Remote ID Is Affecting Drone Pilots
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июл 2023
- The FAA will be introducing Remote ID in September 2023 and right now the outlook for some drone pilots right now is not good.
FPV Freedom Coalition: fpvfc.org/
Discord: / discord
A big thanks to the following people for drone footage:
Brutus: @Secret1one2
Flying Baguette:@flyingbaguettefpv
Botgrinders Video: • You can say no to remo...
_______________________________________________
Buy me a coffee ☕ www.buymeacoffee.com/Chinaexp...
Product Links: 💸
Cheapest lipo charger I recommend (very basic): amzn.to/3NsS8Vu
The lipo charger I use: amzn.to/435gwSV
My controller of choice: amzn.to/3Nkfs7S
My recommended tools: amzn.to/3PAaQNE
_______________________________________________
Footage used under Creative Commons licence:
@NLDroneshot
@BavarianMultiRotor
@DansTubeTV 
Развлечения
FRIA Fields have been approved, not a lot, but one of our 2 local clubs has been approved.
That's good to know. I've heard some rumours but the FAA haven't officially posted and confirmed anything to the general public. I will pin this comment.
You don't get the point huh? who cares if your field got approved? A lot of other didn't. What are you trying to say? The point of the video is that RID is stupid. Guns are legal in the US, but a drones / UAV has to have so many fucking regulation. Like he said how many people died or got injured with a drone or UAV? 0. Yet guns kill so many people every day. "oh but, my field is approved."
Remote ID violates real property rights, as it, unconstitutionally appropriates the use of private land, by denying the landowner, the full enjoyment and exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere of their land. “We have said that the airspace is a public highway. Yet it is obvious that, if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. . . . . The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as the can occupy or use in connection with the land.” United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256 (1946) Citizen tracking, surveillance, control, and denying private property rights, without due process of law, are all unconstitutional! "When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.
@@ghettogardens1 I know many law suits have been filled about many things since the FAA stepped in heavy 3 years ago. I think the right group and lots of legal fees money could make a good stand but frankly the judicial tends to lean towards 3 letter agencies that Scream " the sky is falling".
@@CentralPaRcFlyingDays The RDQ case failed because their argument was premature, in that, there is no issue in controversy at this time, i.e., nobody has been damaged by the rule yet. The fun starts after September 16, 2023, when the doo doo finally hits the fan.
I’m definitely one drone pilot it WON’T affect.
FPV?
@@legorj35 I fly FPV on distance flights, using my tablet screen (not goggles) for FPV. Regardless, RID is still a non-event for me. How I fly after 9/16 will be same as how I fly now.
Eventually the legal requirements will be so restrictive. That pilots will either have to give it up or fly illegally . Restrictions are being put into place quickly while drone pilots are in the minority of the population. And therefore easier to suppress,while most of the public are misinformed regarding risks and drone pilots are seen as pursuing a potential ilegal activity.
@@andrewtitcombe8378 I can only speak for myself in saying I’m completely at ease with the prospect of flying illegally. In fact, weather permitting, 16-September will be my initial illegal flights.
As USA FPV, I along with others are giving FAA the middle finger. No compliance
I bought a drone that was built 3 months ago. When I went to register it, it had no remote ID serial number. Oh well I'm just a consumer buying products legally sold on Amazon lol.
Wow that really sucks. Ready built drone manufacturers should already be complying.
Fantastic work! Truly one of your best! Funny, great production values, terrific gags and punch lines, informative, and most importantly, short, sweet and to the point!
As a European, it's things like these that make America (or at least parts of it, by which I mean organisations or governments) look so incredibly dumb.
Great video, keep it up.
It will be implimented in europe in about two years. so dont be to happy.
Well done video. 💯😉👍👍
Thanks for your input
Thank you for sharing (fpv racing pilot)
thanks
I find the best way to deal with rules like these is to ignore them 😅
I've said it before, attach the goddamned things to busses and taxis that frequent the airport and the FAA will be rethinking it soon enough.
FAA: Use remote id
Me: no
Seriously, people? what are they going to do?
Fuck all, thats what.
Also, the FAA regulations require a co-located spotter in order to fly FPV. So, there should be at least one other person with the pilot. So, the bad guys are just sitting around waiting for a drone so they can to "attempt" to steal it. Well, some pilots and their spotter just might be packing heat. So, this might be more of a hypothetical scenario.
Will you be complying with Remote ID? why/why not?
no, because I am not in USA.
I fly everything RC line of site so good luck with Remote ID no cameras on my planes no ID
250 grams and below folks dont let them fool you just fly under that and tyhey can pound sand
Not even if there is a cash prize for the race. 107 applies "In furtherance of a business" It's intentionally vague terminology.
