Originally Posted by
dabigboy
(1) operating at fixedflying sites or
(2) a software-based solution.
This is pretty much EXACTLY what ended up in the NPRM.
Not at all. A "software based solution" would be something like LAANC. Not a requirement to have a "beacon" permanently installed in each plane broadcasting location and altitude in real time.
You left out a few other things. The AMA did not ask for universal registration requirements. Nor did the AMA ask for a prohibition on flying "amateur built" aircraft outside of club fields. Nor did the AMA ask for all the "UAS Producer" provisions that essentially make it impossible for individuals to build Remote ID compliant models.
To me, it looks like the AMA asked for two common sense alternatives: An exemption for existing flying sites, and a simple notification of intent to use the airspace outside of flying sites. I think they were just as surprised as the rest of us by what the FAA responded with.