All,

We had an extended telecon with AMA HQ yesterday where we discussed this *proposed* rule.

The AMA is pushing for AMA fields (existing AND new) to be exempted from the RID requirement AND AMA sanctioned events to be exempted as well - in perpetuity.

The recreational flyer (AMA or non-AMA) flying at a non-exempted location is more problematic. In that case, the AMA is pushing for an extended operating area (larger than the proposed 400' "bubble") with (perhaps) notification via an app or such.

The AMA believes, and I do as well, that these provisions will ultimately adopted in the final rule AS LONG AS the FAA gets enough comments to that effect.

Right now, we NEED everyone to send in comments on the NPRM. See https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/am...uas-remote-id/ for a template to send in a comment. It was emphasized that this is a *numbers* game, so even if you just send in the template unchanged, it will count - much more so than a comment that just says "this rule is stupid."

The previous campaign to send letters to Congress on the altitude limitations has taken hold and the FAA is working with the AMA to get higher altitudes than 400' in controlled airspace and higher than 700' or 1200' in uncontrolled airspace. This shows that our comments and input into the process DO COUNT, so PLEASE comment on the NPRM for Remote ID.

Bob Klenke
JPO President