FAA Drone ID Proposal- Round Two

[Mavic Air Head]

Gang- I might recommend you read the essential parts of the proposed law (it's an 87 page document).

We have FOUR YEARS before this law begins to actually take effect. Kindly read as follows which is pasted from the proposed legislation, found on page 72488 (it's a weird gov numbering thing- the actual doc is 87 pages), Section XVII. Highlights are mine from the paste section below.

"Requirements that prohibit operation of UAS without remote identification would begin 36 months after the effective date of the rule. This 36-month period runs concurrently with the 24- month period provided for the development of means of compliance, and for the design, production, and sale of UAS with remote identification.

Once UAS with remote identification are widely available, this proposal would allow an additional one- year period of time for UAS owners and operators to purchase and transition to operations of UAS with remote identification."

Hope this is helpful and positive in tone. I'm not an expert or an attorney, just a guy who believes in due diligence before I believe publicly shared information.

Best-

Neil Reid
Dallas, TX

Thanks for wading through the paperwork and finding this.
In other words we have 3-4 years to crash our current MA or lose it in an ocean before we have to buy the latest compliant version. (wink and a nod In case SAR 104 thinks I don't know what I'm saying in this comment as I employ a microscopic bit of levity in a most somber venue)

 

[Fly Petaluma]

A good reason to stay in the sub 250 gram and continue to build my own....

You know, manned aircraft aren't supposed to be below 500 agl and uas not over 400 agl most places.... Just sayin'

There is language in the proposal, (see p. 73) that indicates that the sub 250 gram exception may not continue.

 

[Fly Petaluma]

Was @sar104 incorrect when he said that lack of internet connectivity is not a requirement to be able to fly outside of a 400-foot bubble? My understanding from his numerous posts regarding this point was that the drone needs only to be able to broadcast the requisite data elements - a capability that most recent DJI drones already have.

If I understand correctly, with Standard remote ID, the controller has to be able to connect to the Internet. How does the controller connect to the Internet?

 

[sar104]

If I understand correctly, with Standard remote ID, the controller has to be able to connect to the Internet. How does the controller connect to the Internet?

That's incorrect. The aircraft has to be capable of connecting to the internet to transmit data to a USS, generally via the RC and mobile device.

 

[cavenger]

You guys, this whole thing is prejudiced and offensive. My aircraft does not remotely identify itself as a drone. It identifies itself as a kite.

 

[Mavic Air Head]

You guys, this whole thing is prejudiced and offensive. My aircraft does not remotely identify itself as a drone. It identifies itself as a kite.

Now that I've been reprimanded that I can set my max altitude at 500 meters, I'm trying to get my Mavic Air to transition to an ozone molecule instead of identifying as an argon atom. Glad it doesn't identify as CO2.

 

[deleted member 877]

There is language in the proposal, (see p. 73) that indicates that the sub 250 gram exception may not continue.
View attachment 89648

Yep, around about the time that all the hype regarding the Mavic Mini was blossoming, the FAA started making noises about the sub 250 gram threshold and that it wasn’t necessarily set in concrete.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

Manned aircraft fly below 500ft quite often like for takeoff and landings, search and rescue, fighting fires, locating fugitives, crop inspections, building inspections, dam inspections, surveying, installing large HVAC on roofs, etc etc.

Take off and landings are already dealt with via rules regarding controlled airspace around airports. As for the others, they represent a miniscule number of flight operations and can be controlled via a NOTAM system that you could receive on your smart phone to notify drone pilots of the activity.

 

[MaxE1955!]

I'm going to give EVERYONE reading this who intended to respond to the NPRM.... think ahead be sure to make your response fit into this bubble:

• concise
• specific
• respectful

I've been reading a batch of the current "Comments" and I've gotta say... it doesn't look good so far. Reasoning like:

"FPV isn't a crime"
or
"Freelancers and content creators should be able to perfect their craft and expand opportunities without unreasonable limitations "
or
"This legislation will kill a hobby that isn't actually harming ANYONE. Maybe instead of bothering people that aren't hurting anyone you actually protect people "

is not going to have any effect what so ever. Take the time to give suggestions/options rather than just being completely negative and critical. Details are IMPORTANT!!

Amen!

 

[islandflyer]

some say it violates the 4th amendment because it shows your name and location. and it encourages crazies to find you or wait for you at that location and bash your drone, if not you.

 

[Thomas B]

some say it violates the 4th amendment because it shows your name and location. and it encourages crazies to find you or wait for you at that location and bash your drone, if not you.

