DJI published a white paper regarding remote identification back in 2017 in anticipation of the FAA adopting some system of remote ID. Below are two excerpts that highlight using technology already in place and avoiding a network approach to dealing with the issue...
"This localized approach is preferred to networked solutions, which raise a number of concerns. A networked solution requires network connectivity, most typically via mobile phone. There are various locations that lack reliable data signals, which would thwart the ID system, as well as provide an excuse to a non-compliant operator. A networked solution also inherently raises the possibility that all UAS operations will be tracked and recorded for future unknown exploitation, including enforcement quotas or business espionage. A networked system is also susceptible to system-wide hacking, or the creation by detractors of false entries of drone
operations that do not exist..."
"The key to deploying a viable identification system is to leverage and primarily focus on technology that already exists as the primary method. UAS in widespread use today already transmit data at significant range, using their command and control and video transmission links. We propose use of protocols within the existing C2 or video link to transmit identification information to ground receivers. These control and video links most often make use of the 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz bands. To facilitate widespread adoption of this approach, DJI proposes creating at least one open identification protocol for UAS that use wifi control links, in addition to protocols that might be developed for other UAS using other control links."
DJI White Paper on Remote ID
The idea of creating a new network to track every flight no matter where it occurs versus a localized system that tracks flight around sensitive areas is (to use the DJI phrase) an Orwellian model for remote ID. As commercial avenues for delivery are establish new areas can be added as needed. It shouldn't be blanket the whole sky with this system and maybe release small sections as the FAA sees fit for public use.
"This localized approach is preferred to networked solutions, which raise a number of concerns. A networked solution requires network connectivity, most typically via mobile phone. There are various locations that lack reliable data signals, which would thwart the ID system, as well as provide an excuse to a non-compliant operator. A networked solution also inherently raises the possibility that all UAS operations will be tracked and recorded for future unknown exploitation, including enforcement quotas or business espionage. A networked system is also susceptible to system-wide hacking, or the creation by detractors of false entries of drone
operations that do not exist..."
"The key to deploying a viable identification system is to leverage and primarily focus on technology that already exists as the primary method. UAS in widespread use today already transmit data at significant range, using their command and control and video transmission links. We propose use of protocols within the existing C2 or video link to transmit identification information to ground receivers. These control and video links most often make use of the 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz bands. To facilitate widespread adoption of this approach, DJI proposes creating at least one open identification protocol for UAS that use wifi control links, in addition to protocols that might be developed for other UAS using other control links."
DJI White Paper on Remote ID
The idea of creating a new network to track every flight no matter where it occurs versus a localized system that tracks flight around sensitive areas is (to use the DJI phrase) an Orwellian model for remote ID. As commercial avenues for delivery are establish new areas can be added as needed. It shouldn't be blanket the whole sky with this system and maybe release small sections as the FAA sees fit for public use.
