DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Here we go Remote ID Cost

You are always the combative one when this stuff comes up. I don't mean the signal to the RC I am referring to the remote ID losing signal and not continuing broadcasting the message elements. What happens? I don't see that anywhere. Does the drone stop? Does it return to home? Does nothing happen? And yes, the consultant has an agenda, which is to save us drone owners ridiculous government oversights and more costs associated with, what is for most, a personal hobby. What's next, a remote ID for people who build ships in a bottle?

Combative - yes, if you mean I tend to combat disinformation. Why do you keep posting this stuff? You clearly haven't read the NPRM, have almost no understanding of how the proposed system would work. RemoteID losing signal? What on earth is that supposed to mean? Why would the aircraft stop broadcasting the message elements? If it did then that would be a malfunction, and it would imply that it had also lost connection with the RC, in which case it would either land or RTH, just like it does now, depending on the user failsafe setting.

The consultant's agenda is to try to avoid any regulation that might impact DJI sales.
 
Now you are guessing. It might imply it, but having the drone sit in place, land or RTH is not a good scenario depending on where your drone is. I fly almost exclusively over water and sometimes from a boat. Landing on its own and RTH are not good news. Let's use your drone to work the bugs. Let me know how it goes. The consultant's agenda keeps DJI drones in the air, thus benefitting those of us on this forum. If DJI makes more sales, they continue to makes better updates and products. I am on the side of the consultant, biased or not.
 
Now you are guessing. It might imply it, but having the drone sit in place, land or RTH is not a good scenario depending on where your drone is. I fly almost exclusively over water and sometimes from a boat. Landing on its own and RTH are not good news. Let's use your drone to work the bugs. Let me know how it goes.

I'm not guessing. The lost signal behavior is already in the firmware. If your drone stops broadcasting then that is already the failsafe behavior.

I'm sorry, but I simply cannot accept that you are this ignorant. Please just stop posting nonsense.
 
I'm not guessing. The lost signal behavior is already in the firmware. If your drone stops broadcasting then that is already the failsafe behavior.

I'm sorry, but I simply cannot accept that you are this ignorant. Please just stop posting nonsense.
Sorry, I will leave this thread for geniuses only then. Let us know when we can get your drone for the testing and don't write anymore. Just go get your checkbook and pay the government. Write out a nice big one. They'll love ya.
 
Sorry, I will leave this thread for geniuses only then. Let us know when we can get your drone for the testing and don't write anymore. Just go get your checkbook and pay the government. Write out a nice big one. They'll love ya.

At this point I'm going to hope that anyone reading this thread has figured out that you don't have a clue what you are talking about, and so I don't need to waste any more time responding to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itsneedtokno
Please keep it that way anytime I write anything and we'll be good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: badaxed
To elaborate - you trust an analyst hired by a company with a significant vested interest in fighting the proposal more than you trust the proposal itself. That seems unwise. And there is little motivation for the FAA to under-estimate the cost, since it will have to be nailed down before anything becomes law anyway. I'm not clear what this has to do with government procurement practices, since they won't be paying.

I am just saying, the government is not known for estimating the correct cost of things.

Maybe the analyst has an agenda, that's not for me to say. But from a perspective of common sense, $2.50/month seems like a pipe dream. Nothing is ever that cheap...
 
I am just saying, the government is not known for estimating the correct cost of things.

Maybe the analyst has an agenda, that's not for me to say. But from a perspective of common sense, $2.50/month seems like a pipe dream. Nothing is ever that cheap...

The estimate was $5 per month. Just as an example, the basic Airdata paid subscription (beyond the free one) is $3 per month.
 
AGAIN... my gripe is that any previous non-ID equipped aircraft will be obsolete and illegal to fly. There NEEDS to be some alternatives. I fly in the middle of nowhere pretty often, there is no need what so ever for remote ID in certain situations. The majority of this push IMO is for the large delivery service companies that are supposedly going to emerge in large numbers. We already have many tools in place to document (real time) were we are flying.
 
