@@minkorrh everyone should know Benjamin Franklin said this. ... If you didn't, now you know. 👍 It's a profound quote every single one of us should live by daily. In other words, stop relying on government to save you, all they care about is how much more of your hard earned money they can steal from you.
OK, Mr Web self-appointed numpty, prey tell, who was this robbed 'Author'? All I know is... The words were nothing remotely like Phillips take on what is obvious... well to a seagull… ‘Satirical humour’ not a teaching aid to historical accuracy… lol. Please, Chill out babe.
There is absolutely NO REASON to need any broadcast ID to fly in the middle of nowhere. No cell service, no internet......Maybe within controlled space but that is it!
The thing is, in controlled airspace with how the FAA has proposed this no airport tower will see it on scopes, no full sized aircraft will see it. They don't want it to interfere with full sized aviation and why they want a 3rd party to handle all of it. This is a farce and just a reason to clear the airspace for the commercial drone industry.
On hobbyist......The registration process will not work for model aircraft. It's based on the false assumption that AMA members have just 2 planes that last for 10 years. Page 194. It also requires that The Rx detect Internet or it will not initialize. It also states a requirement for the Rx to broadcast telemetry data with a serial number or session Id to a 3rd party contractor approved by the FAA and that data be held for 2 years. Additionally, if you have aircraft that do not have remotes I'd you can only fly at FAA approved flying sites. Furthermore there are some scary words on page 174 that state that waivers will only be granted to fixed flying sites for s period of 12 months. After that period there will be no more waivers granted and renewals must occur every 48 months. Which means that if you lose your field , you will not get FAA approval at another field. It also states in very clear language that the expected result is that over time fixed flying sites will go away by attrition and that everyone will be flying with remote I'd. Problem is, all of that is geared towards drones and assumed that model aircraft are the same thing. They have some pretty lofty technological asks and compliance demands that manufacturers will have to adhere too...and since most non AMA fliers fly DRONES , airplane and heli manufacturers will be screwed due to loss of revenue and most likely go out of business. Leaving only drones. If Horizon, for example, thinks it's not profitable to make model aircraft , they won't ..the FAA is demanding manufacturers to come up with thier own solutions in order to comply. It will take some time to roll out but if all of this stays like it is , the model aircraft hobby is dead and anyone who has money in this is screwed. It's called Tyranny through over regulation in an attempt to deny airspace to model aircraft...
What I am having a problem with is the treatment of UAV pilots different than any other general aviation pilot. This can all be resolved so easily if the interest truly is safety. 1. UAV Registration a. All aircraft flying under Part 107 rules need to be registered just as any other aircraft. b. Hobbyist flying in controlled airspace who fly at designated sites should be free from registration. i. Airspace within these sites are already approved for activity with NOTAMS available for all pilots. c. Hobbyist who are flying in only Class G airspace should not be required to register their aircraft. i. Pilots are still responsible for aircraft separation same as any other type of aircraft. Remote ID a. Part 107 aircraft operating within controlled airspace, (E, D, C B) should require some remote ID (Squawk code or ADS-B). (Remote ID) b. Flying within class G airspace should not require Remote ID i. This is the same as any civil aircraft within class G airspace, where no Transponder is required. c. Hobby aircraft flown within controlled airspace within the limits of approved sites, such as clubs or AMA sits should be exempt from remote ID. 3. Controlled airspace a. Remote pilots, (Part 107) should be considered professional pilots with the same rights as any pilot. i. This can allow for clearance from ATC to fly in controlled airspace. b. Part 107 pilots should be able to receive ATC Radio communications training to enable radio use acquire clearance in controlled airspace. c. Remote Part 107 pilots only fly during VFR and are responsible for establishing and maintaining aircraft separation. i. This is similar to any other pilot flying VFR. ii. Without a waiver, the UAV must be in visual line of site.
The gov't is acting like drones are taking down aircraft and airliners every week. There is no reason for them to know every move a drone pilot makes. No reason whatsoever.
After reading the proposed rule on remote id for drones I have some concerns. I own 2 DJI drones that I have used on the ranch for the past 3 years . I am a private pilot and have a part 107 rating to comply with the currant rules. I use them to check for new born calves in the spring, checking fences, gates and water gaps, checking pastures to locate cattle and strays and check fields for weeds and disease. These tasks take much less time and resources than 4 wheelers or horses in rough country. The problem that I see is that these areas have limited to no cellular service or access to the internet. The areas that I use these drones would be off limits if this rule were adopted the way it is written. My drones would be worthless if I had to stay within 400 ft of the transmitter, which is also part of this rule. There are many more people that use drone technology in agriculture that would affected in the same way. I use my drones 90% of the time as tools that save many hours of time, a lot of fuel and wear and tear on vehicles. I don’t see why tracking could not be accomplished with the signals already transmitted by the aircraft and the transmitter. The only problem with the current rules seems to be lack of knowledge and enforcement. The hard part of any rule is making it apply to everyone. It would be to bad if this were adopted to please the few at the cost of the many.
I fly RC planes and helis that never leave my sight, these requirements would be ridiculous for the RC airplane hobby. They basically fly in the same space that someone can throw a football...no cameras, no fpv, you just fly out 100 - 200 feet in line of sight so you can maintain orientation.
Too late! The time to speak out was when the FAA was being given control of "UAS." Now our fate is in the hands of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. You commercial users are to blame for this, and you will get your just deserts. You and your delivery drone offspring may have just killed a wonderful, wholesome hobby and a burgeoning industry with your demand for airspace to yourselves for commercial operations. The hobbyists brought model aviation to you commercial users, now you're taking model aviation away from us. If this all passes, I hope your businesses go T-U from the regulatory and financial burden.
Thanks Paul, I just have to say I really appreciate your passion for the drone hobby and drone industry. I bought my first drone in May of 2019 and have been nothing but excited in learning drone technology and the future positive benefits drones can bring to our world. Plus what an awesome hobby!! I would hate to see my recent discovery of flight/ piloting be put to and end over fear/profit. I will follow the lead of the folks who have been living and working in this amazing segment of American aviation longer than myself. Thanks Drone U for standing up!! Sincerely, Lenny P.S. 24 flighty hrs and counting!!
Substance of future response to FAA, early stages: . I am not a drone photographer as such, but ... I do use my drone as a tool, to wit: (I am 73 years old, and the drone is a tool I use to keep me off off ladders and to do household chores efficiently.) (1) Inspect my gutters, so I don't have to use a ladder (safety concern). (2) Inspect my roof (safety concern). (3) Inspect my small pond (5~acres) for algae, etc. (~safety concern) (4) Hang rope around my sixteen Leyland Cypress trees that I am felling at about 2/3 to 3/4 way up the tree to help with the fell direction. (safety concern) 5) Future, will use used second hand drones to put down fertilizer and herbicide as the costs come way down. Maybe with neighbors partnership. None of these uses should concern anyone other that the landowner. Recommendations to FAA: (1) Do not require any identification/regulations for drones use to the tree tops (and a short distance above) in privately held property. (2) Require any drone delivery system to mandate an "opt in" from the address owner before they can deliver to a specific address. (3) Help keep me safe, don't make me a felon. Note: In responses to FAA, always include recommendations.
Hello I am Danny damveld from the Netherlands ,city Enschede. I am also a drone pilot and love flying with drones for 5 years and I do this as a hobby and specialty to make beautiful nature video Documentaires from beautiful nature Locations and places and put it on my TH-cam channel to Share it with the world How Beautiful mother earth is in his Nature .so i hope that this ID Bul***t never ever go to work and never ever go to Activated Worldwide . Greetings Danny damveld from Netherlands.
Great video! As an Airline pilot and drone operator I'm very concerned and dissapointed with the FAA on this proposal. Just horrible. I agree, this is not legal. Violates so many privacy laws. If this were to go into effect, I predict lawsuites.
Hate to break this to you, but now isn’t the time to fight. Remember when the CDA said we need to get rid of Part 336? That was the time. Now is the time to create a legal defense fund, so that the first time they try an enforcement action based on these 100% inevitable RID rules, we can get the whole package overturned by a judge.
Finally somebody that’s not willing to roll over! I subscribe to a lot of channels drone related and there’s nothing but crickets or... there’s nothing we can do. Ya know, “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything!” We need a voice to come together, your the man. Don’t stop, just tell us where to sign!
Model aviation is not a crime! Redefine the airspace! Makes you wonder if this remote ID is really to benefit the big business drones in giving them an active read out where everyone else is and they don’t have to pay for it!
Apparently broadcast is now accepted as a form of standard ID, no internet required. I think DJI will mostly make it out okay, which is great for DJI users and people who use them commercially, but there's actually fine print that completely outlaws FPV drones altogether. Even if we were to put a transponder on it, which is way too heavy for us to do, it doesn't make it legal simply because it was built. Essentially, what will end up happening, is we will have to buy pre-built drones from FAA approved manufacturers. That means what is likely is that DJI will be the only place we can buy fpv quads. We won't be able to upgrade the parts. And if we crash, we will have to buy the same parts to repair it. FPV quads crash (safely, away from people) all the time. Part of what we do is break quads and repair them. I just bought a race quad and after all tax and shipping and everything, it cost me $175. DJI's recommended fpv builds cost like $600+ iirc. When they alone have rights to sell the parts (as a kit, as specified by the FAA), they will be able to charge even more. And none of it even has to be technically proprietary to lock you in, the law does that and forces you to have to buy from them. Assuming we will even be able to buy replacement parts, which might not even be the case, the parts themselves will also be way more expensive simply because it will be monopolized. And this is all pretty much best case scenario. We will have worse quads that don't fly how we want at 3x (or more) the price. And they will break the first time we fly them and we will have to either buy overpriced parts or buy and entirely new quad. FPV can't exist like that. Don't get me wrong, I agree with everything you've said and you're saying some things other TH-camrs have left out, but it seems the proposal is already being moved to make DJI users have access to the sky. I'd love to see more push for fpv (not at the expense of DJI, just in addition to) because we are the minority and we still are fighting what seems to be a hopeless battle. Also, remember that if it gets amended so that DJI drones can essentially operate as is without anything changing but other cinema drones can't (both currently existing or potential future ones that don't yet exist), that pushes DJI even closer to a monopoly on that market which is not good for you either. And also don't forget that all of this is to push us out of the sky so that big corporations can have exclusive access to it (it's not about safety, it's about "separation," as their IG says, except they are separating us from big corporations by putting us on the ground"). All that to say, don't stop pushing just because broadcast goes through and becomes accepted. Just because a mavic and a phantom might be able to continue flying on broadcast does not mean that there won't be dire repercussions from the proposal going through otherwise. There's a LOT more wrong with this proposal than just that it (initially) doesn't allow broadcast and forces an internet connection.
