Welcome Inspire Pilots!
Join our free DJI Inspire community today!
Sign up

Big Brother will be watching - Big Time!! (USA)

Joined
Nov 11, 2015
Messages
40
Reaction score
7
Age
77
For those of you, like me, with an interest in drones for photography … take a look at what is coming.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-28100.pdf

Unbelievable … 319 pages !!

If they’re going to require ADS-B out for drones, why not make it for any drones flying above 400 ft., or those applying for waivers to fly in controlled airspace …

Imagine what your TCAS will look like when all drones have ADS-B out ??

And what about the problem w. limited numbers of ADS-B towers and little low-altitude coverage .. thousands more towers??

After 12/31/19 you can ‘comment’ on the proposed rule here: Public Inspection: Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I urge you to pass this around, and consider commenting …
 
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
46
Reaction score
12
Age
62
I guess we are somebody now.

So much for class H airspace, This will probably make things a little safer perhaps. But our little drone world is going to change a lot it seems.
 

The Editor

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
10,490
Reaction score
5,499
For those of you, like me, with an interest in drones for photography … take a look at what is coming.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-28100.pdf

Unbelievable … 319 pages !!

If they’re going to require ADS-B out for drones, why not make it for any drones flying above 400 ft., or those applying for waivers to fly in controlled airspace …

Imagine what your TCAS will look like when all drones have ADS-B out ??

And what about the problem w. limited numbers of ADS-B towers and little low-altitude coverage .. thousands more towers??

After 12/31/19 you can ‘comment’ on the proposed rule here: Public Inspection: Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I urge you to pass this around, and consider commenting …
I have added ‘USA’ to your title since it is not pertinent to the rest of the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donnie Frank
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
469
Reaction score
109
Location
Sweden
I have added ‘USA’ to your title since it is not pertinent to the rest of the world.
We in Europe will have similar rules soon.. crazy!

 
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
180
Reaction score
13
For those of you, like me, with an interest in drones for photography … take a look at what is coming.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-28100.pdf

Unbelievable … 319 pages !!

If they’re going to require ADS-B out for drones, why not make it for any drones flying above 400 ft., or those applying for waivers to fly in controlled airspace …

Imagine what your TCAS will look like when all drones have ADS-B out ??

And what about the problem w. limited numbers of ADS-B towers and little low-altitude coverage .. thousands more towers??

After 12/31/19 you can ‘comment’ on the proposed rule here: Public Inspection: Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I urge you to pass this around, and consider commenting …
Should you decide to comment, you may want to choose your words carefully, as you may find yourself with a Target on your back.
Just some food for thought. 😉
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
32
Reaction score
1
Age
63
For those of you, like me, with an interest in drones for photography … take a look at what is coming.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-28100.pdf

Unbelievable … 319 pages !!

If they’re going to require ADS-B out for drones, why not make it for any drones flying above 400 ft., or those applying for waivers to fly in controlled airspace …

Imagine what your TCAS will look like when all drones have ADS-B out ??

And what about the problem w. limited numbers of ADS-B towers and little low-altitude coverage .. thousands more towers??

After 12/31/19 you can ‘comment’ on the proposed rule here: Public Inspection: Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I urge you to pass this around, and consider commenting …

well, it states towards the front that ADS-B Out will not be permitted, nor a transponder.

a lot to read-and this is a NPRM, not a final rule
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
3
Age
35
They are making rules for the drones that will be in the future delivering packages and such. If there are a lot of drones by random fliers, it would be more dangerous. If we are piloting a real plane, it would suck to hit one and crash. It would make sense that being able to detect drones in the air as a good thing. Unless you have a job that is near an airport and they question you to death or fine you, then it would suck to have it. There are a bunch of drones that have lost control as they are unreliable. Any drone can become unreliable for many reasons. With the latest drones it can increase confidence and you can feel as though you can bring it home no problem but the reality is, it can still lose control of itself.

Personally, none of my DJI drones have failed me. The Mavic Mini, 249g, the one where registration is not required have a lot of flyaway reports.

Way back, DIY drones and early expensive drones weren't so reliable. It was scary to fly even 200m but w/ the drones now, at least with the expensive reliable DJI drones and solid flying procedures, you can go 500m and feel as though it's 50m away.

