FAA Drone ID Proposal:

[sar104]

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?

Basically - yes. The aircraft needs to be capable of connecting to the internet via the mobile device, and needs to transmit the required elements to a subscription USS if the internet is available. In addition it will broadcast similar elements directly via the aircraft radio. Then you can fly anywhere that is currently legal. Although note that "under-the-radar", illegal BVLOS flights will not longer be "under-the-radar".

 

[Camino Ken]

Basically - yes. The aircraft needs to be capable of connecting to the internet via the mobile device, and needs to transmit the required elements to a subscription USS if the internet is available. In addition it will broadcast similar elements directly via the aircraft radio. Then you can fly anywhere that is currently legal. Although note that "under-the-radar", illegal BVLOS flights will not longer be "under-the-radar".

Sorry, just to confirm. If my drone can broadcast the info and I have no internet connection at the time I can still fly normally?

 

[sar104]

Sorry, just to confirm. If my drone can broadcast the info and I have no internet connection at the time I can still fly normally?

Yes - that's the main point of the direct broadcast requirement - when no internet connection is available. For compliance with Standard Remote ID:

• If the internet is available at takeoff, the UAS would have to do the following from takeoff to landing: (1) connect to the internet and transmit the required remote identification message elements through that internet connection to a Remote ID USS; and (2) broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft.
• If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, or if during the flight, the unmanned aircraft can no longer transmit through an internet connection to a Remote ID USS, the UAS would have to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft from takeoff to landing.

 

[deleted member 877]

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?

For the third time, I asked you to cite any other instances of The FAA overstepping its authority and enacting an illegal regulation. I was trying to make a point about, in this particular case, the futility of the recreational drone community taking on the FAA in court.

To be sure heads at the FAA would have rolled following their losing the case that you brought up - very embarrassing for them indeed. That's not going to happen again, especially in regard to this new and highly significant proposal.

But in any case I'll be happy to take back my assertion about the anomaly, the one-off. I figure that you have spent the last hour or so feverishly googling and have triumphantly found something that you now have up your sleeve. Hit me big fella !

 

[Rangerider]

Yes - that's the main point of the direct broadcast requirement - when no internet connection is available. For compliance with Standard Remote ID:

• If the internet is available at takeoff, the UAS would have to do the following from takeoff to landing: (1) connect to the internet and transmit the required remote identification message elements through that internet connection to a Remote ID USS; and (2) broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft.
• If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, or if during the flight, the unmanned aircraft can no longer transmit through an internet connection to a Remote ID USS, the UAS would have to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft from takeoff to landing.

Okay so forgive for being stupid, but doesn't this mean you can't fly without an internet connection? I'm a little slow on the uptake so please bear with me. A picture is always preferable for slow learners like me. Thanks for helping me to understand.

 

[Camino Ken]

Yes - that's the main point of the direct broadcast requirement - when no internet connection is available. For compliance with Standard Remote ID:

• If the internet is available at takeoff, the UAS would have to do the following from takeoff to landing: (1) connect to the internet and transmit the required remote identification message elements through that internet connection to a Remote ID USS; and (2) broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft.
• If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, or if during the flight, the unmanned aircraft can no longer transmit through an internet connection to a Remote ID USS, the UAS would have to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft from takeoff to landing.

Thanks. BTW, do you have any thoughts or information about whether the existing Mavics will need a firmware update or is it as simple as flipping the switch in the GO4 app?

 

[Camino Ken]

Yes - that's the main point of the direct broadcast requirement - when no internet connection is available. For compliance with Standard Remote ID:

• If the internet is available at takeoff, the UAS would have to do the following from takeoff to landing: (1) connect to the internet and transmit the required remote identification message elements through that internet connection to a Remote ID USS; and (2) broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft.
• If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, or if during the flight, the unmanned aircraft can no longer transmit through an internet connection to a Remote ID USS, the UAS would have to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft from takeoff to landing.

By the way, I read 5 articles from 5 different sources yesterday where 4 out of 5 got it wrong and specifically stated that you would need an internet connection. I think that is why many people are confused.

 

[Thomas B]

By the way, I read 5 articles from 5 different sources yesterday where 4 out of 5 got it wrong and specifically stated that you would need an internet connection. I think that is why many people are confused.

