"Yeah, those that cannot afford whatever the govt wants to charge get the heck out of the way. Only those who can afford what our govt mandates should have the right to fly..........he he he. Let them eat cake." " Fictitious Amazon internal memo"
To clarify, it has an ADS-B receiver where manned aircraft should be transmitting ID and telemetry.
Yeah, but I think you would find that most, if not all, drone operators could easily afford the Remote ID fee, let's split the difference at $5 per month. If not how did they afford to spend an average of probably $1,000 on the drone (including accessories) in the first place? Maybe they could give up their Netflix or that daily cappuccino from Starbucks??
So like I said, they can pay the fee or get another hobby where no fees are required. Simple choice really but, of course, there are those who will continue operating their drones but not pay the fee. "God-given right" and all that other intelligent stuff that comes out of their mouths - LOL
The issue isn't afford, the issue is proven necessity. Why should anyone be required to pay for a government mandated piece of equipment when the government hasn't proven a compelling need for that equipment? Of the millions of flight hours flown by drone operators I'd like to see the statistics that there are any safety concerns that rival those for general aviation. What ifs don't amount to compelling evidence.
So what are you suggesting? That there be a sky chock full of all sorts of drones, commercial and recreational, without any kind of Tracking system? Instead of the constant whining, it would be good if someone could come up with a viable alternative to Remote ID that would be free of cost to the end-user. And don’t bother suggesting that the government should pay for it because that clearly isn’t going to happen especially given the massive deficits that will burden the public purse for generations to come.
A viable alternative for what purpose? Again, show me the compelling evidence that mandates the system is needed. No, the FAA does NOT operate on what ifs. If they did there would be no general aviation, experimental aircraft or recreational pilot's license. I could come up with many more dangerous what ifs for those operations than for any drone operations. If the FAA or any other government agency is going to mandate I have to spend X amount of dollars for a piece of equipment there sure do need to have a compelling reason for it. Or are you one of the "sheep" that bend the knee to whatever the government mandates regardless of the reasoning or lack of reasoning behind the mandate?
I’ve been a manned aircraft pilot for over 30 years so you’re not going to lecture me on how things are done in the real world.
I see you continue to avoid the central question. What is the pressing need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars (more likely billions) and create this system of remote ID? And yes, when we are talking about spending this type of money and dramatically changing the requirements for flying drones, you should be able to demonstrate a pressing need for developing these regulations.
You didn’t address the central question. Your “a sky chock full of all sorts of drones” is gross speculation. Where is the “real world” analysis on the how many drones, utilized in what manner drives the need for spending billions of dollars? Where is the analysis based on historical data that demonstrates there has been a serious public safety issue given the number of drones currently in use that can be extrapolated to show a real world danger when that number is doubled or tripled?
No, I get that you don’t have a factual, rational and logical basis for your argument. But you are not alone since the FAA doesn’t have one either. These regulations aren’t about safety but control. Enjoy your laugh. Ignorance is bliss.
Regulations in aviation are not always based on statistics. They are often based on predictions about what could happen if the regulation wasn’t there. Take ADS-B, for example. It isn’t being introduced because aircraft are regularly flying into each other - it’s being introduced to prevent them flying into each other. Just like many other regulations, a potential threat to safe operation in congested airspace was noted and a requirement introduced to try to mitigate it. Your drone uses the same airspace as every other aircraft so there’s no reason why it shouldn’t be subject to similar safety-related rules and regulations. Many DJI drones can already transmit flight data to a suitably equipped ground station so the technology doesn’t necessarily have to be wildly expensive.
