone isn't going to do anything to it. And that's part of the problem... the FAA is treating a 251g drone the same way they would treat a 55lb drone. That's really dumb. Meanwhile, there's no tracking on the things that ACTUALLY kill people every single day. (Guns & Automobiles.)
@@Dartheomus I agree with your main point. Your first sentence, however, seems to be completely misreading the comment you replied to. Andrew said "an accident involving a hobby drone and an aircraft".
You replied "not true" and described as n incident where someone hurt themselves with their own model helicopter.
That's not an accident involving an aircraft and a hobby drone. That's someone hurt themselves with their own toy. Just like people hurt their own thumbs with their own hammers every day. Or any other household object people hurt *themselves* with. Still not a danger to aircraft.
@@senseisecurityschool9337 You are correct. I read the first part and missed the second. Either way, we all agree that the risk hobby drones pose is minimal compared to the MASSIVE waste of tax dollars that will be spent tracking them.
Facts
The main problem that the FAA seems to forget about is that if someone is intending on breaking the law, they'll do it. regardless of how much more illegal it is. sure, if every drone ever made came with remoteID and every individual who fly drones goes along with the rules, you are only impacting the people who mean well. just about every innovation in FPV has been through open source hardware and firmware, and you can't effectively regulate something this easy to obtain. It's like marijuana. it's a literal plant, and it takes little to no effort to grow, but it's a schedule 1 drug. States are starting to realize how futile their attempts are at controlling the production and distribution of pot because it's not practical. It does more harm than good adding regulations to recreation. it makes criminals out of enthusiasts and attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Sure, there are outliers. dumb freestyle pilots that shouldn't be flying in public places around people, or in controlled airspace. Those types of people are incredibly problematic. but I'd wager that those people are outliers in the statistics of law abiding fpv pilots, and that these problems won't go away, regardless of how much restriction you add.
There will always be law breakers, but the BVLOS is what nearly every drone pilot wants and this is the direct means to have it and be legal. What more do you want? The air space is controlled by the FAA and is getting rapidly more congested - package delivery is starting as well as the exploding growth of drones. Myself, flying GA as well as 107 drones, want to know where other aircraft (be they GA or Drones) are when I am flying.
At first I was totally against RID. However - if they make BVLOS legal as well as prevent a manned aircraft disaster then I want it. Going to be interesting to see how this all pans out. If it turns out like other government ideas 💡 maybe 🤔 I will once again lose hope and not fly as much if at all.
The argument that lawbreakers operate outside the law and therefore the law is useless, but responsible operators self regulate is not persuasive. A law and the
consequences of violation is a deterent to those flyers who may fly improperly.
BVLOS is not compatible with AMA rules. The requirements of flights at a field is the starting point of AMA rules.
There are some exceptions like dynamic slope soaring, high altitude gliders and free flight which often occurs at locations that are not sanctioned fields.
BVLOS is a flight style not compatible with AMA rules and should never have been part of the discussion.
@@jeffs7915 these discussions of "why bother making the rules when criminals will break them", often don't address the nuance or "higher-resolution" of the issue at hand. Many things are made illegal not because they're immoral. This is the real point I believe people like myself and @kenkillian make: it's not like we don't think there should be laws against mass murder simply because murderers will always be murdering... just pointing out that the laws against intermediate activities in a chain of events on something relatively benign are obviously going to be ignored by someone who's willing to commit a much more SERIOUS crime. One reason some people fail to understand the silliness of gun regulations. Many people believe that by restricting firearms operations with regulations, that will reduce murder rates. For example, we all agree murder should be outlawed and is a very serious crime. Therefore, if a person is willing to murder someone; then that same person will not think twice about committing a much less serious "crime"; by taking a gun into a "gun free zone" where it is illegal. No mass shooter, plans to shoot up a school and then notices that the school has a no-gun-zone decal on the door, and turns around and goes home--in fact it's one reason why "no-gun-zones" are preferred targets--no one there to shoot back. A person wanting to use drones to drop bombs on civilians will not be worried about breaking the law regarding RID. In fact, once again, it will benefit their objective to NOT use RID, and any "fear" of being caught not using RID is dwarfed by any fear they may be caught for blowing up a bunch of people.
US citizen. I have believed that non-compliance will prevail. I have said that someday someone will be able to TURN OFF Geo-fencing for DJI drones. I recently found out there a company doing just that. I am fairly new to this hobby and I started with an Air 2 and have recently moved to an Air 2s, I also have a Mini 2. To me this is the classic "head in the sand" approach to this. When flying I have been approached many time by people who have questions about drones and I stop and bring the drone close to them and land and answer their questions and they always feel better, I have shown them what's seen from the drone, they were curious and now these people are pro-drone people. But I do believe that non-compliance will be trend going forward
Excellent work Michael! Education of the public is always best coming from a drone operator! Keep up the good work and representing our shared surname...
I use drone hacks for my DJI AIR 2S
@@gioman116 OK good to know. I have an Air 2s and a Mini 2 was considering using them to turn off the geo-fencing. Honestly how does it work for you and was it complicated to install. Then what about the updates that come along? I think its great just don't want to mess the birds up
@@miichaelhickey very easy to install & it's simply a NFZ certificate that's on the drone so you never have to worry about it also I just ignore the drone update pop up & make sure you have in the app settings that auto download updates is turn OFF
@@miichaelhickey you're not gonna mess anything up with the drone it's not gonna have any issues with the hack on there
I have emailed the FAA, in their email responses their wording showed that they’re aware about the lack of compliance that will be happening.
I said they should’ve listened to users in the community and they stated that they had a comment section with 50,000 comments which is the most an FAA regulation has ever had. From their wording we as pilots would only need one module if we are not flying part 107 and it could be swapped between drones and I explained to them how that would be next to impossible to implement because each drone has different stack capabilities and that were also increasing risk by affecting flight characteristics of the quad depending on the size of the module.
They are well are of the amount that will be non compliant, and most of us have built up a relationship with our local PD departments and we have already discussed with them and they won’t be enforcing it or checking for compliance unless an issue arises.
Very poorly done imo, because I know I won’t be complying 🤷🏼♂️ unless it’s for part 107.
Have you been in forums? Every drone Karen expects you to have a part 107 just to wipe your own ass or check your own barn
One thing that isn't being addressed is the separation of the rules from the hardware. The FAA makes the rules and the requirements as well as sets the deadlines. Then, they wash their hands. It's up to the market to "fix" its problem by that deadline. Well, whoop dee doo. Now we're at the mercy of private industry to create the solution, market it and charge us anything they wish because they can BECAUSE it's a requirement. Seems like a solution that many will not accept nor partake in. What happens when only one manufacturer comes to market? The only one so far has a $300 module. That's more than many new drones cost. I say not until there are sufficient and affordable options that are on the market will I consider complying.
@@ScienceNotFaith yup, it costs way to much and it’s too big to use on anything less than a 7”
All too often government enact laws in a knee jerk reaction. They want to be perceived as "doing something". Unfortunately all too often these laws become draconian and keep people who would use the technology responsibly, from even attempting to use it at all.
On the other hand it does nothing to prevent the people who misuse the technology. Especially with those that specifcally intend to use it nefariously.
