ECHO24

For Immediate Release
May 5, 2020
Contact: [email protected]
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today announced
the eight companies that will assist the Federal government in establishing requirements for future suppliers of
Remote Identification (Remote ID). Remote ID will enable Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), commonly called
drones, to provide identification and location information while operating in the nation’s airspace.

The FAA selected the following companies to develop technology requirements for future Remote ID UAS Service
Suppliers (USS): Airbus, AirMap, Amazon, Intel, One Sky, Skyward, T-Mobile, and Wing. These companies were
selected through a Request for Information process in December 2018.

Etc., etc.

I think all 8 companies already have their own in-house USS, which will also to be part of the system..

franklin_m

It's abundantly clear that this is moving forward, and all the form letters (or minor variations of form letters) is not going to make a difference. Sad given that AMA had an opportunity to be in on the ground floor years ago, but it would have required some level of compromise. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed, and once again the AMA is wondering what hit them. RemoteID is coming for everything, including recreational as FRIA go away over time - not a matter of if, just when.

jcmors

So, to me, this indicates that the FAA never intended to follow the law and the proper process in opening the NPRM for public comment. They had apparently decided on remote ID to the point of selecting companies to develop Remote ID a full YEAR before the NPRM was even opened for comment. I would think that this would be proof that could be used to call the FAA on their lack of following proper process.

init4fun

My Friend , while I believe you to be correct in principle , in reality the cynical side of me is left believing this would end up as a textbook case of "Ya can't fight city hall" .

jcmors

I hate to admit it my friend, but I have a feeling you are absolutely correct.

franklin_m

With DHS, DOD, and state & local LE calling for RemoteID, the FAA has a big mandate.

ECHO24

I don't know where you got that idea. Remote ID is the law and has been planned for drones from day one.
The NPRM just lays out the the details of how the FAA intends to carry it out.

More than a few people warned that bringing drones into the model aircraft world would have a bad ending.

ECHO24

FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016,

"SEC. 2202. IDENTIFICATION STANDARDS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation,
the President of RTCA, Inc., and the Director of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, shall convene industry
stakeholders to facilitate the development of consensus standards
for remotely identifying operators and owners of unmanned aircraft
systems and associated unmanned aircraft.

jcmors

Point well taken. You are correct sir.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I can't help but wonder when those that have kept saying, "Just you wait and see, the AMA has our back and is involved in the process" and "Nothing has changed, we can still operate as we always have" and "it's just a 5$ fee and register with the FAA, no big deal" and, "it's just a test, don't worry about it" will finally step up and admit that the AMA has completely failed to advocate for its membership.

Astro

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

apparently, they have been a failure at advocating for anything. members or not, even for their own survival.

049flyer

My Feedback: (18)

What do we expect?

Muncie is a place in the middle of no where, far removed from accountability, and we have a membership where most have no interest in modeling beyond being able to fly “ready built” model planes. Do you think the guy that doesn’t have time to build, compete, attend club meetings or fiddle with model engines is going to be interested in anything the AMA does? I would venture that 20% of those that join drop out within 5 years, moving on to other pursuits, it’s not a long time endeavor for many people these days. Easy come easy go for most.

Sure, some of us are longtime members, enthusiasts, competitors, builders, tinkerers, and lovers of the hobby. But our numbers are few, we are a dying breed, there just aren’t enough of us to change the course of events. We are bailing out the Titanic with buckets.

Seems to me the AMA structure is all wrong, we should have been installing at the top levels, people who are especially effective at advocating our position, REGARDLESS of their interest in modeling. Instead we hire modelers first and hope they are good at managing a special interest organization.

No wonder we are here in this place now, I’m surprised it took so long. It’s obvious that the AMA is supremely impotent and now find ourselves at the mercy of the FAA.

Lucky for me I still enjoy control line flying, because there may not be much more of the hobby left after the AMA is done protecting it.

ECHO24

In the 2012 AMA blog Jester posted where AMA "asserted its position" with the FAA, there is an exchange
in the comments between an FPVer and Hanson.

The FPVer thought AMA had turned their back on FPV. Hanson assured him AMA was working on it and
agreed that FPV was the future of the hobby, but pointed out the problem with flight beyond VLOS:

"In order to qualify for the exemption the aircraft must meet the definition of a model aircraft as defined in the
law in that, the aircraft must be ...“flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft”.

Then contradicted himself, "Currently there is no specific legal restriction to flying FPV beyond VLOS ..."

And concludes, "PL 112-95 limits these operations [FPV] to within visual line of sight".

After that contraditory mess AMA sued the FAA over FPV, when the FAA said no. That kind of double-think takes
a toll on objective reality. You can see it in forced membership. If 336 actually required joining AMA it wouldn't
take 3 sentences to "prove" it.

init4fun

I still have one last control line plane in my collection , a Flite Streak with an Enya .19 (yes it does have a muffler ) and if it comes to that I'll make a decal for it that says ;

"Flown on strings , cause the FAA clipped our wings"

jcmors

Pressing the imaginary "like" button again... ===> Like

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

https://www.modelaircraft.org/podcast

Episode 34

jcmors

Thank you for sharing this!

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Out flying and enjoying our hobby the same way we did 10 years ago.

ECHO24

I can't get it to load at the moment. What's the gist of it?

ECHO24

Thanks BarracudaHockey but I was finally able to get the podcast.

ECHO24

From the exclamation point I expected some good news. The rumor about FAA going through comments
faster with people working from home means the stay of execution for non-AMA flyers will be shorter.

Hydro Junkie

Sounds like the same old thing to me, just a verbal format. I've come to not believe anything the AMA puts out until it's verified by other "official" sources

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Ahhh yes, just like flying in the waning days of summer.....
Take advantage of this great weather while you can!

Astro

jcmors

Apologies ECHO, I didn't mean to get your hopes up. I rarely listen to the podcasts and I was merely expressing my appreciation for Andy sharing these details here. Certainly the fact that the FAA may be going through the comments faster than expected isn't a good thing. The fact that they are reading through them at all is, to me, in my opinion, hard to believe but I could be wrong, in fact I hope I am wrong. It was nice to see that at least the AMA was addressing the FAA announcement in some form and sharing this with us.

Hydro Junkie

Do you mean the fact that we are supposed to be in the 70s today and 80s for the rest of the weekend or are you hypothetically referring to Speed's post?