Very informative video on the lawsuit against the FAA on remote ID. You decide ?

[thispilothere]

There are security concerns that unfriendlies will be able to gather intel on you and your drone. I could see where such information could be hacked and used maliciously by a neighbor who thinks he has some kind of leg to stand on to "save the neighborhood." One would have to have complete faith in government entities to NOT have this concern. I'm surely not one of those people.

D

It doesn't need to be hacked, the location information will be readily available for anyone to search.

 

[Kenichi]

No, I only fly legally about once a year. it is too expensive otherwise.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Oh - we should be rooting for a vandal now because he made money from his crime?

LOL
How did you ever come to that conclusion from my post? You mentioned about a guy who flies near trains. I simply gave you the name of the guy I remember doing it and getting fined.

 

[BruddahMidds]

Why don’t they have sobriety testers installed on every car sold in the United States? More people are killed by drunk drivers than UAV’s every year. They only have laws if you’re caught, no proactive approach to a problem that destroys thousands of lives every year.

And how many people are killed by guns every year? The government can’t seem to figure out what to do about that. I own several guns myself, I enjoy shooting with friends a couple of times a week and I enjoy the piece of mind of have my M&P 2.0 next to my bedside, but, I do not entertain the thought of having to carry it with when I go flying.

The government is frustrated, they can’t target groups that impact innocent peoples lives yet they go after a small group that has no significant impact and no statistical data to warrant it. It just seems like this whole idea of the ID system came about because of big corporations wanting to grab airspace for their delivery systems which I believe Amazon has thrown in the towel due to financial feasibility issues.

I’m done venting…….

 

[Fearless Flight]

The FPV flyer called NURK FPV flew his drone in and out of a freight train. Was some pretty impressive video but it ended up costing him a good chunk of change. 27k according to the FAA website. In a video he did with another youtuber he said it cost him the price of a car. I'm sure that one video made him more then 27 grand just by the number of views.

It's too bad there wasn't a remote ID law. I'm sure that would have kept him from doing it in the first place.

 

[SpitFire]

Welcome to the forum from Chicago the Windy City.

 

[jaswalt]

Everything in the new cars is logged. Very easy to get all GPS info from todays cars. Probably don't need to know if you were the one flying. It will log who owns the drone and fine the owner. You could say it was taken by a thief but where is the police report. LOL If they want to get you they will.

Actually, they have to know who is driving a car that has been captured by a red light camera. Red light cams snap a picture of the driver as well as the plate. When I was caught, there was a flash in front of and behind me. When the ticket arrived in the mail, a picture was included of my face behind the wheel. With that in mind, we can only hope that they will need to know who is flying the drone in order to apply some sort of penalty for wrongdoing. There is at least precedence in that regard.

 

[TRogan42]

I know I am going to get flack for this ...and maybe I don't know enough about RID.....but it sounds to me that other than the ID being available to any one who want to seek it out...if you are a responsible drone flyer...there really is nothing else bad about it...if that part were eliminated ...I can't see any reason to object to it...I started to watch the video, but it got off to too much of a slow start for me ...and is too long to keep my interest...I am not looking for arguments with any one...but I am curious why some are so opposed to it...it seems to me that if you are flying responsibly....there is no reason to object to it

Argument "I have nothing to hide" is childish, I could say "I have nothing to show" If you start critical thinking process there are circumstances where "nothing to hide" can be used against you by malicious party/competition. Just becasue we do not know how to use the data, doesn't mean others don't as well.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Posted by Brendan Schulman on UAV News Group.

If you are following the lawsuit against the FAA concerning Remote ID, here's the brief from DOJ on behalf of the FAA, arguing that the rule is legal and valid, just filed tonight:

RespondentsBrief_Brennan-v-FAA.pdf | Powered by Box

app.box.com

 

[Mavic-Master88]

The government is frustrated, they can’t target groups that impact innocent peoples lives yet they go after a small group that has no significant impact and no statistical data to warrant it. It just seems like this whole idea of the ID system came about because of big corporations wanting to grab airspace for their delivery systems which I believe Amazon has thrown in the towel due to financial feasibility issues.

I agree with your sentiments about govt. going after people who are 99% of the time doing harmless things in uncrowded airspace. Plus, this Remote ID system can be greatly abused --- just think of how many low IQ police officers can simply grab your drone ID and make up a fake story about how you were flying recklessly and endangering the public, without any video evidence to back it up?

However, I do disagree with you about Amazon "throwing in the towel" over drone delivery. I believe they are "all in" on drone delivery and just waiting for the FAA to give the all-clear and approve autonomous commercial drones for large scale use. Amazon will be at the forefront of this innovative charge because they have the money and motivation to do it.

 

[sar104]

I agree with your sentiments about govt. going after people who are 99% of the time doing harmless things in uncrowded airspace. Plus, this Remote ID system can be greatly abused --- just think of how many low IQ police officers can simply grab your drone ID and make up a fake story about how you were flying recklessly and endangering the public, without any video evidence to back it up?

And what stops them from doing that without RID? In fact RID makes it harder to do that since the flight is documented.

 

[Mavic-Master88]

And what stops them from doing that without RID? In fact RID makes it harder to do that since the flight is documented.

What I'm implying is that if drones didnt broadcast your ID, then a cop would just see it in the air and be powerless to identify it unless you were within sight. I happen to fly a lot of long distance flights (>1 mile) so no police officer can identify me from that distance, and therefore I won't have bogus charges brought against me.

But with Remote ID, any cop can point his little "Drone ID Thingy" and find out who you are regardless of where you are operating the drone, and that means you got police showing up your door with a criminal complaint about "alleged" illegal things you were doing with your drone, even though they have no video evidence to back it up. They can simply make up a story and now you got a mess on your hands, all because it was too dang easy to find out your ID.