Non-compliance is already a casual everyday thing. I bought my drone at least 6 years ago. I did my duty by taking the non-commercial classes, registering my drone and using the "before you fly" app to know if I'm OK where I am and how high I can go. But, I'll be damned if I'm going to spend another $300 to comply with something that is useless except for bean counters. Show me the need for this regulation. Show me all the problems that this solves (not the potential problems, but the real-world ones). And before you go into airports, they already have radar and can monitor the skies. I can't even fly my drone where I live to look at my house's roof for damage after a storm. WHY??? No airplane is going to be flying 60 feet in and around the trees where I live. It's stupid and just unnecessary regulations. A simple rule of "you can fly anywhere at any height within 100 feet of any object or 75 feet over the topmost point" Not even helicopters fly that close or low - (I have a heli pilot's license so know this). No aircraft will be in danger if they use their normal avoidance rules for objects.
They can't find all the flyers who don't comply. I'm nervous about who will be made an example of.
When I'm flying, normally it's pretty easy for anyone who hears my drone to see me, since I don't fly far. So finding the pilot is generally pretty easy, but those who fly far, won't tend to comply anyway, so really, RID will just make more problems for anyone who complies, since more people can potentially find the pilot, rather than just a passer by.
Very detailed info. Thanks, Sean.
Put simply, non compliance, and a lack of enforcement will kill RID. Where I live, the only LEO we have is our local sheriff's, and he has already stated that we have much bigger problems than" enforcing the federal lunacy of tracking down drone pilots". His office will not be dedicating any resources for these purposes... As a recreational pilot, the faa can put those regs where the sun don't shine.
That and the guys like me just waiting for a protocol to be released so we can make spoofers. Gonna be hard to find someone out of the million other drones that are being broadcast but don’t really exist.
Most cops have more important things to do than chase after model aircraft pilots.
@@glidesfpv I was asking if it would be viable to make an RID spoofing app for mobiles a while back. You think this is definitely going to happen?
@@glidesfpv Sounds promising. Not only would spoofing cover you if you want to comply (for some unknown reason) but don't want to add a £150 module to your quad but you could even spoof your location miles away so people don't pester you even if you aren't complying..
On top of that, if spoofing becomes common place then it undermines RID, even in law. Which makes it an irrelevance.
@@WitchidWitchid I am a retired cop and I don’t know a single one who would not laugh at this. Either RID will help manned aircraft see drones or it is just a big brother tactic.
Don't confuse Remote ID, a 'safety' measure, with a security function - any less-then-well-intentioned individual who wishes to utilize a drone to conduct some end goal will EITHER not use Remote ID, transmit falsified Remote ID info, or use legit Remote ID data to conduct their behavior... if a terrorist is willing to commit murder, risking prison time or worse, do you think they care about an FAA fine? Criminals either remove their license plates or use a stolen car to commit crimes - somewhat narcissistic of the FAA to think they've outwitted existing human behaviors...
its about making everyone a defacto criminal with no rights.
@@DieselRamcharger typical american legislation and enforcement culture.
It has nothing to do with public safety or crime prevention, and everything to do with making the skies safe and clear for the smooth rollout of Amazon and others' commercial delivery UAVs.
@@AD-lr2ww How can you say it has nothing to do with Public Safety, then say it's meant to keep the skies safe? The FAA provides the following answer to the question of why do we need Remote ID, "Remote ID helps the FAA, law enforcement, and other federal agencies find the control station when a drone appears to be flying in an unsafe manner or where it is not allowed to fly."... and you were saying? If it has NOTHING to do with public safety or crime prevention, then only require Remote ID compliance from individuals or organizations that seek to conduct BVLOS or more complex operations, period.
@@J4nkyFPV I'm just giving my opinion. Note for whom I stated it makes the skies safe. It wasn't the public. It's ok you don't have to agree with my opinion.
I remember when I was a kid in the 70 's ,my dad bought a cb for the van, and said "" the FCC says we all have to get a ham license to talk on the cb, or face fines "" Nobody did , and you could buy cb's everywhere. The FCC couldn't enforce it, and eventually abandon that rule. Actually I don't think it was abandon, they just conceded there would be no enforcement of fines.
R-id will fail
I remember cb radios.
The FCC tried to control it.
They were able to when cb we're few but once it became popular they gave up.
People did not comply and they just gave up.
The faa will give up if people will not comply.
My goodness this is a hobby.
exactly, it's a hobby, and the FAA needs to go away. rules already existed (400ft) that worked just fine. enforce them.
From the recent SC rulings EPA have no authority to make law, FAA has no authority to make law. Start suing. FAA has no authority over your drones.
You posted the question of the FAA educating the public about RID and the regulations. I only found out about RID during my research into which drone to buy. Had I not been performing this research, I would not be aware of it’s existence. I live in the US, in Virginia. Only about two hours away from Washington, DC.
couldn't have said it better myself you have to look to be able to see anything abt remote id, i feel sorry for the parents buying their kids dji's and 5'inchers just to learn they basically wasted that money due to having to give up the safety of their child to being tracked, or spend another $250 on a remote id unit, its legit like they do with sex offenders soon well all have to go door to door and tell everyone we own a drone lmao shits ridiculous.
One thing I want to know, why aren't they talking about Remote ID for bicycles? Why is it that people need to know everything about me when I fly my planes, but when I get on my bike I can be just a face in the crowd?
love your honestly about spotters, this remote thing should just happen above 400ft, make it a paid thing and make sure people are being safe
Thanks Andrew, hope you are well.
?
400ft is DMZ, can't fly there for safety reasons. Remote ID doesn't change that.
@@chris2790 I an not on about remote ID, if your drone has a camera, you meed to register it with CAA and pay £9, you also need to pass a test and you get two numbers, one you fit on your drone and one you keep with you, as for FRZ, keep off there land, in some cases you need you keep a distance from there land, if you wanted to fly near, your best thing would to had call them up and just say you will not be fly over and just like to inform them where you would be, CAA contrail the aur space as for FRZ it would depend and would need checking, if they had a helly pad I would be more, this guy is a ass, again would had been funny if they checked if the drone was registered, again camera on drone should be registered, not thet I agree with the BS paying and rules like spotter when flying fpv as everyone is not following that, but if your going to do whet this guy did, keep to the law and if he is registered and did go up 400ft and back down he did not brake any rules along as he did not brake the one for FRM
exactly, rules already exist to keep drones below 400ft, and aircraft above 500ft in most cases.
ID should only apply to certain commercial drone ops, and for those operating above 400ft.
Just look at the driving on any freeway, here, in the Los Angeles area -- it's easy to see non-compliance will be the norm. Often seems forgotten that consent of the governed is of critical importance.
Exactly mate 👍🤝
"We hear you" means we will ignore you! "Security" or "Public Protection" are words used by those limiting personal freedoms and rights.
I hate the fact that this would require you to log on to the internet before starting the drone. Also hate that the map is available to the Public. I will not upgrade my drones with Remote I.D.
Upgrade? Seems more like a downgrade to me. I won't be participating, status quo for me.
