While the FAA and others are calling the required remote ID a "license plate" for drones, an automobile or truck license plate does not broadcast the location of the vehicle.
Don't engage with the truth please... (heavy sarcasm). ---- They say its a license plate...it is not. There's one of those lies the tell us as truth...But if you call them on it @v1rotation then your not grown up.
I don’t even really care about RID anymore, I just wish I could fly BVLOS in the very “remote” rural areas near me, particularly over forests and swamps that are nearly inaccessible on foot. That’s the whole reason to fly drones there..
While it may seem safe to operatie BVLOS in a remote area, there are still helicopters, inspections, other drones, and agricultural aviation going on in those areas just above the ground or tree levels below 400 feet..@@SkyFireDrone2022
It should also be noted that it is a violation of the FAA regulations to fly beyond visual line of sight (and that doesn't mean being able to see a tiny spec on the horizon that is your drone). Also, none of these regulations are NEW; then have been in effect since at least 2018 including all of the Part 107 and Recreational Exemption regulations. All of that said, GOOD VIDEO and good explanation of the parts covered.
It should also be noted that you have no clue what you are talking about. If you can see it, you can see it. End of story. There is no "size" determination. You can even use a strobe light to extend the distance you can still SEEEEEEE the drone. Remote ID was just a couple month ago. Geez, why do you post things that are simply not true? Where are you getting your bad information? Fox News? Maybe if you had a Part 107 you would know what you are talking about? I see no record of "Buddy Adkins" being a registered 107 pilot at the FAA's Airmen Lookup Page. Side note: UAV Coach never said this video was about "new" rules. It very clearly states "Latest FAA Rules". RemoteID is literally the "latest FAA rule" for drones. Looking at your two posts.... you are wrong about everything. Holy Cow!
This is great news, but my issue is that I really don't know what areas are legal to fly ... state and local laws seem to change weekly. Can't fly in any state or fed parks, ok so that cuts out about 90% of the locations where I would want to fly my drone. B4UFLY doesn't have ANY data regarding local state laws or even city laws ... for example you can't fly a drone in any part of the Cannon Beach city limits here in Oregon even though B4UFLY shows no issues. Same with Oregon coast, 95% of the coast is prohibited ... then they added during specific times of year, then they add none of the Islands of the coast ... What NO ONE is really addressing is the integration of state/local laws into mobile apps like B4UFLY. I have my Trust certificate and a Remote ID for my DJI Mini 4 Pro and I'm working on my part 107 but that isn't really relevant ... 107 or not, if one is flying in a prohibited area without knowing because information to "know" is not easily available, I'm still subject to a fine and/or arrest? Gets even worse when there are people looking for a fight that aren't qualified but pretend to be ... anything from idiots shooting at drones to people calling the cops making false claims I attacked them with my drone. It's insane and the responsible drone pilots are getting step one in every sense of the word, we have ZERO rights and NO ONE is fighting our battle at either local, state, or federal level.
Flying recreationally? Stay under 400 feet and use LAANC ALOFT APP system to ensure you are safe, beyond that ignore everything else. Flying part 107 or commercially follow all the FAA RULES
Unfortunatly for those of us who fly responsibly and obey the rules, there are bad apples who could care less. Recently more bad press for us came from some idiot who flew in the no fly zone at the kc Ravens football game. Welcome remote ID it just might be the thing that will save us from a lot more restrictions from local rules. Those who are complaining about Remote ID probably are the bad apples who aren't following the rules.
@uavcoach And just to clarify, it does not need remote id under 250 grams flying recreationally? I couldn't find this information at the FAA website but alot of people are saying this. The FAA website makes it sound like all drones have to have remote id and be registered with the FAA. I started to register my but deleted the application in fear registering would now require me to install remote id on my sub 250 gram drone. Most of the time I'm just going to be flying in my back yard.
Excellent video! I just purchased a Roku F11Gim2. This drone comes with Remote ID and GPS navigation. Does this mean I can fly Beyound Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS)? If not, can I fly on my own property BVLOS?
