Drone ID not popular

There is a time period to add comments on the FAA’s website in regards to the drone ID NPRM. Don’t agree at all with drone ID but I think constructive criticism would be more beneficial than a protest.
 
Yes, hopefully all the protestors have also made comments on the NPRM.
 
Does anyone actually think this nonsense will make them “safe”?
 
Who knows. The RC hobby was originally pretty self regulating, either through the Academy of Model Aeronautics, or people who basically followed the AMA guidelines and had some self control. With the advent of cheap imported drones the cost to entry came down a lot and anyone can fly a cheapo drone, including some people who quite frankly shouldn't be entrusted to any mechanical device. I like drones, they're fun when operated properly. But quite frankly the actions of a few have brought the hammer out and the FAA is ready to drop it especially after the Max snafu.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Apparently a protest regarding the drone id proposal. FAA may have shut down its office for the day.

https://dronedj.com/2020/03/01/protesters-tell-faa-if-we-build-it-let-it-fly/
Click to expand...
Nope, offices were open. Here was the internal alert that went out:
PRELIM INFO FROM FAA OPS: WASHINGTON, DC/FAA ON FEBRUARY 28, 2020 AND FEBRUARY 29, 2020, FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED DEMONSTRATIONS ARE SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE NEAR THE FAA HQ. ON FEBRUARY 28, 2020 ACTIVITIES ARE PLANNED TO BEGIN AT 1200 EST AND HAVE NO DEFINED TIME FOR CONCLUSION. ON FEBRUARY 29, 2020 ACTIVITIES ARE PLANED TO BEGIN AT 0900 EST AND CONCLUDE AT 1700 EST. PER OPEN SOURCE INFORMATION, THE CURRENT NUMBERS OF PARTICIPANTS ARE 166 GOING AND 413 INTERESTED IN THE EVENT. THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS OF PLANNED VIOLENCE OR CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE AT THIS TIME. THE FAA IS COORDINATING ALL SECURITY ACTIVITIES WITH THE FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY PROGRAMS. WOC 7-3333 MK/DF https://www.helpsaveourhobby.com/
 
Half Fast said:
Certainly!

First it was drone registration. Now it’s drone ID. Next comes drone confiscation. Then we’ll finally be safe from drone violence and mass killings.

It’s for the children.
Click to expand...

The drone registration marking is what I find the most hilarious. First, if someone wants to break the rules, they’re not going to register and mark their drone. That would be an easy way of getting caught should something go bad.

Second, marking the drone on the outside is no guarantee to alert law enforcement that the drone is safe from an IED. There’s not even a character size requirement. One could mark a registration ID so small that you wouldn’t even be able to see it unless you’re a foot away. By the time you get that close, the IED would already have gone off. And since it only has to be marked once on the outside, it could easily be hidden based on damage or the angle as it sits.

Just wonder who comes up with this nonsense.
 
Velocity173 said:
The drone registration marking is what I find the most hilarious. First, if someone wants to break the rules, they’re not going to register and mark their drone. That would be an easy way of getting caught should something go bad.

Second, marking the drone on the outside is no guarantee to alert law enforcement that the drone is safe from an IED. There’s not even a character size requirement. One could mark a registration ID so small that you wouldn’t even be able to see it unless you’re a foot away. By the time you get that close, the IED would already have gone off. And since it only has to be marked once on the outside, it could easily be hidden based on damage or the angle as it sits.

Just wonder who comes up with this nonsense.
Click to expand...
The FAA did a little as humanly possible to satisfy law enforcement. A nice, vague, performanced-based mandate: legibly write the numbers somewhere on the outside of the drone.
 
I think the entire remote ID thing is all about autonomous commercial operations beyond line of sight involving supposedly much bigger drones and unfortunately the small time amateur hobbyist is getting steamrolled in the process to accommodate such dreams. I say dreams because I can tell you right now that when someone starts making frequent residential drone deliveries of pizza or chia pets and flying over people’s back yards the public outroar is going to something the likes of which the folks in Washington have yet to experience.

The whole idea is a pipe dream.
 
Silvaire said:
I think the entire remote ID thing is all about autonomous commercial operations beyond line of sight involving supposedly much bigger drones and unfortunately the small time amateur hobbyist is getting steamrolled in the process to accommodate such dreams. I say dreams because I can tell you right now that when someone starts making frequent residential drone deliveries of pizza or chia pets and flying over people’s back yards the public outroar is going to something the likes of which the folks in Washington have yet to experience.

