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

[Vic Moss]

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.

There absolutely is a rule against using something like a scope.

I’m at a training (drone training coincidentally) at the moment, but I’ll supply the language and the links later today.

All VLOS operations must be unaided by anything other than corrective lenses. That is the law.

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.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

It just goes to show you how useless the TRUST exam is in my opinion.

 

[Drone_Pilot]

There absolutely is a rule against using something like a scope.

I’m at a training (drone training coincidentally) at the moment, but I’ll supply the language and the links later today.

All VLOS operations must be unaided by anything other than corrective lenses. That is the law.

 

[Chip]

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.

It depends what you mean by "personal information." I think my location and flight data is personal to me. The only reason the FAA can argue otherwise is by using RID to force me to broadcast it publicly. IMHO that is the hipocricy of the program. Otherwise every motor vehicle in America should be publicly broadcasting GPS location and name and plate number for potential monitoring at local, state and federal level. Far more people are killed and maimed driving vehicles on the roads and highways than by flying a 251 gram UAV.

As far as whether there is just cause to release flight data, is that not the role of a judge? Does the FAA have any regulations which explain in detail what it considers just cause to release UAV registration data? How such requests shall be tracked and stored? The penalties for accessing or releasing data without just cause?

 

[sar104]

It depends what you mean by "personal information." I think my location and flight data is personal to me. The only reason the FAA can argue otherwise is by using RID to force me to broadcast it publicly. IMHO that is the hipocricy of the program. Otherwise every motor vehicle in America should be publicly broadcasting GPS location and name and plate number for potential monitoring at local, state and federal level. Far more people are killed and maimed driving vehicles on the roads and highways than by flying a 251 gram UAV.

As far as whether there is just cause to release flight data, is that not the role of a judge? Does the FAA have any regulations which explain in detail what it considers just cause to release UAV registration data? How such requests shall be tracked and stored? The penalties for accessing or releasing data without just cause?

You certainly are under no obligation to disclose those data. Unless you want to fly in the NAS, of course.

 

[Vic Moss]

It depends what you mean by "personal information."

@Mavic-Master88 Master wrote "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."

So by personal informatoin, he means our names and addresses.

As far as whether there is just cause to release flight data, is that not the role of a judge?

The FAA legal team would make that decision based on the needs of the asking entity.

Does the FAA have any regulations which explain in detail what it considers just cause to release UAV registration data?

No.

How such requests shall be tracked and stored? The penalties for accessing or releasing data without just cause?

All requests are kept indefinitely.

 

[Chaosrider]

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

I will never buy a drone with Remote ID, as long as the rule allows J Random Citizen to access the data.

I'm totally fine with having Remote ID on my drones as long as only the FAA and law enforcement have access to the data. With that restriction, it's a good idea.

TCS

 

[Chaosrider]

As previously reported, the ACLU, on 2/9/21, issued its position on Remote ID, and the ACLU is generally ok with it. I agree with that position. For one thing, I want to be able to legally fly BVLOS, and as the ACLU puts it, “a regulatory framework permitting routine BVLOS flights was never going to happen … until the law enforcement and national security communities are comfortable with their ability to identify and track” drones.

With regard to broadcast transponders that would broadcast their unique ID numbers locally to anyone within range, the ACLU said “We think this is good; the broadcast Remote ID should be sufficient to achieve both the security goal of allowing facilities to identify and deter illegal or hostile drone flights and the privacy goal of empowering individuals to know what aerial cameras may be recording them.”

The ACLU further said: “The FAA is doing a good job in building an infrastructure that will give us the ability to know what “eyes in the sky” are observing our streets, communities, and cities. While details still need to be worked out, the agency’s goal seems to be a system in which anyone can see the “license plate” of nearby drones on their cell phones."

I certainly have some issues concerning the safety of drone pilots and I anxiously await a definitive decision by the courts on these difficult issues.

Interesting and well written, thanks.

I might be willing to put an "open channel" RID on one of my drones, if I could then legally fly it BVLOS.

But that would be a compromise. It's the "open channel" RID that I don't like. RID for FAA and LEOs is fine.

TCS

 

[Chaosrider]

I don't have the knowledge that alot here have when it comes to remote ID. and all the pros and cons that it brings. But I do not want to be bothered by no one when I'm flying commercially or recreationally or worse get hurt or dead.

I think the main issue is protecting the pilots from all these issues. If they can set it where it shows a 3 mile radius without pinpointing where the pilot is I would not have too much of an issue with it. Just my two cents

Your comments gave me an idea for a possible good compromise.

