Open letter to AMA leadership concerning FAA’s NPRM for Remote ID for Drones

[Jagerbomb52]

A very good read. Take the time to read it.

https://ww.dronedj.com/2020/01/31/o...qZm_LwskAray5ZNSFHfkwqsalRu601VrfW2BSvxSuLGY#

 

[PatR]

Nice letter but it fails to chastise the AMA to the extent deserved.

Another ex long time AMA member.

 

[twoheadlines]

Never have been an AMA member; for fairly obvious reasons. But the underlying theme of the open letter and its importance for putting a "strong", "cohesive" argument in front of the FAA potentially has implications for model A/C enthusiasts and UAS operators well outside the FAAs jurisdiction. Whatever the final RID Rule looks like, there will be many other civil aviation authorities around the world who will almost certainly look to that US RID Rule as a model for their own countries particular version. Sound well thought through arguments, that are clearly and concisely written, will always gain the credible attention of lawmakers, ahead of ill-conceived, poorly written BS.
A good and interesting read, well worth taking on board, regardless of where in the world you might enjoy your hobby or pursue a UAS business.

 

[dylanfm]

For people in the USA:

FYI, today is the last day to submit a comment on the FAA's proposed UAS Remote ID rule. This rule would make most of the equipment we already own (legally) useless, drive up costs to replace and opperate equipment that is compliant, essentially end the hobby of DIY building of RC "aircraft" of all types, and restrict where you can fly (you need to be able to get internet access).

I don't know if it makes a difference, but if you haven't already submitted a comment you might want to. Regulations.gov

 

[PatR]

Thanks for your concern, but like you I feel it won’t do much good. The number of drone users that have responded to the FAA has been very small compared to the number flying them. For some reason the few with anything to say spent all their time on internet forums complaining amongst themselves instead of responding directly to the FAA.

But RC will go on, but vastly different from what it has been up to now. The price to participate will increase dramatically, to a point only the well heeled will be able to play. Locations to fly will be slowly limited or eliminated, and permission to fly will eventually be required. It’s the price to be paid for apathy.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

51,006
Comments Received

A lot more comments then I thought there would be. Good to see some people got of the couch and made their views known.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

Hopefully there were not very many from GA pilots, extolling the virtues of eliminating unmanned operations altogether.

 

[PatR]

Actually, GA came in largely in opposition to the NPRM, especially those members of the EAA as they recognized that was being done to us could quickly extend to them. AOPA was a little less in opposition as they believe that remote ID is necessary, but not for everyone. They appear to see it more applicable for BLOS ops, someplace where I agree.

When we consider those two groups represent a couple hundred thousand people they provided a lot of support in our favor.

 

[Mike Irish]

Thanks for your concern, but like you I feel it won’t do much good. The number of drone users that have responded to the FAA has been very small compared to the number flying them. For some reason the few with anything to say spent all their time on internet forums complaining amongst themselves instead of responding directly to the FAA.

But RC will go on, but vastly different from what it has been up to now. The price to participate will increase dramatically, to a point only the well heeled will be able to play. Locations to fly will be slowly limited or eliminated, and permission to fly will eventually be required. It’s the price to be paid for apathy.

As I see it we as drone pilots and the RC model aircraft /helicopter pilots ie AMA have made it so hard to sort out the problem because they won't band together as one group. Always remember the old saying ( Divide and conker)
We here in Ireland and indeed in Europe have followed this same path to destruction. I was a member of the MACI for years before I went back to photography. When I went to rejoin I was told that I couldn't fly my drone on the site . This made me mad with anger as I knew most of the lads in the local club. I didn't even get a chance to tell them that I had a modal aircraft almost ready to fly, I wouldn't even bother telling them new. This is the kind of resentment they have against drone. They believe that drones are the cause of all their problems with the IAA/FAA/CAA etc. They don't even realise that the IAA want all the airspace for the likes of Amazon/UPS/ USPS etc.
Mike

 

[PatR]

The “problem” is divided into two parts. The beginning of the problem initiated with the introduction of FPV, and the later addition of autopilots that permitted pretty much anyone having functioning eyes snd fingers to fly. Those two features permitted the unthinking to perform acts with the potential to harm hundreds of people at a time while incurring $millions in property damage. Someone once said, I think Galileo, something along the line of the quantity of those that are stupid is vast. Unfortunately, many of them demonstrated their intelligence.

The second part of the problem manifested when big business became cognizant of what could be obtained once airframe designs, autopilots, and manipulating government could achieve. All they needed to do was wait for product maturity and for us to convict ourselves with a little help from a willing media seeking to sensationalize anything.

For us it was over after the NRO employee, a person devoted to national security, alleged to be intoxicated, crashed a Phantom on the White House lawn. How someone that likely had a TS clearance was unaware of the law defies reason. That initiated our media frenzy. Accident, or something else?