There's a legal case connected with one of the airlines approaching and leaving an airport in Long Island. This case established that leaving and returning to the ground are included in a US citizen's public right to transit the air space above USA soil. Common sense, . . . how do you transit the airspace if you can't take off (or then, obviously, LAND!). And since the FAA is authorized to regulate the air space (including take offs and landings) then local communities or STATES have NO authority to say we can't take off and land wherever we want.
Thanks for this video. I think we have to point out the importance of not falling into this thinking that IDs, remote or not, makes any sense. We need to be able to fly in total anonymity for our safety. As noted, the reason for remote ID, tracking of flight data etc has nothing to do with safety (no serious accidents confirmed). It has nothing to to with efficiency of transportation. Drones will never be a mainstream way to deliver goods, and even if it did, it would be easy for the stakeholders to define a system (without FAA's introducing endless delays in the process) that deals with route planning and collision avoidance in areas of high traffic density, a system that would not in any way interfere with other uses of drones. Who would fly FPV close to transportation drone highways? Who would ride a bicycle in the middle of a motorway? So there are no benefits of remote ID and flights data collection regulations of civilian drones for companies like Amazon, FedEx etc. Systems like LAANC has been promoted like a good thing by many blue-eyed people both from within the drone community and from authorities. It cannot be pointed out enough how dangerous the LAANC system is for the users. When you install the LAANC based apps is that your name and your location is recorded and transferred to a central database. This database can be accessed by numerous people and the data is not secure. (Same goes for the logs of DJI drones). This data inevitably ends up in the hands of corrupt people, criminal organizations etc. Corrupt politicians and drug-lords are the main beneficiaries of knowing where you are flying and who you are. Needless to say, these groups are very powerful and if they want your flight data, they will get it. The only ways to fight this is to fly drones that does not have any un-encrypted ID and position transmitted and that does not record the flight data in forms reachable from the internet or other communication paths. What we need is encrypted communication links to/from our drones. Open source projects developing such software/firmware is what I would expect our authorities to promote and support if they think in terms of safety. What would you think a drug-lord would do to you if he find out you are flying close to areas where illegal activities were carried out. He would most likely wait until you land and then kill you and confiscate your drone and the police would probably think you were also involved in the drug business and your case will never be recorded as being the result of bad regulations! FAA knows this, law enforcement knows this, but so far their efforts ha gone in the completely opposite direction. Why? Corruption?
We shouldn't be using the argument that drones already have a remote ID system. Most R/C planes and helicopters don't have that and we should be fighting to keep it that way unless used for commercial purposes. There is no safety problem to solve with traditional model aviation.
Some good arguments. 👍👍👍 I've already left my comments for the FAA. I hope others have as well. As of today 01/03/2020 there are just 847 comments left by the drone community for the FAA. Com'on guys...I know we've got a bigger voice than this. Leave you comments on the FAA site for the sake of this hobby. If you don't know what to write read through some of the other comments others have left to help form your own opinion. You can see the individual comments on the far right of the the main FAA site of this Proposal, under "View Comments". One problem though...the little guy doesn't have the money/resources to fight the FAA should things go to court. Could cost thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight should this proposal become law/regulation, and later goes to court.
So, other than legislation on a piece of paper, what would actually stop me from flying my hobby drones (Hubsan H501ss and Fimi X8) in my backyard and at the local park, like I do now? And stocking up on similar non-RID drones before this nonsense is enacted?
Prison planet it's called earth, I'm not a sheeple dont follow people it's that simple I've been flying a very long time safely dont need to be baby sat
This was one of the best explanations of this absurd proposal. Saying it was a "license plate" was perfect. I literally just bought a mavic 2 pro on black friday (and had plans to buy an fpv wing) and after hearing this, I felt kinda duped. Thing is, I live in a rural part of Oregon where we wouldn't see any sort of delivery drone, at least in this decade, but I would still have to follow this ridiculous rule. Sorry, but I'm going guerrilla.
Paul, Gobblin Valley UT already charges drone pilots $ 5.00 to take off from the ground! That's the only way you can fly. I think it is completely illegal! Great stuff Paul!
In Miami I have to pay $150 for a permit to take off. Some parts of Miami I have to pay an off duty police officer $68.50 per hour to supervise my flight
Mountainsky Aerial Photography its not I spoke with the FAA about that and the reason miami gets away with it is because I have to take off from their land and to do that they want the permit to “ensure” I’m flying safely and their “paperwork”. I also have to carry 2 million in liability. So basically $500 is what I have to pay just to get in the air in Miami lol.
I agree with your opinions with the exception of the driving force behind this. The current administration in general and the FCC has already shown themselves to be very focused on facilitating commercial operations at the expense of personal or small business, and I think that kind of intent has come to be in the FAA also. What sections of industry would benefit by curtailing manually operated drones?
One of my first hobbies was slot cars. When I was finally old enough to go to the big track and purchased a slot car and controller that track shut down 3 weeks later and the next closest track was 20 miles away, it was crushing. I still have that slot car and has been used twice. Just bought a drone and it was not cheap. It looks like it may get a spot next to the slot car.
Great analysis. You mentioned my thoughts. Being from and living in Europe I will not comment to the FAA. Our EU drone regulation will come to effect 06/2020 where in specific scenarios (over 250g, urban aerial or near uninvolved people) the drone must have a broadcasting remote ID. And most probably the DJI Remote ID is or will be valid. We have a similar issue on privacy as the broadcast of the pilot location is meant to be public... but this would go against the EU GDPR regulation 😊.
They're pushing this from a security standpoint. One response to this is worth thinking about: Every driver of a motor vehicle on public roads is required to pass a test, to have a license, to have licensed and registered vehicles, and to have insurance. But it does nothing to prevent a dents, does nothing to stop thieves from using stolen vehicles, an it does nothing to stop terrorises from deliberately killing people with motor vehicles. So why does anyone think that this proposed legislation will be any better? No; this is about taxation above all, making money from unregulated airspace, allowing commercial exploitation by people like Amazon, and not about national or airline security. If anything, it will destroy an old hobby with a record of ZERO FATALITIES after around a century of flying. Meanwhile, how many people have been killed in manned aircraft accidents each year? Is there even an international record of those deaths and injuries?
I know how you were all for regulation when it only effected the amateur and now that it's going to effect you it's a different story, and we should have been much more banded together when they changed the long standing 336?.. so they can change anything at any time... Well we gave them an inch... Anyway glad to have you onboard... Welcome to the rebellion 🔥🔥🔥
I am 60 years old, I can no longer climb a ladder and inspect my roof. I bought a toy/hobby grade quad rotor rc, it has no autonomy, it must be controlled, and now I can safely inspect my roof, along comes the faa and wants to make a regulation that says I cant do this anymore. this is insane.
In the name of "safety"? I have to question the safety aspect of this when the skies will be filled with thousands of much larger, heavier and louder delivery drones than hobby drones being flown right now.
With the in place LAANC system, this is a system that works for tracking. It provides local airports with information as to who's flying. It also provides a profile for info on the drone and the pilot and their phone number. I use LAANC everytime when I fly
18:25 really strikes a cord. I'm in my 40s and as a kid, I remember going to the local park and flying my kite. You'd be amazed at how many city and county parks no longer allow kite flying. Great video. Thanks for the information.
Thanks Paul for sharing your views on this subject. There is no way this is about individual drone owner flight safety. This is about control and money. Why the Government wants to do this will become clear in the future. You said it yourself. 8 million drones, 3 flight problems. I will do everything I can do to ask my Government to not to do this. It violates our rights to not self incriminate. Thee Government will tell us if we want to fly we have to give up rights to be able to fly. How do we Americans think that will work out. God Bless America and the Drone, RC Community.
Love your passion! I completely agree and am looking forward to the webinar this evening! As for getting with your respective congressional leaders they are the reason for this rediculos proposal. Page 205 mentions Mike Lee (Thats who they refer to). Lee voted against our industry just as Diane Feinstein (D from California) so it’s bipartisan. Thats why it took the FAA as long as it did. They were waiting on congress to approve KNOWING this is a BAD idea. Incredibly great point about FOIA. That may be our only out. At last count of reading the responses we’re in trouble as most are not articulated professionally and there are some responding with same verbiage from the same individual. If we do not step up we’re screwed. We all know its not about safety. If the FAA was so worried about safety they would have grounded the MAX immediately after the first crash not giving Boeing the ability to self diagnose. What happened? O ya, another MAX crash killing a couple of hundred more humans. The proposal has more opinions and speculations versus true facts that is backed up with data. They never did a risk assessment or even provide ANY evidence of the harm done by a drone. How many US Citizens killed by a drone? Never mentioned how the technology has saved lives and lastly (well theres a ton more wrong) that the FAA must think we’re are a bunch of idiots. This has NEVER been about safety mentioned 20 times of the first 33 pages! Its all about big money, Amazon, Google, etc., utilizing the airspace that we utilize. The less of us the better off they are. The big donors, the big dogs, the companies that drive governmental decisions that drives the law making. They KNOW about the drones that already broadcast. Hell so does the Mavic mini. It’s in the app! I could go on forever like you, I’m pissed. Looking forward to this evening.