I have been building and flying all types of model aircraft since I was a child and I discovered "control line". Later on I got into RC planes and helicopters. Now Uncle Sam is telling me I had better make sure my models can be tracked and they must be retrofitted so they can tell the world where I am. Sorry bit its not gonna happen here. No way am I going to ground my planes, helicopters, and drones until I put a.spy.system on them to spy on me. What comes next? Are they going to tell me I need a commercial pilots licenae with multiengine ratings, IFR ratings, and 1000 hours of flight time logged just to fly a balsa wood plane rhat I have flown without incident since I was a child.
The goal is to legally push as many people out of the hobby as they can.
Just as they have done with GA. They don’t want to have to work on issues that will not get them hired by big corporations in the end.
What’s amazing is why the RC community has not tried to work with the EAA or even the gun rights groups or other groups who getting the regular treatment where rules which affect honest people are created and enforced on them while little is actually done about truly dangerous people even when caught.
I have received nothing from the FAA. I wanted to return to the rc aircraft hobby but happened upon something about regulation. Only after my curiosity lead me to look at the regs did I see the RID module req for my 10-20yr old airplanes!!! Flying on private farmlands 20+ miles from the nearest airport I am req to have a transponder now? Last update I’ve seen doesn’t req part 103 ultralights to have ANYTHING but my 5lb balsa airplane does. Furthermore I haven’t found modules to buy and there is less than a year until the deadline date.
Thank you for your perspective on this important topic. I think you’ve raised some very valid challenges in front of the FAA. I agree 100% that my personal safety is my biggest concern and haven’t seen much if any campaign by the FAA to help educate the general public. One thing that has happened in the US in recent years is more drone operators arming themselves. It’s an unfortunate reality but a resolve that many pilots have taken. There’s a lot of work ahead by the industry and regulators to bring this whole idea of remote ID in place by the September 2023 deadline.
I for one will proudly announce that I have NO intention to "comply" given it's current "status".
I MAY comply, if they agree to making this "info" ONLY available to "authorities"... But yeah, in this current "state", I have ZERO intent to comply!
Agreed !
Nice video, quick question, they mention the need for Remote id, one of the reasons is because of possible use for nefarious reasons. The elephant in the room is, why does the FAA think the nefarious actors wouldn't build their own, or simply find a quick way to disable the remote ID. We go back to people who break the law, are NOT going to use remote id.
My take on drone regulation is they understand the potential tactical advantages to public drone use. But that ship has sailed and they can never put it back.
Look at the USA sending consumer drones to the Ukraine with a wink and a nod then TH-cam triumphantly posting improvised anti personnel uses. Yeah, this is like gun control and it's not ever going to be prevented.
Remote ID might be a good idea, that is showing the location of the drone, it's height, speed and direction of travel. The take off location and the location of the operator should be restricted and only available to authorities
Completely agree. Seems so simple doesn't it? Only allow law enforcement etc to see the main data and I think a lot more people would get on board. Thanks for your comment.
I wouldn’t trust the police in the US. Willful ignorance of the law and adversarial, recipe for disaster.
@@Geeksvana I still don't see the point. Law abiding citizens don't need to tattle on their own location because they're not breaking the law, and malicious parties aren't going to tell you their location. It's a pointless system.
True,location of take off an pilot,by public an of law officials, puts drone pilots of all ages age security risks an confirmation an could cost someone's life they some of these crazy Karen's act an what not an could care less if they hurt anyone over a drone,especially if they're not hurting anyone or being a peeping tom or doing anything stupid with there drone
The problem I see is that there are many people who can wander into a shop and buy a drone.
They can have no knowledge on how to fly a drone and end up flying it in a high air traffic area and cause some serious loss of life.
Remote ID does nothing to prevent that, there should be steps in place to regulate those buying drones to become licensed, just like a car or motorbike.
Tests should be in place to make the public aware of the potential dangers of flying a drone, with the exception of sub 250g drones.
It's like saying here's a drone capable of going up to 1650ft but you're only allowed to go up to 400ft, you don't need to go that high, and if other commercial flights are above 500ft, then drones should be capped at 400ft.
There are ways of keeping us and the public safe, but the fact that anyone can buy a drone with no knowledge on the common sense rules, its ridiculous.
There is always going to be idiots out there, having Remote ID info available to the public is dangerous too, the general public have no business knowing where a pilot is stood, its an infringement on data protection.
I think only air traffic control or some official body should have that kind of knowledge to ascertain where people are flying, if they go over 400ft for a long period of time will show up on their flight screens, just like in air traffic control towers.
If its all about safety, then implement such rules, when official bodies want to take our money and not regulate properly, it seems like they're just profiteering off us and they look like hypocritical capitalists.
Hey Lone Wolf. Yes, the ease of use and relative affordability has opened GPS drones up to anyone and many owners do not even see it as a hobby etc. Some excellent points, thank you for joining the conversation.
@@Geeksvana I know there are so many complex variables when it comes to drones.
The reason I'm sure you already know why the FAA and CAA are regulating them, because they ARE so affordable and they have many applications in the real world aswell as serious implications if in the wrong hands.
I mean, just look at what Ukraine are using their drones for, it doesn't take a mastermind to figure out how to make IED's.
That's why Gatwick now have millions of pounds invested in anti UAV systems.
As a guy starting Film Production at University in September, and I obviously use drones on my TH-cam channel, I think I have a great story to create a very compelling documentary about drones.
I'd like to include you in it as someone who is very knowledgeable on the subject, its going up on TH-cam when it's finished, but I'd love to include your thoughts and wisdom on this documentary.
.... all of that shit is already on place bud it's called part 107
The main thing that concerns me with RID is the public being able to track drone operators if they were to make RID Not accessible to the public for obvious security reasons I would probably feel more at ease, but any remote pilot would definitely be at risk ..
You are right. Why would the FAA want the Karens to be able to track all RC operated models ( including fixed wing and helicopters )? How would this improve "air safety" ?
They need to file another suit after the first operator is harassed or robbed because of remote ID.
Yep I've already said that the majority of us fpv pilots break the rules every time we fly by not having a spotter. My nephew is a cop, actually detective now, and he says they don't have time to be bothered with drone calls, and with some of the stories he tells me I believe it, he's in a town of only 17,000 not a suburb and you'd swear it was at least 10x that size with all the crazy stuff that goes on.
So it seem that LE won't really give af if you aren't being a dumb ass.
Sean, thank you for your enlighting comments and suggestion. Your video brings to light just a few of the problems we, as drone pilots, know will happen. Thank you for your balanced and logical presentation. I agree that the FAA has a long way to go to protect drone pilots and a better plan, not going back to fix already known problems. Take Care!
How do you know what will happen? Nobody else does. Its just conjecture.
Remember Captain Sully? Landed a plane on the Hudson River because of a bird. A multi-million dollar piece of equipment that was disabled by a bird. What about hardening planes so that a bird can't destroy them. Or possibly a UAV.
Why should a farmer checking his irrigation system or a kid flying a toy drone add another transmitter / receiver pair, processing power, extra weight and power draw to get shorter flight times and poorer performance? These systems do not need to be part of the air traffic management systems because most of the country is rural. In cities things are a bit different we would not want to throw off those flight navigation systems (they aren't that sensitive and if they are then they need to be fixed. If the idea of cameras bother you then why isn't satellite part of the discussion? Simply pull the curtains. The real problem is stated at the beginning. A few sea birds can cause a jumbo jet to come crashing down therefore detection of rogue UAV around an airport can have the same effect therefore the UAV sighting real or imagined can shut down an airport.