The whole idea is a pipe dream.
Click to expand...
I think you’re right about hobbyists getting steamrolled. I also think that may not be unintentional... not on the part of the FAA necessarily, but I’m sure law enforcement and Amazon would be perfectly happy if no one but commercial operators were allowed to fly anything at all. Give the kiddies VR kite simulator subscriptions and keep them indoors. As for public outrage... yeah. That’ll last until people start getting their pizza and egg rolls delivered by air, and the Luddites who still object will be summarily ignored. Of course interfering with that commercial delivery drone zipping through your back yard will be made a federal felony.
 
The reason for these things being advanced is because the hobby has not self regulated. People are flying drones all over - airports, accident scenes, fires, even interfering with life flights. Requiring external markings probably won’t help this much, but it becomes one more club to beat the offender with.
 
bflynn said:
The reason for these things being advanced is because the hobby has not self regulated. People are flying drones all over - airports, accident scenes, fires, even interfering with life flights. Requiring external markings probably won’t help this much, but it becomes one more club to beat the offender with.
Click to expand...
I think the traditional AMA RC folks were reasonably self regulated, but things changed when the DJI quadcopter phenomenon took off.
 
Brad Z said:
Nope, offices were open. Here was the internal alert that went out:
PRELIM INFO FROM FAA OPS: WASHINGTON, DC/FAA ON FEBRUARY 28, 2020 AND FEBRUARY 29, 2020, FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED DEMONSTRATIONS ARE SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE NEAR THE FAA HQ. ON FEBRUARY 28, 2020 ACTIVITIES ARE PLANNED TO BEGIN AT 1200 EST AND HAVE NO DEFINED TIME FOR CONCLUSION. ON FEBRUARY 29, 2020 ACTIVITIES ARE PLANED TO BEGIN AT 0900 EST AND CONCLUDE AT 1700 EST. PER OPEN SOURCE INFORMATION, THE CURRENT NUMBERS OF PARTICIPANTS ARE 166 GOING AND 413 INTERESTED IN THE EVENT. THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS OF PLANNED VIOLENCE OR CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE AT THIS TIME. THE FAA IS COORDINATING ALL SECURITY ACTIVITIES WITH THE FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND OTHER FACILITY SECURITY PROGRAMS. WOC 7-3333 MK/DF https://www.helpsaveourhobby.com/
Click to expand...

I ASSUME MY LATE FATHER IN LAW IS BEING CHANNELED BY SOMEONE IN THE FAA. GOD FORBID THAT THEY WOULD USE LOWER CASE CHARACTERS WHEN TYPING ON A COMPUTER.

But the proposal is beyond intrusive and devastating for the typical young people who are the pilots of the future, while, at the same time, being totally ineffective w.r.t. safety.
 
Problem is people keep flying their drones near airports. In Europe flights are routinely diverted due to drone activity near airports. Is it an overreaction? Probably, but no one knows the intent of the bozos flying these things and political pressure to do something is overwhelming. There's no second amendment for drones.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I ASSUME MY LATE FATHER IN LAW IS BEING CHANNELED BY SOMEONE IN THE FAA. GOD FORBID THAT THEY WOULD USE LOWER CASE CHARACTERS WHEN TYPING ON A COMPUTER.

But the proposal is beyond intrusive and devastating for the typical young people who are the pilots of the future, while, at the same time, being totally ineffective w.r.t. safety.
Click to expand...

Everything my Dad types online is in caps lock. 25 years of working FSS / AFSS will do that to ya I guess. Still gives me a headache trying to read his FB posts though.
 
Personally, I'm in favor of leaving things to nature. It seems logical that allowing hunters to bag drones would would keep the pests to a minimum, not to mention easing the burden borne by our poor wildlife.
 
Brad Z said:
Problem is people keep flying their drones near airports. In Europe flights are routinely diverted due to drone activity near airports. Is it an overreaction? Probably, but no one knows the intent of the bozos flying these things and political pressure to do something is overwhelming. There's no second amendment for drones.
Click to expand...
But, this proposal does what to actually address this problem?
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
But, this proposal does what to actually address this problem?
Click to expand...
The Remote ID rule requires the drone to transmit certain identification and location information that people on the ground and other airspace users can receive. Think of it as ADS-B for UAS. The idea is if someone is flying somewhere they shouldn't be, law enforcement can determine the ID of the operator as well as the location of the control station.
 
Brad Z said:
The Remote ID rule requires the drone to transmit certain identification and location information that people on the ground and other airspace users can receive. Think of it as ADS-B for UAS. The idea is if someone is flying somewhere they shouldn't be, law enforcement can determine the ID of the operator as well as the location of the control station.
Click to expand...
You have an internet connection in your airplane? That's what you will need to get information about drones in the area.

