FAA Release NEW rules for UAS Operations

[Flightpro]

I got the email yesterday and glanced through the PDF file. We all have to remember that this is the FAA, A federal agency laying out the future for all drone flight. That also takes into play the commercial delivery services. They will be regulated to the max and the FAA is laying out those rules and regs from A to Z. It is a safety issue and I believe that RID Is necessary. We as hobbyists and professionals will either be able to retrofit our current aircraft or buy new with RID built in. DJI or other aftermarket companies will develop or may already have developed stick on modules to mount on our current machines. I for one am not worried, this whole system will play into accident avoidance.

Word!!

 

[LColdiron]

No recurrent test. Instead, no-cost recurrent training online. Nice!

Night Ops is of interest for those who may conduct SAR missions.

I couldn't make heads or tails of what they were trying to say about recurrent testing. To me, it sounded like they were doing away with recurrent testing, but then in the same sentence requiring recurrent testing with the new remote ID and night/over people flying rules.

 

[z28lt1]

They use a technical definition that I can't quite wrap my head around because I'm not a Physics major.

For example, Category 2 says, in part, "a transfer of 11 foot-pounds of kinetic energy upon impact from a rigid object, does not contain any exposed rotating parts that could lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being".

Uhhh, that would include...what?

DJI Spark? Or MA2? Or Inspire?

And are propeller guards sufficient to meet this requirement? Etc.

It also says, "Requires FAA-accepted means of compliance and FAA-accepted declaration of compliance."

I think it's a great move in the right direction, but it's also clear as mud.

They purposely left it up to the manufacturers to figure out how to meet the 11 and 25 ft-lbs of energy. You can do that with a combination of weight, design, materials, speed, altitude limits, etc.... We won't be able to know if our drones meet the categories, but the manufacturers will build to those categories. Future drones will come labeled with their categories, and they could even be in multiple categories (such as Cat 2 for Tripod mode, and Cat 3 for Normal and Sport Mode)

 

[aerials]

They purposely left it up to the manufacturers to figure out how to meet the 11 and 25 ft-lbs of energy. You can do that with a combination of weight, design, materials, speed, altitude limits, etc.... We won't be able to know if our drones meet the categories, but the manufacturers will build to those categories. Future drones will come labeled with their categories, and they could even be in multiple categories (such as Cat 2 for Tripod mode, and Cat 3 for Normal and Sport Mode)

The question is, will older drones be placed into these categories?

 

[z28lt1]

Ya it seems like the only safe bet right now is the Air 2 since it’s less than .55g or whatever. I have a Mavic pro 2 with a lot of accessories invested. I don’t want to just not be able to use it because I can’t tell what category it fits in.

There is no difference for you. You can't fly over people now without a waiver. So, if your Mavic Pro 2 does not get get put into Category 2, you still won't be able to fly over people.

 

[aerials]

There is no difference for you. You can't fly over people now without a waiver. So, if your Mavic Pro 2 does not get get put into Category 2, you still won't be able to fly over people.

Yes I could if I get an RID module.

 

[z28lt1]

The question is, will older drones be placed into these categories?

My guess is almost certainly no. The manufacturers would have to test them and get all the results certified. It's also somewhat likely that current drones will not meet the standards, since they were not designed to do so.

 

[z28lt1]

Yes I could if I get an RID module.

No, you can't fly over people. Do not confuse what is going on here with the multiple new rules.

1) In 30 months you will not be able to fly outside of designated areas without Remote ID, period.
2) Today - you can't fly over people, period. The new rule allows you to fly over limited people depending upon the category of drone you have. The Mavic 2, even with remote id, if left uncategorized, still can't fly over people, just like it can't today.
3) To fly over "open air assemblies", you need to be in one of the categories with those rules AND have remote ID, even before remote ID is required.

 

[aerials]

No, you can't fly over people. Do not confuse what is going on here with the multiple new rules.

1) In 30 months you will not be able to fly outside of designated areas without Remote ID, period.
2) Today - you can't fly over people, period. The new rule allows you to fly over limited people depending upon the category of drone you have. The Mavic 2, even with remote id, if left uncategorized, still can't fly over people, just like it can't today.
3) To fly over "open air assemblies", you need to be in one of the categories with those rules AND have remote ID, even before remote ID is required.

Yes I know. I was referring to #3 if the Pro 2 gets categorized and I get an RID.

 

[z28lt1]

By the time all this stuff comes together, the sub-250-gram registration exemption may possibly not still be in place.