Its all about control and money. Once this is in place they can tighten restrictions and increase fees whenever they want. If you read the document it says drones under 5.5 g are exempt, but near the end it says they may wave the weight determination if they decide they pose a safety hazard also.
It's not because of the quads this is happening,I'm a fixed wing 3d pilot,and a few small quads like the woop...it's Amazon and every other business that thinks drone delivery is going to be the next best thing...good luck with that. No more porch pirates,just shoot it down or follow it to it's delivery destination. Amazon and Google have a lot of pull in our government,why because our country is ran by big business,not by the people for the people. They want us to blame drones for this so we can be divided. I wonder who is doing the testing in the whole Colorado,Nebraska night formation flying.. hmm maybe Amazon? False flag for why we need this. Just like all those sightings by commercial aircraft of drones at crazy altitudes just when the drones were becoming real popular..all of a sudden we all have to register these "dangerous" things it's all Bull sh*t..we need to stand together or we are all going to be done. Thousands of dollars worth of equipment now worthless,thanks FAA. How about the AMA get to work or I'll get rid of my membership, so far they haven't done much. 😠 I could rant for days. I love my hobby and fly almost everyday, plus SIM time to lose this would definitely be a huge loss.
Just watched your video. Big thanks for a very informative video about this remote ID proposal. I just got certified so that I could turn my passion into a business. Thanks again!
I'm from Australia, not the US, but I see new laws are popping up here. I think around 18:20 you hit the point. I suspect making it hard for people to fly drones and get started is one of the underlining goals and to clear the sky for larger aircraft. I am not saying this is the only reason to make complicated regulations, monitoring systems, and alike, but it looks to me like it is a motivator. More people get killed by a motor vehicle every year than by drones, but I have never heard of any laws that require your car to have a tracker on it. Where is everybody parking? Where do they drive to, and how long do they spend driving? Yep, we need that data to make roads safe, right? I feel flying is a freedom that is being taken away slowly worldwide because the fear people have for fatal drone accidents far outways the real-life incident data.
You ask why not use the system that most drones already have? Because while that would be an effective remote ID, it wouldn’t get all existing drones out of the airspace the CDA thinks they can exploit for profit. How is this not obvious?
I am quite possibly wrong here, but my UK take on this is that the big consumer companies want the skies free for their own use.. Such as delivery systems.
Law quoted does not apply. That law is to keep them from listening to stuff like cell phone calls for the purpose of collecting intelligence from US citizens without a warrant. Remote ID does not apply is because it's meant to be public information, like the license plate on your car.
Yes! I will be commenting, and reaching out. I really hated reading it as a Christmas present from the FAA. I think all registered pilots were sent this proposal, and it sucks, agreed. I was just going to start flying FPV, and this would KILL that even more than photography.
Alf Ram exactly this crap shouldn’t have even got this far a year ago everyone on TH-cam welcomed all this regulation now everyone is paying the price. Let’s get petitions started
My Comment to the FAA "Hello, I am a software engineer, and a hobbyist drone photographer. This proposal is not only a breach of privacy (no matter how it's worded to sound like it's not), but it also makes our drones susceptible to attacks. I've seen lots of new technologies get implemented on listen to me when I say that whenever you connect something to the internet, it's at risk. Nest cameras and thermostats, when people in their homes began connecting household items to the internet, a slew of hacks and wireless attacks began happening. Anytime anything gets connected to the internet, there is a 100% chance of it eventually being exploited by a hacker, especially when its something easily accessible like what this proposal will do. I have serious concerns with how this makes us "safer" or more private. This will only be somewhat useful in *very very* rare circumstances and might also make targetted harrassment easier. Cops will begin to target drone users, citizens will also start targetting them, and with our locations at all times this makes it better than ever, even giving serial numbers to identify us personally. This will cause far more harm than good, our drones will eventually get hacked and lost, cops who know absolutely nothing of the FAA regulations will harrass us, citizens angry about the noise who know nothing of the FAA regulations will harrass us, private entities will have excessive personal information on us, and some or most of our current drones may be bricked, totally useless, making the investment of these expensive things pointless."
What will I be able to do with my older drones? Like my M2P and Inspire 2? Will there be a way to add remote ID to the both of them without breaking my wallet? I’ve already posted my comments on the FAA website voicing my opinion/concerns.
Think about this: If 8,000,000 drones are required to pay $5 a month to a USS (subscription internet service), That is $480,000,000.00 a year. Who are the most likely to be the first to dominate the nation wide USS platforms? Why it is Google and Amazon who also happen to be in the drone delivery business. In other words, they get to make a profit on that, use it themselves and then turn around and include it with all the other information they sell to others. They also are on the Drone Advisory counsel for the FAA. Something doesn't smell right in my opinion.
Great Stuff! Thanks. Talk about potential for harassment and loss of privacy. Let's say you're a real estate investor of large parcels and you're considering purchasing a parcel of ground and you use your drone a few times to check it out. If RID is tracking you what is stopping your competitor or land seller from knowing what you're looking at? Or sure, the FAA will say that its secure and no one can access your flight areas. Any bets that I can take a car license plate number and find out who it belongs to? This over reaching proposal opens the door to loss of privacy and invitation for harassment. We wouldn't put up our autos being tracked like this! Being from Utah, I use my drone mainly for exploring mountain and desert areas where there is no internet access. Is the FAA going to designate little 400' areas for me to fly IN? I hate it when city desk flyers decide what's best for us country boys!
Pretty good RANT Paul. I have to admit I am somewhat surprised as I've always found Drone U to be pretty pro FAA. But I'm really glad to see you speak out. I feel these new potential regs are almost punitive in nature. I just don't see the need and it's a total over reach of authority. I'll go to the Drone U website to find the link and tell the FAA to find a different solution. This one wreaks of BIG BROTHER!
Read the FAA proposal carefully. The remote ID will not appear on any screen in the airport towers so airport tower operators will not see drone traffic to alert anyone. It is a separate system. My assumption is that it is only available to law enforcement. It will not make the skies safe. You can speculate how it will be used and the rest
Sadly, Paul, as others have noted, this is neither about enhanced UAS safety nor better monitoring of drone or other unmanned aircraft. As much as we have been somewhat arbitrarily divided into recreational and commercial/107 UAS pilots, it looks increasingly like all of us are now lumped together in one group of “undesirables”. Not because we represent a danger to the community. We clearly do not. Not because the industry began with renegade hobbyist DIYers. It most certainly did not. And most assuredly it’s not because we refuse to participate in the rule-making process. It appears more and more that this is simply a way to legally curtail and ultimately eliminate all UAV flight that isn’t directly related to commercial deliveries and centralized BVLOS command and control systems. Think of it from the viewpoint of an overworked and understaffed agency tasked with making the likes of Amazon, FedEx, et. al. happy, as well as commercial industry conglomerates that crave the airspace from 0 to 400 AGL for themselves. You said it yourself; if we could eliminate or severely curtail the somewhat unpredictable flights of over 8 million drones, that would certainly clear the way for these much bigger players to avoid mid-air collisions and operate with greater impunity. And all without passing a single piece of legislation. Yes, it’s about the money. But it’s also about the lack of any real influence in the decision-making process. I am also a ham operator. The main (and perhaps ONLY) reason we have the freedom to operate as we do today is because the government realizes we are simply the court of last resort when all other forms of wireless communications are down. Because we fill a genuinely perceived need in times of emergency, our specific airwave sovereignty is ensconced in FCC rules. Perhaps it’s time we UAS pilots band together to point out to the FAA our potential roles in times of crisis: to locate the lost, bring help to the stranded, to strengthen security and support LEO when called upon to provide aid. If we can rally around that mission, and remind the FAA of our merit, we may yet have a voice in determining our future in all of our airborne ventures. As these are still early days, there is time to act, if we act now and act cohesively and decisively.
Remember when you were bragging about FAA’s new regulations last year helping commercial but limiting and hurting recreational pilots? Remember you said in one of your videos “this is a good freaking day!” ?? How do you feel now that you are getting hurt? Ah??
I'm a part 107 pilot and general hobbyist and yes I've been avoiding this channel because of this attitude of his. However it is good to see that he has seen the light and can now be a resource to help fight these proposed regulations because we need all the help we can get.
Has anybody come up with a Form Letter to our specific states Reps and Congress person, that addresses the illegal and penalizing aspects not to mention the abuse of knowledge of ID that this would propose, so that we can easily send a form letter to our Reps?
Could the faa be responsible if by some chance you were assaulted or robbed because you were flying and your location was made available by their regulations? Wouldn't they have some sense of liability
I would be a criminal after spending thousands of dollars going out and flying my 5" quad FPV under these rules. I fly safe, never had an issue and never break 200ft altitude.... F**K the FAA for this... my 1 relaxation, my anti-anxiety is trying to be taken for corporate big dogs owning the sky
Awesome info! You have over 30,000 views. Sure, not everyone that is affected is a viewer but as of today Jan 29, 2020 there are just over 7000 comments! If 1/3 of your viewers commented to educate the Feds we would have 10,000 comments on the proposed rule. Remember these government employees working in an office are listening to industry. They have very little clue to what we do as hobbyist! You can add files to your comments. I suggest adding pictures of friends, family, children flying at all types of venues. Some of you may fly other types of radio control... include those pictures as well. You have until March 2nd... The FAA denied an extension to the comment period.
