Guys, heads up this pop up in my mailbox today from FAA on NPRM require SUAS identification.

https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...rcraft-systems


Remote ID Banner
Twitter ButtonFacebook Button
We want YOU to read and comment on the Remote ID Proposal
Get ready for the next exciting step in safe drone integration! The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued the proposed rule for remote identification of drones.

With nearly 1.5 million drones and 155,000 remote pilots registered with the FAA, the ability to provide identification and location is essential to keeping drones safely separated from other aircraft operating in our airspace.

We encourage drone enthusiasts, and anyone interested in aviation safety, to read our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking now in the Federal Register. In the next few days, a 60-day comment period will open to receive your feedback which can help us develop a final rule that enhances safety and security in our nation’s skies

Comments open 12/31/19. 60-day period.

AMA response here:

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...e-id-proposal/

But please take the time to read this. Also, understand that this applies to us, no question about that at all.

It requires registration of each and every aircraft over 250 grams.
Limits flying sUAS without onboard RID equipment to CBO flying sites recognized and approved by the FAA. This is a different from the current "blue dot" stuff.
Only the CBO can request approval of a flying site.

Some not so bad and a whole lot of ugly in this. Read it over and be ready starting 12/31 to bury the FAA in comments.

Read pages 8&9 of the FAA page

I got the email but it didn't make total sense... so what now you have to register each of your aircraft not just pay for one membership for all of your stuff?
then you have to have some type of electronic ID on the aircraft? that they can track?
this is if you want to fly anything thats not LOS flying? so all the regular LOS guys are fine just the guys with Long range aircraft the ones have to do this?


i have some FPV gear i use but i can't get much distance so someone standing next to me can always see it LOS.

except for my DJI spark.. I guess with DJI they will make them update the software so if your not registered you cant fly




More CRAP if you ask me its still not going to help anything

I know this is all very frustrating and I think its pretty sad. Lets all keep our comments here and to the entities we are dealing with as civil and responsible as possible. Its to our advantage...

And PLEASE read the NPRM. It is long but critical to know what it says. Don't rely on what your buddy told you he thinks he read on the Internet.

Here is the Executive Summary from the full NPRM

Removed

Originally Posted by Judge

Comments open 12/31/19. 60-day period.

AMA response here:

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...e-id-proposal/

But please take the time to read this. Also, understand that this applies to us, no question about that at all.

It requires registration of each and every aircraft over 250 grams.
Limits flying sUAS without onboard RID equipment to CBO flying sites recognized and approved by the FAA. This is a different from the current "blue dot" stuff.
Only the CBO can request approval of a flying site.

Some not so bad and a whole lot of ugly in this. Read it over and be ready starting 12/31 to bury the FAA in comments.

So we still have a hobby but what is are the potential losses?

Can new flying sites be added 5 years down the road with this?

What happens with IMAC, pattern, soaring, etc.?

I'm going to download and read it but anyone can get lost in the details. I know the AMA is fighting for us and I will not only be making comments to the FAA but also my representative and senate members.

It's a shame we are having to deal with this but it seems like the noose is slowly getting tighter and tighter on the hobby. My $0.02.

Originally Posted by ben_beyer

So we still have a hobby but what is are the potential losses?

Can new flying sites be added 5 years down the road with this?

What happens with IMAC, pattern, soaring, etc.?

I'm going to download and read it but anyone can get lost in the details. I know the AMA is fighting for us and I will not only be making comments to the FAA but also my representative and senate members.

It's a shame we are having to deal with this but it seems like the noose is slowly getting tighter and tighter on the hobby. My $0.02.

Page 224 of the full doc. It says that applications for all fixed sites must be within 12 months of final rule. Approvals for 4 years and renewable, but it states no new sites after the initial approvals.

UGH. Loose your club field and you can’t get a new one

Seems like this approach is just going in as a concession to a transition time and they expect in a decade or so will no longer be amateur built nonID drones. Which means that if IMAC, jets and scale modeling still exist at minimum our receivers will be remoteID compliant and the 400 ft altitude limit may be hard enforced by software.