In the United States, no one has a right, especially a government agency, whether in public or not, to force a citizen to wave their constitutionally protected rights (4th, 5th, 6th Amendments) and submit to, without probable cause and/ or a 4th Amendment warrant, government tracking, surveillance, and control of a citizens private movements while enjoying a hobby, all while collecting and recording evidence that can, and will be used against a citizen in any FAA prosecution against them. I’m sorry, but It doesn’t get more unconstitutional than that!
given people can spoof SIMs and steal phones, what stops someone from spoofing a remote ID code and doing actual illegal stuff with a drone? Also the issue comes is people probably will not upgrade their drone if the only way to comply is full hardware upgrade of the entire unit. Sure replacement of systems requirement works on actual manned aircraft, but drones are a consumer good. In the eyes of the average person who bought one off Amazon they bought a flying camera, to them its a piece of electronics no different than their iPad. Someone is not going to scrap that until it stops working.
Reminds me of the fights between the FCC and people using older wireless microphone systems(commonly non profit groups who do small events and smaller churches), Trying to get people to stop using devices on frequencies they have since sold to the cellphone companies. Its very hard to make people replace something that works, Especially people without the budget to just fully replace whole systems when rules change.
Indoor races will not require RiD
Correct, the FAA doesn't control airspace inside buildings. Not yet anyway.
Flying within Visual Line of Sight for ALL UAS (drones) is not new, it has been in the FAA regulations since 2016 (?). Long Range flights have pretty much always been a violation of FAA regulations.
My reason for mentioning that is the requirement for visual line of sight seems to be missing from the wording of the regulations for pre-built drones with remote ID. I don't know if that means that with Remote ID, camera drones will be able to fly BVLOS or it's just an oversight by the FAA in the wording.
@@ChinaExpatsRC Here is the Recreational Exemption. Still, factory drones are NOT exempt:
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim
@@ChinaExpatsRC So, maybe read the FAA regulations and show me where it says that pre-built drones are allowed to fly beyond Visual Line of Sight.
@@buddyadkins2432 I didn't say it did. I said the wording is so bad it might imply you can or it might just be they wrote the infographic incorrectly.
The line "Limited to visual line of sight operations" is missing from the infographic for pre-built drones, while on the infographic for diy drones it is written. www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id
@@ChinaExpatsRC That is because it is covered elsewhere in the more general provisions that apply to ALL UAS (drones).
If it very clear if one starts at the beginning and reads ALL of the drone regulations. Except for the Recreational Exemption, most other flights actually fall into the Part 107 activity classification which the FAA interprets quite liberally. It just is what it is. Now we each just need to see where we fit into the grander scheme of things.
quite stupid in my opinion, don't live in usa but still.
FUD.
Pretty much going to follow the rules. All my drones are DJI and for the exception of the Mini 2 the rest of my drones are already compliant. They sure work hard so many of us that have FPV to fly our drones. Not like everyone has a VO in their pockets so they can put on goggles and fly their drones.
Seems if everyone has to comply regardless of weight of drones, or Planes, helicopters Balloons and whatever else goes into the air is going to be required to have remote ID. Yes it sucks and we need to fight it. I don't see why it has to be only drones for the most part that have to be RID compliant. FAA makes it like only drones can all out of the sky and cause some sort of accident and is the real danger.
I find it complete bullshit that those of us that have a 107 and are complaint to the law and have proven our knowledge of the sky regarding safety and were the ones that have to pay the most. Why do professional drone pilots that are doing jobs have to deal with the most regulations, while little "Timmy" just got a toy drone for Christmas and know nothing about drones, has little to nothing regarding remote ID?
Yes, any UAV will have to comply if it's over 250G, be it drone, helicopter, fixed wing, whatever. And if it's operated commercially it doesn't matter the weight all must comply.
@@ChinaExpatsRC even as a 107 they pretty much look at us as owning all drones for jobs.
About being robbed. Really? Check out your local pawn shop and see if they buy "drones" and what they are willing to pay for them. Pennies on the dollar. Plus, if it is DJI, it has to be unlocked if anyone but the owner tries to operate it. Plus, an FPV pilot always has a spotter (or better have, I do) per the LAW, so that is 2 people the thug has to deal with. And, here both of the FPV crew might be "packing". Now, a thug has to locate the pilot, determine how much he can get (he doesn't want the gear, he want to convert it to money; ie: pawn shop) and then confront two people. His reward is likely higher to rob someone else. I fly out in the open, in public, for anyone to see. Yeah, no one has attacked me. This argument is just something that sounds like it should make a difference. It doesn't. Also, RDQ lost their lawsuit and it was based on pilot security. Yeah, that didn't fly.
Seriously though Remote ID as it is, is absolutely useless for the many reasons people on youtube have already shown. The idea is sound, but in practice is asinine. Imagine trying to take someone to court and say you have their DNA as proof, BUT that DNA matched 5,000,000 other people.... how well would that work out?
It doesn't even stop anyone flying dangerously if they want to either.
I completely disagree! RID is completely useful. Well, for Karen's!