Using the larger battery, remote id?

[mavic3usa]

If you are a recreational flyer, and your drone is below the 249 gram limit, then are you required to register your drone on the FAA website?

No. The recreational flyer who's drone is below 250g does not have to register on the FAA website.

If the answer to the above question is "no", then how will anyone be able to link the Remote ID information back to you, when the drone is not registered?

Since you brought it up:

Correct, there is no link. The Remote ID information is not tied to anyone or any registration. Exactly the reason why the entire RID concept falls flat. But you can look at it two ways:

Ordinarily the drone which is less than 250g does not usually have RID capabilities so just because DJI decided to include RID, one could consider it extra details above and beyond what is ordinarily available. I guess the FAA does not really expect 250g drones to log into the database (except commercial) so no big loss. Still, a 249g drone flying in and around and near and over a soccer game is a "problem."
(was: Still, a 249g drone flying over a baseball game is a "problem.")

Or, there will be literally tens if not hundreds of thousands of registered drones (of all weights and sizes) which are registered but will not contain RID details, many of which are active and flying....because people will fail to register properly and people will forgo proper registration. Which means the FAA database is a sham. It's a database containing the vast majority of honest, law-abiding drone flyers who follow the rules and basically volunteer their details so when they make a mistake or break the rules, they can be identified, located, and sanctioned. In the meantime, the criminals and the law-breakers who fly over football games, repeatedly enter no-fly zones, flying in restricted airspace without proper authorization, fly about 400 feet AGL, etc. those individuals refuse to share their details and are not in the database and their only immediate risk is failure to properly register which is minimally enforced. Doesn't mean they can't be caught but it does mean the usefulness of the FAA database is questionable at best.

 

[Droning on and on...]

If you are a recreational flyer, and your drone is below the 249 gram limit, then are you required to register your drone on the FAA website?

If the answer to the above question is "no", then how will anyone be able to link the Remote ID information back to you, when the drone is not registered?

Just trying to understand how the RID works if the drone isn't registered.

They won't be able to.

What they can do is find out where you are in real time while in flight, and come over and beat you up and steal your drone.

According to some members.

 

[rjwmorrell]

Remote ID is simply a standardized protocol for the drone to broadcast signals. The FAA requires it and they require you register the Remote ID number in their database. But our hypothetical Karen doesn't have access to that database.

However, our Karen could still use an app that reads the Remote ID broadcast, decodes it, and shows on a map where the drone, launch point, and controller are or were. They don't need to know your name or registration info, they can already locate you and (as seems to be the major concern for some pilots) confront or harass you over your drone piloting. Or call police. Or whatever Karen's do.

I think the risk is overstated, most Karen's won't bother with apps to find drone operators in their neighbourhood.

Registered or not, most if not all new drones - even the 249g and under one's - are now broadcasting Renote ID while the motors are on and they are in a jurisdiction where Remote ID is a thing. Mini 3's and 4's can easily be bumped over 249g with long life batteries and other attachments.

 

[Droning on and on...]

No. The recreational flyer who's drone is below 250g does not have to register on the FAA website.


Since you brought it up:

Correct, there is no link. The Remote ID information is not tied to anyone or any registration. Exactly the reason why the entire RID concept falls flat. But you can look at it two ways:

Ordinarily the drone which is less than 250g does not usually have RID capabilities so just because DJI decided to include RID, one could consider it extra details above and beyond what is ordinarily available.

DJI was required to include integrated RID in the mini 3 and 4 because they sell it in a configuration that exceeds 250g (extended battery).

 

[Droning on and on...]

No. The recreational flyer who's drone is below 250g does not have to register on the FAA website.


Since you brought it up:

Correct, there is no link. The Remote ID information is not tied to anyone or any registration. Exactly the reason why the entire RID concept falls flat. But you can look at it two ways:

Ordinarily the drone which is less than 250g does not usually have RID capabilities so just because DJI decided to include RID, one could consider it extra details above and beyond what is ordinarily available. I guess the FAA does not really expect 250g drones to log into the database (except commercial) so no big loss. Still, a 249g drone flying over a baseball game is a "problem.".

Take that up with people that have sustained serious injury from a baseball in the stands. A baseball weighs ~142g.

I find your casual attitude about injuring others very concerning.

 

[mavic3usa]

DJI was required to include integrated RID in the mini 3 and 4 because they sell it in a configuration that exceeds 250g (extended battery).

I see it the other way around: DJI decided to sell the Mini 3 and the Mini 4 in a configuration that exceeded 250g so they made a business decision to gain compliance and applied for the DoC.

 

[Droning on and on...]

However, our Karen could still use an app that reads the Remote ID broadcast, decodes it, and shows on a map where the drone, launch point, and controller are or were.

Minor but important point... for drones with integrated RID, the controller location is continuously updated in real time, so even if you move you can still be found.

