Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

FAA Release NEW rules for UAS Operations

Joined
Sep 28, 2020
Messages
476
Reaction score
152
Age
52
Location
Kozloduy, Bulgaria
I'm particularly amused at how they've published a rule that requires technology that doesn't currently exist to use a standard that doesn't exist.
If no rule to force the people, standards, and technology, which cover it, never be developed.
 
Joined
Nov 28, 2019
Messages
427
Reaction score
253
Age
46
Location
Austin, Texas
If no rule to force the people, standards, and technology, which cover it, never be developed.
I think the point being made is that this is an old guard solution to a new world problem. They obviously are being reactionary to what the feel is a threat. Anyone who has been part of a notably complex development program knows that there is a set of rules that must be followed especially when technology is concerned. Because of the ignorance involved in putting these "solutions" together I fear we are in line for MANY failures before anything streamlined and beneficial to all is constructed.
  1. Identify the problem.
  2. Research the problem.
  3. Generate possible solutions.
  4. Select the most likely solutions.
  5. Create a models of the solutions.
  6. Test the models.
  7. Choose the best solution.
  8. Refine & retest the final solution.
  9. Establish guidelines on the use of the solution.
  10. Communicate the solution.
Obviously we are way off course and are going to have to pay for it ourselves in time, money and heartache.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoomMeister
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
78
Reaction score
95
Location
Etex
I don't think DJI will drive the standard in the United States due to trust issues with the US govt. What ever standard is adopted will be more to align with FAA compliance and will more than likely be developed domestically or in the EU. DJI, Yuneec, and others will follow suit. DJI, Yuneec, and others are more than capable technologically but I can't see the FAA being comfortable with a standard developed in China given the current climate.
I agree with your thoughtful, and as always, logical reply. Also bear in mind that with the change in administrations, the FAA (and other federal agencies) will be in a state of flux.

It's premature to speculate about the future picture. Since the FCC must be involved with RF transmitters, it "may" be safe to say that the RID transmitters will be limited to short range. The air is already inundated with RF frequencies and signals.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
93
Reaction score
28
Age
68
It's my humble opinion that nonexistent technology and standards were mandated because the big corporations aren't going to have to use it. The aircraft they will be using are alot bigger than 55 ilds, show up on radar, and will be using ADSB-out.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
73
Reaction score
33
Age
76
I need to look into the free online current training. I let my part 107 expire because I wasn't using it and laziness. I wonder if it could renew my expired license online or if I will have to re-test first?.

For remote id, the specifics for the range of the device is spelled out, but the device has to be tested to be in compliance with an "FAA-accepted means of compliance". To meet that, presumably the module maker would have to demonstrate some sort of range test that the FAA likes. The rule also says "Standard Remote ID UA and Remote ID Broadcast Modules must be designed to maximize the range at which the broadcast can be received.". That requirement might mean proving that you are sending at the highest power allowed for unlicensed wifi signals along with a suitable antenna, or it could mean something else.

The only way that I can think of this RID rule could work the way that they describe is a WIFI module that acts as a hotspot, hopefully available in either 2.4ghz or 5.8ghz flavors so that people can avoid conflicting with their control signals (while probably affecting their video signals instead), and people will be able to connect their phone to that hotspot using some sort of drone id app and get your remote id info.
If either 2.4ghz or 5.8ghz are used, won't that just add to possible interference. One of the reasons for temporary lost of control or flyaways is wireless interference.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
74
Reaction score
26
Age
59
Location
Sandy Beaches of Florida
I still wish that the rule allowed you, as an individual, to specify your own private property as a "FAA-Recognized Identification Area" that is exempt from RID rules.

Dylan
I agree 100% and that is the way it should be, but, it would be too logical and too simple to implement in the rulebook ,wouldn't it now.... I hate reading complicated writings!
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
19,905
Messages
230,104
Members
24,069
Latest member
SkyMax