Yes, that was troubling me as Arizona has vast stretches of “open” land since over 80% of the state is National Forest or state trust land. No cell or WiFi towers away from major roads.

 

[sar104]

Okay so forgive for being stupid, but doesn't this mean you can't fly without an internet connection? I'm a little slow on the uptake so please bear with me. A picture is always preferable for slow learners like me. Thanks for helping me to understand.

No - how are you reading that into it?

If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, or if during the flight, the unmanned aircraft can no longer transmit through an internet connection to a Remote ID USS, the UAS would have to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft from takeoff to landing.​

Perhaps the description on page 94 of the proposal is clearer:

A standard remote identification UAS would be required to broadcast and transmit the remote identification message elements from takeoff to landing. If the internet is available at takeoff, the standard remote identification UAS would have to connect to the internet and transmit the message elements through that internet connection to a Remote ID USS and would also be required to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft. If the internet is unavailable at takeoff, the standard remote identification UAS would only be required to broadcast the message elements directly from the unmanned aircraft.​

 

[sar104]

By the way, I read 5 articles from 5 different sources yesterday where 4 out of 5 got it wrong and specifically stated that you would need an internet connection. I think that is why many people are confused.

Yes - I realize that there is a lot of misinformation out there. That's why I keep quoting directly from the proposal and encouraging everyone to look at it. But it's quite bizarre how many posters are clearly unwilling to read it.

 

[Prmath]

Yes, that was troubling me as Arizona has vast stretches of “open” land since over 80% of the state is National Forest or state trust land. No cell or WiFi towers away from major roads.

the FAA answer to that......... “too bad”

 

[sar104]

the FAA answer to that......... “too bad”

No - the FAA's answer to that is likely to be "read the proposal".

 

[Thomas B]

the FAA answer to that......... “too bad”

? Seems contradictory to the document. FWIW the info in my post was included in my response to the FAA/DOT request for input.

 

[AMann]

No - you have misunderstood. It doesn't matter whether there are direct broadcast receiving stations in the area - that's not one of the operational requirements - only that the aircraft broadcasts directly.

I understand, directly to what?

 

[sar104]

I understand, directly to what?

Transmitting doesn't necessarily involve to anything. The requirement is to transmit - just like ADS-B. There is no assurance that any receivers are within range.

 

[wco81]

This guy breaks down the proposal, urges all recreational pilots to make comments to the FAA proposal, because he say these were drafted by commercial UAS interest without ANY input from recreational pilots.

He also says we'll likely have to pay fees or subscriptions to Remote ID Service Providers so that they can cover operating costs as well as make profits.

 

[sar104]

? Seems contradictory to the document. FWIW the info in my post was included in my response to the FAA/DOT request for input.

It's not contradictory to the document. I have repeatedly posted the requirements directly from the document in this thread, including as recently as post #488.

 

[Thomas B]

This guy breaks down the proposal, urges all recreational pilots to make comments to the FAA proposal, because he say these were drafted by commercial UAS interest without ANY input from recreational pilots.

He also says we'll likely have to pay fees or subscriptions to Remote ID Service Providers so that they can cover operating costs as well as make profits.

Posted before

 

[MarkNJ]

so, i watched our NZ brother’s video commentary over here and his counter-proposal to the FAA is that they just adjust the designated altitudes zones. hobbyists get up to 400 ft, commercial UAVs (for delivery, etc.), get 500 to around 1000 ft (or perhaps tighter, as they will be precisely controlled), and manned aircraft get 1000 ft and up.

since the main concern being hyped is the 1.5 million small UAVs being a safety risk for commercial UAV activities and manned flights, this gives a huge safety increase compared to the burden/cost/inconvenience of a whole new tracking system.

i plan to include this suggestion in my response to the FAA. any chance they will reconsider based on technical feasibility and practicality?

 

[AMann]

Transmitting doesn't necessarily involve to anything. The requirement is to transmit - just like ADS-B. There is no assurance that any receivers are within range.

Ok, so earlier you said “The aircraft needs to be capable of connecting to the internet via the mobile device, and needs to transmit the required elements to a subscription USS if the internet is available.” So in remote areas, one of the ways to really do it reliably could be through a satellite transmitter, yes?

OK so what happens when the aircraft cannot connect to the Internet, doesn’t that mean it’s a no fly?