Some people don't like showing their ID. They don't even want to give their name out at times. I'm so transparent w/ all of this that I have high-level endorsements on my driver's license such as Hazmat where you can transport nuclear weapons.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
84
Reaction score
29
Age
69
I have only read the new proposed rules to page 89. This is a huge document. I am a bit stunned to that they have included Class G in the mix. Here in MT I have a lot of flights that are nowhere near an airfield and are flown less than 150' AGL. And to add to the problem(s) with their new rules is that there are a lot of areas where internet connections are zero. Examples are on USFS and BLM lands where the mountains totally eliminate cell and internet use. There are a lot of issues with this new proposal. I hope that they will deal with reality and this is not a way to simply get rid of UASs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Black Sky
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
3
Age
35
I have only read the new proposed rules to page 89. This is a huge document. I am a bit stunned to that they have included Class G in the mix. Here in MT I have a lot of flights that are nowhere near an airfield and are flown less than 150' AGL. And to add to the problem(s) with their new rules is that there are a lot of areas where internet connections are zero. Examples are on USFS and BLM lands where the mountains totally eliminate cell and internet use. There are a lot of issues with this new proposal. I hope that they will deal with reality and this is not a way to simply get rid of UASs.
They just want to find ways on how to keep the skies safe. When BTC was on the rise they were proposing how people need to declare the assets for tax purposes or people are subject to fines. Now, they were saying how you can declare the losses. I've lost big by staying in and kept the documents but never declared it to the tax.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
3
Age
40
For those of you, like me, with an interest in drones for photography … take a look at what is coming.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-28100.pdf

Unbelievable … 319 pages !!

If they’re going to require ADS-B out for drones, why not make it for any drones flying above 400 ft., or those applying for waivers to fly in controlled airspace …

Imagine what your TCAS will look like when all drones have ADS-B out ??

And what about the problem w. limited numbers of ADS-B towers and little low-altitude coverage .. thousands more towers??

After 12/31/19 you can ‘comment’ on the proposed rule here: Public Inspection: Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I urge you to pass this around, and consider commenting …
Whilst the main document is over 300 pages, the link below summarizes it pretty well. Gives you the link to make comments to the FAA as well.

The FAA Proposed Rule On Remote Identification Will Kill Drone Flying
 
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
38
Reaction score
13
Age
65
Location
North Central Minnesota
Could the more experienced members comment on how the proposed rules would apply to the I2? As I recall, the I2 has remote ID built into it. Or am I mistaken?
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
177
Reaction score
42
Location
Denton, TX
Could the more experienced members comment on how the proposed rules would apply to the I2? As I recall, the I2 has remote ID built into it. Or am I mistaken?
This is all about remote identification. The FAA seems like they are on the verge of contracting the Remote ID USS system to the telecom giants requiring they everyone operating unmanned aircraft weighing over 0.55 pounds to transmit an ID signal via the internet or RF from the aircraft AND base station information (registration number, drone make, location, speed, altitude, etc.). A third party supplier will invent and administer the system. That same third party supply may charge for the service. Part 91 and Part 107 will be amended to bar unmanned pilots from using ADS-B unless specifically authorized by the Administrator.

There will be three use cases: under the first (best) case scenario you will be able to operate normally, BUT both your aircraft AND your base station (controller) must be transmitting a positional signal to the third party supplier via the internet. If your internet connection fails then you may also transmit the information via PUBLIC RF. You are not able to infringe on any FCC bands. The second scenario is if your connection fails completely in which case you are limited to fly within a 400 foot radius of your base station. The base station must still be transmitting location data on its position. The worst case scenario is if you do not have the ability to transmit any location data from both the aircraft AND the base station. You will be restricted to FAA approved zones that have been pre-designated (kind of like AMA sites but the FAA has to approve each site location).

