- Joined
- Oct 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,086
- Reactions
- 846
If you have not done so, PLEASE make a comment. Be courteous, explain your concern, offer a solution or idea. We have until 11:59 pm tonight (I'm assuming EST)
Just complaining will do nothing. This is what I wrote, some may or may not agree with what I've said, but it might help some with a comment, feel free to cut/past/chop/hack.... just please send them a comment!
HERE is the direct link to the comment page.
Hello FAA,
I would like to take this opportunity to share my thoughts on this "aggressive" Remote ID proposal. I have been flying R/C aircraft for over 40 years and currently hold my 107 certificate.
It is the current impression of the R/C community that the FAA is giving way to the big players in the industry (future delivery/taxi services) without proper consideration to the masses of the general public and this proposal is way out of bounds and over reaching of our government.
My main concern is for recreational/hobbyist pilots. I am not sure that the FAA has a full understanding of the numbers of "back yard flyers" that fly every day in low key areas and have done so for 40+ years. Of all the pilots know, only about 25% of them belong to the AMA and of those only about half even fly at AMA designated fields. The number of pilots that fly "at the local hill" for instance is, I feel, a lot more numerous that the FAA is aware. If it suddenly becomes illegal to fly anywhere but an AMA field (without a transponder of some kind) this will devastate the R/C community and render all previous aircraft illegal to fly.
The proposed requirement for all aircraft to have transponders/Remote ID is not just impractical but basically impossible to retrofit older aircraft to meet your proposed requirements. The ability to retrofit older aircraft would be impossible in most cases. Most of this issue I feel is centered around the newer quadcopter type aircraft "drones" and this proposal, I feel have almost entirely left out traditional fixed wing R/C and older aircraft.
There needs to be a solution for "back yard flyers" or the R/C industry will be crushed. We need a system (set of rules) for areas that are in rural or desolate areas that will not require any Remote ID. If I am in Utah, hundreds of miles from the nearest town or even flight corridor, why should Remote ID be a requirement?
When the FAA rolled out the LAANC service I thought this was a huge step forward and would solve most of the issues raised in today's environment. Given the new goals of the FAA (and apparently the big players of future drone delivery services) this is apparently not enough.
For newer aircraft, drones specifically, and in areas with wireless coverage I feel that with some modification, the LAANC system could cover most of the FAA's goals. Specifically combining an app such as "Flight Radar 24", LAANC and the users flight interface onto the pilots screen. This would do several things:
1) Notify FAA/other pilots who and were an aircraft is flying
2) An integrated "flight radar" type App would tell the pilot the whereabouts of other aircraft in the vicinity.
3) I could see this as an alternative to a physical "transponder" that could be incorporated into future control and aircraft systems.
I would implore the FAA (and the industry as a whole, which include the R/C manufacturers and pilot community) to come up with solutions that:
1) Can be integrated easily into current App capable aircraft.
2) Design rules that allow aircraft not able to be upgraded to fly legally even if not at an AMA designated field or if no mobile internet service is available.
One note about new pilots and "drones" in general. In my opinion manufacturers have not done enough to be sure that new pilots understand the importance of flight safety. Something as simple as requiring a new pilot to register the aircraft and take a simple safety test before the aircraft can even fly.
The R/C community is a step ladder to the younger generation into flight, aerospace and other future technologies. To basically shut down the hobby we have enjoyed for decades will in the long run hurt the USA in terms of technical development and encouragement in our younger population. Without a new generation able to appreciate R/C aircraft without overly burdensome requirements will put the USA behind the rest of the world.
Thank you for the consideration, respectfully Yours, Concerned R/C pilot for over 40 years
Just complaining will do nothing. This is what I wrote, some may or may not agree with what I've said, but it might help some with a comment, feel free to cut/past/chop/hack.... just please send them a comment!
HERE is the direct link to the comment page.
Hello FAA,
I would like to take this opportunity to share my thoughts on this "aggressive" Remote ID proposal. I have been flying R/C aircraft for over 40 years and currently hold my 107 certificate.
It is the current impression of the R/C community that the FAA is giving way to the big players in the industry (future delivery/taxi services) without proper consideration to the masses of the general public and this proposal is way out of bounds and over reaching of our government.
My main concern is for recreational/hobbyist pilots. I am not sure that the FAA has a full understanding of the numbers of "back yard flyers" that fly every day in low key areas and have done so for 40+ years. Of all the pilots know, only about 25% of them belong to the AMA and of those only about half even fly at AMA designated fields. The number of pilots that fly "at the local hill" for instance is, I feel, a lot more numerous that the FAA is aware. If it suddenly becomes illegal to fly anywhere but an AMA field (without a transponder of some kind) this will devastate the R/C community and render all previous aircraft illegal to fly.
The proposed requirement for all aircraft to have transponders/Remote ID is not just impractical but basically impossible to retrofit older aircraft to meet your proposed requirements. The ability to retrofit older aircraft would be impossible in most cases. Most of this issue I feel is centered around the newer quadcopter type aircraft "drones" and this proposal, I feel have almost entirely left out traditional fixed wing R/C and older aircraft.
There needs to be a solution for "back yard flyers" or the R/C industry will be crushed. We need a system (set of rules) for areas that are in rural or desolate areas that will not require any Remote ID. If I am in Utah, hundreds of miles from the nearest town or even flight corridor, why should Remote ID be a requirement?
When the FAA rolled out the LAANC service I thought this was a huge step forward and would solve most of the issues raised in today's environment. Given the new goals of the FAA (and apparently the big players of future drone delivery services) this is apparently not enough.
For newer aircraft, drones specifically, and in areas with wireless coverage I feel that with some modification, the LAANC system could cover most of the FAA's goals. Specifically combining an app such as "Flight Radar 24", LAANC and the users flight interface onto the pilots screen. This would do several things:
1) Notify FAA/other pilots who and were an aircraft is flying
2) An integrated "flight radar" type App would tell the pilot the whereabouts of other aircraft in the vicinity.
3) I could see this as an alternative to a physical "transponder" that could be incorporated into future control and aircraft systems.
I would implore the FAA (and the industry as a whole, which include the R/C manufacturers and pilot community) to come up with solutions that:
1) Can be integrated easily into current App capable aircraft.
2) Design rules that allow aircraft not able to be upgraded to fly legally even if not at an AMA designated field or if no mobile internet service is available.
One note about new pilots and "drones" in general. In my opinion manufacturers have not done enough to be sure that new pilots understand the importance of flight safety. Something as simple as requiring a new pilot to register the aircraft and take a simple safety test before the aircraft can even fly.
The R/C community is a step ladder to the younger generation into flight, aerospace and other future technologies. To basically shut down the hobby we have enjoyed for decades will in the long run hurt the USA in terms of technical development and encouragement in our younger population. Without a new generation able to appreciate R/C aircraft without overly burdensome requirements will put the USA behind the rest of the world.
Thank you for the consideration, respectfully Yours, Concerned R/C pilot for over 40 years
