I am confused. For me, the link posted at the top points to the DJI home page. I tried two different browsers to no avail. Is this only happening to me?

If I copy and paste the link's text to the browser window, it works, but not by clicking on the link.

GaryDoug Posted at 1-8 14:33
I am confused. For me, the link posted at the top points to the DJI home page. I tried two different browsers to no avail. Is this only happening to me?

If I copy and paste the link's text to the browser window, it works, but not by clicking on the link.

I have no idea why it’s doing that, it does it to me too. May just have to copy and paste it.

Any DJI mod or admin know why it’s doing that?

JodyB Posted at 1-8 14:38
I have no idea why it’s doing that, it does it to me too. May just have to copy and paste it.

Any DJI mod or admin know why it’s doing that?

Fine for me ...

JodyB Posted at 1-8 14:38
I have no idea why it’s doing that, it does it to me too. May just have to copy and paste it.

Any DJI mod or admin know why it’s doing that?

For some reason, the link shows it to be:  "https://forum.dji.com/FAA%20REgs%20Comments"

Below is the link as seen at top, embedded under normal namming.


Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

I fixed the original link. Sorry about that guys!!

Just Bill Posted at 1-6 09:36
Just a thought.  I was talking to a friend about this that fly's a different brand drone.  His isn't Geo Fenced like dji.  He asked me, so your upset that your own country might pass rules you don't like but are perfectly happy to let a company in a another country (I won't address all that involves) decide where you can fly your drone?  I'm fairly new to drones but in reading all the hoops folks have to jump through to fly in a Blue Zone, that don't seem to work all the time, I kind of see his point.

I really enjoy flying the Mini but I am glad I am not too invested in the brand to maybe explore another.  I would add to the contacting the FAA maybe we should be contacting DJI for some change also.

While I agree with you, I think that DJI is just getting out in front of the issue. I honestly believe that within 5 years all companies will be required to enforce these zones or be held liable for the actions of their users who violate them. (Red Zones)

Cheers!
=C=

I intend to send the questions outlined below to the FAA. As I don’t believe the website that was setup to receive Proposal specific feedback is also a place to ask questions, I will be sending this to - UAShelp@faa.gov

I am hoping to receive answers of “True” to all three questions in which case the widespread concern regarding not being able to fly outside of a 400-foot bubble, in remote areas where there is no internet service, will hopefully be assuaged.

RE: [Docket No.: FAA–2019–1100; Notice No. 20–01]
RIN 2120–AL31
Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

In regard to the above proposal could you please provide True/False answers to the following:-

In the scenario described below It is assumed that both the UAS and associated remote control device (e.g. iPhone) are fully compliant in terms of their abilities to connect to an internet-based USS and to be able to also perform Direct ID (message elements) broadcast via radio frequency spectrum.

Question 1: In a remote area where there is no wi-fi or cellular-based internet service available the fully compliant UAS will be allowed to take-off and fly beyond 400 feet horizontally (as per Limited remote identification UAS) provided that it is directly broadcasting the required message elements via radio frequency spectrum and that VLOS is maintained for the duration of the flight?  True or False?

Question 2: In the above scenario the intention is for low flying aircraft and law enforcement personnel operating in the vicinity to be able to receive the ID message elements being broadcast by the UAS and thus determine its location (such as GPS coordinates and height AGL). True or False?

Question 3: There is no requirement for the ID message elements to actually be received by any aircraft or personnel which would obviously be the case should none be within the range of the broadcast for the duration of the flight. True or False?

So I have not received any answers to my questions but am still hoping that something will come back now that the window for submissions has closed. Meanwhile people are still overreacting and making the drone flying community look stupid - as per below.

Guy announces plans to take the FAA to court

crystal-pete Posted at 3-6 14:07
So I have not received any answers to my questions but am still hoping that something will come back now that the window for submissions has closed. Meanwhile people are still overreacting and making the drone flying community look stupid - as per below.

Guy announces plans to take the FAA to court

I suppose the minority is always right .