Toy and hobbiest drones don't need Friend or Foe detection, traffic management, flight plans, ADSB or any other flight system to circle a few trees and the FAA wants to move towards that exactly. They have much bigger fish to fry like coordination of updating past present and future air traffic control systems for both ground and air so that they continue moving traffic safely. Last time I checked there were air and ground systems that had not fully implemented decades old safety systems like ADSB and most smaller aircraft will never be. If you fly a toy or a small plane in Montana to check your cattle heards you should not be forced to follow the same rules as commercial passenger aircraft and that is where the FAA is trying to take us.
Well if you are an FAA licensed drone pilot and complying with their rules shouldn't the FAA provide you with an armed air marshall for your security when you fly?
As always Geeks, well thought out presentation and makes perfect sense. There's the kicker though, the regulating body here has left common sense behind and has sold the hobbyist and 107 pilot alike out to the corporate entities. Could we have a good safe system similar to UTM, of course we could, and it would be the best for everyone. Over on this side of the pond though, guess we're going the other way. As a 107, I don't really get a choice on compliance, what I do have, is one in the chamber with 15 friends that follow really closely behind. We'll see how it goes!
Hey D&Ds! Great to see you and hope you are well. Understand that completely and many will comply out of commercial necessity.
Sure you still have options:
Make sure to use a sub 250g drone that would not require "registration" for 44809, and make sure to bring a 107 registered unit with you too. IF or when it comes up "yes, I just completed a 107 op with that drone over there" or "yes, I have a 107 op coming up later today that I'm going to complete with that drone over there", and "right now, I am conducting a 44809 flight"...
Easy Peasy..!
I personally, usually, have no less than 200 rounds on or near my person! Doesn't mean I actually want to use it though! I could see this actually putting me MORE at risk of "having to" so, I'd rather simply NOT COMPLY with this RID BS..! IJS
And if you're "violating" one thing, why not violate another. Which is actually why I've stopped studying for my 107, thinking, if I'm going to "violate" RID then I may as well also operate "commercially" without a 107 - EFF the man..!
PS) I used to "illegally" carry my sidearm (IL resident) for MANY MANY MANY moons before they FINALLY "legalized" it ;) Basically, NO "bad law" should EVER be followed ;)
@@sparcsapphiredge3087 As with most uneducated people you totally do not understand the system. As with gun control, they are not going to show up at your house with a bunch of agents. You will receive a summons to appear, and if you do not show, an arrest warrant will be issued. Next step is swat team will take you out. (don't think they are intimidated by your 200 rounds!)
Yep I agree,if I can for now on,I will have a buddy accompany me as a spotter an as muscle also my gaurd, 17 friends thst follow closely as well,got protect yourself no matter what your doing,hell there's been a shooting at Walmart even,shift manager did it then turned gun on himself I don't believe my neighbors have a problem with my drone,as long as I don't fly over there house,now they may occasionally ask me when home to fly my drone over as I'm walking over an let them check it out,one of my neighbors has one but it's a toy grade folding one from Walmart that he asks me about operating sometimes an I try explaining the new goofy drone laws an regulations an about drone registration,you can't really call it a hobby anymore to enjoy it with dumb shit now I understand some people doing stuff with there drones,like flying around white house or flying contraband in jail,I've seen it on the news,but don't punish everyone for it,make those responsible pay for there crimes most of this stuff is common sense stuff,have to be safe an smart how an where you fly an not be high or drinking alcohol while operating drone,just like operating a car
The FAA does not enforce its current Drone regulations how do they intend to enforce new ones? Further more they offer little to no support to drone pilots conducting legal flights and fined, have their gear confiscated, or worse when their drone is shot out of the air..
Hey Rob! Great to see you. I actually had this precise thought last night whilst watching TNL. There is ZERO enforcement to support drone pilots in the US. The recent chap who had his Mavic shot down is a perfect example. Excellent point, thank you.
Five years of flying drones under my belt, I've never damaged any property, public or private. In these five years I have been harassed many times and every time the harassment increased the risk level of flying. I have had harassers antagonize&distract me into crashing. Every time I have been confronted I have ceded ground and gone elsewhere. I know that I am not the problem when it comes to drone safety, public ignorance is to blame. My worry is that harassers/Karens with access to the location of drone pilots will drive up the number of crashes. Thus creating a vicious cycle where the very thing this Remote ID law is supposed to remedy actually drives confrontations between pilots and the public resulting in less safety for everybody. I am buying up drones before 2023. I will continue to fly safely, but I refuse to comply.
Im more worried about getting robbed. Thieves are definitely more likely to find drone pilots and rob them than Karens are to harrass you. Both are bad dont get me wrong. But I dont want my life threatened
7:34 No, I haven’t seen or heard anything from FAA about education of the public about “Drone Love”! 🤷♂️🤔🤦♂️
You are spot on on the system will be a failure. There are going to a huge group that simply don't comply, there will be a significant market for devices (or hacks) that mis-transmit user and/or drone location data and cheap arduino like wifi transmitters are easy to make that will be used to flood the airwaves with straight up wifi noise/fake data.
Yep, the "word on the street" is just don't comply. They should just cut out 400 ft to 500 ft for the commercial (delivery) drones; give them their own space.
I will not by complying!
here's why your hypothesis is flawed, it is based on the presumption that the FAA is being truthful with regards to their publicly stated motivation for model aircraft remote id and all the other requirements/restrictions that are being implemented. You are correct with your prediction about the high level of non-compliance, at least for a while, but that won't last long and the reason is, unlike other FAA regulations which are enforced by the US government, they are implementing these laws with the full intent of them being enforced by local law enforcement, you don't live in the US so the reality that our criminal justice system as been transformed into a for profit enterprise isn't something that you have factored into your supposition. As to why remote isn't going to be what fails, because the real goal is to cause the hobby to fail, the big corporations want hobbyist out of the sky and are spending a lot of money to make sure they get their way....
What RID really "should" be is, literally a "digital license plate". RID should be NOTHING more than "broadcasting" your "license plate" (FAA registration number), and THAT'S IT. NOTHING more NOTHING less.
Just like with cars, civilians CANNOT "look up" a license plate on a motor vehicle. Likewise civilians should NOT be able to garner ANY information from your FAA registration number either. THIS should be (just like tags for cars) RESERVED for the FAA and/or law enforcement ONLY...
THAT is a version of "RID" that I think I'd be okay with. Because granted I am still "newer" to this "hobby" - I have wondered why the registration stickers, besides if/when a drone "falls" nobody is EVER going to actually see that (not like the N number on a manned AC)... So digitally broadcasting the AC's "REG NUMBER" - I think I'd be okay with.
You can't check who's driving a car here. But you can check who owns it and everyone who has ever owned that car using just the license plate. As a private person.
One thing I’ll say is any criminal out there wanting to use a drone is simply not going to use RID! So it’s bs really!
I suppose an argument would be that those not using it will be more obvious amongst a backdrop of compliant hobby and commercial operators. The issue there of course is compliance!
