FAA Drone ID Proposal:

[Deleted member 93449]

It would be insane for DJI to back this proposal. Their sales would drop like a rock if newbies understood all the new regulations they faced. I for one would never have purchased my Mavic Pro if I had known how restricting the current rules are. There are very few places to fly where I live. I am considering selling my drone if the new rules as written are formalized.

I think DJI sees bigger fish to fry in the commercial drone market. Even if the ID proposal is modified (throw up the most restrictive with something not quite as bad happily accepted) the general trend will be more regulations and restrictions. The consumer drone market is already down and I can’t see additional restrictions as helping that situation regarding the hobby market.

 

[AMann]

If it were from the ground up you would have to get FAA authorization to build a house, plant a tree or erect a swing set in your backyard. I don't think that is accurate.

Look at B, C and D airspace- they all can start from the surface for FAA regulation of aircraft, not buildings.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

You need to go back and relearn your B’s, C’s and D’s (airspaces). They all can start from the surface for FAA regulation of aircraft, not buildings.

I don't need to relearn anything (part 61, part 107 and instrument rated pilot). Actually you need to understand the history of airspace litigation in the U.S.

 

[SandiSCE]

A FRIA is an AMA field, but they do allow a 12 month period for other CBO’s to form. Refer below:
FAA-recognized identification areas
Applicability Prescribes procedural requirements to establish an FAA-recognized 89.201 identification area.
Eligibility
Only a community based organization (CBO) recognized by the Administrator would be allowed to apply for the establishment of an FAA-recognized identification area.
89.205
Requests for establishment
Application:
A CBO requesting establishment of an FAA-recognized identification area would have to submit an application within 12 calendar months from the effective date of the final rule. The FAA will not consider any applications submitted after that date.
89.210

So no new flying clubs can form, build their field, and apply once the rule is in place????

 

[AMann]

I don't need to relearn anything (part 61, part 107 and instrument rated pilot). Actually you need to understand the history of airspace litigation in the U.S.

Hey , sorry- I toned down my reply but too late... when did the separation from property use above the surface and FAA’s jurisdiction of airspace for aircraft from the surface up occur? Because per this, FAA claims jurisdiction starts at the surface (see #1):

Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft

www.faa.gov

 

[BigAl07]

As for the comment about using the NAS and playing with the big boys, are you saying recreational flyers and small commercial "players" have no right to use this national resource? If large corporate interest are allowed to force them out of the airspace what's next, waterways and state/federal lands?

That's my comment and not at all (Not even close) to what I implied. I consider Big Boys to be manned aircraft. Part 107/Commercial (regardless if it's Amazon or Allen flying to a Construction client) isn't what I consider a Big Boy. I think all sUAS should have to follow the same basic set of rules in order to help ensure or at least appear to increase Manned Aircraft Safety.

If I want to drive my gocart on the interstate (and I don't own one btw but if I did) wouldn't I need to follow the same "Guidelines" of the highway? Same direction of travel, similar speeds and other "Traffic" type of procedures? If I didn't I would be potentially causing HAVOC on the highway and in the above care probably getting myself killed.

If you're going to fly in the NAS (much like the Big Boys) then it's on you to play by the same rules. We can't integrate into the NAS with any reasonable amount of safety without all playing by the same rules. I don't think a sUAS (any sUAS regardless who it belongs to, how it's flown, or what it's purpose is) should have any different requirements as other aircraft. It's not a popular through process but I think Part 107 should be the bare MIN for anyone flying within the following criteria:

A) Not at a fixed/approved flying site (R/C flying field for instance)
B) Flying an aircraft capable of Fully Automated Flight (GPS and Stabilized)
C) Able to fly higher than 100' and further than 400' (random # but good for the argument) horizontally

If your operation/flight doesn't fall into all of the above boxes then you should be exempt or at least be able to operate under some type of an "Exception".

 

[Peter Hughes]

Not sure if I have the right end of the stick here but I thought these somewhat draconian measures are at the consultation stage?

That being the case it would be in everyone’s interest to respond with their thoughts to the relevant people (FAA?) and have your say.

As things stand, it seems very strange to me in the U.K. that the powers that be are proposing to make it harder to fly recreationally than it is to buy an automatic firearm!

 

[sar104]

As things stand, it seems very strange to me in the U.K. that the powers that be are proposing to make it harder to fly recreationally than it is to buy an automatic firearm!

Right - but which of those needs to be changed? Actually don't answer that - it's a can of worms.

 

[rxlawdude]

Not challenging, just asking. In effect, what is the difference?

Statutes (legislation) are the "law," while regulations are promulgated by administrative agencies of the Executive Branch as authorized by enabling legislation. Regulations may not be made that exceed an agency's statutory authority, or that do not have an articulated relationship to public health and safety.

 

[Mschinella]

Exactly. This is a nightmare for anyone purchasing a drone today and expecting to be able to fly it in other than VERY limited locations.

So Should I consider Returning my Mavic 2 that I just purchased.

 

[Mschinella]

Exactly. This is a nightmare for anyone purchasing a drone today and expecting to be able to fly it in other than VERY limited locations.

Also does the Mavic 2 Pro support Remote ID

 

[NCKen]

Just bought an M2 pro to take real estate photos ( a am a realtor - had to send it back right out of the box and am waiting for DJI to acknowledge receipt etc. and now thinking I should try and cancel the order all togather.

