FAA Drone ID Proposal:

[Rangerider]

Conspiracy theorists predate the CIA. And they are real, and characterized by their determination to invent their own reality that is inconsistent with established fact.

Good point but you ignored my point.

 

[sar104]

So what is the rid/uss thingy going to cost me? It's just one more layer of bureaucracy and cost to enrich some new cottage industry tool of the corps in my opinion.

The estimates are in the proposal. The FAA is currently suggesting a subscription service at $2.50 per month. I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a free service though - the same model as LAANC.

 

[sar104]

Good point but you ignored my point.

Which point?

 

[Rangerider]

I agree with him 100% and this was the first thing that came to mind when I saw the proposal. This is to open the sky for commercial use, BVLOS, night flights, exedra. Most commercial flights will be automated and this system will allow drones to see other drones. Local law enforcement agencies will see this cash cow and automate their end. Sending you a fine in the mail when you fly outside of your 400 foot bubble.
This will definitely make the hobby more expensive and of course a lot more restricted. Please post your videos and pictures of your local AMA box I can't wait to see them. The first thing I thought of when I saw the Mavic mini was there goes the weight restrictions. Do you think if battery technology increased energy density by four you would be allowed to fly for hours? The FAA would step in and restrict flight times not because of safety but because no commercial entity wants a hobbyist in the sky for hours. I've said it before and I'll say it again "there is gold in them there skies and hobbyists (me) are just in the way." I wonder who's gonna pay the 500 million for this system?
Please write the FAA and let them know what you think. It's probably our last chance.

I think you are right. Just look at the night time tests going on now in Colorado. Large drones flying grid patterns and nobody can figure out what they are doing? Really? Flying in the dark in grid patterns and nobody can figure out where they come from or where they land each night! Really? The news agencies love this though. They can generate all kinds of 'conspiracy theories' to marginalize those they keep in the dark and play mind games with not to mention selling 'news'.

 

[Rangerider]

The estimates are in the proposal. The FAA is currently suggesting a subscription service at $2.50 per month. I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a free service though - the same model as LAANC.

Oh wow. Okay that sounds reasonable. Right! That may be the introductory cost but soon that will be raised if you want to keep your seat at the rigged table. Let's see, new equipment costs, new monthly subs, the opportunity to get mail tickets for violations, jail time, what else did you say?

 

[sar104]

I think you are right. Just look at the night time tests going on now in Colorado. Large drones flying grid patterns and nobody can figure out what they are doing? Really? Flying in the dark in grid patterns and nobody can figure out where they come from or where they land each night! Really? The news agencies love this though. They can generate all kinds of 'conspiracy theories' to marginalize those they keep in the dark and play mind games with not to mention selling 'news'.

I think the news agencies like these kinds of reports simply because they are good mysteries, and people love mysteries.

 

[sar104]

Oh wow. Okay that sounds reasonable. Right! That may be the introductory cost but soon that will be raised if you want to keep your seat at the rigged table. Let's see, new equipment costs, new monthly subs, the opportunity to get mail tickets for violations, jail time, what else did you say?

Sorry - I just can't keep up with that level of rampant, unsupported speculation. That's one of the big problems in this thread, and social media in general - when people run out of real facts to complain about then they just start making up stuff and plow on seamlessly.

 

[Rangerider]

I think the news agencies like these kinds of reports simply because they are good mysteries, and people love mysteries.

So tell me something about that. Don't the large drones (30 or more) with 6 ft wingspans operating in the dark need some kind of FAA waiver? The FAA denies any knowledge of this activity even though it is widely reported in the fake news.

 

[sar104]

So tell me something about that. Don't the large drones (30 or more) with 6 ft wingspans operating in the dark need some kind of FAA waiver? The FAA denies any knowledge of this activity even though it is widely reported in the fake news.

So are you saying it is fake news?

 

[deleted member 877]

I don’t think it’s very appropriate to essentially label every person that disagrees with this proposal a nut bag or conspiracy theorist. Since you insist on pointing out when others may be breaking a forum rule, you might wanna review general rule #2 and #14 yourself.
This proposal is obviously very personal for almost every person who operates a UAV. Just because one persons opinion differs from another’s is not grounds for the disrespect being shown in this thread by many. I for one am one of those “nut bags“ or “conspiracy theorist” and I will be expressing my concern for parts of the proposal accordingly. But I would prefer not to be labeled as a negative stereotype simply because I have concerns.

I was talking about Facebook. Did I refer to anyone posting on this forum? I think you will find that the forum community rules don’t prohibit talking about what happens on an entirely different social media platform.

 

[Huckleberry]

So your saying that the expressed opinions on Facebook, which mirror many of those same opinions that are being expressed here, are stereotyped differently? Come on Pete. Be honest. There’s no difference. If you think that those expressing concern on Facebook are nut bags and conspiracy theorist, then you know darn good and well you think those of us on here expressing concern are nut bags and conspiracy theorists. You can’t separate based on the platform at which we share our concern.