Analysis Puts Remote ID for Drones Costs 9X Higher than FAA Estimate: DJI Urges FAA to Reconsider
Posted By: Miriam McNabbon: March 03, 2020

image public domain
The comment period for the Remote ID for Drones NPRM closed yesterday. There were more than 50,000 comments posted on the NPRM, including and 89 page comment by the world’s leading drone manufacturer, DJI. While DJI has been active in developing and implementing technology that could simplify Remote ID for users, the company fears that the rule’s requirements place an unreasonable burden on all stakeholders, from manufacturers to individual pilots to industrial clients, who will end up shouldering the costs of a burdensome solution.

In a press release issued today, DJI says that an independent economic study finds that costs of compliance with the proposal far exceed the FAA’s estimate – and in fact are 9 times higher. DJI is urging the FAA to take the comments into consideration and reconsider the rule.

The following is a DJI press release.

DJI Urges FAA To Reconsider Flawed Remote ID Rule
Independent Economic Analysis Finds Costs Nine Times As High As FAA Estimate
March 3, 2020 – DJI, the world’s leader in civilian drones and aerial imaging technology, has filed an 89-page formal comment urging the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to allow drone pilots to choose which method of Remote Identification to use with their drones, which would significantly reduce the costs and complications of Remote ID while boosting compliance.
DJI’s filing includes an independent economic study that concludes the FAA’s Remote ID proposal would prove nine times as costly as the FAA’s estimates, imposing $5.6 billion worth of burdens on society over the next decade. The analysis finds many of those costs could be obviated if drone pilots could choose between two different methods of compliance, rather than doing both as the FAA proposed.

The economic analysis was prepared by Dr. Christian Dippon, Managing Director at NERA Economic Consulting, who considered the societal costs of the FAA’s proposed rule. He concluded the average monthly cost of a Remote ID network-based service for a drone user would be $9.83, rather than the FAA’s $2.50 estimate; that demand for drones would fall 10 percent if the FAA’s proposals were imposed as written; and that total costs over ten years would be $5.6 billion instead of the FAA’s $582 million estimate.
“We have known for years that Remote ID will be required by governments worldwide and will provide members of the public with confidence in productive drone uses, but the FAA’s deeply flawed proposal poses a real threat to how American businesses, governments, educators, photographers and enthusiasts can use drones,” said DJI Vice President of Policy & Legal Affairs Brendan Schulman. “We hope our detailed economic analysis and comments, as well as tens of thousands of comments from other concerned parties, will encourage the FAA to develop a more risk-based, balanced and efficient Remote ID rule, so our customers and the entire industry are not hurt by the final outcome.”
DJI’s comment was one of more than 51,000 filed by the FAA’s March 2 deadline, and is expected to be available soon at this link. DJI’s comment is also available for download at this link. NERA’s economic analysis is available for download at this link.

Remote ID allows authorities to identify and monitor airborne drones in near-real time, so they can see the location of the drone as well as a serial number to identify its owner. Congress tasked the FAA in 2016 with exploring consensus-based technology standards that could lead to Remote ID regulatory solutions. Late last year, the FAA proposed that almost all drones should broadcast that information directly to nearby receivers, as well as transmit it over wireless networks to a service provider’s database, with an anticipated monthly subscription fee for that service. DJI and many other drone stakeholders have instead said the FAA should let drone operators choose whether to use broadcast or network solutions for Remote ID. Any new Remote ID rule is unlikely to take effect before 2024.