I think that is unlikely. The FAA specifically discussed that they did not want to limit the sales of the "toy drones". They don't want the little $20 things that weight nothing and don't go far, and blow away with the wind that you buy at the convenience store to not be able to be sold. There's no way those things will have remote id. DJI's mini is probably not what they had in mind in the toy drone market, so I could maybe see the weight going down a little, but they aren't going to ground those little toys (In my opinion, since they stated so....)

 

[anotherlab]

My guess is almost certainly no. The manufacturers would have to test them and get all the results certified. It's also somewhat likely that current drones will not meet the standards, since they were not designed to do so.

It's going to apply to any drone that you would want to fly over people. Since you can't do that now under the current rules, excluding older drones that can't be retrofitted isn't a new restriction.

A larger company like DJI would have the resources to test and certify protective devices for a number of models. It doesn't make sense for DJI to be retrofit a Mini-sized drone, it would cheaper to buy a new one. The Air 2 is questionable, and that's probably where you would see 3rd party mitigations offered. The Mavic Pro and Inspires would be doable for both DJI and 3rd party.

 

[z28lt1]

Yes I know. I was referring to #3 if the Pro 2 gets categorized and I get an RID.

In that case, we go back to the original point.

You stated "I have a Mavic pro 2 with a lot of accessories invested. I don’t want to just not be able to use it because I can’t tell what category it fits in."

My orignal reply still stands. You can use your Mavic Pro 2, just as you can today, and just as you were able to when you made the investment in accessories for the next 30 months. You can't fly over people today, and unless somehow the thing gets certified, you won't be able to fly over people in the future. So when you say "just not be able to use it", you can use it just fine. You can't use it over people, because you can't tell what category it fits in.

So, no changes for you. 30 months from now (or actually the date of the final rule), regardless of the category, you'll need a Remote ID module, and then you can still fly, exactly as you fly today.

I think people should go into the drone buying thing with an eye to knowing it is a rapidly changing industry, and at some point, your drone might be grounded. The EU is going through some of this now with their new rules as well, and now the US is following suit. More or different regulations are almost certainly coming all over the world in the future, so if you buy something now, do it with your eyes wide open, that 3-5 years from now, it may or may not be usable....

EDIT: And I should add, the night and people rules are actually taking away restrictions, not adding them. Right now the complaint would be your drone has the same exact restrictions you had when you bought in, but a newer drone, might have less.

 

[NG Wildman]

I received one of them by email. It mentioned RID an that could exempt having to get a waiver for flying over people. Doesn't mention the technology required to be used for RID.

Same here from the FAA.

 

[Vic Moss]

HI all. I was busy with the FAA and other forums yesterday and couldn't get to this one. I asked @BigAl07 to post our links in his forums.

I'll get back to this one later this morning and get to the questions people have asked. Sorry for the delay.

 

[NG Wildman]

In that case, we go back to the original point.

You stated "I have a Mavic pro 2 with a lot of accessories invested. I don’t want to just not be able to use it because I can’t tell what category it fits in."

My orignal reply still stands. You can use your Mavic Pro 2, just as you can today, and just as you were able to when you made the investment in accessories for the next 30 months. You can't fly over people today, and unless somehow the thing gets certified, you won't be able to fly over people in the future. So when you say "just not be able to use it", you can use it just fine. You can't use it over people, because you can't tell what category it fits in.

So, no changes for you. 30 months from now (or actually the date of the final rule), regardless of the category, you'll need a Remote ID module, and then you can still fly, exactly as you fly today.

I think people should go into the drone buying thing with an eye to knowing it is a rapidly changing industry, and at some point, your drone might be grounded. The EU is going through some of this now with their new rules as well, and now the US is following suit. More or different regulations are almost certainly coming all over the world in the future, so if you buy something now, do it with your eyes wide open, that 3-5 years from now, it may or may not be usable....
yeah, but you can't
EDIT: And I should add, the night and people rules are actually taking away restrictions, not adding them. Right now the complaint would be your drone has the same exact restrictions you had when you bought in, but a newer drone, might have less.

Solid points. I believe I read 60 days after the print date of the final rules is when the clock starts.
My complaint is the ability for nosey people to interfere with drone flights. I fly legally, but with as many questions as we (in the hobby) have with things sometimes not being clear, imagine how many drone haters will have an agenda and now the ability to interfere with operations (based on the ability to identify and locate). It's funny. even my non-drone friends always ask questions like: "is that legal", "don't fly over my house" etc. because they are uneducated and don't care to be. This will bring the drone community more in the public spotlight. I have no problem with that as irresponsible drone pilots give us a bad name. However, this will make it easier for anti-droners to interfere with the safe operation of our drones. I hope there is appropriate and equal attention given to ramifications for those who do interfere with our legal operations.