 

[sar104]

What I'm implying is that if drones didnt broadcast your ID, then a cop would just see it in the air and be powerless to identify it unless you were within sight. I happen to fly a lot of long distance flights (>1 mile) so no police officer can identify me from that distance, and therefore I won't have bogus charges brought against me.

But with Remote ID, any cop can point his little "Drone ID Thingy" and find out who you are regardless of where you are operating the drone, and that means you got police showing up your door with a criminal complaint about "alleged" illegal things you were doing with your drone, even though they have no video evidence to back it up. They can simply make up a story and now you got a mess on your hands, all because it was too dang easy to find out your ID.

There is no evidence at all to support that assertion. LE officers already see plenty of people flying drones without feeling the need to accuse them of anything. Why do you think they will suddenly start falsifying accusations just because they have another way to find drone pilots?

 

[Mavic-Master88]

There is no evidence at all to support that assertion. LE officers already see plenty of people flying drones without feeling the need to accuse them of anything. Why do you think they will suddenly start falsifying accusations just because they have another way to find drone pilots?

I'm just saying the Remote ID system makes it hella easy for a police officer to quickly find out who are you and then "embellish" details about your drone flight that might not be favorable to you in a criminal case!

It's the same thing as you parking your car in a shady neighborhood and one of those plate-camera police cruisers rolls by and records your license plate. Once they have your ID, then they can think up all kinds of nasty ways to implicate you in drug deals, robberies, vandalism, or other crimes that might've occurred in the same time and area where your license plate was recorded. It would just be a LOT better for you if you didnt have your license plate on your vehicle at the time it was being entered automatically entered into a police database.

 

[sar104]

I'm just saying the Remote ID system makes it hella easy for a police officer to quickly find out who are you and then "embellish" details about your drone flight that might not be favorable to you in a criminal case!

It's the same thing as you parking your car in a shady neighborhood and one of those plate-camera police cruisers rolls by and records your license plate. Once they have your ID, then they can think up all kinds of nasty ways to implicate you in drug deals, robberies, vandalism, or other crimes that might've occurred in the same time and area where your license plate was recorded. It would just be a LOT better for you if you didnt have your license plate on your vehicle at the time it was being entered automatically entered into a police database.

You know what - as soon as police departments get access to computerized vehicle records they will start looking up license plates and then come round to your house to arrest you on fabricated charges for driving recklessly. Of course that never happened, but you see what I did there? I did exactly what you are doing - inventing completely fictional predictions predicated on the logical fallacy that because something could happen it will happen.

How many times have you been implicated in criminal activities just for having parked somewhere?

 

[Chip]

Actually, they have to know who is driving a car that has been captured by a red light camera. Red light cams snap a picture of the driver as well as the plate. When I was caught, there was a flash in front of and behind me. When the ticket arrived in the mail, a picture was included of my face behind the wheel. With that in mind, we can only hope that they will need to know who is flying the drone in order to apply some sort of penalty for wrongdoing. There is at least precedence in that regard.

Interesting analogy. Here the camera takes picture of your plate not your face. Ticket is automatic but can be beat with doc signed under penalty of perjury denying you were driving. Maybe photo taken varies by state. I think that to convict someone of reckless or illegal flying the prosecutor must prove the controller was in their hands beyond a reasonable doubt. Registration alone does not prove who was flying. My assumption is that remote ID signal can be spoofed which is another reason pilot must be caught in flagrante delicto.

 

[Vic Moss]

I'm just saying the Remote ID system makes it hella easy for a police officer to quickly find out who are you and then "embellish" details about your drone flight that might not be favorable to you in a criminal case!

Absolutely false. There is ZERO personal information in the RID information packet. The only identifiable aspect of the RID is the RID registration number. And in order to compare that to the FAA's database, they have to show just cause, and go through the FAA's legal department.

You mention that you fly >1 mile. In that case, the cop doesn't need to "embellish" your flight. You're already flying illegally unless you have a waiver, and the FAA will be quite interesting in talking to you anyway. So RID is required exactly because of flights like that.

It's the same thing as you parking your car in a shady neighborhood and one of those plate-camera police cruisers rolls by and records your license plate. Once they have your ID, then they can think up all kinds of nasty ways to implicate you in drug deals, robberies, vandalism, or other crimes that might've occurred in the same time and area where your license plate was recorded. It would just be a LOT better for you if you didnt have your license plate on your vehicle at the time it was being entered automatically entered into a police database.

Your analogy is way off base. How in the world could an LEO make up charges simply because they have your flight data (which as I explained above, they can't get). Your flight records would exonerate you if nothing else. They're proof you didn't do anything wrong. Except BVLOS of course. In which case, it would be an ASI (rightly) knocking on your door instead of a cop.

And this paragraph explains why you're so opposed to RID. It's a mindset with you.

 

[Mavic-Master88]

You mention that you fly >1 mile. In that case, the cop doesn't need to "embellish" your flight. You're already flying illegally unless you have a waiver, and the FAA will be quite interesting in talking to you anyway. So RID is required exactly because of flights like that.

I'm not flying illegally at over a mile range because I am still "line of sight". There is nothing in the FAA rules that states the LOS needs to be via an unaided eyeball. I use high-powered scopes when I fly and also very bright strobes so I can see my Mavic 2 Zoom from over 3 miles away.

 

[spudster]

There is nothing in the FAA rules that states the LOS needs to be via an unaided eyeball.

§ 107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.

(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:

(1) Know the unmanned aircraft’s location;

(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft’s attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;

(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and

(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.

(b) Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be exercised by either:

(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or

(2) A visual observer.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/events_calendar/archive/2019_uas_symposium/media/How_To_Get_Approval_to_Fly_BVLOS-Part_107.pdf