Carry a phone?

 

[brettbrandon]

There is language in the proposal, (see p. 73) that indicates that the sub 250 gram exception may not continue.
View attachment 89648

My little whoops could not fly with the extra weight. So we can't fly our little guys at all?

 

[deleted member 877]

My little whoops could not fly with the extra weight. So we can't fly our little guys at all?

You'll be able to fly at Drone parks , AMA fields (if you join up), and other FAA sanctioned locations. And maybe the next version of the Tiny Whoop will be a tiny bit bigger to accommodate the extra weight (I believe it's only a few grams) of the ID Broadcast module.

Edit: See my next post (#56) for a correction to the above.

 

[brettbrandon]

My little whoops could not fly with the extra weight. So we can't fly our little guys at all?

Looks like for now I also have this on my side.

A quote from the proposal:
All UAS produced for operation in the airspace of the United States would have to comply with the design and production requirements established in this proposal with exceptions for amateur-built UAS, UAS of the United States government, and unmanned aircraft that weigh less than 0.55 pounds.

I got two out of three... I am building my own quads and will continue to do so. We (amateur-built) pilots are a very small group compared to the store bought gps drones. They may just leave us alone. We generally aren't flying 100's of feet in the air either (racing/freestyle).

 

[BigAl07]

Looks like for now I also have this on my side.

A quote from the proposal:
All UAS produced for operation in the airspace of the United States would have to comply with the design and production requirements established in this proposal with exceptions for amateur-built UAS, UAS of the United States government, and unmanned aircraft that weigh less than 0.55 pounds.

I got two out of three... I am building my own quads and will continue to do so. We (amateur-built) pilots are a very small group compared to the store bought gps drones. They may just leave us alone. We generally aren't flying 100's of feet in the air either (racing/freestyle).

I agree. As a rule your group is some of the least rule breaking but often times the FAA finds it easier to lump everyone into one basket and be done with it. Maybe not this time though.

 

[deleted member 877]

Looks like for now I also have this on my side.

A quote from the proposal:
All UAS produced for operation in the airspace of the United States would have to comply with the design and production requirements established in this proposal with exceptions for amateur-built UAS, UAS of the United States government, and unmanned aircraft that weigh less than 0.55 pounds.

I got two out of three... I am building my own quads and will continue to do so. We (amateur-built) pilots are a very small group compared to the store bought gps drones. They may just leave us alone. We generally aren't flying 100's of feet in the air either (racing/freestyle).

Yeah sorry, I didn't take into account the 250 gram weight thing. I reckon the FPV industry will benefit greatly from all of this and most drone flyers who first and foremost enjoy the pure art of flying are already into FPV.

 

[brettbrandon]

I agree. As a rule your group is some of the least rule breaking but often times the FAA finds it easier to lump everyone into one basket and be done with it. Maybe not this time though.

Thats the problem with most rules and regulations, there is no "one size fits all" solution.

 

[brettbrandon]

Yeah sorry, I didn't take into account the 250 gram weight thing. I reckon the FPV industry will benefit greatly from all of this and most drone flyers who first and foremost enjoy the pure art of flying are already into FPV.

Not a problem.

I tried the FPV thing and got hooked. My replacement M2P thats about 6 months old has less than 30 minutes flight time on it. I use it for photography but do my fun flying with the whoops. The M2P is just too sluggish and hard to find a place to fly it . I can fly my little whoops up and down the street as well as indoors.

I just gutted a GoPro Hero 4 Black and have it down to 30 grams. I'm building another FPV whoop to carry this and get 4k video out of a tiny drone I could fly right into somebody and not hurt them.

 

[Fly Petaluma]

That's incorrect. The aircraft has to be capable of connecting to the internet to transmit data to a USS, generally via the RC and mobile device.

Thank you for your correction. So am I to understand the mobile device connected to the RC must have a cellular connection and that a tablet or iPod without a cellular connection can't be used with the RC?

 

[sar104]

Thank you for your correction. So am I to understand the mobile device connected to the RC must have a cellular connection and that a tablet or iPod without a cellular connection can't be used with the RC?

Good question - the answer is not completely clear yet, at least to me. A device without cellular is still capable of connecting to the internet, via wifi, and so one could argue that the lack of wifi in that situation is no different to the lack of cellular signal, or the lack of coverage of the specific cellular provider that you use. That then simply puts it into the "capable" but "not connected to the internet" category of Standard Remote ID, and so you could fly with just the broadcast method.