@@Geeksvana hearing ya brother 🤘🤝
@@Geeksvana Only if they are detected, and not transmitting makes a drone considerably harder to detect. Further, if they somehow were detected the sorts of things that would really qualify as bad acts in this domain are short duration activities such as taking down delivery drones, cargo drops over prisons, or piloted munitions employment that are going to be over before anybody can A) spot the quiet drone B) confirm it really is running dark C) determine the control method D) triangulate the control signal (if it has one) and then E) get law enforcement to that location. The one thing it may do is cause the FAA to put pressure on local police to hassle pilots when they come across them, and this will be regardless of sub250g because local cops don't know anything about either drones or grams.
I would disagree with that. Every drone by the very nature of the controller and drone setup is transmitting. CUAS systems can currently track a pilot location from 25 miles away.
@@Geeksvana exactly mate & the triangulation is instant also, even if you turn on and off it’s logged instantly 👍 I’ve not long left the military and it’s been like that for a while, What I will say is from speaking to friends still working in signals is that although it’s all there to see it’s only used in a Legal purpose if someone has been involved in a crime so there is something to charge them with ( for now 😅 )
I can’t and won’t say what I have seen but believe me when I say even when you turn on your TX16 it’s picked up ( in the U.K. anyway )
I smile every time I switch on knowing it and also that those watching don’t care about it, why? Because if you’re not near somewhere you shouldn’t be they couldn’t give a flying F! 😅 how this is going to change I don’t know but I’m happy for them to see it ( not like I have a choice) just not some random drone hater with an agenda 😱👍
Bit of a 'rebellious' video title Sean!!😲⚠️😊
Glad you're now opening your eyes and questioning these sometimes over bearing, disproportionate rules and regs that just aren't practical or give any benefit or make anything safer than they already are!
Welcome to the club.....⚠️😲😁👍
Thank you, I think this is one of the best responses to the issues remote ID (in the USA) looks to bring.
I wonder if there’d be anywhere near the same issues with it, if it was simply proposed to broadcast the drone’s ID like flight tracker & only allowing the relevant authorities a link to the drone pilot?
Great video, well done.
Thank you.
I agree about non-compliance due to the general public being able to find the remote pilot. I also agree that this rule will ignite the self-built segment as people find ways to avoid compliance.
I also think another trend will materialize: the explosion of the sub-250 gram segment which will be exempt from remote ID. That's an easy way to avoid the nasty parts of the rule. I believe it is telling that the two largest drone manufacturing companies have recently introduced sub-250's which have capabilities that could only have been dreamed of a short time ago. By Sept of 2023 I would bet that there will be sub-250 gram drones that will be fully adequate for hobby and even some professional applications.
Were kinda already there....
Problem is dji and autel are they only real quality makers
I have a nano+.... its not that great.very mid....autels best quads are MUCH bigger then even DJIs
What was the purpose of including pilot location anyway? Location for the drone, sure, for avoidance.
For commercial flying I can at least grasp the need for some control and regulation in open public areas. A giant feature film camera rig flying over populated areas should definitely be subject to some regulation and monitoring. Its just good sense. But to apply this to people flying on private property is stupid and a self defeating overreach. And its all far simpler than the explanation given here (I've come to understand that people in other countries don't fully grasp how freedoms work here in the US). Private property laws are fundamental. The first time FAA tries to enforce this on private property they're going to submarine the whole thing. They simply don't have the authority to control 'airspace' 2 feet above the grass in your backyard. That's a constitutional issue. They can put it on paper and posture until the cows come home. But in court this would all be nullified in 2 seconds. Assuming they could even enforce any of it, which they definitely can't. They can't come on your property without a search warrant. And they have no probable cause for that search warrant if you are not complying with RID and feeding them what is basically a confession. So by virtue of not following the regs, they are rendered toothless and worthless. So what's the point? Its just a stupid dog and pony show by bureaucrats trying to justify their jobs and bilk bribes from DJI and Amazon.
I would think it is very hard to defend how you are allowed to kick a football 30 feet up into the air, even in restricted airspace, but you can't fly a drone 2 feet off the ground in your own backyard, even in non-restricted airspace. I imagine they would say 'yes, but you _could_ bring your drone up higher than that, and a football will always fall back down'. Yes, but that's like closing a street down for all traffic because while most cars stop at the traffic light, some people _could_ ignore the red light and keep on driving.
It isn't about what you _could_ do, it's about what you _actually_ do. People with nefarious intentions will always disregard the rules, setting stricter rules will not change that. And people that are happy to comply if it means they can fly over their own backyard up to 30 feet high will stay within those bounds. And no, there's no privacy issue with the neighbours there, because I can see into their garden from that altitude out my window, it doesn't matter if that's seen through a drone or not. Besides, the same principle applies. It doesn't matter that you _could_ watch your neighbours, it matters whether or not you _actually_ watch your neighbours.
Not only do I hope you are wrong, but think that you are wrong. I have been a GA pilot for over 42 years (as well as an RC and Drone pilot for many years. There were people that said the same about ADS-B when originally mandated. Requirements dates were extended due to unavailability of transponders and installers. But in most everybody's opinion ADS-B has been the best thing that has happened to GA flying in many years. Having said that. The requirements for Drones is NOT ADS-B! It is far less powerful and far less informative. However it is the Cornerstone of "Beyond Visual Line of Sight" (FAA words not mine). All Drone operators want BVLOS and this is the direct path to obtaining it.
I hope the same thing Ken. However, the sheer number of vocal operators who claim that they will not comply is a genuine concern. However, the atmosphere might be very different by the end of next year!
Do they require remote id or a license for ultralight aircraft? Not that I’m aware of.. then why should I have to install the remote id on my sub 250g drone that I bought without it?
Now I have over $1g into a drone that’s trying to force me to install demote I’d every time I fly now.
Are we all acting like you can’t just home build one without remote I’d?
There’s no way for them to regulate the parts to stop it.
There probably needs to be some solution to this, but trying to implement things without having it all ironed out doesn’t give me good feelings.
I don’t know why we can’t just altitude limit and geofence, this has been working as far as I know.
@@Brandonthesnifferofall Yes, an ultra light must be certified and registered prior to sale (see FAA Part 91 Experimental) and if the ultralight has an electrical system (not exempt) and is going to fly in Mode C airspace it is required to have an ADS-B out (not in) transponder as are all other GA aircraft ( not military). Like your automobile, yes, you can drive all over your own private property, but having a drivers license and license plate is advised if you stray off it. Insurance is another issue. As a commercial pilot, I need insurance to get work, and without proper license and registration - there is no insurance. Back to your Ultralight example; yes you can fly without insurance; would I advise it: Absolutely not! Also, if your Ultralight is kept at a public airport, you will be required to have insurance. Also most Ultralight pilots have a Sport Certificate which is required if you have a passenger. (FAA Part 103)
@@FunFlyingPilot § 103.7 Certification and registration.
(a) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to certification of aircraft or their parts or equipment, ultralight vehicles and their component parts and equipment are not required to meet the airworthiness certification standards specified for aircraft or to have certificates of airworthiness.
(b) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to airman certification, operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements to operate those vehicles or to have airman or medical certificates.
(c) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to registration and marking of aircraft, ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to bear markings of any type.
