Here we go Remote ID Cost

[RCdancer]

You would quit doing aerial SAR because of a couple of extra requirements?

No. Because of the possible monthly charge. I'm gonna pay to provide a voluntary service that we provide at no cost? The warning from Cpt KO is appropriate,

"This is how it started for us Captain's in the US after 911. Vessel Remote ID but we had to pay $100+ a month for the 'service'. The kicker was then we had to call into that service every time the boat left the dock for any reason. Commercial, Charter, boat ride, fuel run, anything meant a call to the service. Once they get their foot in they never go away. Hope they don't try that with us now. Just sayin"

 

[Plainview]

To me this is just a way of penalising law abiding citizens. They're the ones that will register their equipment, and themselves, take tests, and fund this whole thing.

What are they going to do about all the people that don't bother?
It's the same here in the UK. I live in a rural area and every day there are people on illegal motorcross bikes speeding through public streets. No insurance, no tax, no safety equipment, going two and three times the speed limit and nothing gets done about it. I drive within the law and I've been stopped three times this year and breathalysed and had my cars emissions checked.

It'll be the same with drones soon enough.

So true,

 

[Plainview]

I think the FAA sees $$$$, it is not especially concerned with safety. Imagine if this invasion of privacy took place with cars, every time you started the engine you lit up an icon on a law enforcement screen, then the police would be called for anyone breaking even the slightest rules. Showing up on your doorstep with warnings, fines or arrest.
The FAA needs to get back to managing man carrying aircraft, which is what they were originally created to do, not to destroy a great hobby that has existed for 60+ years.
Aircraft are supposed to fly at 500ft and higher, except when landing or taking off. We are supposed to stay at 400ft or less. What is the issue????

Exactly, how many small planes, helicopter, ultralites have remote ID’s? Any? Why are They exempt?

 

[llbaker2]

I had basically decided to get a DJI Maveric Zoom but will hold off due to all the FAA regulations that are up in the air. Im not willing to pay monthly ID fees on top of other proposed fees. As things stand now I will not be spending nearly 2 thousand dollars on a drone only to face a monthly ID charge, a data plan charge, a annual licence fee and who knows what else (insureance?) the blood suckers will come up with. No drone for me unless FAA backs off.

 

[RCdancer]

I had basically decided to get a DJI Maveric Zoom but will hold off due to all the FAA regulations that are up in the air. Im not willing to pay monthly ID fees on top of other proposed fees. As things stand now I will not be spending nearly 2 thousand dollars on a drone only to face a monthly ID charge, a data plan charge, a annual licence fee and who knows what else (insureance?) the blood suckers will come up with. No drone for me unless FAA backs off.

If it turns out bad with monthly charges, I will simply put my drones into maintenance storage with occasional flights in "approved areas" to keep everything operational, awaiting the day (that hopefully never comes in my lifetime) of the Apocalypse. Then laws will no longer matter as anarchy rules and my drones will be a useful survival tool.

 

[Bumblebee@sea]

You would quit doing aerial SAR because of a couple of extra requirements?

A couple of extra requirements? Making all current drones obsolete because they don’t have the necessary hardware to connect directly to the Internet for tracking (SIM cards!). Even DJI’s proposed drone to phone app had an open to the general public real time I’d tracker showing the pilots exact location as he/she flies the drone (mug me or harass me please!). This combined with ambiguous laws such as Florida’s that make it potentially illegal to record any footage of someone private property above street level, incidental or not as long as their lawsuit hungry attorney can claim “surveillance“ is a recipe for disaster for the average drone hobbyist.

Sorry but it’s definitely a proposed overreach by the FAA.

Just someone who likes to write it as he sees it!

 

[sar104]

No. Because of the possible monthly charge. I'm gonna pay to provide a voluntary service that we provide at no cost? The warning from Cpt KO is appropriate,

"This is how it started for us Captain's in the US after 911. Vessel Remote ID but we had to pay $100+ a month for the 'service'. The kicker was then we had to call into that service every time the boat left the dock for any reason. Commercial, Charter, boat ride, fuel run, anything meant a call to the service. Once they get their foot in they never go away. Hope they don't try that with us now. Just sayin"

Unless your SAR equipment is all free, and you get reimbursed for all expenses, the proposed cost is dwarfed by everything else.

