Boberticus
Active member
Sooo. elephant in the room, but the FAA just released the as of now unpublished proposed rules, requiring remote identification on (nearly)all UAS in the US.
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...e-identification-of-unmanned-aircraft-systems
while they sorta touch on it in several places, at the end of page 16, beginning of 17 they talk about how amateur built aircraft flown in space designated for RC will be exempt from the requirements.
c. UAS without Remote Identification Equipment
Under the proposed rule, the vast majority of UAS would be required to have remote identification capability, however as discussed in section X. A. 3, a limited number of UAS would continue to not have remote identification. The FAA envisions that upon full implementation of this rule, no unmanned aircraft weighing more than 0.55 pounds will be commercially available that is not either a standard remote identification UAS or a limited remote identification UAS. However, there will be certain UAS including amateur built aircraft and previously manufactured UAS that might not have remote identification capability. A person operating a UAS without remote identification equipment would always be required to operate within visual line of sight6 and within an FAA-recognized identification area. Under the proposed rule, an FAA-recognized identification area is a defined geographic area where UAS without remote identification can operate. An area would be eligible for establishment as an FAA-recognized identification area if it is a flying site that has been established within the programming of a community based organization recognized by the Administrator. The FAA would maintain a list of FAA-recognized identification areas at https://www.faa.gov. FAArecognized identification areas are discussed further in section XV of this preamble.
So, for the average Flitetester flying at their local hobby club field, as far as this paragraph says, for the time being things are going to be ok as long as you fly like what we would expect a hobbiest to do. Racing is in the same boat as long as they are doing it in approved areas...what about landowners flying on private property? Do you get a local club to designate your property a flying field and then register it with the FAA? seems to be a bit of gray area there.
However, the guys ripping a sick dive on a office building with a transponder-less multi-rotor might be breaking the law even if he has permission to be there, but if he has a remote identifier and permission he can fly pretty much as he was before, right?
Regulation sucks, but so does having idiots dropping wads of cash on something they dont understand, tapping cordinates on a ipad and having a computer do dumb things making us all look bad. this seems like a OK-ish compromise from the "these things all should be illegal" and the "you cant regulate me, bro"
I have two quads, a tricopter, and am working on a tailwitter Vtol, so I'm more a multi-rotor pilot than a fixed wing, and am a bit bummed that all my local parks are outa the question for the time being, but i personally am not flying to get followers, or to make money illegally without a part 107, to to get sweet footage I can set to techno, or anything commercial, Im flying to enjoy it, and these rules changes wont be affecting me quite nearly as much as I worried they might.
At the end of the day, i think im going to breath a cautious sigh of temporary relief, my fleet is legal at my local field. I hope that the tech becomes a negligible thing, like an integrated osd, a BEC on a speed controller, or a GPS+compass combo, just economies of scale and demand making things cheap and accessible.
And Im waiting with baited breath for that list of approved fields, FAA, I bet that'll get released at the exact time the rules will go in effect, and not be delayed for a couple years only to get mothballed by another directive
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...e-identification-of-unmanned-aircraft-systems
while they sorta touch on it in several places, at the end of page 16, beginning of 17 they talk about how amateur built aircraft flown in space designated for RC will be exempt from the requirements.
c. UAS without Remote Identification Equipment
Under the proposed rule, the vast majority of UAS would be required to have remote identification capability, however as discussed in section X. A. 3, a limited number of UAS would continue to not have remote identification. The FAA envisions that upon full implementation of this rule, no unmanned aircraft weighing more than 0.55 pounds will be commercially available that is not either a standard remote identification UAS or a limited remote identification UAS. However, there will be certain UAS including amateur built aircraft and previously manufactured UAS that might not have remote identification capability. A person operating a UAS without remote identification equipment would always be required to operate within visual line of sight6 and within an FAA-recognized identification area. Under the proposed rule, an FAA-recognized identification area is a defined geographic area where UAS without remote identification can operate. An area would be eligible for establishment as an FAA-recognized identification area if it is a flying site that has been established within the programming of a community based organization recognized by the Administrator. The FAA would maintain a list of FAA-recognized identification areas at https://www.faa.gov. FAArecognized identification areas are discussed further in section XV of this preamble.
So, for the average Flitetester flying at their local hobby club field, as far as this paragraph says, for the time being things are going to be ok as long as you fly like what we would expect a hobbiest to do. Racing is in the same boat as long as they are doing it in approved areas...what about landowners flying on private property? Do you get a local club to designate your property a flying field and then register it with the FAA? seems to be a bit of gray area there.
However, the guys ripping a sick dive on a office building with a transponder-less multi-rotor might be breaking the law even if he has permission to be there, but if he has a remote identifier and permission he can fly pretty much as he was before, right?
Regulation sucks, but so does having idiots dropping wads of cash on something they dont understand, tapping cordinates on a ipad and having a computer do dumb things making us all look bad. this seems like a OK-ish compromise from the "these things all should be illegal" and the "you cant regulate me, bro"
I have two quads, a tricopter, and am working on a tailwitter Vtol, so I'm more a multi-rotor pilot than a fixed wing, and am a bit bummed that all my local parks are outa the question for the time being, but i personally am not flying to get followers, or to make money illegally without a part 107, to to get sweet footage I can set to techno, or anything commercial, Im flying to enjoy it, and these rules changes wont be affecting me quite nearly as much as I worried they might.
At the end of the day, i think im going to breath a cautious sigh of temporary relief, my fleet is legal at my local field. I hope that the tech becomes a negligible thing, like an integrated osd, a BEC on a speed controller, or a GPS+compass combo, just economies of scale and demand making things cheap and accessible.
And Im waiting with baited breath for that list of approved fields, FAA, I bet that'll get released at the exact time the rules will go in effect, and not be delayed for a couple years only to get mothballed by another directive