@@Brandonthesnifferofall I stand corrected. Good job looking that up. The only ultralights that I was aware of exceeded 254 lbs and must be inspected and fell under the experimental designation. However as I said don’t carry a passenger without at least a Sport license.
I've been flying model airplanes for over 50 years we fly around in a circle line of sight How come the government is not making a stipulation between a drone and a fixed wing model airplane
I had a angry passerby throw my drone bag into the ocean while my aircraft was in flight.
After a hundred years of education we have apparently failed to convince the general populace of the “good use case” for vaccination with a sizeable minority of the population prepared to take action, sometimes violent action to force their viewpoint on the majority of the population …. But the public is going to be educated as to the benefits of drones to the point that drone pilots will be safe? In the words of Arnold Rimmer “Wrong, Wrong, Wrong absolutely brimming over with wrongability”
Hey Remote Pilots Australia! I want to call you Ari? Hope I got that right and that you are well. An excellent point and I thank you for making it!
@@Geeksvana Yes Sean, your memory isn’t that bas after all 😁 Ari it is.
Once Remote ID is required, I will either stop flying entirely, or find a way around having to use it, whether above-board or not. Alternately, I will OPEN CARRY.
flying fpv gives me much more situation awareness and ability to properly locate my craft away from potential hazards, keeping people and property safe, much more than a LOS spotter
I fly with one other person an dwe often spot for each other. At least when we're not trying to troubleshoot in the field after a crash. We'll give each other a heads-ups if walkers, bicycle riders, or dog walkers come around. Out here in SoCal, you can't get away from people. Even in some wooded areas, there are the occasional mountain bikes and hikers. But we've never been hassled. Some are genuinely curious.
We see a lot of manned aircraft still flying without ADS-B with no repercussions. Do we really think the authorities will have the will or resources to police drone hobbyists?
Hey Gary! Precisely. Without a compliant regulated hobby, their plans simply cannot work.
But do you want to be the unlucky one?
There are no repercussions because we don't have to have ADS-B on manned aircraft in class E and G airspace. They actually rather not have transponders in that airspace because it will completely saturate the FIC radar. They simply turn us off on their radar screen.
@@Nkkdxn45j I think I'd prefer to risk being made an example of rather than letting the government put overbearing laws on me that dictate I lose one of my few sources of fun. Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. I won't crawl under their boot.
@@jaysonrees738 So be it.
I strongly suspect that non-compliance will be an issue. I do not fly drones. However, the existence of the rule disclosing the operator's location inspired me to think of ways around it. The motivation for someone who flies drones will be much greater. No one wants to be doxed.
The ones responsible for this regulation might be more sensitive to the problems if they were required to broadcast their physical locations to their entire city whenever they participated in their favorite hobbies.
The FAA said in that clip that they are aware of the pilot safety issues and that they will work to educate the public to prevent this.
1. I have had quite a few issues with the public in places that we are encouraged to fly RC aircraft in two privately owned parks in my area;e is a section of each pack set out for this.
I had many crazy people confront me, two instances where I was physically attacked and one where a guy pulled out a gun threatening me. Since then these parks have added security.
2. The FAA went through a lot of trouble and expense in 2018 through 2020 and even into 2021 to make as many people as possible hate and fear drones and the RC hobby.
3. So now imagine Remote ID and now anyone, specially these psycho people, can find any drone pilot at any time. How many of us RC pilots will have to die before the FAA pulls their heads out of their you know whats? The FAA is a giant circle jerk with each one of them with their head up another's rear end.
4. No one in the FAA has ever flown anything RC. They are absolutely clueless about everything RC, including ground vehicles.
5. The FAA only sees dollar signs with the concept of drone deliveries. When it comes to that, the FAA are complete hypocrites. All the restrictions put on RC pilots of where we can fly are completely thrown out the window for drone delivery. They have zero concern for safety of the people or property when it comes to drone delivery.
Bottom line, the FAA wants to eliminate the RC hobby for drone delivery. Drone delivery will not work at all. Between the expense, the safety of the public, the complaints that everyone will be filing with the nuisance of drones flying all over neighborhoods day and night, the drone failures that will cause crashes, property damage and serious injury to people.
Imagine a curious kid or a family pet running up to a delivery drone and being hit by it.
The FAA doesn't give a Flying A$$ or a Rat F**k about the people, only $$$$$$$$$$$$.
Very interesting views. You do say at the end that this will probably cause a resergence of home / kit build, the implication being it avoids the need for remote ID in the US?
It doesn't, I think. Ignoring FRIAs, I believe anyone who flies under part 107 (eg as part of a business, posting on TH-cam even if not deliberately monetised etc), or 250g and above, is subject to remote ID, because it is anyone who has to register.
That seems to mean that a ready built craft of any sort over 250g purchased after mid-Sept must have standard remote ID built in - not sure if there are any apart from prospectively DJI. A home / kit built (depending on the level of 'kit') over 250g can use an external broadcast module and has a further year's grace.
But, it is simply weight and purpose of flight that is the decider, not how it was built. That only determines the type of remote ID you can get away with.
RCModelReviews seems to think that part 107 flights must always be with standard as opposed to external broadcast remote ID, but I didn't see that in the rules - maybe I'm wrong.
So, except for sub 250g 100% recreational, there are no exceptions long term, and if I was a betting man, I'd say this will encroach further sub 250g given time. Also, the idea that ANY post online is 'in furtherance of a business' seems especially mad and authoritarian. I would have thought that might be challengeable - but who wants to go to court?
To me though, it's not the privacy issue, it's the fundamental premise that all airspace users are treated under the same regulatory framework is where it all starts to go wrong. Me flying a small FPV quad is NOT the same as an F16, a real Piper Club or an Airbus, and there is no logical reason why we should be treated the same. A football or golf ball also use the same airspace.
I recall an instance where a FPV craft receiver failed and the craft instantly failsafed and crashed (no one around - we check for that). But, in theory, that would now require me to report it to the CAA. Damn silly.
I don't see how the UK UTA trial can possibly succeed and be scalable. To make it financially worthwhile, delivery drones need to go everywhere, not just down little corridors - 'the last five miles'. That would require infrastructure countrywide, akin to the mobile mast infrastructure. I don't think that is cheap?
In the end, this type of regulation will probably cause me to dump it all. Hobbies have to be fun, this is becoming less so. Probably the intention, whatever the regulators say.
Totally agree mate 🤝
If you think im going to broadcast my location at 5am doing sunrise photography with thousands of dollars of gear your absolutely nuts... I have already had one robbery attempt and a successful robbery. Had someone sneak up and steal my phone while flying. It fails from a security stand point. Privacy and personal security come first. Just take a look at our country. Its a mess. Not only no but hell no.
You say, a drone in the wrong hands is a danger. What I want to add is a plane or a helicopter in the wrong hands is also a danger so I don't see the problem. It's just a way to impose more rules on us and destroy the hobby.
Hey Klaas, hope you are well. That was actually my point. As I stated, even a van can be used by extreme bad actors to harm others.
You guys have all good points. I wanted to also mentioned that someone planning something with bad intentions may consider a drone alot easier than traying a plane, helicopter etc... is just too many ways to get caught or tracked ahead of their plans or even after. With a drone you don't even have to be present, specially with a home made FPV drone of any size. And since they don't care anyway they will just violate all the rules anyway. Is like giving a thef the choice of a hard car to steal or an easy target. Which one would they most likely go for? I'm a beginner myself with DJI mini and I do like to hear both sides of the argument and hopefuly at the end some resonable agreement will come up were all parties involved agreed upon.