 

[Rangerider]

So are you saying it is fake news?

Yes. The so called news they present is mainly propaganda. It is brain washing if you ask me. The media uses the event to marginalize and denigrate the term they so much love to use 'conspiracy theory'. They present the story with no real investigative reporting and fan the flames of speculation allowing many 'theories' to propagate so that they can later justify the continued use of the term 'conspiracy theorist' to marginalize anyone them want in the fake news system. The opposition to the 'plan' must be marginalized and shut down.

 

[sar104]

Yes. The so called news they present is mainly propaganda. It is brain washing if you ask me. The media uses the event to marginalize and denigrate the term they so much love to use 'conspiracy theory'. They present the story with no real investigative reporting and fan the flames of speculation allowing many 'theories' to propagate so that they can later justify the continued use of the term 'conspiracy theorist' to marginalize anyone them want in the fake news system. The opposition to the 'plan' must be marginalized and shut down.

So if it is fake news - why are you asking about FAA waivers?

 

[Rangerider]

I was talking about Facebook. Did I refer to anyone posting on this forum? I think you will find that the forum community rules don’t prohibit talking about what happens on an entirely different social media platform.

Well we don't want to break the rules now. Forget that FB, twitter etc have allowed the data of their system to be divulged to the world. There is no security on the internet and that includes using the proposed system via the internet!

 

[Rangerider]

So if it is fake news - why are you asking about FAA waivers?

Wow. You win SAR. Carry on.

 

[sar104]

Wow. You win SAR. Carry on.

Er - OK. I'm not sure what I won though - your posts started to get really confusing.

 

[bumper]

If the Wright brothers had known what the FAA would one day do, they'd of layed there on the beach, watching the seagulls, and said, "The H___ with it, ain't worth the hassle!".

FAA over regulation of small manned aircraft, along with our tort system and jury awards, is killing private aviation. It's so expensive that private plane ownership is only within reach of the relatively wealthy. Just one example is the cost of a new Lycoming IO-360 engine (200 hp, air cooled, 4 cylinder, more'n half a century old design). Without needed accessories (starter, ignition system etc), and *with* a trade-in of a used engine, that would be over $56,000! My Husky A-1B, purchased new in '05 for $175K, now costs $300K to $400K

The current altitude limit of 400 feet AGL, and within a realistic range that would not preclude line of sight, is all that should be required. On principal, we should not roll over and accept this new rule without a fight. An anology to cars was offered earlier - - perhaps a better related example would be if the government mandated all cars report any instance of excess speed.over the posted speed limit. A ticket for such violation would be sent to the registered owner. The fine, if not paid promptly, would be added to next years registration renewal with late penalties - obviously people would pitch a fit.

We are on the cusp of witnessing the demise of recreational UAS flying, save for the exemption for RC or drones that are DIY made (and those will probably be included later).

For those who like more rules, I suggest turning your attention to the problem of drunk driving - - a far more insidious killer of innocents than drones will ever be.

 

[deleted member 877]

I don’t think it’s very appropriate to essentially label every person that disagrees with this proposal a nut bag or conspiracy theorist. Since you insist on pointing out when others may be breaking a forum rule, you might wanna review general rule #2 and #14 yourself.
This proposal is obviously very personal for almost every person who operates a UAV. Just because one persons opinion differs from another’s is not grounds for the disrespect being shown in this thread by many. I for one am one of those “nut bags“ or “conspiracy theorist” and I will be expressing my concern for parts of the proposal accordingly. But I would prefer not to be labeled as a negative stereotype simply because I have concerns.

I was talking about Facebook. Did I refer to anyone posting on this forum? I think you will find that the forum community rules don’t prohibit talking about what happens on an entirely different social media platform.

So your saying that the expressed opinions on Facebook, which mirror many of those same opinions that are being expressed here, are stereotyped differently? Come on Pete. Be honest. There’s no difference. If you think that those expressing concern on Facebook are nut bags and conspiracy theorist, then you know darn good and well you think those of us on here expressing concern are nut bags and conspiracy theorists. You can’t separate based on the platform at which we share our concern.

Believe what you like - I don’t really care. If you’re not a nut bag or conspiracy theorist ( and I am in no way suggesting that you or any other member of this forum is one or the other) then you have no reason to be offended.

 

[Camino Ken]

I have read this entire thread with interest and some amusement. A healthy discourse involving different opinions is great because it allows people to learn new points of view. I do, however, think the civility could be improved.

i would like to see if I got this straight. No internet connection is required if your drone broadcasts the required information, which a lot of our existing birds can already accomplish (maybe with a firmware upgrade). You pay around $2.50 a month for an ISP type service. And then you can fly exactly like we do now. Did I get this right?

 

[Chip]

you still haven’t answered my question - LOL!

Im not sure I follow. What is your question that demands my answer? Can I find any other case in recorded history where an FAA reg has been thrown out by a court? Is that it? If I do that for you, then what?