(08-12-2022, 02:57 PM)counterintelligence Wrote: [ -> ]So far there are no community based organizations recognized by the FAA. Many would be already existing AMA bingo fields.
Nor is there is any federally recognized quadrocopter parks.
And the industry standard packet protocol for use with remote ID as demanded by the FAA has even been released.
The remote ID campaign is well on its' way with the deadline for implementation of new quads and RCs with remote ID in less than a month.
It's all about a drones capability as being used f or audio, video capturing device and a
precision weapon. RC aircraft and helo's could be but unlikely. It's all bullshit.
(08-12-2022, 03:04 PM)Arkan_Ted Wrote: [ -> ] (08-12-2022, 02:57 PM)counterintelligence Wrote: [ -> ]So far there are no community based organizations recognized by the FAA. Many would be already existing AMA bingo fields.
Nor is there is any federally recognized quadrocopter parks.
And the industry standard packet protocol for use with remote ID as demanded by the FAA has even been released.
The remote ID campaign is well on its' way with the deadline for implementation of new quads and RCs with remote ID in less than a month.
It's all about a drones capability as being used f or audio, video capturing device and a precision weapon. RC aircraft and helo's could be but unlikely. It's all bullshit.
Maybe if they never come up with it, it'll just be an easy way to ground everyone? Or just an easy roller coaster to chip away at all the freedoms we have left? Obviously, if they can't make their own deadlines, people will be less likely to take them seriously.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X6txbGCu2GA
DJIs geofencing typically doesn't follow the airspace or the restrictions.
May be restricted by some guy sitting behind a desk in China that works for DJI. Or other places where they shouldn't be flying isn't restricted at all.
This is an interesting read:
https://jrupprechtlaw.com/remote-identification/
This law firm has spoken on quad related legal issues before.
Maintaining visual line of sight was brought over from the model aircraft operators. They typically did not have cameras being used. But quads do.
and so to maintain being under the visual line of sight rules they made up stories about quads peering in people's windows?
It's reasons like this that make the rules they have on the books inconsistent and make the FAA look like just somebody's yes man. Of course the FAA had some unusual bedfellows that they consulted.
There is also an interesting timeline that this article presents.
Also the court case stated that the FAA wouldn't be logging any of the flights, so that they will avoid scrutiny over 4th Amendment violations as per this recent court ruling. They'll leave that to the local, state and LEOs. But the court case was left with possible allowance for consideration into any 4th Amendment proceedings that might come about.
The FAA pulled an ex parte regulation which is mostly illegal.
Anti-Collision lights visible for three statute miles in order to fly a quad at night? Hmm...how do I go about proving whether my light system that my quad can barely accomodate or if tapped into the quads battery shortens the range of my flight? I'm still trying to figure out just how to prove whether a laser pointer advertised to be visible for three miles can be done. Now just some light that is not that big or heavy or has enough battery power to be able to be seen more than an average light. And all of this just so I can visible to other aircraft. But I thought we weren't supposed to be incroaching on the other's airspace. Just how high do they think we are going to go at night that we can't go during the day?
https://jrupprechtlaw.com/drone-anti-collision-lights
All very intriguing questions.
Just another idea brought over from the other side of things that don't necessarily carry over to the quad world and still make sense.
Oh no! There's a quad. I can see it. It's about three miles away. And it's about several hundred feet below us. Quick! Do something. Yeah, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
To be or not to be?
Do I need a part 107 or not?
Now we have to determine the intent of our flight. And we can't can't switch intent midair. Ok, so I'm going to go spy on my neighbor, looking through their windows which is most likely going to be a reflection, so that'll probably be a recreational flight unless I try to sell the videos to somebody, so that'll make it commercial. So if it falls under commercial, then I'll probably need a part 107, and the quad will have to be registered regardless of weight. But I can fly recreational under a part 107. And then they want the recreational guys to take a TRUST certificate.
Make perfect sense?
About like muddy water!
And if you're flying recreationally under a community based organization, you'll be following under their rules. And that is if the FAA ever starts recognizing any such entries.
https://www.ntd.com/drone-tech-dramatica...25645.html
An actual drone (airplane shaped and possibly more than 55 lbs making it an official aircraft) being used for search and rescue operations of power restoration instead of drive around in hazardous conditions to try and find them.