Need Help Any R/C Molders or anyone that wants to help!

https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/a...fgym40A5PB1o7jt9-01MX7prHLHe5ZnBGEkQ3h20biUUY


Summary of FAA’s Proposal for Remote Identification of UAS


Summary of FAA’s Proposal for Remote Identification of UAS

The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) released on December 26, 2019 suggests three options for compliance with remote identification. The full 319-page rule can be downloaded and read here.

1. Standard Remote ID: This is how many UAS that are not model aircraft would comply with remote ID. The proposed requirement is for UAS to broadcast identification and location information directly from the aircraft and simultaneously transmit that same information to a Remote ID UAS service provider through an internet connection. This would be done through equipage on the UAS.
2. Limited Remote ID: This is another option to comply with remote ID for UAS flying no more than 400 feet from the control station and within visual line of sight. The proposed requirement is for UAS to transmit information through the internet only, with no broadcast requirements. This would be done through equipage on the UAS.
3. FAA-Recognized Identification Areas: This is how many traditional model aircraft will comply with remote ID. This does not require any equipage on the model aircraft. Under the proposal, models (and other UAS manufactured before the compliance date) would be permitted to fly at certain specific geographic areas established under this rule specifically to accommodate them. These locations would need to be submitted to the FAA for approval and renewed every four years.

In addition, to these three remote ID compliance options, the FAA has proposed to revise the existing UAS registration requirements to require all owners of unmanned aircraft to register each unmanned aircraft individually. Furthermore, the owners of standard or limited remote identification unmanned aircraft would have to provide the serial number of all unmanned aircraft registered. The serial number would establish the unique identity of the unmanned aircraft.

https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2020/01/02/summaryremoteidproposal/

 

No, they are not dangerous the hobby for R/C aircraft has been around for 80 years, this is a get infringement of millions of people who love the hobby. This law that is being proposed by the FAA would destroy countless businesses and industries. If we the hobby community losses you will see more drones flying over your head as the big business what the air space for themselves.

 

January 16, 2020 - EAA is very concerned that the FAA’s proposed rule on Remote Identification (RID) of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) could have a severe detrimental impact on traditional model aviation, and is preparing a full package of comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

The rule would require most UAS, no matter whether they are “drones” or traditional model aircraft, to carry equipment that identifies the device and broadcasts its location. Additionally, many would be required to be equipped with “geofencing” systems that autonomously contain the craft within a defined altitude and lateral boundary.

While EAA is primarily an organization that fosters and supports passion for manned flight, we recognize the modeling community as an important pathway into aviation. In fact, last year we launched the Young Eagles Build and Fly Program, a chapter activity to guide youth in building their own electric RC model, which they can then fly with a local Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) club. There are many legitimate safety concerns surrounding drones, primarily those that are airborne camera platforms capable of flying beyond visual line-of-sight with little or no training by the operator, but traditional modeling has been operating trouble-free for nearly the entire history of manned flight. Despite this NPRM not directly impacting the manned flying community, we are concerned that regulatory overreach in the modeling world could easily set a precedent for future action against general aviation, such as an equipment mandate for the benefit of commercial UAS integration into the airspace.

EAA’s first action on this rule was to request a comment period extension from 60 to 120 days to allow time for the public to adequately evaluate this complex and sweeping proposal. Since then we have been carefully reading through the NPRM and working with industry partners in the modeling community. So far, these are our top concerns:

read more