Using the larger battery, remote id?

[mavic3usa]

One thing is being told to the public and behind the scenes, like any other government function, the system will be tortured and abused; exploited and used for not what it was intended. That's what you see going on here which is why it is so difficult to get our point across; it's designed to not be so obvious.

That's how it is intended, to make sure it's not obvious to how it will be actually used and to evolve slowly as to avoid detection or revealing the true nature. However, the results will show, particularly in the first 3-5 years where the bad stuff (incidents) regarding RID (harassing pilots, collecting their data, tracking down their flights, monitoring their activities, issuing notices, punitive actions, etc) will outnumber the good stuff (airspace management activities) by 10 to 1. License plates on cars are the number one comparison to RID and we all know what license plates are good for and it's not traffic management.

 

[Droning on and on...]

RID has been in place on many DJI drones for well over a year and a half. All mini 3's have been broadcasting since they were purchased.

Where are all the crackdowns? Is anyone aware of a single incident in the US where RID was used to track down the pilot by LE and cite them for... something?

How many verified Karen harassment in the last 18 months? Crooks finding the pilot with RID and robbing them?

RID has been around already long enough to see if it was going to cause these problems. So far, it doesn't seem to be. What is the triggering future change that will cause LEOs to start spending a portion of their time monitoring RID? In many US cities, you can't even get an LEO to visit for a home robbery, but are told to file a report on line.

Yet some here believe Karen will get action when she calls in annoyed by a drone? Seems highly improbable.

 

[mavic3usa]

RID has been in place on many DJI drones for well over a year and a half. All mini 3's have been broadcasting since they were purchased.

Where are all the crackdowns? Is anyone aware of a single incident in the US where RID was used to track down the pilot by LE and cite them for... something?

How many verified Karen harassment in the last 18 months? Crooks finding the pilot with RID and robbing them?

RID has been around already long enough to see if it was going to cause these problems. So far, it doesn't seem to be. What is the triggering future change that will cause LEOs to start spending a portion of their time monitoring RID? In many US cities, you can't even get an LEO to visit for a home robbery, but are told to file a report on line.

Yet some here believe Karen will get action when she calls in annoyed by a drone? Seems highly improbable.

Now we want to go to the "facts?" That's rich.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Now we want to go to the "facts?" That's rich.

Facts are very stubborn.

Still waiting for the sky to fall. The conditions for chunks to start littering the ground have been in place for a while, and yet, no sky chunks on my front lawn...

 

[RogerDH]

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.

If you are not a Part 107 pilot, you must register as a pilot to fly a drone over 250g, but you don't register each drone individually, so the FAA will not know those RIDs.

In addition to providing some degree of accountability for drones that cause damage, of course RIDs can be used to enforce all FAA regulations, including flying beyond VLOS, over 400 feet, in restricted airspace, etc., so I think much of the FAA's incentive is to discourage that sort of stuff, even if it's sparsely enforced. Maybe we won't be seeing so many range tests on YouTube or bragging posts on forums.

 

[mavic3usa]

If you are not a Part 107 pilot, you must register as a pilot to fly a drone over 250g, but you don't register each drone individually, so the FAA will not know those RIDs.

Unfortunately the rules have changed and this is no longer the case. It is still true that a recreational pilot must register on the FAA website (as applicable) and get one unique registration for all drones owned; however, the next step is to add each drone to your personal online inventory. Therefore one pilot will maintain a list of drones by adding and deleting them from the inventory kept in the FAA database. For every drone entry, there is a dropdown where you will input your standard RID. If you are one pilot and you own 4 drones all with standard RID then you will input 4 unique RID numbers into the database. If you have a Mini without RID, choose No and leave the RID column blank. In addition, for every RID broadcast module you use, input those as well. When the database is complete and accurate, the FAA will know every RID number that is assigned to you.

In addition to providing some degree of accountability for drones that cause damage, of course RIDs can be used to enforce all FAA regulations, including flying beyond VLOS, over 400 feet, in restricted airspace, etc., so I think much of the FAA's incentive is to discourage that sort of stuff, even if it's sparsely enforced. Maybe we won't be seeing so many range tests on YouTube or bragging posts on forums.

There is no way for the FAA to know these flight details because they have not certified the data reported by the RID modules (built-in or external). If the FAA is tracking a drone and it says the drone is flying at 495 feet, how will the FAA know this is true if they've never tested any of it for accuracy? This is the what many have complained about, in the legal world, you don't get a pass because there's "safety" involved or because it's "the government" or because it's exclusive airspace and the FAA gets to decide. If you are going to take criminal or substantive administrative action against someone, you have to come with it. But if the FAA is going to send you a warning letter because someone sent them a screen shot of your drone showing 650 feet, that's a different story. RID is not going to stop anything, you realize the drones you see on Youtube today are transmitting already, right? Let's see what happens.