DJI’s comment also expands on many other points DJI has made previously about the risks of the FAA’s proposal, which would hurt people who have safely and successfully used drones across the country for years, hamper the adoption of a technology that is bringing enormous value to America, and create costs and complications that far outweigh the benefits of the FAA’s broadcast-and-network approach. Most importantly, a burdensome proposal undermines the government’s own goals for Remote ID.
“A Remote ID requirement that is costly, burdensome, complex, or subject to multiple points of failure, will be a requirement that fails,” DJI wrote in its submission. “We offer these comments, many of which are highly critical of aspects of the FAA’s proposal, in the sincere interest of promoting a good final rule for the FAA, the U.S. Government, and the UAS industry.”
DJI has advocated for favorable solutions to Remote ID for years, recognizing that authorities need to understand drone activity in real time in order to allow full integration of drones in the skies. DJI recently demonstrated a “Drone-to-Phone” broadcast Remote ID solution which uses an open, non-proprietary industry standard and provides Remote ID information on commonly-available smartphones without imposing any extra cost or effort on drone operators. This demonstration showed that Remote ID can be accomplished in a way that is far cheaper and easier than what the FAA has proposed.

a63a0b8dddd8bba2cd521329ce091bb5

Miriam McNabb
Miriam McNabb is the Editor-in-Chief of DRONELIFE and CEO of JobForDrones, a professional drone services marketplace, and a fascinated observer of the emerging drone industry and the regulatory environment for drones. Miriam has a degree from the University of Chicago and over 20 years of experience in high tech sales and marketing for new technologies.
For drone industry consulting or writing, Email Miriam or (for paid consulting engagements only) request a meeting through AdvisoryCloud:
Isn’t there a remote signal transceiver in the Mavic Air 2 platform already?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRock
"Analysis Puts Remote ID for Drones Costs 9X Higher than FAA Estimate: DJI Urges FAA to Reconsider"

No surprise there.
 
My biggest issue with this proposed law is the 400 foot rule. It isn’t altitude. It is distance from operator. You won’t be allowed to fly further than 400 feet from you in any direction. THIS will kill the hobby. This is some BS.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: TheRock
I spoke recently to an FAA representative and asked him about this. He said off the record that the FAA was not going to be retroactive with this as they understand the technology is not available for the current drones. Their focus is future drones where the technology can be "made" into the drones. We have seen drones evolve with better obstacle avoidance and other navigational aids so the future drones will have the id system built in. I'm for anything that makes EVERYONE in the sky safer.
 
For what it's worth, I enjoy watching Bruce on his YouTube channel Xjet.

He posted this video about remote ID recently.


Bare with Bruce, he likes to rant for all of us.



At about the ten minute mark, the student asks the FAA representative about remote ID.


Model aviation is not a crime. :)
 
I don't know how it works, but all commercial vessels, even small charter boats, have to have an AIS transponder. This shows up on other vessels radar and provides relevant information. These transponders can be turned off, which dodgy fishing boats do all the time, just like they 'black out' so they can trawl in close to the beach and in 'no trawling' zones... steam in, shoot their net, trawl, haul - lights on and scarper.

AIS is fairly common now. Is that what the FAA are asking for? There is no subscription, not over here anyway, unless it is part of the commercial registration fee.
 
I don't know how it works, but all commercial vessels, even small charter boats, have to have an AIS transponder. This shows up on other vessels radar and provides relevant information. These transponders can be turned off, which dodgy fishing boats do all the time, just like they 'black out' so they can trawl in close to the beach and in 'no trawling' zones... steam in, shoot their net, trawl, haul - lights on and scarper.

AIS is fairly common now. Is that what the FAA are asking for?
They want RC aircraft operators to stay in compliance and follow their rules. The rules as of now are actually not too bad and I hope the FAA doesn't apply the proposed operating procedures. Time will tell.
 
I think that if this rule is implemented many will leave the drone community and the FAA will have heavily contributed to destroying a large part of the industry, hobby, etc....
Opens the sky for Amazon. Gets other drones out of the way to operating 89 lb Amazon drones @ 70 mph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MKurr
Opens the sky for Amazon. Gets other drones out of the way to operating 89 lb Amazon drones @ 70 mph.

I'm betting that there will still be plenty of great places to fly where there won't be any commercial drone-related activity - at least in the short to medium term. If you're a serious player (recreational or otherwise) then you will pay whatever it costs to stay in the game - those that don't want to pay would be better off getting a new hobby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RadioFlyerMan
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
131,127
Messages
1,560,117
Members
160,099
Latest member
tflys78