 

[mavic3usa]

Take that up with people that have sustained serious injury from a baseball in the stands. A baseball weighs ~142g.

I find your casual attitude about injuring others very concerning.

I just want the same effort applied to regulating and controlling and tracking baseballs (which seriously injure thousands of people every year) applied to drones which is: ZERO

Learn to focus on the real problem (baseballs) not the harmless problem (drones).

Drones won't be a problem when MLB Drones start flying over the stadium. They will simply add the disclaimer in the list....flying baseballs, falling drones....

 

[rjwmorrell]

Take that up with people that have sustained serious injury from a baseball in the stands. A baseball weighs ~142g.

I find your casual attitude about injuring others very concerning.

Despite their heavier weight, a 249g drone travelling at 11 m/s will cause less injury than a 149g baseball travelling at 45 m/s (100mph). The momentum(P) (found using the formula P = m×v) of the example drone is less than half the momentum of the smaller, lighter baseball.

One way to approximate the difference in forces is to use kinetic energy and the unit of joules. The drone has kinetic energy of about 15 J. The baseball has 144 J.

One source I found describing fall energy injury potential suggested that 20-40 J would cause an injury requiring medical attention. Above 40 J would cause serious injury, potential broken bones etc.

While I'm not saying it's safe to fly a drone under 250g around a crowded area, there is clearly a reason why these smaller lighter drones have far fewer restrictions and regulations than do the heavier drones.

 

[mavic3usa]

Take that up with people that have sustained serious injury from a baseball in the stands. A baseball weighs ~142g.

I find your casual attitude about injuring others very concerning.

I'm going to go back to my post and change it

from: Still, a 249g drone flying over a baseball game is a "problem."
to: Still, a 249g drone flying in and around and near and over a soccer game is a "problem."

My statement, when taken in the proper context, was meant to point out that regardless the weight of the drone, any drone that flying into the stadium during a game whether it 500g or 250g is problematic for the game at this point and based on the current RID rules, the 500g is detectable and the 250g is not. How does that make sense unless the 250g is not a "problem?"

But instead you decided to twist the logic and talk about injuries from baseballs and bringing up drone victims (which don't exist) and somehow tried to make it seem like I don't care that people are getting hurt by baseballs...and well, you know the rest. Pretty sad.

 

[rjwmorrell]

Minor but important point... for drones with integrated RID, the controller location is continuously updated in real time, so even if you move you can still be found.

So I've heard, but I have not been able to replicate that with my own app tests. That could be for a variety of reasons, but so far I've only been able to get my drone detector app to ping the drone once, and after that it doesn't update any changes at all.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I just want the same effort applied to regulating and controlling and tracking baseballs (which seriously injure thousands of people every year) applied to drones which is: ZERO

I hear you. You don't have the support of the rest of the public, though, and let's be real, that's never going to happen.

Also, that wasn't a serious comment, was it? Do you really want baseballs regulated like drones?

Finally, there are obvious, and significant, differences between baseballs and drones. You are in control of a drone at all times. A baseball is a ballistic object once it leaves a person's hand.

When you go to a baseball game, you consent to the risk of being hit by a baseball in the stands. It's on the ticket in fine print. You do not consent to being blinded by the spinning props of a drone. You are watching for baseballs. Not so for drones.

And on and on. Comparing baseballs to drones from a regulatory perspective seems rather misplaced.

 

[mavic3usa]

Do you really want baseballs regulated like drones?

Just in the narrow context of what we are discussing. The game ball and the drone should be treated "similarly" in the "game area" when it comes to spectator safety. So quite the opposite, I would like drones to be regulated like baseballs...in this context. And let's be honest, it will be when it comes to stadiums and leagues and networks using drones during the game. As I mentioned, they will simply add "flying, out of control, wayward drones" to the hazard list and move on. You *will* consent to be cut and struck by falling drones once it's their drones. And again, I'm not against prohibiting our drones (vs theirs) in and over the field during a game, I understand the rights, distractions, etc. But I'm not a fan of the scope of the TFR and that's for another thread so we can flesh out the specifics (i.e. I would like to see a temporary LAANC-type setup to accommodate).

Back to drones at the game. I advocate for reasonable regulations that are effective and make sense. I'm not a fan of complete banning and overregulation to the point of a defacto ban. Prop guards, parachutes, emergency switches, bright colors, etc. I'm not against those. To me, that's no difference than when they use nets and shields and high walls and helmets for sporting events. You play the game and you mitigate the damage and you make changes and adjust as necessary instead of just digging in and saying no.

 

[Droning on and on...]

@mavic3usa, if I understand correctly, you feel recreational drones should not be prohibited at sporting events. I strongly suspect that were the total ban to be lifted, there would be many, perhaps dozens of private drones flying at most NFL games, and for a major game, like playoffs, even more.