If the RID was configured so that J Random Citizen could *only* get a *registration number*, I'd be totally fine with that. IF JRC wanted to identify the pilot, or file a complaint, they'd need to do that through either the FAA or LE.

Let JRC get the *aircraft* ID, but not the *pilot* ID, from the RID unit.

Thoughts?

TCS

 

[sar104]

Interesting and well written, thanks.

I might be willing to put an "open channel" RID on one of my drones, if I could then legally fly it BVLOS.

But that would be a compromise. It's the "open channel" RID that I don't like. RID for FAA and LEOs is fine.

TCS

I don't think that BVLOS is going to happen any time soon for consumer-level UAVs. The almost complete lack of situational awareness that it entails is a showstopper. Safe BVLOS is currently only achieved for official operations such as search and rescue by the blunt approach of putting a TFR in place to ensure that there is no other traffic in the airspace. That works, and I can typically get a TFR up in less than an hour, but it's never going to be a solution for recreational flights, or even the normal commercial use case.

 

[AnzacJack]

do you guys have extended line of sight authorizations in the states?

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Move to Canada. Not as hard to get BVLOS. Transport Canada continues to approve SFOC applications for routine, low-risk BVLOS operations that are accompanied by high-quality SORA documentation.

 

[Ty Pilot]

--- 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?

How many? Zero. First, I don't think that there are a whole lot of police officers (low IQ or not), that would waist their time and jeopardize their career over such non-sense, but moreover; the incredibly detailed telemetry a drone creates would be hard to argue against, should someone 'make up' a fake story.

 

[thispilothere]

How many? Zero. First, I don't think that there are a whole lot of police officers (low IQ or not), that would waist their time and jeopardize their career over such non-sense, but moreover; the incredibly detailed telemetry a drone creates would be hard to argue against, should someone 'make up' a fake story.

Go watch some 1st amendment audit videos. Low IQ cops routinely waste their time harassing people who are on video not breaking any law and it often leads to an arrest. Even when the person wins a settlement for false arrest, the officer's job is rarely jeopardized.

 

[Mantrain]

i am fairly new to this hobby. Do the new drones being sold by the major manufactures already have RID in place? IE, I have a new AIR 2 S which of course I registered. So when I registered the drone, did that activate the RID through the DGI Go Fly software? The reason why I ask is because the first day I used the drone I had the RTN setting too high and that was a violation. I am wondering if I will be pinched for that.

 

[thispilothere]

i am fairly new to this hobby. Do the new drones being sold by the major manufactures already have RID in place? IE, I have a new AIR 2 S which of course I registered. So when I registered the drone, did that activate the RID through the DGI Go Fly software? The reason why I ask is because the first day I used the drone I had the RTN setting too high and that was a violation. I am wondering if I will be pinched for that.

No.

 

[Vic Moss]

i am fairly new to this hobby. Do the new drones being sold by the major manufactures already have RID in place? IE, I have a new AIR 2 S which of course I registered. So when I registered the drone, did that activate the RID through the DGI Go Fly software? The reason why I ask is because the first day I used the drone I had the RTN setting too high and that was a violation. I am wondering if I will be pinched for that.

No, because the actual standards for RID aren't out yet. Soon, but not yet.

There is a good chance that many of the newest RFT models from DJI, Autel, Parrot, etc. will be able to update firmware to become compliant though.

 

[Smooth Rhythm]

I consider it nothing more than propaganda and a fundraiser!

 

[Smooth Rhythm]

The Annenberg Public Policy Center found that 37% of Americans can’t name any of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment, and only 26% can name all three branches of government. Given that, do you wonder why there are some who argue “I'm going to ignore any RID requirement … I'll do my own thing …” That is indicative of a mindset that they are somehow “privileged,” “entitled,” or “elitist.” I get it, It’s all about you, you, you, and the hell with anybody else. I hear you saying … “I’ll fly the way I wanna and nobody’s gonna tell me how to fly … this is America, we’re free to do whatever we want … I have the RIGHT to fly the way I wanna and nobody can tell me not to … the government this, the government that ...” We hear you. Unfortunately, this is a huge problem., and while this attitude is not the reason for RID, it doesn’t help. To be clear, not everyone is so dense; some are just after the money! Not a sermon … Jus sayin.’

 

[Smooth Rhythm]

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…….

It’s OK to vent, I do it myself sometimes. As I see it, here is the problem with your argument. The problem is not the “government“ but individuals, both inside and outside the government, who are only concerned about their own self interest.