Originally Posted by jharkin

Page 224 of the full doc. It says that applications for all fixed sites must be within 12 months of final rule. Approvals for 4 years and renewable, but it states no new sites after the initial approvals.

UGH. Loose your club field and you can’t get a new one

Seems like this approach is just going in as a concession to a transition time and they expect in a decade or so will no longer be amateur built nonID drones. Which means that if IMAC, jets and scale modeling still exist at minimum our receivers will be remoteID compliant and the 400 ft altitude limit may be hard enforced by software.

As much as I don't like what I am seeing here, I am hopeful that in 4 years that advances in technology and manufacturing will enable devices so small that their addition to our planes will be insignificant as to weight and space required so that we can meet the requirements at new fields.

Originally Posted by MarksHangar

As much as I don't like what I am seeing here, I am hopeful that in 4 years that advances in technology and manufacturing will enable devices so small that their addition to our planes will be insignificant as to weight and space required so that we can meet the requirements at new fields.

But what about the serial number of each aircraft and all your personal information being required to be transmitted? Also, no new fields, the FAA even states that they foresee no new fields within a very short time. And being this is the gov I can see within a year or so the FAA having the need for a flight plan of some sort.
I see a lot of people leaving the hobby as soon as this is law if not before then. Guess what this will do to local clubs and fields. And as these fields exit none will be allowed to replace them.

Face it people, the FAA is willingly, methodically, systematically removing us from the airspace.
And being as everyone on every forum is like the political arena in that they can only see their idea or opinion we will never be able to come together and fight this. The only way we would stand a chance would be if thousands of us banded together for a common cause and took ourselves with an airplane to Washington and protested the law. Other minority groups do it quite often and that is the only way for a minority to overcome the systems repression.

Enjoy the next 5 years or so. Because it is going to be a different world once this thing is in full effect. Despite AMA declaring this a big win, etc., etc., it looks to me as another means to drive legacy model airplane hobby out of existence. It is clear to me that AMA has had relatively little impact on how this new rule was crafted.

I am also not looking forward to the chaos that will ensue with AMA being responsible for completing and submitting over 2,500 applications for flying sites to be recognized as a FRIA.

Originally Posted by jharkin

Page 224 of the full doc. It says that applications for all fixed sites must be within 12 months of final rule. Approvals for 4 years and renewable, but it states no new sites after the initial approvals.

UGH. Loose your club field and you can’t get a new one

Seems like this approach is just going in as a concession to a transition time and they expect in a decade or so will no longer be amateur built nonID drones. Which means that if IMAC, jets and scale modeling still exist at minimum our receivers will be remoteID compliant and the 400 ft altitude limit may be hard enforced by software.

I guess I should keep flying my 14SG for a few more years then until everything needs to be remote ID.

Originally Posted by Judge

Enjoy the next 5 years or so. Because it is going to be a different world once this thing is in full effect. Despite AMA declaring this a big win, etc., etc., it looks to me as another means to drive legacy model airplane hobby out of existence. It is clear to me that AMA has had relatively little impact on how this new rule was crafted.

I am also not looking forward to the chaos that will ensue with AMA being responsible for completing and submitting over 2,500 applications for flying sites to be recognized as a FRIA.

Thanks for your insight Judge. I have always been interested in your responses because they seem appropriately optomistic and level headed.

I too am afraid at what the future holds. My wife and I had our first child a little over 2 years ago and he loves going to the flying field with me for club meetings and events. If he hears a full scale plane, he will try to find it in the sky so I can see he has the same general interest in aviation. I bought a couple kits over the past few years so that I could also introduce him to building. But I worry that he will not be able to enjoy the hobby as I have due to restrictions from the FAA.

I see it as good news for "traditional" flying sites, as you wont need to have any sort of reporting device (yet). It just depends on how tough it will be to get your site recognized. Obviously the FAA holds all the cards. I also wonder how it will affect the foamy I fly in my front yard. I can build and fly it in hours with standard radio gear, vs a drone that needs software in order to fly. The regs will be aimed and getting those (drones) under control first, as they can force manufacturer compliance. I wonder how they will force compliance among those of us who build and use more traditional radio guidance. I am sure we will see soon enough.