I wonder how long it will be until it is illegal to fly any drone without a remote ID regardless of how or where it is being flown. That the concern I have.
September of 2023 I think is when it goes into effect.
The Theatrical Security Agency knows it isn't a viable idea, but they just want to clamp down on what the public does...
I am 72 years old and have flown rc planes for about 45 years. I have been an AMA member for years so I thought I would try to comply and register with the FAA. After going on their website all I see is drone registration. They say nothing about rc planes and their questions make no sense at all. The hobby is getting to be no fun now that the government has gotten involved and I have come to the conclusion it"s time to quit flying and just run my rc boats. Even the AMA seems to be of no help to us anymore.
With all these new regulations forthcoming and all the confrontations that come along with drone flying is exactly why I'm staying completely away from flying a drone.... it takes the fun out of it and frankly just isn't worth the agitation just to go to a park and fly on a nice day
What if I just happen to leave the remote ID on and drive around town close to government buildings or airports?
Will this trigger collision warnings or initiate closers?
Unlikely unless you are also driving at 200ft...
I will build my own drones and many others will follow, bypassing the system. Remote ID is dangerous to drone pilots & The FAA does not care. - EveryDayDrones
Now THIS sounds like FUN !!!
Maybe one day I shall build my own drone(s) :D
Interesting what you were saying about the need for security. If they are wanting to liken it to commercial aviation then surely see the start point will be sufficient. See where it too off from and where it is now and if there is something happening then the appropriate resources can be despatched by the appropriate authorities. No need to allow public access to location. Or make location private EXCEPT to authorities (Police, FAA etc)
So does this not break the data protection law at least Waze in the UK or does America not actually have this particular type of legislation
Hi Mark. Hope you are well. Correct, the US does not have the same data protection. Although the version of Remote ID proposed in EASA regs is actually pretty similar but would not permit public access.
What makes Remote ID so dangerous is all the hate built up by bad drone pilots. Some guy is going to be annoyed by kids with toy drones and look for a solution. He will find some RID app and then some poor guy operating with RID is going to get blamed for the others bad behavior. Who knows how bad the interaction will be after all that anger has built up.
The UAV vendors are treating Canadians the same as USA so Canadians will have to follow the procedure in order to get the UAV to fly....not fair
Gee how could anything go wrong? Let's take a look at general aviation in the U.S.. all the way up til the 1980's General aviation was robust. All across America there were little private airports with communities attached. But the government got more involved the faa got bigger and general aviation started getting smaller, aircraft had to change because of fuels and more and larger controlled areas began appearing. Now, general aviation is such a has been that its a shadow of the 1970's. So faa participation in regulating and controlling model aircraft will only result in hardships and perhaps death of the hobby. Some of the damage to the hobby is self induced but as with the fcc mandate taking away our frequencies in days gone by to leave your Kraft sport series illegal or useless at controlled flying sites, that caused you to leave the hobby because you couldn't afford a new radio, remote ID will make flying too expensive for some older flyers and many new ones. Flitetest has done an amazing job lowering costs and that allowed new pilots to enter the hobby. Faa rules will fix that little problem...
Remote ID for Amazon delivery and any other commercial heavy lifting drone NOT needed for hobby toy drones I’m sorry but this is just a cash grab and biggest law flexing BS I have ever seen
Until the FAA does something even more brazen
As it stands today, I don’t understand how the FAA expects Remote ID to function- technically.
First, the language the FAA used to describe the “methods” by which manufacturers will broadcast this Remote ID data is “for example: WiFi or Bluetooth”. Bluetooth has a range of 30 feet. The range of a mobile WiFi hotspot is also: 30 feet. Does FAA expect that in order for a curious citizen to gather identification of a suspicious drone they see up above the neighborhood , they must go hunting across backyards and private properties until they are within 30’ of a potential drone pilot and then attempt to somehow pair to an indifferent person’s BlueTooth or WiFi hotspot? This has not been thought-through.
Lately, the FAA has further clarified that Remote ID will not put the burden of costs on the operator for any extra cell data transmission. Also, the open receiving of the signals will not require specialized equipment. So no requirement for the operator to transmit to the internet. What in our civilization is left that satisfies these criteria? How has DJI already made some of their current drones Remote ID-ready? I have seen NOWHERE where ANYONE, either governmental or content creator, has explained the nuts and bolts how this will all fall into place by September next year.
you probably see now Chris... DJI's latest firmware to mini 3 (sub 250g) forces you to do this now.
Law enforcement will only harass those who are compliant
And what about drones that deliver food?
NOT JUST DRONE FLYERS! This applies to model aircraft as well.
I think you’re confusing “quadcopter” and “drone”
The FAA regards and define all model aircraft as "drones".
Yup and just like COVID a lot of people not gonna comply
If you build a drone and don't fit it with RID capabilities, who would actually know and police that? As for RID 'transponders', who would manufacture, certify and maintain them? Would there be periodic regulation to have the RID system checked for correct operation and accuracy? How much would that cost? You can't just broadcast anything into the airwaves without it being certified, especially if laws are being built around it's use. How much would that cost to the user? I agree that larger commercial drones, UAV's, etc should be monitored, but to apply this across the board is insane, just from managing that regulation point-of-view. From the security PoV, WHY would the information be made available to the public? What actual purpose does that serve other than to fuel conflict! Surely position of the operator is only required if the drone if flown outside the regulation limits and committing an offence.
It's meant to fuel conflict, the FAA knows exactly what they are doing.
I stocked up on transmitters & receivers with the intention of non-compliance.
To hell with Defund the police. I say, Defund the FAA!
Yeah I definitely agree, I dont imagine many people complying. For the most part people already don't comply with drone regulation and for the most part no one really gets in trouble for it (very often).. I imagine a lot of people are probably already thinking that a fine sometime down the road will just be part of the cost of the hobby, even before RID. For a lot of people this is just going to be the 5th law that theyre breaking when they fly.
And I'm almost sure the FAA didn't think about people that would otherwise be complaint, into full non compliance over this (RID)!
Example: I have actually been studying for my 107, but for me this RID crap will be the straw that breaks the camels back (unless they change something about the privacy of it)! So, I have CEASED studying for my 107 because I figure, if I am going to "disobey" RID, then why should I even bother with a 107. Surely it does NOT mean that I will not fly "commercially", just means I will be "in violation" (oh well, what's "one more" "violation"!?)...
Some humans clearly just don't think (many of which work at the FAA and/or in gubbamint)!!!!!!!!!
I think you're missing something here. You won't have the choice to comply with RID. From this date forward, all drones and aircraft sold in the US wil have RID built-in, turned on, and broadcasting. Wouldn't it be easier to just register it and not have any worries about getting busted and paying a fine? Personally, I don't have a problem with it at all. I'll still have fun flying and it can broadcast AM radio for all I care!