How would you manage this?

Imagine what the air just over the end zone would look like for a potential game-winning field goal.

 

[mavic3usa]

@mavic3usa, if I understand correctly, you feel recreational drones should not be prohibited at sporting events. I strongly suspect that were the total ban to be lifted, there would be many, perhaps dozens of private drones flying at most NFL games, and for a major game, like playoffs, even more.

How would you manage this?

Just to be clear, they shouldn't be prohibited at such a wide berth and for such a long time before and after the game. Plus I have at least 50 other proposals. For example, directly over the game and over the property (parking lot), yeah that's fine to prohibit right before, during, and after the game. Look, I really would prefer this topic was brought up in another thread; at this point I don't feel it is helpful to discuss my thoughts on the proper management of drones at professional sporting events in this thread.

I suspect there are hundreds of others who have excellent ideas and viable solutions as well but it's either that or take the easy route which is "no drones, period" and I suspect that latter is the favorite. Before I go into any further detail about my thoughts on how to make this work, I'd like to first understand if anyone is open to the idea or would I just be wasting my breath and you're never going to agree to allow drones to fly anywhere near a major sporting event and you like things the way they are right now, no changes.

One more question, before there were drones, were there dozens of aircrafts, helicopter, blimps, and gliders flying around major sporting events? And do you believe the TFR is what prevents dozens of drones from flying around these major sporting events today?

 

[Wreckhunter]

If you are a recreational flyer, and your drone is below the 249 gram limit, then are you required to register your drone on the FAA website?

If the answer to the above question is "no", then how will anyone be able to link the Remote ID information back to you, when the drone is not registered?

Just trying to understand how the RID works if the drone isn't registered.

If you are a recreational flyer,and your drone is below 249 grams,you DO NOT have to register your drone on the FAA website.
If you use the + size batteries in the mini 3 pro,or 4 pro it puts it over the 249 gram weight,then you have to register it.

 

[Droning on and on...]

One more question, before there were drones, were there dozens of aircrafts, helicopter, blimps, and gliders flying around major sporting events? And do you believe the TFR is what prevents dozens of drones from flying around these major sporting events today?

I do. Chiefly because most are DJI, and won't fly even if the human wants to due to FlySafe.

It is my opinion that most people that would like to fly over, hover, film, etc. a game are rank amateurs that are even more likely to have a DJI drone rather than a different brand. I want to be clear that's speculation based on the broader social and cultural trends associated with sports fans. No rigorous data.

 

[Torque]

I'm not seeing all of the comments on this topic (by choice), but it appears that some think the only reason RID was implemented was to mitigate physical damage from falling drones?
Funny.

 

[rjwmorrell]

I'm not seeing all of the comments on this topic (by choice), but it appears that some think the only reason RID was implemented was to mitigate physical damage from falling drones?
Funny.

No, I think the main reason Remote ID was implemented was for FAA enforcement and regulatory purposes.

The 250g limit appears pretty accepted worldwide as the threshold at which most aviation regulations believe the risk of the aircraft without some more stringent regulation is unacceptable. Below 250g there are few regulations in most jurisdictions, because the weight of the drone is at an acceptable risk level when falling or colliding with aircraft etc. Probably mainly as a compromise, too, as so many "toy" type drones are in that weight class that it wouldn't make sense in any real way to impose additional requirements like Remote ID in the US. That's not to say they can't be dangerous, but they are just not "as" dangerous as larger drones.

Falling drones is just one risk. That's mitigated with rules like not flying over people, etc.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Much is being misunderstood about RID. Sadly this misunderstanding is being driven by the inexplicably bone-headed decision to include the control station location publicly and unencrypted. Quite understandably its generated a lot of paranoia about draconian crackdowns by authorities.

This is wrong on several points. First, the primary driver of airspace management in the coming years when sUAV flights are expected to explode in numbers can be found in the public record from FAA meeting transcripts about the issue while it was being worked.

Second, hints of this are also in the regulation itself (some not so "hinty" but obvious).

Third, the resources to meaningfully "crack down" on the common violations – altitude and VLOS – are simply not in existence, and aren't ever going to be.

Too many here obsess over RID and the pilot (understandably), but that's way off the mark. RID is about the aircraft. It seems to be forgotten that the drone can recieve RID too, and develop a picture of the local airspace nearby, continuously planning its flight path to avoid collision.

Without RID, this would be impossible with current airspace management tools. Current land-based radar is woefully insufficient for this purpose.

Commercial expansion of sUAV use for semi-autonomous operations can not go forward unless the drones can be aware of other aircraft at low altitude in their immediate vicinity. Commercial delivery operations can't practically have one dedicated pilot for each bird in the air. The drones need to be able to avoid each other on their own, and that's the principal reason RID was developed.