FlyUSA

Franklin, so it is obvious you are carrying on your personal vendetta against the AMA and by your own claims have caused much of the grief we experience now. Congratulations! The whole TajMuncie (childish) thing amply evidences this. I got it, you hate the AMA and want to see it go away. Advocating against FRIAs to accomplish this is disingenuous. But I digress.

The problem with the NPRM is not the FRIAs, it's the fact that there is no technology for direct broadcast that satisfies the LEO's needs, without creating an unfunded mandate that they acquire specialized equipment to receive the broadcast ID and/or telemetry information. Most LEO's have typical smartphone capabilities for radio (Voice/Broadband Data/WiFi/Bluetooth) plus, their emergency services radios. Unfortunately the session establishment times (pairing, associating to an SSID) make these unsuitable as the "broadcast" standard for Remote ID. Not to mention the very short ranges (300' for WiFi and 800' for Bluetooth5) that don't even cover VLOS.

So there exists no current solution for direct broadcast. ADS-B is not meant for these densities and is thus unusable for sUAS, despite the fact that aircraft to aircraft broadcast, without the latency of the Internet, is the only solution to realtime traffic information for avoidance. The punt by the FAA to Internet backhaul opened an even bigger can of worms regarding cost, coverage, privacy, how to fund the collectors (stock FAA answer, "user fees") etc. Aviation in general (all of it) will never have the relevance to force cellular carriers nor CPE (phone) makers to incorporate specialty radios or protocols to do this. So, your simple scheme of a "doohickey" for direct broadcast that is built into next gen receivers (or movable from airplane to airplane, or not) is pie in the sky. You may be an aviation safety expert, but you should talk to some wireless data experts before assuming that the NPRM as proposed is implementable.

So, we arrive at an impasse. What do you propose now?