That is the NPRM as I understand it simplified. How is it going to affect you? It depends entirely how they implement the change. The system has not been designed. The FAA is going to manage everything by contract versus regulating the industry. There are no price controls built into the system. It will ultimately be managed by a third party supplier under the FAA sort of the same way LAANC was handled (locally for me as a case in point, 70% of our local airports (7) are not covered by LAANC; only (4) are). The FAA is not trying to use existing systems; they are pushing to re-invent the wheel so existing tech on your aircraft is probably not going to be compatible with the new system. If you have not already commented (due by March 2nd, 2020) then you need to get familiar with the proposed rulemaking and comment. For hobbyist, I see you either upgrading your aircraft to meet the standards and then paying to fly or watching your side of unmanned aircraft flying off into the sunset.

If you don't have the link, Regulations.gov
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2019
Messages
45
Reaction score
11
Age
67
Could the more experienced members comment on how the proposed rules would apply to the I2? As I recall, the I2 has remote ID built into it. Or am I mistaken?
Yes and no, the I2 doesn’t have the ability to project it’s serial number, so under the “new” regs your drone could only be operated within a 400 foot distance, but might be condemned to fly in FAA approved fields only.

DJI has a good system but the feds want to use something much more complicated and costly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shamus
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
84
Reaction score
29
Age
69
Thanks RMartin. Good analysis. I have provided comment, BUT I did not address one important part of it: Fixed Wing. Their 400' reg is not going to work for anyone flying a fixed wing unit. There are many recreation pilots (aka RCers) who fly electric and gas fixed wing. And many without telemetry. I cannot imagine how they would be able to fly in such a small area. And of course there are the racing quads that typically do not get more than 10' off the ground. I am very suspicious of the FAA's intent. I included in my comments that maybe the solution is more LAANC areas and lower the AGL ceiling from 400' to maybe 250' for more separation from manned aircraft. Their rule prohibits manned flights below 500' anyway. My 2 bits.....
 
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
38
Reaction score
13
Age
65
Location
North Central Minnesota
This is all about remote identification. The FAA seems like they are on the verge of contracting the Remote ID USS system to the telecom giants requiring they everyone operating unmanned aircraft weighing over 0.55 pounds to transmit an ID signal via the internet or RF from the aircraft AND base station information (registration number, drone make, location, speed, altitude, etc.). A third party supplier will invent and administer the system. That same third party supply may charge for the service. Part 91 and Part 107 will be amended to bar unmanned pilots from using ADS-B unless specifically authorized by the Administrator.

There will be three use cases: under the first (best) case scenario you will be able to operate normally, BUT both your aircraft AND your base station (controller) must be transmitting a positional signal to the third party supplier via the internet. If your internet connection fails then you may also transmit the information via PUBLIC RF. You are not able to infringe on any FCC bands. The second scenario is if your connection fails completely in which case you are limited to fly within a 400 foot radius of your base station. The base station must still be transmitting location data on its position. The worst case scenario is if you do not have the ability to transmit any location data from both the aircraft AND the base station. You will be restricted to FAA approved zones that have been pre-designated (kind of like AMA sites but the FAA has to approve each site location).

That is the NPRM as I understand it simplified. How is it going to affect you? It depends entirely how they implement the change. The system has not been designed. The FAA is going to manage everything by contract versus regulating the industry. There are no price controls built into the system. It will ultimately be managed by a third party supplier under the FAA sort of the same way LAANC was handled (locally for me as a case in point, 70% of our local airports (7) are not covered by LAANC; only (4) are). The FAA is not trying to use existing systems; they are pushing to re-invent the wheel so existing tech on your aircraft is probably not going to be compatible with the new system. If you have not already commented (due by March 2nd, 2020) then you need to get familiar with the proposed rulemaking and comment. For hobbyist, I see you either upgrading your aircraft to meet the standards and then paying to fly or watching your side of unmanned aircraft flying off into the sunset.

If you don't have the link, Regulations.gov
Thanks for your concise explanation! I will comment for sure!
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2016
Messages
294
Reaction score
104
Age
55
I guess we are somebody now.

So much for class H airspace, This will probably make things a little safer perhaps. But our little drone world is going to change a lot it seems.
no such thing as class H airspace. There is no airspace that is specifically for drones nor will there ever be
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,673
Messages
199,851
Members
30,253
Latest member
atxdronedude