I am a hobbyist drone pilot and have been using AirMap. You mentioned that they have nefarious intention; would like to know what this means? Thank you
I see these issues about to be visited on Australian enthusiasts.... fpv has effectively been outlawed by regulation and now registration is mandatory.... I believe that CASA will look to the FAA and follow their lead to place shackles on enthusiasts here in AUSTRALIA.... what happens to you happens to us and so it goes without saying that we wish you success in your endeavours to make the FAA see sense....
I think they should have someone on the committee that knows what they are talking about. I love building drones and legislation like this bans it. I decided many years ago that I will no longer follow silly rules or oppressive/unreasonable laws. Stuff like this only makes me pissed. I can build any drone I wish even if it were illegal, I can fly it where I want, and put any alternative payload on it I want. No law is ever gonna stop me from this, so why not just make reasonable rules. We should not even think of accepting unreasonable laws. There is enough surveillance in society! Police have no right to know where I or my drone is! Our acceptance of this increased control is why we have this situation. You accept cell phone tracking, licence plate scanners, ISP logging, cameras everywhere.....you will have no problem with facial recognition or iris scanning,.....you will go like sheep into the truck.
Expect an amended version to be inclusive of weight change for any drone capable of 400' altitude... that includes the Mini, and a few others under the 250g weight limit. Amended versions are supposed to included any drone GPS or other equipped with ranges BVLOS, and altitudes of 400' to be required to have the registration and RID... so, the big finger from DJI did not impress the FAA or US leaders on the committee. DJI is not a trusted name in the governing communities either. Leaders even mentioned the ease of circumventing their technology that allowed their UAS craft to fly well above the 400' FAA limit. They cited many videos from YT to prove it... and several had DJI drones in the air over 5000 feet videoing airliners on approach. So yeah, some blame to go to the user community as well as those that do circumvent the limits and safety measures built in. I expect a lot of amendments going forward. Still much to be considered. The entire thing is based on not just drone, but any unmanned or other systems including delivery and possibly human transport. Still a ways to go for that... but I think the idea was setting up or defining some measures for the infrastructure required for all this new tech.
do not wast your time if your not willing to show up at FAA to voice your disgust! remember to ask for a risk assessment for any regulation or rule regarding drones! demand them fire each FAA member with remote ID stock!
FAA Rule 30,057: All drone propellers will have individual GPS and registry number. Provided by a Governmental system. All propellers will cost $20 a month to maintain Propeller Pilots license certification. FAA Rule 30:058: All Individual drone propellers will be 3x4x5 inch or greater for improved detection.
A bit of a rookie here , but thanks for the video . You make a number of good points , lets hope we can kill this before it starts . On a side note , what if we had a 400' ceiling and private planes stayed above 500' ? I live near a small lake and several times I have witnessed planes well below 500' . Wealthy people like to buzz their house or friends houses . As a former fire fighter , I wish all drone pilots would at least check and think about not flying near an active fire . Same for active police activity or rescue operations .
We have strict rules here in Canada. Need to take an exam, with no guide book, minister of transportation says go to drone school, $$$$, exam has a lot of questions that don't relate to drones, and then you have to register your drone. Bunch of BS if you ask me, Just a money grab.
Absolutely agree, we are all in this together. Some of the fixed wing guys tend to think quad pilots are what caused this. I fly fixed wing and fpv mini quads. If that were the case, I'd be shooting myself in the foot. Thanks for acknowledging the truth.
I'm not! I was a full scale pilot before I had a crash in 2004, this drone stuff is BULLSHIT by comparison! It's like trying to describe New York pizza to someone in Oklahoma who thinks Little Caesar's is the Tits, you guys have no CLUE what piloting an aircraft is all about.
@@SCFPV it is the case quads did cause this . A monkey can buy a cheep drone from wall Mart and fly it with no skill needed so they end up flying where and when they shouldn't . Helicopters and fixed wing have a learning curve ( there harder to fly ) and are expensive so almost all new pilots have someone teach them. I.e. at an a.m.a field or a friend that is in the hobby so they end up learning flying etiquette and have more respect for where they fly . So yes Cheep no skill needed drones caused this . But. It does not matter. This is an infringement on our rights and we all need to stick together when we say we will not comply and keep our rights safe by force if needed
@@StupidTVclips It's just a wee bit arrogant of you to assume that you are the only one that does both. I'm rated commercial/instrument in fixed-wing but didn't mention it because it didn't matter for my comment.
great video, lots of useful info. another good bullet point is the risk assessment route too, how it unpublished and might not expose any real risk. xjet might of said something but im starting to get a little more hopeful this proposal is just that, a proposal to see what they can get away with.
We have to remember, these are proposals for right now. In regards to pilots' personal data available to the public. It already is. You 107 information is public record to anyone who knows about it.
They are going to eventually sell airtime if we let them do this. There is already so many restrictions since I started flying, now you have to be licensed to just fly.
I am going to comment officially on this. Only been flying since 2018, but this hobby has enriched my life (while draining my bank account) and I want to see its expansion and growth. There is not much to do like flying that is wholesome anymore, shame to see it die due to over-regulation.
If Drone are like-weapons? then license them as one. Just like we have the right to bear arms, but have to go through background; drone pilots should have this instead of remote ID and should be treated like when buying a weapon avoiding falling into bad hands. Kids get the 249g drone. This means no Id remote. I’m not opposed to broadcast nearby drone location. Point here is that safety is the concern then we should be Americans and have freedom of liberty and have background check before buying a drone. Put a ceiling on the drone software where no fly zone is and now the job is done. Only good people flying. Having remote ID is like having law enforcement adding a camera on your weapon and seeing everything you do with it. Privacy infringement. Having remote ID is like having dmv installing monitoring camera in your car. Would you be comfortable in your own car while they watch everything you do? Having Remote ID is like having a intersection camera giving you a ticket every time you go through a stop light to make a right turn. If its good then why don’t we have that in every intersection? Obviously because it’s an infringement. Use drone built in broadcast at certain locations only where you cannot have or fly drones. Have a ceiling like there is on airports. Have that built into drones through DJI. Have DJI open an application where you do t want drones. They can add a ceiling there for us not to be able to fly in. Remote ID is infringing in our freedom and liberty. Flying drone should be a privilege to good citizens-that goes through background check. Have your considered that terrorist will actually build their custom flybomb? No remote ID will stop that! Because they won’t put one on; they don’t abide by rules but good citizens do. I hope this helped. Use Drone broadcast instead of remote ID Have background check before purchase drones. Set the right prohibited area zones where drones can’t fly. Sincerely Alex
You aren’t required to have a radio or a mode C transponder if you’re flying VFR in class G airspace in a full sized airplane that weighs thousands of pounds and is moving over 250 mph. But the FAA is telling me they need to know where I’m at when I’m flying my drone in my backyard in the country under the tree line? That’s rich.
I really liked the points you comment on your video. Of all the videos I've seen so far about these new laws. You have very good points, I like your comments. By the way, I don't have or have bought a drone yet. Thank you!
Good video and information. I recommend Drone U make a couple of "template" letters for everyone to download and use. It would make a lot of sense and everyone would be on the same page. Let us know what you think?
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”
Phillip Holmes 🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼
If you use a quote, give credit to it's author.
@@minkorrh everyone should know Benjamin Franklin said this. ... If you didn't, now you know. 👍
It's a profound quote every single one of us should live by daily.
In other words, stop relying on government to save you, all they care about is how much more of your hard earned money they can steal from you.
OK, Mr Web self-appointed numpty, prey tell, who was this robbed 'Author'? All I know is... The words were nothing remotely like Phillips take on what is obvious... well to a seagull… ‘Satirical humour’ not a teaching aid to historical accuracy… lol. Please, Chill out babe.
@@minkorrh okay there Karen.. simmer down.
There is absolutely NO REASON to need any broadcast ID to fly in the middle of nowhere. No cell service, no internet......Maybe within controlled space but that is it!
Very True
The thing is, in controlled airspace with how the FAA has proposed this no airport tower will see it on scopes, no full sized aircraft will see it. They don't want it to interfere with full sized aviation and why they want a 3rd party to handle all of it. This is a farce and just a reason to clear the airspace for the commercial drone industry.
Don’t worry it will use your Bluetooth to find you.
Boycott Amazon and any company that tries to "own the sky".
On hobbyist......The registration process will not work for model aircraft. It's based on the false assumption that AMA members have just 2 planes that last for 10 years. Page 194. It also requires that The Rx detect Internet or it will not initialize. It also states a requirement for the Rx to broadcast telemetry data with a serial number or session Id to a 3rd party contractor approved by the FAA and that data be held for 2 years. Additionally, if you have aircraft that do not have remotes I'd you can only fly at FAA approved flying sites. Furthermore there are some scary words on page 174 that state that waivers will only be granted to fixed flying sites for s period of 12 months. After that period there will be no more waivers granted and renewals must occur every 48 months. Which means that if you lose your field , you will not get FAA approval at another field. It also states in very clear language that the expected result is that over time fixed flying sites will go away by attrition and that everyone will be flying with remote I'd. Problem is, all of that is geared towards drones and assumed that model aircraft are the same thing. They have some pretty lofty technological asks and compliance demands that manufacturers will have to adhere too...and since most non AMA fliers fly DRONES , airplane and heli manufacturers will be screwed due to loss of revenue and most likely go out of business. Leaving only drones. If Horizon, for example, thinks it's not profitable to make model aircraft , they won't ..the FAA is demanding manufacturers to come up with thier own solutions in order to comply. It will take some time to roll out but if all of this stays like it is , the model aircraft hobby is dead and anyone who has money in this is screwed. It's called Tyranny through over regulation in an attempt to deny airspace to model aircraft...
