Originally Posted by
ECHO24
It's probably too late now for an exempt class of model aircraft, but my thought was something the size of the E-flight
Apprentice or Fun Cub at 3 pounds would fill the need. Franklin's NPRM comment recommends 2 pounds and under,
which would be too low IMO.
Another potential idea. The proposed rule encourages early adoption. A remote ID add-on module is will not comply as
written, but nothing says they could not be used pending the final rule. It might at least demonstrate the feasability of
that option. Presumably, Google will be one of the first to have a remote ID USS up and running as well as the current
LAANC providers.
Grasping at straws.
*Franklin, you recommended a 2 pound exemption for model aircraft but 8 pounds for helicopters (rotary wing).
I don't know a lot about RC helicopters. Why the big difference in weight?
A fixed wing plane, non 3D, eats up a lot more airspace compared to a helo. Plus the helos are generally slower. Of course there are always exceptions, but I’m talking generally.
to be fair, I don’t think a single factor is the best way to do it. I think weight plays a factor ... Total Energy (TE) = Potential Energy (PE) + Kinetic Energy (KE) would be a better measure. But from a public policy standpoint, that’s too complex. So weight and type sUAS gets you most of the way there.