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.
Identify the problem.
Research the problem.
Generate possible solutions.
Select the most likely solutions.
Create a models of the solutions.
Test the models.
Choose the best solution.
Refine & retest the final solution.
Establish guidelines on the use of the solution.
Communicate the solution.
Obviously we are way off course and are going to have to pay for it ourselves in time, money and heartache.
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.
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.
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.