Agreed, most fixed wing guys think this wont affect them but it will. Will hit the ama fields and flyers the hardest.
What I am having a problem with is the treatment of UAV pilots different than any other general aviation pilot. This can all be resolved so easily if the interest truly is safety.
1. UAV Registration
a. All aircraft flying under Part 107 rules need to be registered just as any other aircraft.
b. Hobbyist flying in controlled airspace who fly at designated sites should be free from registration.
i. Airspace within these sites are already approved for activity with NOTAMS available for all pilots.
c. Hobbyist who are flying in only Class G airspace should not be required to register their aircraft.
i. Pilots are still responsible for aircraft separation same as any other type of aircraft.
Remote ID
a. Part 107 aircraft operating within controlled airspace, (E, D, C B) should require some remote ID (Squawk code or ADS-B). (Remote ID)
b. Flying within class G airspace should not require Remote ID
i. This is the same as any civil aircraft within class G airspace, where no Transponder is required.
c. Hobby aircraft flown within controlled airspace within the limits of approved sites, such as clubs or AMA sits should be exempt from remote ID.
3. Controlled airspace
a. Remote pilots, (Part 107) should be considered professional pilots with the same rights as any pilot.
i. This can allow for clearance from ATC to fly in controlled airspace.
b. Part 107 pilots should be able to receive ATC Radio communications training to enable radio use acquire clearance in controlled airspace.
c. Remote Part 107 pilots only fly during VFR and are responsible for establishing and maintaining aircraft separation.
i. This is similar to any other pilot flying VFR.
ii. Without a waiver, the UAV must be in visual line of site.
Well said!
The gov't is acting like drones are taking down aircraft and airliners every week. There is no reason for them to know every move a drone pilot makes. No reason whatsoever.
After reading the proposed rule on remote id for drones I have some concerns. I own 2 DJI drones that I have used on the ranch for the past 3 years . I am a private pilot and have a part 107 rating to comply with the currant rules. I use them to check for new born calves in the spring, checking fences, gates and water gaps, checking pastures to locate cattle and strays and check fields for weeds and disease. These tasks take much less time and resources than 4 wheelers or horses in rough country. The problem that I see is that these areas have limited to no cellular service or access to the internet. The areas that I use these drones would be off limits if this rule were adopted the way it is written. My drones would be worthless if I had to stay within 400 ft of the transmitter, which is also part of this rule. There are many more people that use drone technology in agriculture that would affected in the same way. I use my drones 90% of the time as tools that save many hours of time, a lot of fuel and wear and tear on vehicles. I don’t see why tracking could not be accomplished with the signals already transmitted by the aircraft and the transmitter. The only problem with the current rules seems to be lack of knowledge and enforcement. The hard part of any rule is making it apply to everyone. It would be to bad if this were adopted to please the few at the cost of the many.
I fly RC planes and helis that never leave my sight, these requirements would be ridiculous for the RC airplane hobby. They basically fly in the same space that someone can throw a football...no cameras, no fpv, you just fly out 100 - 200 feet in line of sight so you can maintain orientation.
You must fly some pretty small stuff if 200 feet is enough. I break 500 feet on some of my planes taking off.
Too late! The time to speak out was when the FAA was being given control of "UAS." Now our fate is in the hands of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. You commercial users are to blame for this, and you will get your just deserts. You and your delivery drone offspring may have just killed a wonderful, wholesome hobby and a burgeoning industry with your demand for airspace to yourselves for commercial operations. The hobbyists brought model aviation to you commercial users, now you're taking model aviation away from us. If this all passes, I hope your businesses go T-U from the regulatory and financial burden.
Yucannt Hahvitt please leave this comment on the government website for this message to be heard just copy and paste it. Thank you
Thanks Paul, I just have to say I really appreciate your passion for the drone hobby and drone industry. I bought my first drone in May of 2019 and have been nothing but excited in learning drone technology and the future positive benefits drones can bring to our world. Plus what an awesome hobby!! I would hate to see my recent discovery of flight/ piloting be put to and end over fear/profit. I will follow the lead of the folks who have been living and working in this amazing segment of American aviation longer than myself. Thanks Drone U for standing up!! Sincerely, Lenny P.S. 24 flighty hrs and counting!!
Substance of future response to FAA, early stages:
.
I am not a drone photographer as such, but ...
I do use my drone as a tool, to wit:
(I am 73 years old, and the drone is a tool I use to keep me off off ladders and to do household chores efficiently.)
(1) Inspect my gutters, so I don't have to use a ladder (safety concern).
(2) Inspect my roof (safety concern).
(3) Inspect my small pond (5~acres) for algae, etc. (~safety concern)
(4) Hang rope around my sixteen Leyland Cypress trees that I am felling at about 2/3 to 3/4 way up the tree to help with the fell direction. (safety concern)
5) Future, will use used second hand drones to put down fertilizer and herbicide as the costs come way down. Maybe with neighbors partnership.
None of these uses should concern anyone other that the landowner.
Recommendations to FAA:
(1) Do not require any identification/regulations for drones use to the tree tops (and a short distance above) in privately held property.
(2) Require any drone delivery system to mandate an "opt in" from the address owner before they can deliver to a specific address.
(3) Help keep me safe, don't make me a felon.
Note:
In responses to FAA, always include recommendations.
Hello I am Danny damveld from the Netherlands ,city Enschede. I am also a drone pilot and love flying with drones for 5 years and I do this as a hobby and specialty to make beautiful nature video Documentaires from beautiful nature Locations and places and put it on my TH-cam channel to Share it with the world How Beautiful mother earth is in his Nature .so i hope that this ID Bul***t never ever go to work and never ever go to Activated Worldwide . Greetings Danny damveld from Netherlands.
Great video! As an Airline pilot and drone operator I'm very concerned and dissapointed with the FAA on this proposal. Just horrible. I agree, this is not legal. Violates so many privacy laws. If this were to go into effect, I predict lawsuites.
Hate to break this to you, but now isn’t the time to fight. Remember when the CDA said we need to get rid of Part 336? That was the time. Now is the time to create a legal defense fund, so that the first time they try an enforcement action based on these 100% inevitable RID rules, we can get the whole package overturned by a judge.
Exactly this.
No; it’s not the time to fight. It's way too late.
Exactly
Finally somebody that’s not willing to roll over! I subscribe to a lot of channels drone related and there’s nothing but crickets or... there’s nothing we can do. Ya know, “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything!” We need a voice to come together, your the man. Don’t stop, just tell us where to sign!
Model aviation is not a crime! Redefine the airspace! Makes you wonder if this remote ID is really to benefit the big business drones in giving them an active read out where everyone else is and they don’t have to pay for it!
Apparently broadcast is now accepted as a form of standard ID, no internet required.
I think DJI will mostly make it out okay, which is great for DJI users and people who use them commercially, but there's actually fine print that completely outlaws FPV drones altogether. Even if we were to put a transponder on it, which is way too heavy for us to do, it doesn't make it legal simply because it was built. Essentially, what will end up happening, is we will have to buy pre-built drones from FAA approved manufacturers. That means what is likely is that DJI will be the only place we can buy fpv quads. We won't be able to upgrade the parts. And if we crash, we will have to buy the same parts to repair it. FPV quads crash (safely, away from people) all the time. Part of what we do is break quads and repair them. I just bought a race quad and after all tax and shipping and everything, it cost me $175. DJI's recommended fpv builds cost like $600+ iirc. When they alone have rights to sell the parts (as a kit, as specified by the FAA), they will be able to charge even more. And none of it even has to be technically proprietary to lock you in, the law does that and forces you to have to buy from them. Assuming we will even be able to buy replacement parts, which might not even be the case, the parts themselves will also be way more expensive simply because it will be monopolized.
And this is all pretty much best case scenario.
We will have worse quads that don't fly how we want at 3x (or more) the price. And they will break the first time we fly them and we will have to either buy overpriced parts or buy and entirely new quad.
FPV can't exist like that.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with everything you've said and you're saying some things other TH-camrs have left out, but it seems the proposal is already being moved to make DJI users have access to the sky.
I'd love to see more push for fpv (not at the expense of DJI, just in addition to) because we are the minority and we still are fighting what seems to be a hopeless battle.
Also, remember that if it gets amended so that DJI drones can essentially operate as is without anything changing but other cinema drones can't (both currently existing or potential future ones that don't yet exist), that pushes DJI even closer to a monopoly on that market which is not good for you either.
And also don't forget that all of this is to push us out of the sky so that big corporations can have exclusive access to it (it's not about safety, it's about "separation," as their IG says, except they are separating us from big corporations by putting us on the ground").
All that to say, don't stop pushing just because broadcast goes through and becomes accepted. Just because a mavic and a phantom might be able to continue flying on broadcast does not mean that there won't be dire repercussions from the proposal going through otherwise. There's a LOT more wrong with this proposal than just that it (initially) doesn't allow broadcast and forces an internet connection.
There's a legal case connected with one of the airlines approaching and leaving an airport in Long Island. This case established that leaving and returning to the ground are included in a US citizen's public right to transit the air space above USA soil. Common sense, . . . how do you transit the airspace if you can't take off (or then, obviously, LAND!). And since the FAA is authorized to regulate the air space (including take offs and landings) then local communities or STATES have NO authority to say we can't take off and land wherever we want.
Thanks for this video.