Think of it as an ADS-Bish system that is 100% incompatible with the current ADS-B system and is going to require you to replace your current system (or add a second parallel system) if you want to get the data.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
You have an internet connection in your airplane? That's what you will need to get information about drones in the area.

Think of it as an ADS-Bish system that is 100% incompatible with the current ADS-B system and is going to require you to replace your current system (or add a second parallel system) if you want to get the data.
Click to expand...

The system is not intended to be compatible with the Existing ADS-B system. The primary intent seems to be for law enforcement to identify from the ground where the operator of the drone is located.
 
Unpopular? You think?
I have 25(ish) radio control planes in my basement ranging in wingspan size from 28" to 4 meters
Based on the new plan, most of them are illegal.
Hopefully, someone with some brains will shortstop this entire process and leave model builders alone.
 
Brad Z said:
Nope, offices were open.
Click to expand...

This is a Friday we're talking about, in Washington D.C.?

I don't know about the FAA in particular, but it would hardly surprise me to hear that no warm bodies were present on a Friday, even if the offices of an agency were technically open. Maybe the protestors should have chosen a different weekday.
 
Shepherd said:
Unpopular? You think?
I have 25(ish) radio control planes in my basement ranging in wingspan size from 28" to 4 meters
Based on the new plan, most of them are illegal.
Hopefully, someone with some brains will shortstop this entire process and leave model builders alone.
Click to expand...

My collection is not as extensive as yours, but it does go back 30some years. They all burn nitro-methane and not electrons for propulsion. Hell, I even still have an old AM radio around here somewhere. Figure the odds of any of them ever being fitted with a transmitter of any type. o_O
 
Brad Z said:
The primary intent seems to be for law enforcement to identify from the ground where the operator of the drone is located.
Click to expand...
Then you might want to fix your previous post.
Brad Z said:
and other airspace users can receive.
Click to expand...
The only people that law enforcement will be able to identify will be those who are not smart enough to turn the system off.
The RC hobbyists who attempt to follow the rules are just SoL.

Shepherd said:
I have 25(ish) radio control planes in my basement ranging in wingspan size from 28" to 4 meters
Based on the new plan, most of them are illegal.
Click to expand...

And, according to the proposed rules you would need 25(ish) separate ID transmitters. I'm sure it will cost you less than $25,000. Or, perhaps more.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Then you might want to fix your previous post.

The only people that law enforcement will be able to identify will be those who are not smart enough to turn the system off.
The RC hobbyists who attempt to follow the rules are just SoL.



And, according to the proposed rules you would need 25(ish) separate ID transmitters. I'm sure it will cost you less than $25,000. Or, perhaps more.
Click to expand...

No edits necessary in my post, but i'm assuming you submitted your comments on the NPRM?
 
Some of the other rules are even more ridiculous.
One of the worst is the 400ft distance and 400ft maximum altitude.
I have a few gliders and free-flight models. How do you thermal a glider when you have a max altitude or distance of 400ft? How do you stop a free-flight from flying out of bounds?
 
The really irksome thing about it all is that despite it's overly complex and oppressively expensive and burdensome nature to the hobbyist recreational drone user it doesn't appear to in any way interface or provide any situational information to those of us who are up there utilizing that same low level airspace in our private people carrying aircraft.

I think that's a long enough run-on sentence that I'll just stop right there and not say any more about it.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I ASSUME MY LATE FATHER IN LAW IS BEING CHANNELED
Click to expand...

Microsoft Word has (or used to have) buttons to change the case of text that could fix that. I have sometimes used it since I find reading all caps quite difficult. [Shift]F3 toggles round Upper, lower, first letter of sentence capitalised. I occassionaly paste stuff from web sites into word and fix it for me. Stupid backgrounds under text, stupid fonts, stupid long lines that won't reflow, stupid line spacing, ... Guess I'm a grumpy old foool :)
Word 2007 has a Case button - upload_2020-3-8_6-28-45.png

I found this neat web site recently, when I was looking for an ascii converter, takes two steps. -
http://www.unit-conversion.info/texttools/lowercase/#data
http://www.unit-conversion.info/texttools/capitalize-sentence/#data

The FAA statement re-cased.
Prelim info from faa ops: washington, dc/faa on february 28, 2020 and february 29, 2020, first amendment protected demonstrations are scheduled to take place near the faa hq. On february 28, 2020 activities are planned to begin at 1200 est and have no defined time for conclusion. On february 29, 2020 activities are planed to begin at 0900 est and conclude at 1700 est. Per open source information, the current numbers of participants are 166 going and 413 interested in the event. There are no indications of planned violence or civil disobedience at this time. The faa is coordinating all security activities with the federal protective services and other facility security programs. Woc 7-3333 mk/df
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Shepherd said:
Some of the other rules are even more ridiculous.
One of the worst is the 400ft distance and 400ft maximum altitude.
I have a few gliders and free-flight models. How do you thermal a glider when you have a max altitude or distance of 400ft? How do you stop a free-flight from flying out of bounds?
Click to expand...