 

[RogerDH]

Unfortunately the rules have changed and this is no longer the case. It is still true that a recreational pilot must register on the FAA website (as applicable) and get one unique registration for all drones owned; however, the next step is to add each drone to your personal online inventory. Therefore one pilot will maintain a list of drones by adding and deleting them from the inventory kept in the FAA database. For every drone entry, there is a dropdown where you will input your standard RID. If you are one pilot and you own 4 drones all with standard RID then you will input 4 unique RID numbers into the database. If you have a Mini without RID, choose No and leave the RID column blank. In addition, for every RID broadcast module you use, input those as well. When the database is complete and accurate, the FAA will know every RID number that is assigned to you.

Ah, somehow I missed hearing about that, thanks -- I suppose I would have found out when I have to renew next year, and I'm okay with that. I guess it's not surprising that they closed that loophole.

...

There is no way for the FAA to know these flight details because they have not certified the data reported by the RID modules (built-in or external). If the FAA is tracking a drone and it says the drone is flying at 495 feet, how will the FAA know this is true if they've never tested any of it for accuracy? This is the what many have complained about, in the legal world, you don't get a pass because there's "safety" involved or because it's "the government" or because it's exclusive airspace and the FAA gets to decide. If you are going to take criminal or substantive administrative action against someone, you have to come with it. But if the FAA is going to send you a warning letter because someone sent them a screen shot of your drone showing 650 feet, that's a different story. RID is not going to stop anything, you realize the drones you see on Youtube today are transmitting already, right? Let's see what happens.

I was thinking more along the lines of how simply having RID in place would discourage at least some illegal activity. Of course, people who don't believe that they can do anything will continue, so I guess we'll see if they're right.

 

[mavic3usa]

Ah, somehow I missed hearing about that, thanks -- I suppose I would have found out when I have to renew next year, and I'm okay with that. I guess it's not surprising that they closed that loophole.

Today, either the database is broken or it isn't functioning properly. No matter what drone you have, if you choose NO when asked if it has remote ID, then you can save the drone into your inventory and renew your registration successfully. Currently there is no way for the database to check your answer and prevent you from simply answering NO to all of your drone and never actually entering anything other than the serial number.

This MUST change otherwise the entire process is pointless. Few days up until the original September deadline, this had not changed which makes me believe nothing will change in March either. If that's the case, the entire system is completely voluntary and unless they do a purge/hard-reset of some sort, it will take the renewal cycle "3 years" to fix the mess. Technically you are not properly registered until you take the final step which is "enter your details into the FAA database" but the FAA will soon find out that way more than 50% of the entries have no compliance details, but...

I was thinking more along the lines of how simply having RID in place would discourage at least some illegal activity. Of course, people who don't believe that they can do anything will continue, so I guess we'll see if they're right.

...even if this deters some people initially, eventually the norm will kick in and people go back and realize the lack of enforcement; it's human nature and other factors. Unfortunately even the most honest of people will eventually speed in their car at some point (if that is their desire) should traffic enforcement cease to exist and others are doing it with impunity.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Unfortunately even the most honest of people will eventually speed in their car at some point (if that is their desire) should traffic enforcement cease to exist and others are doing it with impunity.

It doesn't take pillars of the community speeding to cause dogs to sleep with cats. The tiniest fraction of ethically challenged malcontents can totally wreck the party for everyone else if we let them.

That experiment is underway right now in the US. Just look at what's happening in major US cities that have decriminalized petty theft. We now have an epidemic of petty theft. Which has evolved to organized petty theft.

 

[finity]

But if the FAA is going to send you a warning letter because someone sent them a screen shot of your drone showing 650 feet,

And that brings up another point of failure in RID.

I'm pretty sure that RID will only show height AGL from the take off point. There are many situations that being above 400' AGL as reported by the drone won't be a true violation.

I know when I was flying around the mountains on my Colorado trip that I was over 400' AGL as reported by the system many times but I was also well within 400' of true AGL.

How is the FAA going to regulate that with just a report of RID data without also checking the actual terrain where you were flying over to analyze if you ever were in true violation?

I'm sure they could do it (and may well do it with the most obvious and egregious violations) but I would have a hard time they would put that many resources into an incident if it didn't fall into the aforementioned "obvious and egregious" category.

 

[mavic3usa]

And that brings up another point of failure in RID.

I'm pretty sure that RID will only show height AGL from the take off point. There are many situations that being above 400' AGL as reported by the drone won't be a true violation.

I know when I was flying around the mountains on my Colorado trip that I was over 400' AGL as reported by the system many times but I was also well within 400' of true AGL.

How is the FAA going to regulate that with just a report of RID data without also checking the actual terrain where you were flying over to analyze if you ever were in true violation?

I'm sure they could do it (and may well do it with the most obvious and egregious violations) but I would have a hard time they would put that many resources into an incident if it didn't fall into the aforementioned "obvious and egregious" category.

I agree, it's not likely to happen unless it is repeated often or you get unlucky. Your AGL can be determined by looking at all the data include the GPS but my point is if they are just going for warnings and education and advising and such, hard facts aren't required. "You are reminded that.... Please refer to section.... If you have questions...."