The good, the bad and the ugly- Remote ID Proposal PRM
- Thread starter LUIS MARTINEZ
- Start date
In simple words... as written is has a LOT of potential to screw the vast majority of us over. Key words being As Written.
I would like to have more information about the details, infrastructure, real costs (not guesstimates), and hardware specifics before I would feel good about any aspect of it. Way to much "Grey Area" is placed in it and I'm confident that is by design.
I would like to have more information about the details, infrastructure, real costs (not guesstimates), and hardware specifics before I would feel good about any aspect of it. Way to much "Grey Area" is placed in it and I'm confident that is by design.
That and the fact that those guys involved in ‘fly anywhere’ aren’t gonna use a compatible drone anyway. Maybe our older aircraft will be worth more than we think!
LOL.. This is what I was thinking... Save your closets drones just in case.. Who knows what could happen..
Out of the 33 documented meetings held to date on the NPRM, the three below were the most eye opening for me. And you thought AUVSI was an advocate for us....
The inclusion of Akin Gump in the Consumer Technology Industry Association indicates to me we are being sold out. Akin Gump is "known for its influence on Capitol Hill and its representation of high-profile clients "
The inclusion of Akin Gump in the Consumer Technology Industry Association indicates to me we are being sold out. Akin Gump is "known for its influence on Capitol Hill and its representation of high-profile clients "
Last edited:
clolsonus
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2019
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 148
- Age
- 55
Just to play devils advocate: every time someone posts a video like this on youtube, it probably counts as 10,000 comments in support of the FAA's proposed draconian restrictions. Every time we stress how safe and responsible our community is, another one of these types of videos shows up on youtube. It's just a small percentage of people acting irresponsible and thumbing their noses at authority, and arguably mostly harmless fun ... but when I run across these videos it helps me at least see the FAA's perspective.
Never, ever have I thought the AUVSI supported us. My perception has always held AUVSI management to be pimping themselves out to the highest bidder, and lacking a competitive bid, elevating themselves to the next highest management position in line.
They only folks the AUVSI supports is themselves.
They only folks the AUVSI supports is themselves.
AOPA’s response to the NPRM
AOPA seeks to improve drone tracking
While AOPA supports remote identification of unmanned aircraft in broad terms, the rules that the FAA has proposed would impose needless burdens on recreational users and others who keep their aircraft in sight.
www.aopa.org
This is a problem of their own making. Being under-staffed and under-funded is just not an excuse. The FAA had the choice to punish people like the clown in the video under the regs but they chose instead to "educate" them. The FAA has consistently failed to uphold the regs with only a few examples facing prosecution. And now the unmanned community as a whole is going to have to pay the price because the FAA has failed to maintain the safety of the NAS by enforcing their own regulations.
Amen, brother. The feds lax enforcement has created this monster.
AOPA is hustling hard to get those membership fees.AOPA’s response to the NPRM
AOPA seeks to improve drone tracking
While AOPA supports remote identification of unmanned aircraft in broad terms, the rules that the FAA has proposed would impose needless burdens on recreational users and others who keep their aircraft in sight.www.aopa.org
It was a better response than some thought it might have been. They were even in existence in time to respond directly to the NPRM. Imagine that!
As I’m also a full scale pilot it makes much too much sense to be a member. For the drone specific group, perhaps not so much as they’ve repeatedly demonstrated a desire to remain fragmented individualists.
As I’m also a full scale pilot it makes much too much sense to be a member. For the drone specific group, perhaps not so much as they’ve repeatedly demonstrated a desire to remain fragmented individualists.
AOPA is hustling hard to get those membership fees.
All of the public meeting notes seemed to say that they are in favor of the NPRM without actually understanding what was being proposed and they all wanted it really fast. The sad part is that this isn't anything other than a tool for the FAA and law enforcement to track operators down. It does not provide any information to general aviation or ATC that would improve everyone's safety. It stores the data in a database until someone needs it. At least that was my read. No clue at this point what the system will be. No regulation other than by contract which is BS. No price controls. Develop a new system that may or may not work at our expense ultimately.
We are going to impregnate a lot of goats with this proposal as written.
There’s more than a little cause to be concerned about the FAA’s ability to make effective use of newer technologies. The article discusses inventory tracking but much of the FAA’s system is similarly behind in upgrade schedule completion.
news360.com
PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions
Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.
news360.com
Last edited:
The proposed rule was the FAA's wish list, which would clearly make all current drones obsolete without expensive modifications, if the manufacturers want to mod them at all. However drones are more like computers and cameras than GA aircraft. The industry moves fast, tech is obsolete after several years as new equipment and technology comes out, so after the three year waiting period, most of the lower level consumer/prosumer drones would probably be replaced. However.. the internet requirement is a major problem and I'd be surprised if it wasn't removed. It's just not workable, even if 5G on every street corner. We take pictures in all manner of places, a lot without cell coverage, and even if it was available, someone would have to pay for the connection and the third party service provider to receive and store the information. Let's see what the FAA comes up with for the next update of the proposed rule. DJI and other major vendors will no doubt play a major role. I would imagine some kind of radio broadcast requirement which could be easily integrated into drones. I'm betting small R/C aircraft at designated AMA flying sites will be exempt as long as the model has identifying marks and the pilot has AMA or similar governing body membership.
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
I think many people are raising concerns about what big brother will do in the future. I've been involved in aviation for many years, I have seen many changes. What I have seen is the FAA moves like molasses in the winter time. They seem to be more reactive than proactive at times. They are looking at how to safely allow drones to fly much greater distances meaning another headache for ATC. We can't have drones flying long distances without having a way for ATC to keep traffic separation. If anything we will eventually need a transponder and file actual flight plans with ATC, personally I think that is a long ways off, but with the speed that technology changes today it may be much sooner.
I don't see incorporating a transponder to our current drones as a big problem. I think the idea of collecting flight data via the net isn't practical because that doesn't give ATC the ability to monitor drone flights. We now have hybrid drones that can fly for several hours, that makes them a practical tool for long range missions. You can't send an aircraft off on say a hundred mile flight and not give ATC the ability to monitor that flight and communicate with the pilot, not only that we need a much more reliable way to control that flight than we now have.
I don't see incorporating a transponder to our current drones as a big problem. I think the idea of collecting flight data via the net isn't practical because that doesn't give ATC the ability to monitor drone flights. We now have hybrid drones that can fly for several hours, that makes them a practical tool for long range missions. You can't send an aircraft off on say a hundred mile flight and not give ATC the ability to monitor that flight and communicate with the pilot, not only that we need a much more reliable way to control that flight than we now have.