I think we have to point out the importance of not falling into this thinking that IDs, remote or not, makes any sense.
We need to be able to fly in total anonymity for our safety.
As noted, the reason for remote ID, tracking of flight data etc has nothing to do with safety (no serious accidents confirmed).
It has nothing to to with efficiency of transportation.
Drones will never be a mainstream way to deliver goods, and even if it did, it would be easy for the stakeholders to define a system (without FAA's introducing endless delays in the process) that deals with route planning and collision avoidance in areas of high traffic density, a system that would not in any way interfere with other uses of drones. Who would fly FPV close to transportation drone highways? Who would ride a bicycle in the middle of a motorway?
So there are no benefits of remote ID and flights data collection regulations of civilian drones for companies like Amazon, FedEx etc.
Systems like LAANC has been promoted like a good thing by many blue-eyed people both from within the drone community and from authorities.
It cannot be pointed out enough how dangerous the LAANC system is for the users.
When you install the LAANC based apps is that your name and your location is recorded and transferred to a central database.
This database can be accessed by numerous people and the data is not secure. (Same goes for the logs of DJI drones).
This data inevitably ends up in the hands of corrupt people, criminal organizations etc. Corrupt politicians and drug-lords are the main beneficiaries of knowing where you are flying and who you are. Needless to say, these groups are very powerful and if they want your flight data, they will get it.
The only ways to fight this is to fly drones that does not have any un-encrypted ID and position transmitted and that does not record the flight data in forms reachable from the internet or other communication paths.
What we need is encrypted communication links to/from our drones. Open source projects developing such software/firmware is what I would expect our authorities to promote and support if they think in terms of safety.
What would you think a drug-lord would do to you if he find out you are flying close to areas where illegal activities were carried out. He would most likely wait until you land and then kill you and confiscate your drone and the police would probably think you were also involved in the drug business and your case will never be recorded as being the result of bad regulations!
FAA knows this, law enforcement knows this, but so far their efforts ha gone in the completely opposite direction.
Why? Corruption?
Good info Paul! Thanks for all the info! 🙏🏼🙏🏼
Ahh, so THIS is why they say rules were meant to be broken....
The absolute best explanation of the effects of Remote ID. Most other videos on the subject are mostly opinion mixed with facts. Thank you!!
We shouldn't be using the argument that drones already have a remote ID system. Most R/C planes and helicopters don't have that and we should be fighting to keep it that way unless used for commercial purposes. There is no safety problem to solve with traditional model aviation.
Correct John! It is a money grab and nothing to do with safety!
Some good arguments. 👍👍👍 I've already left my comments for the FAA. I hope others have as well. As of today 01/03/2020 there are just 847 comments left by the drone community for the FAA. Com'on guys...I know we've got a bigger voice than this. Leave you comments on the FAA site for the sake of this hobby. If you don't know what to write read through some of the other comments others have left to help form your own opinion. You can see the individual comments on the far right of the the main FAA site of this Proposal, under "View Comments".
One problem though...the little guy doesn't have the money/resources to fight the FAA should things go to court. Could cost thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight should this proposal become law/regulation, and later goes to court.
Oh, and I think you meant *Friday 01/03 (today)* for the podcast, not the 6th as mentioned at 17:05 in video.
Good job. One thing that screams out here is, what about my clients rights to privacy?
That's a very good question!
So, other than legislation on a piece of paper, what would actually stop me from flying my hobby drones (Hubsan H501ss and Fimi X8) in my backyard and at the local park, like I do now? And stocking up on similar non-RID drones before this nonsense is enacted?
Thank you, Paul! Keep up the fight!
Prison planet it's called earth, I'm not a sheeple dont follow people it's that simple I've been flying a very long time safely dont need to be baby sat
Well said sir I've been doing the same and don't need to be babysat and have never hurt anybody or any property
antone silvia bring back alex jones also leave a comment on the FAA website. Tell them you will not comply
@@worldends2 I will
This was one of the best explanations of this absurd proposal. Saying it was a "license plate" was perfect. I literally just bought a mavic 2 pro on black friday (and had plans to buy an fpv wing) and after hearing this, I felt kinda duped. Thing is, I live in a rural part of Oregon where we wouldn't see any sort of delivery drone, at least in this decade, but I would still have to follow this ridiculous rule. Sorry, but I'm going guerrilla.
Paul, Gobblin Valley UT already charges drone pilots $ 5.00 to take off from the ground! That's the only way you can fly. I think it is completely illegal! Great stuff Paul!
In Miami I have to pay $150 for a permit to take off. Some parts of Miami I have to pay an off duty police officer $68.50 per hour to supervise my flight
@@adnan_velic That's rediculas and I suspect illegal!
Mountainsky Aerial Photography its not I spoke with the FAA about that and the reason miami gets away with it is because I have to take off from their land and to do that they want the permit to “ensure” I’m flying safely and their “paperwork”. I also have to carry 2 million in liability. So basically $500 is what I have to pay just to get in the air in Miami lol.
@@adnan_velic Hmm, is this indian land? You said "their" land, so I am curious?
All state parks in Utah charge a permit fee.
I agree with your opinions with the exception of the driving force behind this. The current administration in general and the FCC has already shown themselves to be very focused on facilitating commercial operations at the expense of personal or small business, and I think that kind of intent has come to be in the FAA also. What sections of industry would benefit by curtailing manually operated drones?
One of my first hobbies was slot cars. When I was finally old enough to go to the big track and purchased a slot car and controller that track shut down 3 weeks later and the next closest track was 20 miles away, it was crushing. I still have that slot car and has been used twice. Just bought a drone and it was not cheap. It looks like it may get a spot next to the slot car.
Great analysis. You mentioned my thoughts. Being from and living in Europe I will not comment to the FAA. Our EU drone regulation will come to effect 06/2020 where in specific scenarios (over 250g, urban aerial or near uninvolved people) the drone must have a broadcasting remote ID. And most probably the DJI Remote ID is or will be valid. We have a similar issue on privacy as the broadcast of the pilot location is meant to be public... but this would go against the EU GDPR regulation 😊.
They're pushing this from a security standpoint. One response to this is worth thinking about:
Every driver of a motor vehicle on public roads is required to pass a test, to have a license, to have licensed and registered vehicles, and to have insurance. But it does nothing to prevent a dents, does nothing to stop thieves from using stolen vehicles, an it does nothing to stop terrorises from deliberately killing people with motor vehicles. So why does anyone think that this proposed legislation will be any better?
No; this is about taxation above all, making money from unregulated airspace, allowing commercial exploitation by people like Amazon, and not about national or airline security.
If anything, it will destroy an old hobby with a record of ZERO FATALITIES after around a century of flying. Meanwhile, how many people have been killed in manned aircraft accidents each year? Is there even an international record of those deaths and injuries?
Very passionate & dedicated pilot of the drone community.👏👏👏
I know how you were all for regulation when it only effected the amateur and now that it's going to effect you it's a different story, and we should have been much more banded together when they changed the long standing 336?.. so they can change anything at any time... Well we gave them an inch...
Anyway glad to have you onboard... Welcome to the rebellion 🔥🔥🔥
Yep, DJI/AP/107 guys were selfish AF... and, now it will affect them too... awww....
I am 60 years old, I can no longer climb a ladder and inspect my roof. I bought a toy/hobby grade quad rotor rc, it has no autonomy, it must be controlled, and now I can safely inspect my roof, along comes the faa and wants to make a regulation that says I cant do this anymore. this is insane.
In the name of "safety"? I have to question the safety aspect of this when the skies will be filled with thousands of much larger, heavier and louder delivery drones than hobby drones being flown right now.
With the in place LAANC system, this is a system that works for tracking. It provides local airports with information as to who's flying. It also provides a profile for info on the drone and the pilot and their phone number. I use LAANC everytime when I fly
Ask the FAA about there risk assessment files ? There is not anything because they have not done any.
Great blog, super informative. Thank you so much your passion and knowledge is truly on display.
It is good to see someone with the passion I have for flying. Thanks 😊
18:25 really strikes a cord. I'm in my 40s and as a kid, I remember going to the local park and flying my kite. You'd be amazed at how many city and county parks no longer allow kite flying. Great video. Thanks for the information.
Thanks Paul for sharing your views on this subject.
There is no way this is about individual drone owner flight safety.
This is about control and money.
Why the Government wants to do this will become clear in the future.
You said it yourself.
8 million drones, 3 flight problems.
I will do everything I can do to ask my Government to not to do this.
It violates our rights to not self incriminate.
Thee Government will tell us if we want to fly we have to give up rights to be able to fly.
How do we Americans think that will work out.
God Bless America and the Drone, RC Community.
Love your passion! I completely agree and am looking forward to the webinar this evening! As for getting with your respective congressional leaders they are the reason for this rediculos proposal. Page 205 mentions Mike Lee (Thats who they refer to). Lee voted against our industry just as Diane Feinstein (D from California) so it’s bipartisan. Thats why it took the FAA as long as it did. They were waiting on congress to approve KNOWING this is a BAD idea. Incredibly great point about FOIA. That may be our only out. At last count of reading the responses we’re in trouble as most are not articulated professionally and there are some responding with same verbiage from the same individual. If we do not step up we’re screwed. We all know its not about safety. If the FAA was so worried about safety they would have grounded the MAX immediately after the first crash not giving Boeing the ability to self diagnose. What happened? O ya, another MAX crash killing a couple of hundred more humans. The proposal has more opinions and speculations versus true facts that is backed up with data. They never did a risk assessment or even provide ANY evidence of the harm done by a drone. How many US Citizens killed by a drone? Never mentioned how the technology has saved lives and lastly (well theres a ton more wrong) that the FAA must think we’re are a bunch of idiots. This has NEVER been about safety mentioned 20 times of the first 33 pages! Its all about big money, Amazon, Google, etc., utilizing the airspace that we utilize. The less of us the better off they are. The big donors, the big dogs, the companies that drive governmental decisions that drives the law making. They KNOW about the drones that already broadcast. Hell so does the Mavic mini. It’s in the app! I could go on forever like you, I’m pissed. Looking forward to this evening.