 

[sar104]

A couple of extra requirements? Making all current drones obsolete because they don’t have the necessary hardware to connect directly to the Internet for tracking (SIM cards!). Even DJI’s proposed drone to phone app had an open to the general public real time I’d tracker showing the pilots exact location as he/she flies the drone (mug me or harass me please!). This combined with ambiguous laws such as Florida’s that make it potentially illegal to record any footage of someone private property above street level, incidental or not as long as their lawsuit hungry attorney can claim “surveillance“ is a recipe for disaster for the average drone hobbyist.

Sorry but it’s definitely a proposed overreach by the FAA.

Just someone who likes to write it as he sees it!

Firstly, you probably should make some effort to understand the proposed requirements before posting. There is no proposed requirement for the drone to have an internet connection. There is a proposed requirement to transmit telemetry to the internet if a connection is available, and that would be via the mobile device if it has an internet connection. But if it doesn't then that's not required either - all that is required is for the aircraft to broadcast certain telemetry elements on wifi frequencies, which is what it is already doing.

Secondly - do you always hide from public view when flying? If not - have you been mugged many times? If you do hide then that suggests a different problem.

Thirdly, you can be sued for almost anything by a lawsuit-hungry attorney. Most of us survive without facing such lawsuits, and I'm sure you will to unless you really are conducting surveillance.

 

[BullDoggBoyz]

Big brother at his finest take something easy and make it hard and expensive.

Agreed....Just like when the Fed's got involved and took over the commercial trucking industry. SMH. How does anyone think it's a good idea for the general public to access/know who owns what drone flying in a given area? I'm relatively certain this is a BAD idea, as every drone vigilante will be confronting pilots and accusing them of everything under the sun because they don't understand the hobby and feel their privacy is being invaded or crap like that. Having the authorities be able to access the information is one thing, but the general public? Nah....BAD IDEA!

 

[sar104]

Agreed....Just like when the Fed's got involved and took over the commercial trucking industry. SMH. How does anyone think it's a good idea for the general public to access/know who owns what drone flying in a given area? I'm relatively certain this is a BAD idea, as every drone vigilante will be confronting pilots and accusing them of everything under the sun because they don't understand the hobby and feel their privacy is being invaded or crap like that. Having the authorities be able to access the information is one thing, but the general public? Nah....BAD IDEA!

The proposed data don't reveal the identity of the pilot - just their location.

 

[BullDoggBoyz]

The proposed data don't reveal the identity of the pilot - just their location.

Ah, ok...thanks for that info. Still kind of awkward if not hairy IMO. It's a bit unnerving to have people creeping up on you when you are focused on the task at hand.

 

[sar104]

Ah, ok...thanks for that info. Still kind of awkward if not hairy IMO. It's a bit unnerving to have people creeping up on you when you are focused on the task at hand.

That's far more likely to happen when people simply see you flying, rather than by aggressive members of the public to be wandering around with cell phone apps so that they can track pilots.

 

[Drone on]

I had basically decided to get a DJI Maveric Zoom but will hold off due to all the FAA regulations that are up in the air. Im not willing to pay monthly ID fees on top of other proposed fees. As things stand now I will not be spending nearly 2 thousand dollars on a drone only to face a monthly ID charge, a data plan charge, a annual licence fee and who knows what else (insureance?) the blood suckers will come up with. No drone for me unless FAA backs off.

It's at least three years before the rules and fees are effective.
The Zoom would be woefully outdated tech by then.
If there was ever a time to get in, it's now.

 

[Drone on]

If it turns out bad with monthly charges, I will simply put my drones into maintenance storage with occasional flights in "approved areas" to keep everything operational, awaiting the day (that hopefully never comes in my lifetime) of the Apocalypse. Then laws will no longer matter as anarchy rules and my drones will be a useful survival tool.

Thanks...I needed that

 

[Deleted member 93449]

DJI product as of 2016-2017 and on have remote ID it's all in the firmware.I can see why they want to try to control the skys with alot of dumb people flying and with the technology any one can fly but the charging part sucks bad.

How did you come up with “a lot” of dumb people? Actually I don’t think anyone has any empirical evidence to support the use of the words “a lot” in this discussion, which has been one of the main criticisms regarding the remote ID proposal. In my opinion the proposal is a very costly solution looking for a problem.