The guy is so dumb he doesn't even realize that the court will most likely not even allow the case to be heard.  You can't sue the FAA for putting up a proposal - and what is worse is that people are actually donating money to this totally idiotic lost cause.  The guys at the FAA are laughing their heads off !  

crystal-pete Posted at 3-6 14:07
So I have not received any answers to my questions but am still hoping that something will come back now that the window for submissions has closed. Meanwhile people are still overreacting and making the drone flying community look stupid - as per below.

Guy announces plans to take the FAA to court

Not clear what grounds or basis of Lawsuit will be.  As in, FAA violated XX Amendment or Federal Statue #XXX.  


Do see where FAA claiming it has jurisdiction over all Air space would be open to court challenge.  FAA might be forced to allow UAV flights over private property up to say 100-feet, regardless of drone meeting Remote ID ruling.  Really hard for FAA to claim they have control of Air or rule over Air from very ground on up, especially private property.


RaceDayQuads does say: "We have begun researching Freedom of Information Act Requests which would apply to this case and help our cause".   

Should RaceDayQuads be granted Freedom of Information (FOI) Requests, things could get very interesting.  Emails, letters, documents, and transcripts / recordings of closed door meetings between FAA and ______; would have to be turned over.  A few _____ parties might decide Remote ID is not such a great idea, and put pressure on FAA to make changes, in exchange for RaceDayQuads dropping it's suite

crystal-pete Posted at 1-9 13:38
I intend to send the questions outlined below to the FAA. As I don’t believe the website that was setup to receive Proposal specific feedback is also a place to ask questions, I will be sending this to - UAShelp@faa.gov

I am hoping to receive answers of “True” to all three questions in which case the widespread concern regarding not being able to fly outside of a 400-foot bubble, in remote areas where there is no internet service, will hopefully be assuaged.

FWIW: Here is my take on answers to your questions based on the current NPRM:

Question 1: In a remote area where there is no wi-fi or cellular-based internet service available the fully compliant UAS will be allowed to take-off and fly beyond 400 feet horizontally (as per Limited remote identification UAS) provided that it is directly broadcasting the required message elements via radio frequency spectrum and that VLOS is maintained for the duration of the flight?  True or False?

This would be true except for the last part. VLOS is not a requirement as Standard Remote Identification has no requirements for VLOS. You may fly BVLOS! As an added bonus you can fly at night. The thing I find really odd though is how will the FAA establish that you are flying in an area that has internet connectivity. What if the connection is not stable? What if the telecom carrier you use does not cover the area you in but another carrier does? What happens if StarLink becomes available?

I personnally hate the idea of internet connectivity and would like to that dropped. Then we won't need a USS to fly, RID is much simpler and compliance will most likely be much greater.

Question 2: In the above scenario the intention is for low flying aircraft and law enforcement personnel operating in the vicinity to be able to receive the ID message elements being broadcast by the UAS and thus determine its location (such as GPS coordinates and height AGL). True or False?

Should be true but is unknown as that is not part of the NPRM. I am hoping this becomes true. Easy enough to do.

Question 3: There is no requirement for the ID message elements to actually be received by any aircraft or personnel which would obviously be the case should none be within the range of the broadcast for the duration of the flight. True or False?

True

NightThunder Posted at 3-7 10:06
FWIW: Here is my take on answers to your questions based on the current NPRM:

Question 1: In a remote area where there is no wi-fi or cellular-based internet service available the fully compliant UAS will be allowed to take-off and fly beyond 400 feet horizontally (as per Limited remote identification UAS) provided that it is directly broadcasting the required message elements via radio frequency spectrum and that VLOS is maintained for the duration of the flight?  True or False?

There is no proposed requirement for the drone to have an internet connection. There is a proposed requirement to transmit telemetry to the internet if a connection is available, and that would be via the mobile device if it has an internet connection. But if it doesn't then that's not required either - all that is required is for the aircraft to broadcast certain telemetry elements on WiFi frequencies which is, if it's a DJI drone, what it is already doing using radio broadcast technology.