Thanks for the video and the info. It's nice to have someone on our side.
Its all about control and money. Once this is in place they can tighten restrictions and increase fees whenever they want. If you read the document it says drones under 5.5 g are exempt, but near the end it says they may wave the weight determination if they decide they pose a safety hazard also.
I love flying things with fixed wings and now I have to deal with remote ID because of those things.
Thanks.
It's not because of the quads this is happening,I'm a fixed wing 3d pilot,and a few small quads like the woop...it's Amazon and every other business that thinks drone delivery is going to be the next best thing...good luck with that. No more porch pirates,just shoot it down or follow it to it's delivery destination. Amazon and Google have a lot of pull in our government,why because our country is ran by big business,not by the people for the people. They want us to blame drones for this so we can be divided. I wonder who is doing the testing in the whole Colorado,Nebraska night formation flying.. hmm maybe Amazon? False flag for why we need this. Just like all those sightings by commercial aircraft of drones at crazy altitudes just when the drones were becoming real popular..all of a sudden we all have to register these "dangerous" things it's all Bull sh*t..we need to stand together or we are all going to be done. Thousands of dollars worth of equipment now worthless,thanks FAA. How about the AMA get to work or I'll get rid of my membership, so far they haven't done much. 😠 I could rant for days. I love my hobby and fly almost everyday, plus SIM time to lose this would definitely be a huge loss.
Just watched your video. Big thanks for a very informative video about this remote ID proposal. I just got certified so that I could turn my passion into a business. Thanks again!
I'm from Australia, not the US, but I see new laws are popping up here. I think around 18:20 you hit the point. I suspect making it hard for people to fly drones and get started is one of the underlining goals and to clear the sky for larger aircraft. I am not saying this is the only reason to make complicated regulations, monitoring systems, and alike, but it looks to me like it is a motivator. More people get killed by a motor vehicle every year than by drones, but I have never heard of any laws that require your car to have a tracker on it. Where is everybody parking? Where do they drive to, and how long do they spend driving? Yep, we need that data to make roads safe, right? I feel flying is a freedom that is being taken away slowly worldwide because the fear people have for fatal drone accidents far outways the real-life incident data.
You ask why not use the system that most drones already have? Because while that would be an effective remote ID, it wouldn’t get all existing drones out of the airspace the CDA thinks they can exploit for profit. How is this not obvious?
I am quite possibly wrong here, but my UK take on this is that the big consumer companies want the skies free for their own use.. Such as delivery systems.
Great discussion on the proposed new FAA rules. Everyone needs to make their voices heard on this matter. Thanks for sharing.
Great info, keep it up. I am new to drones and flying and I would hate to see this facinating hobby get all messed up by complicated regulation
Law quoted does not apply. That law is to keep them from listening to stuff like cell phone calls for the purpose of collecting intelligence from US citizens without a warrant. Remote ID does not apply is because it's meant to be public information, like the license plate on your car.
Yes! I will be commenting, and reaching out. I really hated reading it as a Christmas present from the FAA. I think all registered pilots were sent this proposal, and it sucks, agreed. I was just going to start flying FPV, and this would KILL that even more than photography.
Why we don't create a webpage where we all can sign against this proposal?
Alf Ram exactly this crap shouldn’t have even got this far a year ago everyone on TH-cam welcomed all this regulation now everyone is paying the price. Let’s get petitions started
Submit a comment on the NPRM. Don't know what to write? Wait a week and some well written and researched examples/templates will show up.
Drone U is working on that!
@@ridemedia767 excellent, I'll be looking forward for it.
@@PaulVolcko Bump!
My Comment to the FAA
"Hello, I am a software engineer, and a hobbyist drone photographer. This proposal is not only a breach of privacy (no matter how it's worded to sound like it's not), but it also makes our drones susceptible to attacks. I've seen lots of new technologies get implemented on listen to me when I say that whenever you connect something to the internet, it's at risk. Nest cameras and thermostats, when people in their homes began connecting household items to the internet, a slew of hacks and wireless attacks began happening. Anytime anything gets connected to the internet, there is a 100% chance of it eventually being exploited by a hacker, especially when its something easily accessible like what this proposal will do. I have serious concerns with how this makes us "safer" or more private. This will only be somewhat useful in *very very* rare circumstances and might also make targetted harrassment easier. Cops will begin to target drone users, citizens will also start targetting them, and with our locations at all times this makes it better than ever, even giving serial numbers to identify us personally. This will cause far more harm than good, our drones will eventually get hacked and lost, cops who know absolutely nothing of the FAA regulations will harrass us, citizens angry about the noise who know nothing of the FAA regulations will harrass us, private entities will have excessive personal information on us, and some or most of our current drones may be bricked, totally useless, making the investment of these expensive things pointless."
What will I be able to do with my older drones? Like my M2P and Inspire 2? Will there be a way to add remote ID to the both of them without breaking my wallet?
I’ve already posted my comments on the FAA website voicing my opinion/concerns.
Think about this: If 8,000,000 drones are required to pay $5 a month to a USS (subscription internet service), That is $480,000,000.00 a year. Who are the most likely to be the first to dominate the nation wide USS platforms? Why it is Google and Amazon who also happen to be in the drone delivery business. In other words, they get to make a profit on that, use it themselves and then turn around and include it with all the other information they sell to others. They also are on the Drone Advisory counsel for the FAA. Something doesn't smell right in my opinion.
Great video thank you so much 👊
Great Stuff! Thanks. Talk about potential for harassment and loss of privacy. Let's say you're a real estate investor of large parcels and you're considering purchasing a parcel of ground and you use your drone a few times to check it out. If RID is tracking you what is stopping your competitor or land seller from knowing what you're looking at? Or sure, the FAA will say that its secure and no one can access your flight areas. Any bets that I can take a car license plate number and find out who it belongs to? This over reaching proposal opens the door to loss of privacy and invitation for harassment. We wouldn't put up our autos being tracked like this!
Being from Utah, I use my drone mainly for exploring mountain and desert areas where there is no internet access. Is the FAA going to designate little 400' areas for me to fly IN? I hate it when city desk flyers decide what's best for us country boys!
I like you more when you are pissed off. It didn't seem like you were acting, this time.
Pretty good RANT Paul. I have to admit I am somewhat surprised as I've always found Drone U to be pretty pro FAA. But I'm really glad to see you speak out. I feel these new potential regs are almost punitive in nature. I just don't see the need and it's a total over reach of authority. I'll go to the Drone U website to find the link and tell the FAA to find a different solution. This one wreaks of BIG BROTHER!
Read the FAA proposal carefully. The remote ID will not appear on any screen in the airport towers so airport tower operators will not see drone traffic to alert anyone. It is a separate system. My assumption is that it is only available to law enforcement. It will not make the skies safe. You can speculate how it will be used and the rest
Well said Paul, Thanks for being a voice in this industry.
Agreed!!
Thank You
Jason Bates hope you left a comment on the government website
Sadly, Paul, as others have noted, this is neither about enhanced UAS safety nor better monitoring of drone or other unmanned aircraft.
As much as we have been somewhat arbitrarily divided into recreational and commercial/107 UAS pilots, it looks increasingly like all of us are now lumped together in one group of “undesirables”.
Not because we represent a danger to the community. We clearly do not. Not because the industry began with renegade hobbyist DIYers. It most certainly did not. And most assuredly it’s not because we refuse to participate in the rule-making process.
It appears more and more that this is simply a way to legally curtail and ultimately eliminate all UAV flight that isn’t directly related to commercial deliveries and centralized BVLOS command and control systems.
Think of it from the viewpoint of an overworked and understaffed agency tasked with making the likes of Amazon, FedEx, et. al. happy, as well as commercial industry conglomerates that crave the airspace from 0 to 400 AGL for themselves.
You said it yourself; if we could eliminate or severely curtail the somewhat unpredictable flights of over 8 million drones, that would certainly clear the way for these much bigger players to avoid mid-air collisions and operate with greater impunity. And all without passing a single piece of legislation.
Yes, it’s about the money. But it’s also about the lack of any real influence in the decision-making process. I am also a ham operator. The main (and perhaps ONLY) reason we have the freedom to operate as we do today is because the government realizes we are simply the court of last resort when all other forms of wireless communications are down. Because we fill a genuinely perceived need in times of emergency, our specific airwave sovereignty is ensconced in FCC rules.
Perhaps it’s time we UAS pilots band together to point out to the FAA our potential roles in times of crisis: to locate the lost, bring help to the stranded, to strengthen security and support LEO when called upon to provide aid.
If we can rally around that mission, and remind the FAA of our merit, we may yet have a voice in determining our future in all of our airborne ventures. As these are still early days, there is time to act, if we act now and act cohesively and decisively.
Remember when you were bragging about FAA’s new regulations last year helping commercial but limiting and hurting recreational pilots? Remember you said in one of your videos “this is a good freaking day!” ?? How do you feel now that you are getting hurt? Ah??
Roy Cornelis exactly. He’s a part -107 holder so thinks he’s god. Lmao. Been flying fixwing before this kids mother was born!
I'm a part 107 pilot and general hobbyist and yes I've been avoiding this channel because of this attitude of his. However it is good to see that he has seen the light and can now be a resource to help fight these proposed regulations because we need all the help we can get.
pbshooter100 Agreed
I remember. This video and their last podcast is somewhat redeeming though.