 

[WanderDawg]

I think the FAA sees $$$$, it is not especially concerned with safety. Imagine if this invasion of privacy took place with cars, every time you started the engine you lit up an icon on a law enforcement screen, then the police would be called for anyone breaking even the slightest rules. Showing up on your doorstep with warnings, fines or arrest.
The FAA needs to get back to managing man carrying aircraft, which is what they were originally created to do, not to destroy a great hobby that has existed for 60+ years.
Aircraft are supposed to fly at 500ft and higher, except when landing or taking off. We are supposed to stay at 400ft or less. What is the issue????

If you think the FAA sees $$$$, you have never worked for the federal government.

 

[Rattydude77]

How did you come up with “a lot” of dumb people? Actually I don’t think anyone has any empirical evidence to support the use of the words “a lot” in this discussion, which has been one of the main criticisms regarding the remote ID proposal. In my opinion the proposal is a very costly solution looking for a problem.

It was suppose to say with alot of dumb people out there flying that's what talk and text does hahaha thanks for pointing that out

 

[Rattydude77]

How did you come up with “a lot” of dumb people? Actually I don’t think anyone has any empirical evidence to support the use of the words “a lot” in this discussion, which has been one of the main criticisms regarding the remote ID proposal. In my opinion the proposal is a very costly solution looking for a problem.

Last post you can catch it

 

[BullDoggBoyz]

That's far more likely to happen when people simply see you flying, rather than by aggressive members of the public to be wandering around with cell phone apps so that they can track pilots.

True to a degree....But I guess that might also depend on where you live/fly. I live in Philly...You never know WTH kind of craziness will emerge in this city. Given the "Killadelph's" deserved reputation, I would not be surprised to see people using the app to rob/jack drone pilots and their equipment. After all, why steal/rob for peanuts when you can get thousands worth of equipment and technology with an application that will literally be like a treasure map for low life jacker's? You might think it's far fetched, but mark my words...Here in Philly, it will definitely become an ongoing issue.

 

[Bumblebee@sea]

Firstly, you probably should make some effort to understand the proposed requirements before posting. There is no proposed requirement for the drone to have an internet connection. There is a proposed requirement to transmit telemetry to the internet if a connection is available, and that would be via the mobile device if it has an internet connection. But if it doesn't then that's not required either - all that is required is for the aircraft to broadcast certain telemetry elements on wifi frequencies, which is what it is already doing.

Secondly - do you always hide from public view when flying? If not - have you been mugged many times? If you do hide then that suggests a different problem.

Thirdly, you can be sued for almost anything by a lawsuit-hungry attorney. Most of us survive without facing such lawsuits, and I'm sure you will to unless you really are conducting surveillance.

Firstly, you probably should make some effort to understand the proposed requirements before posting. There is no proposed requirement for the drone to have an internet connection. There is a proposed requirement to transmit telemetry to the internet if a connection is available, and that would be via the mobile device if it has an internet connection. But if it doesn't then that's not required either - all that is required is for the aircraft to broadcast certain telemetry elements on wifi frequencies, which is what it is already doing.

Secondly - do you always hide from public view when flying? If not - have you been mugged many times? If you do hide then that suggests a different problem.

Thirdly, you can be sued for almost anything by a lawsuit-hungry attorney. Most of us survive without facing such lawsuits, and I'm sure you will to unless you really are conducting surveillance.

Firstly, you probably should make some effort to understand the proposed requirements before posting. There is no proposed requirement for the drone to have an internet connection. There is a proposed requirement to transmit telemetry to the internet if a connection is available, and that would be via the mobile device if it has an internet connection. But if it doesn't then that's not required either - all that is required is for the aircraft to broadcast certain telemetry elements on wifi frequencies, which is what it is already doing.

Secondly - do you always hide from public view when flying? If not - have you been mugged many times? If you do hide then that suggests a different problem.

Thirdly, you can be sued for almost anything by a lawsuit-hungry attorney. Most of us survive without facing such lawsuits, and I'm sure you will to unless you really are conducting surveillance.

Thank you for you patronizing reply. Respectfully, I did read the document and concur with DJI’s assessment of the proposal and a vast majority of the drone community that wholeheartedly disagree with you and your position on this. This can be seen by the overwhelming negative comments to the proposal which closed at well over 50,000 responses.



Under the FAA proposal, if drone operators want to operate freely, they (meaning through the drone and not the cell phone attached to the controller) would have to both broadcast their identity on a radio frequency that can be monitored nearby AND simultaneously upload the information via the internet. You fundamentally misunderstand this and it’s implications.