I don’t know. And I fly RC as well. But pilots need to be accountable. That heartbreaking story of the mother in Taiwan who was killed by an RC glider while with her kid just screams regulation. If you murder someone with your hobby there needs to be accountability.
 
What's going to kill that industry far more efficiently than the FAA on the commercial side will be liability insurance. The first time Bob's Pizza Shop maims little Johnny shooting hoops in his driveway with a pizza drone and little Johnny's parents sue for millions that will be the end of it.
 
woodchucker said:
I don’t know. And I fly RC as well. But pilots need to be accountable. That heartbreaking story of the mother in Taiwan who was killed by an RC glider while with her kid just screams regulation. If you murder someone with your hobby there needs to be accountability.
Click to expand...
Murder someone? You can't possibly be serious.

I think you'd find the number of injuries -- let alone fatalities -- from traditional R/C airplanes, powered or not, per hour flown to be so low as to be statistically insignificant. There have been a number of active R/C clubs in this area for decades, at least back to the mid 1960s and probably before that, and I've never heard of an instance of someone being injured by an errant airplane. You can't regulate something out of existence just because someone, somewhere in the world, might possibly eventually get hurt or killed in a freak accident. We'd have to ban fire hydrants (a guy was killed by one after a car hit it and it went airborne), hay bales (one killed Mike Edwards of ELO), scarves (plenty of people killed by those), and Taco Bell signs.
 
woodchucker said:
I don’t know. And I fly RC as well. But pilots need to be accountable. That heartbreaking story of the mother in Taiwan who was killed by an RC glider while with her kid just screams regulation. If you murder someone with your hobby there needs to be accountability.
Click to expand...
So what rule or regulation would have saved the spectator? Stuff does happen, not everything can be foreseen (despite what greedy lawyers say), and such things happen without intention every day.
 
woodchucker said:
I don’t know. And I fly RC as well. But pilots need to be accountable. That heartbreaking story of the mother in Taiwan who was killed by an RC glider while with her kid just screams regulation. If you murder someone with your hobby there needs to be accountability.
Click to expand...
That’s an unreasonable standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdb
woodchucker said:
I don’t know. And I fly RC as well. But pilots need to be accountable. That heartbreaking story of the mother in Taiwan who was killed by an RC glider while with her kid just screams regulation. If you murder someone with your hobby there needs to be accountability.
Click to expand...

Isn’t murder in that jurisdiction illegal and wrongful death a tort? Those can provide accountability.
 
Half Fast said:
Certainly!

First it was drone registration. Now it’s drone ID. Next comes drone confiscation. Then we’ll finally be safe from drone violence and mass killings.

It’s for the children.
Click to expand...


You got it all wrong :)

It drone registration, Drone ID, Pay to fly. Since we know when and where you fly, now we can charge you for it. It will make everyone feel safer. And it is all about feeling safer, not actual safety.


Brian
 
Silvaire said:
The really irksome thing about it all is that despite it's overly complex and oppressively expensive and burdensome nature to the hobbyist recreational drone user it doesn't appear to in any way interface or provide any situational information to those of us who are up there utilizing that same low level airspace in our private people carrying aircraft.

I think that's a long enough run-on sentence that I'll just stop right there and not say any more about it.
Click to expand...

The is pretty much what my comment to the NPRM stated. Simply that it it doesn’t provide any usable safty benefits.
 
Morgan3820 said:
They came for the drone operators, but I didn’t own a drone, so I did nothing. Then they came for the RC model but I didn’t own an RC model, so I did nothing...
Click to expand...
I think you're barking up the wrong tree by posting that in a recreational manned flight forum. You want me to get umbraged about drone pedestrians being told to eat netflix subscription level yearly internet costs to retain flying access for their hovering gopros? Um, nope. When they snuffed primary non-commercial from signed law, and when they mandated ADSB for desirable landing location (aka airline destinations) coincident airspace, these pedestrians said nothing, token intersectionality of manned pilots and drone enthusiasts on this board notwithstanding.

For the record, recreational manned flight was gentrified long before they were, so your analogy's direction-of-fire is completely backwards. They should be the ones to be moralized about activist inaction in recreational aviation, and they have the numbers we lack mind you. All due respect, spare me the drone poor-mouthing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top