@@Kevin-ib4gv oh no i fully understand that, I fully understand that any drone i buy in the future will come with remote ID and that there is nothing i can do to stop that. When I wrote that comment I was more thinking of FPV drones, which I would build myself even it it werent for RID. and TBH all i do with fpv drones is take them to the park. And when I am flying a FPV drone early in the morning I definitely don't want to broadcast "Hey this is where i am standing wearing goggles". I might change my mind though, i think ill wait to see how often people actually get caught once it is all being enforced.
@@TheNosnawS I get it. I think the FAA will give the community some time to get used to RID but after a while they will impose some huge fines on unregistered/non-compliant drones just to make headlines and get others to register.
how do you install on old drones? example mavic, mavic air and spark??
I have seen ZERO advertisements or info campaigns from the FAA concerning drone operations. (In fact, I’ve never seen ANY informational promotions about ANYTHING from the FAA.)
At this point, I’m very skeptical.
Wide-spread peaceful non-compliance. That's my prediction. Park flyers are going to continue flying in parks. Hobbyists will continue flying in the back yards and local school fields. It'll be generations before there are options for existing UMX planes that will work, and there are millions of them already out there. This whole thing is a solution in need of a problem, and screams of big business pushing their agenda to try and commercialize what has traditionally been the hobbyist's airspace.
Glad I live in an open carry state, so as you can imagine I never have a problem... As for Remote ID while I can see both sides and still maintain it's regulation without representation, FPV being a prime example..
Be safe my drone pilots. But..this is about gov't regulation. How many birds have crashed into planes vs drones? They better get those birds in compliance, too.
Just give the hobby a 300 foot ceiling, anything below this ceiling does not need RID. How simple is that solution?
Anything flying over 400 ft. Needs ID.
How can I find a find drones with Remote ID? What would I use to track drones and find operators? Is it a phone APP, a standalone tracker? No one seems to know.
How would u be able to not comply with the new drones that already have the software updated for compliance?can u turn it off in the app?
Here we are in the US with remote ID coming in Sept and those people who own a drone that does not have built in RID capability need to purchase a module to make the drone RID compliant. So far, I've seen modules on the market costing between $150-$200 US Dollars plus some of them add hefty amount of extra weight to the drone, particularly sub 250 gram drones. Why doesn't the FAA attempt to regulate the cost of these modules?
Unless you are flying Part 107 you don't need remote ID on a sub 250 drone. As of a few weeks ago, RID modules are scarce and only a few models are available. I can't see everybody who bought an over 250 gram drone shelling out another $250 for something they don't want and will likely never be questioned about. I prefer the small drones and only one has RID built it, I have no intentions of buying the modules or registering any other drones.
I'm confused as to how the infrastructure will work. With RID, my drone needs to get permission from the FAA before taking off. The FAA says we can use WIFI or bluetooth, and the FAA specifically said we DON'T need an internet connection for RID to work. So... with the VERY limited range of WIFI/BT, exactly how will we be getting permission from the FAA? The logistics make no sense to me.
The presentation I saw from FAA sells the idea that registration and RID would guarantee that nothing threatening or "nefarious" was afoot.
My little foam RC airplane has to remain within about 300 feet of me or I lose sight of the plane and instantly lose the airplane. If you see my RC plane, then I am the guy standing within 300 feet of it and holding a box with an antenna sticking out of it. I only fly in clear weather (so I can see my airplane) so I don't need to understand the FAA weather forcasting format. If I have to subscribe to a $75 a month service that connects all RID data to a central server then I can not afford to be in this hobby. The $185 fee just to take the FAA written test cost more than my little airplane. If the FAA thinks they should control the airspace within 50 feet of the ground between my house and my barn they can stuff it.
I only fly in class G air space not going to worry about it. By the time a spotter tells you anything it is over.
I would suggest regardless of faa regulations, pilots should keep protection with them , no one will protect you like you will. In Tn. Legal citizens can now carry, I do. And would suggest others do the same.
Always bring a friend too, or maybe more friends, safety in numbers
@@Razor-gx2dq nah loose ends , i have my cameras 🙄 I can be the devil if I so choose. I'm no stranger to violence.
Ken heron recently this is 3 months after the video come out has a remote ID box to attach to a drone and it only shows the position of the drone there's no remote ID controller operator location
Different systems. The Dronetag box is not specifically a Remote ID receiver. It picks up the transmission data already being sent by every drone. Once the RID deadline passes the data will be included, as is the law. (Sadly).
Also understand that private aircraft can block their N-number and information on public tracking sights.
Okay first of all one main thing, people don't realize what is is doing for Aviation. Especially autonomous flight. As a we the Drone Pilots require more and more technology and response from the equipment we purchase. This is advancing regular flight non-fpv also autonomous flight, Plus Aviation. Unfortunately as we go on this cost the regular drone pilot more money for advanced technology. This should not be. The ones that break the law should pay for what they do. And I lost should be stiffer against the law Breakers not the hobbyist and drone Pilots. It'll come to a point where you will need 2,000 plus dollars to fly a drone. Which will kill a hobby. I can remember when as an AMA pilot on Sundays I take my plane and a trainer out to the park. It was Markham Park in Fort Lauderdale at home with gas and Battery and fly my time. The rest of my time out of the park I let the kids learn how to fly the trainers. Besides building my own aircraft and flying them, best time I had was when the parents brought the kids down to the park and fly the trainers I had two trainers. They had a thousand patches on them but they were still stable and good. Two things I loved was building my own aircraft, and flying them. But the best part was teaching the kids out of the fly. The problem was when the parents ask me how much does it cost for me to get my kid a plane in radio. The parents disappeared but the kids came back. LOL teaching the kids was great. Building my own aircraft that flew was great. What I told the parents is if you don't have the money to buy an aircraft call me Saturday morning. And I'll let you know if I have a plan they can fly. I both parts applying building patching and getting the kids in here. Today I don't know with everything changing can't be done anymore I don't think. Not even with a tip jar. I remember one parent showing up with three kids they were very late and I had to tell them I'm out of methane. She goes what's up what's the fuel because how much is it cost can we buy some now I go Saturday at 3:00 guys how much does it cost I said about 45 bucks a gallon. You said okay I'll go get it. And she did. That's how important it was to the kids.
Thanks!
Thank you for your efforts researching and reporting on the issues relating to our hobby. Is project skyway still an option/being considered in the UK or do you think we'll just follow suit as per US with RID?
Are Remote ID Modules available for purchase yet, if so, where?😊
I got a drone to help me shoot photos and videos for my real estate business, but I'm very much thinking of just getting some 30-foot to 60-foot camera masts and avoiding this nonsense. Maybe I'd use other means of getting a camera aloft? I could use kites, balloons, maybe even a potato launcher.
😅👍 dropped you a sub for your awesome sense of humour mate!
Potato launcher 👍🤘😅
@@bugsy742 Thanks!
@@Pooua 🤘🤜🏻🤛🏻
Get a big trampoline! Jump... snap... jump... snap... 😆
might not be a bad idea, look into spiderbeam poles, they are heavy duty collapsible fiberglass masts for ham radio antennas, you can get them from like 10ft up to 80 ft
I have a sub 250 drone. I'm scared to death to fly it. Confrontation is a real fear regulations and avoiding mistakes, I have tried to educate myself to be a safe pilot and I will continue. Remote ID is a good idea with maybe certain data open to the public with personal data for Homeland security or local law enforcement only...