@@Freebird_67 And we had no problem until the advent of quad copters and no skill required. HE is a big reason why I cannot fly in circles anymore!
Has anybody come up with a Form Letter to our specific states Reps and Congress person, that addresses the illegal and penalizing aspects not to mention the abuse of knowledge of ID that this would propose, so that we can easily send a form letter to our Reps?
Well said Paul! Thank you for being such a strong and driving force for our drone industry.
Could the faa be responsible if by some chance you were assaulted or robbed because you were flying and your location was made available by their regulations? Wouldn't they have some sense of liability
You go Paul . Instead of reading the whole thing just show us where the problems are and how we need to react to them
I would be a criminal after spending thousands of dollars going out and flying my 5" quad FPV under these rules. I fly safe, never had an issue and never break 200ft altitude.... F**K the FAA for this... my 1 relaxation, my anti-anxiety is trying to be taken for corporate big dogs owning the sky
Awesome info! You have over 30,000 views. Sure, not everyone that is affected is a viewer but as of today Jan 29, 2020 there are just over 7000 comments! If 1/3 of your viewers commented to educate the Feds we would have 10,000 comments on the proposed rule. Remember these government employees working in an office are listening to industry. They have very little clue to what we do as hobbyist! You can add files to your comments. I suggest adding pictures of friends, family, children flying at all types of venues. Some of you may fly other types of radio control... include those pictures as well. You have until March 2nd... The FAA denied an extension to the comment period.
I am a hobbyist drone pilot and have been using AirMap. You mentioned that they have nefarious intention; would like to know what this means?
Thank you
Ditto
I see these issues about to be visited on Australian enthusiasts.... fpv has effectively been outlawed by regulation and now registration is mandatory.... I believe that CASA will look to the FAA and follow their lead to place shackles on enthusiasts here in AUSTRALIA.... what happens to you happens to us and so it goes without saying that we wish you success in your endeavours to make the FAA see sense....
I think they should have someone on the committee that knows what they are talking about.
I love building drones and legislation like this bans it. I decided many years ago that I will no longer follow silly rules or oppressive/unreasonable laws. Stuff like this only makes me pissed. I can build any drone I wish even if it were illegal, I can fly it where I want, and put any alternative payload on it I want. No law is ever gonna stop me from this, so why not just make reasonable rules. We should not even think of accepting unreasonable laws. There is enough surveillance in society!
Police have no right to know where I or my drone is! Our acceptance of this increased control is why we have this situation. You accept cell phone tracking, licence plate scanners, ISP logging, cameras everywhere.....you will have no problem with facial recognition or iris scanning,.....you will go like sheep into the truck.
Good stuff, Paul. Thanks.
Thank you!
Expect an amended version to be inclusive of weight change for any drone capable of 400' altitude... that includes the Mini, and a few others under the 250g weight limit. Amended versions are supposed to included any drone GPS or other equipped with ranges BVLOS, and altitudes of 400' to be required to have the registration and RID... so, the big finger from DJI did not impress the FAA or US leaders on the committee.
DJI is not a trusted name in the governing communities either. Leaders even mentioned the ease of circumventing their technology that allowed their UAS craft to fly well above the 400' FAA limit. They cited many videos from YT to prove it... and several had DJI drones in the air over 5000 feet videoing airliners on approach. So yeah, some blame to go to the user community as well as those that do circumvent the limits and safety measures built in.
I expect a lot of amendments going forward. Still much to be considered. The entire thing is based on not just drone, but any unmanned or other systems including delivery and possibly human transport. Still a ways to go for that... but I think the idea was setting up or defining some measures for the infrastructure required for all this new tech.
So very well said and put Paul👍
Thank you. -paa
do not wast your time if your not willing to show up at FAA to voice your disgust! remember to ask for a risk assessment for any regulation or rule regarding drones! demand them fire each FAA member with remote ID stock!
I own a real Piper. Must have ADS-B now. Law says if cost is more than $400 it is illegal. Yet min is about $2000.
Commented on the NPRM proposal! So grateful for DroneU!
FAA Rule 30,057: All drone propellers will have individual GPS and registry number. Provided by a Governmental system. All propellers will cost $20 a month to maintain Propeller Pilots license certification.
FAA Rule 30:058: All Individual drone propellers will be 3x4x5 inch or greater for improved detection.
This is why I don’t believe in registration of firearms!
this is why I don't believe in registering my drones I just don't get caught lol
A bit of a rookie here , but thanks for the video . You make a number of good points , lets hope we can kill this before it starts . On a side note , what if we had a 400' ceiling and private planes stayed above 500' ? I live near a small lake and several times I have witnessed planes well below 500' . Wealthy people like to buzz their house or friends houses . As a former fire fighter , I wish all drone pilots would at least check and think about not flying near an active fire . Same for active police activity or rescue operations .
So I just ordered a Mavic Air...kinda feel like I should return it?
And you said it brother I could not have spoken it any better good. On the subject and you get them
Well put Paul. Thanks for the great information. You were the first source I turned to when the mayhem started.
We have strict rules here in Canada. Need to take an exam, with no guide book, minister of transportation says go to drone school, $$$$, exam has a lot of questions that don't relate to drones, and then you have to register your drone. Bunch of BS if you ask me, Just a money grab.
It's good to hear from one that gets just how bad this is! I'm mostly los fixed wing but we are all in this together.
Absolutely agree, we are all in this together. Some of the fixed wing guys tend to think quad pilots are what caused this. I fly fixed wing and fpv mini quads. If that were the case, I'd be shooting myself in the foot. Thanks for acknowledging the truth.
I'm not! I was a full scale pilot before I had a crash in 2004, this drone stuff is BULLSHIT by comparison! It's like trying to describe New York pizza to someone in Oklahoma who thinks Little Caesar's is the Tits, you guys have no CLUE what piloting an aircraft is all about.
@@SCFPV it is the case quads did cause this . A monkey can buy a cheep drone from wall Mart and fly it with no skill needed so they end up flying where and when they shouldn't . Helicopters and fixed wing have a learning curve ( there harder to fly ) and are expensive so almost all new pilots have someone teach them. I.e. at an a.m.a field or a friend that is in the hobby so they end up learning flying etiquette and have more respect for where they fly . So yes Cheep no skill needed drones caused this . But. It does not matter. This is an infringement on our rights and we all need to stick together when we say we will not comply and keep our rights safe by force if needed
@@StupidTVclips It's just a wee bit arrogant of you to assume that you are the only one that does both. I'm rated commercial/instrument in fixed-wing but didn't mention it because it didn't matter for my comment.
@@StupidTVclips Yeah. That's because it's a DRONE and not a real aircraft. Glad you could make the distinction.
The question many of us want to know is...
In Standard Remote ID mode - Can you fly if you have ZERO Internet/Cell Connectivity?
great video, lots of useful info. another good bullet point is the risk assessment route too, how it unpublished and might not expose any real risk. xjet might of said something but im starting to get a little more hopeful this proposal is just that, a proposal to see what they can get away with.
We have to remember, these are proposals for right now. In regards to pilots' personal data available to the public. It already is. You 107 information is public record to anyone who knows about it.
They are going to eventually sell airtime if we let them do this. There is already so many restrictions since I started flying, now you have to be licensed to just fly.
Good video, keep them coming!!
I am going to comment officially on this. Only been flying since 2018, but this hobby has enriched my life (while draining my bank account) and I want to see its expansion and growth. There is not much to do like flying that is wholesome anymore, shame to see it die due to over-regulation.
If Drone are like-weapons? then license them as one. Just like we have the right to bear arms, but have to go through background; drone pilots should have this instead of remote ID and should be treated like when buying a weapon avoiding falling into bad hands. Kids get the 249g drone. This means no Id remote. I’m not opposed to broadcast nearby drone location. Point here is that safety is the concern then we should be Americans and have freedom of liberty and have background check before buying a drone. Put a ceiling on the drone software where no fly zone is and now the job is done. Only good people flying. Having remote ID is like having law enforcement adding a camera on your weapon and seeing everything you do with it. Privacy infringement. Having remote ID is like having dmv installing monitoring camera in your car. Would you be comfortable in your own car while they watch everything you do? Having Remote ID is like having a intersection camera giving you a ticket every time you go through a stop light to make a right turn. If its good then why don’t we have that in every intersection? Obviously because it’s an infringement. Use drone built in broadcast at certain locations only where you cannot have or fly drones. Have a ceiling like there is on airports. Have that built into drones through DJI. Have DJI open an application where you do t want drones. They can add a ceiling there for us not to be able to fly in. Remote ID is infringing in our freedom and liberty. Flying drone should be a privilege to good citizens-that goes through background check. Have your considered that terrorist will actually build their custom flybomb? No remote ID will stop that! Because they won’t put one on; they don’t abide by rules but good citizens do. I hope this helped. Use Drone broadcast instead of remote ID Have background check before purchase drones. Set the right prohibited area zones where drones can’t fly. Sincerely Alex
You aren’t required to have a radio or a mode C transponder if you’re flying VFR in class G airspace in a full sized airplane that weighs thousands of pounds and is moving over 250 mph. But the FAA is telling me they need to know where I’m at when I’m flying my drone in my backyard in the country under the tree line? That’s rich.
I really liked the points you comment on your video. Of all the videos I've seen so far about these new laws. You have very good points, I like your comments.
By the way, I don't have or have bought a drone yet.
Thank you!
Good video and information. I recommend Drone U make a couple of "template" letters for everyone to download and use. It would make a lot of sense and everyone would be on the same page. Let us know what you think?