 

[DoomMeister]

Just bought an M2 pro to take real estate photos ( a am a realtor - had to send it back right out of the box and am waiting for DJI to acknowledge receipt etc. and now thinking I should try and cancel the order all togather.

A very beautiful part of NC, spent a week at a mountain cabin (2500 sq ft ) a few years back. A lot of photo ops along the Broad River.

It might be easier to use a WiFi controlled gimbaled camera attached to a tethered weather balloon when all this RID BS comes to fruition. At least it won’t need an internet connection. I remember the spotty cellular there.

 

[deleted member 877]

Just bought an M2 pro to take real estate photos ( a am a realtor - had to send it back right out of the box and am waiting for DJI to acknowledge receipt etc. and now thinking I should try and cancel the order all togather.

If I were you I’d keep the drone - you’ve got at least a couple of years of taking real estate photos before you need to worry about the outcome of the FAA proposal.

And you don’t necessarily need an internet connection - this has been covered and explained in many previous posts.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

That's my comment and not at all (Not even close) to what I implied. I consider Big Boys to be manned aircraft. Part 107/Commercial (regardless if it's Amazon or Allen flying to a Construction client) isn't what I consider a Big Boy. I think all sUAS should have to follow the same basic set of rules in order to help ensure or at least appear to increase Manned Aircraft Safety.

If I want to drive my gocart on the interstate (and I don't own one btw but if I did) wouldn't I need to follow the same "Guidelines" of the highway? Same direction of travel, similar speeds and other "Traffic" type of procedures? If I didn't I would be potentially causing HAVOC on the highway and in the above care probably getting myself killed.

If you're going to fly in the NAS (much like the Big Boys) then it's on you to play by the same rules. We can't integrate into the NAS with any reasonable amount of safety without all playing by the same rules. I don't think a sUAS (any sUAS regardless who it belongs to, how it's flown, or what it's purpose is) should have any different requirements as other aircraft. It's not a popular through process but I think Part 107 should be the bare MIN for anyone flying within the following criteria:

A) Not at a fixed/approved flying site (R/C flying field for instance)
B) Flying an aircraft capable of Fully Automated Flight (GPS and Stabilized)
C) Able to fly higher than 100' and further than 400' (random # but good for the argument) horizontally

If your operation/flight doesn't fall into all of the above boxes then you should be exempt or at least be able to operate under some type of an "Exception".

But what we are considering is really not flying like or with the Big Boys. Ninety-nine percent of the NAS is reserved for the Big Boys. We are taking about the other 0.1% where the others want to participate in recreation and small business commercial flying. We're talking about class G airspace below 400' that is rarely used by the so-called Big Boys. The premise of your argument that these regulations are required to play with the Big Boys is fundamentally flawed because basically we're not playing with the Big Boys.

The demand that a UAS meet the same requirements "as other aircraft" is ludicrous. The risk posed by sUAS are miniscule compared the risk posed by manned aircraft. Basically that statement is saying crush recreational flying and small business operations and totally ignores risk factors and what systems should be in place to mitigate the risk factors sUAS operations pose.

That said your A, B and C would be a whole lot more acceptable (with C being open for discussion) versus what is being proposed.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

If I were you I’d keep the drone - you’ve got at least a couple of years of taking real estate photos before you need to worry about the outcome of the FAA proposal.

And you don’t necessarily need an internet connection - this has been covered and explained in many previous posts.

There are only two circumstances where you do not need an internet connection (actually three but one involves research) and they are covered on pages 93 ~ 99 of the proposal. You do not need an internet connection for flight at an FAA approved flying area (ex. AMA flying field). The other exception is under the conditions of the Standard Remote Identification UAS classification but the drone would have to be able to transmit the identification information directly.

 

[sar104]

There are only two circumstances where you do not need an internet connection (actually three but one involves research) and they are covered on pages 93 ~ 99 of the proposal. You do not need an internet connection for flight at an FAA approved flying area (ex. AMA flying field). The other exception is under the conditions of the Standard Remote Identification UAS classification but the drone would have to be able to transmit the identification information directly.

To turn that question around - under what circumstances do you think that you do need an internet connection to fly under Standard Remote ID?

 

[Swiater]

So bottom line... if you knew someone was buying their 1st drone, would you recommend then to not even buy one?

I just ordered a mavic mini but it is on backorder and I still have a chance to cancel ther order... based on this new tesh, what would you do?? Over always wanted a drone and im in a sort that I can afford this smaller one. Honest answers are greatly appreciated!

 

[Thomas B]

So bottom line... if you knew someone was buying their 1st drone, would you recommend then to not even buy one?

I just ordered a mavic mini but it is on backorder and I still have a chance to cancel ther order... based on this new tesh, what would you do?? Over always wanted a drone and im in a sort that I can afford this smaller one. Honest answers are greatly appreciated!

Get the drone.... these rules are at least 3 years from implementation.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

To turn that question around - under what circumstances do you think that you do need an internet connection to fly under Standard Remote ID?

My understanding at this point is you would need an internet connection if the drone you are flying cannot broadcast the minimum ID information and you are flying anywhere other than an approved FAA flight area.