 

[floridabeachbum]

One major difference the FAA has overlooked thus far on RID vs Manned:

Remote Pilots are NOT protected from interaction with the public, including law enforcement, by means of physical location as Manned Aircraft pilots are.

Imagine a Gulfstream pilot at 23,000 feet having the local busy-body physically accosting them for flying over their house? Or worse (but it still happens more than we'd like to admit), having 3 cops roll up with guns drawn and demanding they land immediately? (And there are plenty of examples of both.)

The FAA would have a hissy fit, and rightfully so.

But as a remote pilot, we're going to have to deal with this, probably more than we'd like to admit.

It will take more than a few of these incidents recorded on video before there is enough justification to make further changes to RID, such as a time delay, or some sort of access restriction.

Personally, I would love it if I could livestream from my MA2, then put a link in the RID to the livestream. Most of the problems would be solved before they started.

 

[MEFfly]

The wording they use is confusing, but they basically created two close, but separate instances:

1 - "Built in" ( what the FAA is calling "Standard") Remote ID
and
2 - Remote Module Remote ID.

The main changes for the Remote Module are:
A) - Broadcast Take off point instead of control station
B) - Let user know if it is not working before taking off (instead of actually preventing takeoff)
C)- Requires the user to maintain VLOS at all times (which is required now anyway, but part of the push for Remote ID is to eventually allow some more BVLOS flights).

Unfortunately, I think the add on module may have to be made by DJI, as one of the rules state that the module would have to prevent take off if not broadcasting and give the location of the controller. I don't see DJI working with any after third market players as it's not to their advantage in selling new drones. Who knows. I also have not read the entire pdf (actual language) so maybe there is something excluding the retrofitted add on modules for this.

I recall at some point when the proposed rules were being discussed in the forums that a few people had pointed out that it may just be a firmware update to the controller that would meet the requirement.

Also, could it be that a DJI accessory or a third party standalone device could "capture" the RF signal from the controller and act as a repeater to transmit the location info as required, as opposed to something physically added to the drone?

I'm a biologist, not an engineer, so excuse my ignorance in this tech.

 

[lookout]

Remote ID still isn't addressing the issue of airspace incursions which is what the FAA should primarily be concerned.

They're more worried about identifying who's flying a drone.

They've gone off the deep end with something going counter to purpose.

Where does part 107 have something to do with commercial operation?

A commercial drone operator only has to avoid being brought down while doing business.

A commercial manned operator has to cover the cost of maintenance, gas, hotels, car rentals, safety, equipment, skills, training, and several other avenues. The commercial guy can actually charge money for services as opposed to just splitting the cost of the trip.

It sounds like another, if you fly a drone, we're going to tell you what you will eat for dinner, how many cats you can have, what car you will drive episode, that not just the FAA will be doing. Your next door neighbor will also just take over your life.

 

[dmac1]

Also, could it be that a DJI accessory or a third party standalone device could "capture" the RF signal from the controller and act as a repeater to transmit the location info as required, as opposed to something physically added to the drone?

From the Final Rule:

There are three ways to comply with the operational requirements for remote identification. The first way is to operate a standard remote identification unmanned aircraft that broadcasts identification, location, and performance information of the unmanned aircraft and control station. The second way to comply is by operating an unmanned aircraft with a remote identification broadcast module. The broadcast module, which broadcasts identification, location, and take-off information, may be a separate device that is attached to an unmanned aircraft, or a feature built into the aircraft. The third way to comply allows for the operation of unmanned aircraft without any remote identification equipment, where the UAS is operated at specific FAA-recognized identification areas. The requirements for all three of these paths to compliance are specified in this rule.

So, that answers a previous question about whether the Remote ID device hasta be built in...it doesn't, but it hasta be attached.

My concern is that I fly in remote terrain, where there is no cell signal, so whats that mean? (I've just started reading the 470 pages...)

 

[wco81]

Mavic 2 (and my understanding is most of dji current gen ) can already broadcast remote id. Now that said they (dji) were pushing for non networked ( cell ) iterations, as they were already compliant. The faa dropped the cell network requirement. But is the dji version compatible? To make it complaint, if it is, they just need a firmware update to force it on. As currently it's an opt in technology

Drone Training, Industry News, & Free Resources | UAV Coach

Join a community of 100,000+ drone pilots. We offer drone training courses, free industry guides, and breaking drone news updates.

uavcoach.com

it's wifi related, so I think it qualifies as ok

What about during the draft, there was talk about service providers you'd have to pay to broadcast the RID?

So there's no grandfathering in?

If there was, DJI should get their Mavic 3s out before this was implemented.