Umm... NO!!!!!! Please go take your FREE REQUIRED TRUST test. It has RID so I assume its over 250grams, so make sure you register it as well. Happy Flying!
What many do not realize is that ALL drone flights whether money is involved or NOT are Part 107 including flights for charitable purposes, inspecting one's own property, or providing any benefit to anyone including posting to a monetized platform such as UA-cam; even getting a "like" is promoting one's personal business. Those that are collecting or providing content are Part 107. ALL drone flights are Part 107 UNLESS (key word here) the flight legitimately qualifies for the recreational exemption (no one benefits and don't post the video).
@buddyadkins2432 Complete nonsense. Anyone can buy a drone and "inspect" their own gutters or roof. You do not need a Part 107 for that. "Providing Benefit" is subjective and not something mentioned in Part 107. "In furtherance of a business" is the exact term the FAA uses. Monetized YT would be a business. Flying for a non profit organization with no money exchanging hands is still in furtherance of a business albeit a non profit business. Offering to help a neighbor find their lost dog = not in furtherance of a business and no Part 107 required. Educate yourself before posting please. One other thing, if you can "SEE" a tiny little spec, that is still "SEEING". Once you can no longer "SEE" the spec, then it becomes BVLOS. It's not "when you can only see a tiny spec". Who would determine what is a "spec"? You really need to educate yourself before posting BS on a Drone Learning YT Channel. Just wow. And finally... Remote ID is a new rule that took effect in Sept. (although the FAA has delayed most enforcement until March 2024). I would love to know where you got such ridiculous information!
@@WOTHFPV What ever you think. I have seen these very examples from the FAA; exactly. The FAA mentioned the gutters that is NOT something that I made up. Maybe watch some videos with FAA representative Kevin Morris. You forget, it is not what we think or believe, it is how the FAA interprets it. Yes, the language is "in the furtherance of a business", but that is not interpreted as a formal, for money business. The FAA's interpretation is that furtherance (or benefit) to any "concern" including one's self. Maybe send an email to the FAA and ask them. I got all of this ridiculous information from the FAA, from reading the regulations, watching FAA Kevin Morris, and from folks who have gotten hammered. Maybe you should actually check up on that before you chastise me.
@@buddyadkins2432 LOL You keep posting, nothing will ever change the FACT that you are wrong. Kevin knows who I am. We've met twice at conventions. ANYONE can go to Best Buy and buy a toy drone. Reg it if its over 250gr. Take the Trust and pick their CBO. Now, if they want to fly up and take photos of their roof, that is legal. They can email those photos to anyone or post online. If they choose to call those photos a "roof Inspection" that changes nothing and its 100% a non-commercial drone operation. YOU don't even know what a roof inspection is. You think its just taking pictures? A roof inspection gives a printed report to clients that shows not only damage, but angles, lengths, material estimates, thermal photos with radiometric data, etc.... When the FAA talks about roof inspections, they are talking about professional inspections, not 12MP photos taken with a DJI mini drone flown by a kid. But even those would be in violation of part 107 if they were used in furtherance of a business, for profit or compensation of a commercial enterprise. If your own gutters or grandma's gutters are clogged and you want to fly your toy up there to "inspect" them. No 107 is required. If you take photos of granny's gutters and then give those to a gutter company, that changes everything and of course a 107 is required. Plus the toy drone would also need to be reg'd as a commercial aircraft. Here is Kevin's email address: kevin.morris@faa.gov Here is Kevin's personal cell number: 612-360-0493 Give him a call, tell him Woth (Doug) sent you for a free education. Make sure you ask about seeing your drone when its only a "spec" and ask about "inspecting" one's own roof/gutters. Copy/Paste his emailed response for everyone to see. How about you post a link to a FAA UA-cam video where they tell everyone that taking photos of your own roof or gutters requires a commercial suas license. Good luck with that. Merry Christmas Buddy!
You not only need to be able to see the drone but need to know it's direction and attitude according to the rules which makes logical sense in order to be in complete control of your aircraft.@@WOTHFPV
1:45 "If you are a commercial pilot, all drones, regardless of weight, must comply." The structure of that statement carries a high potential for it to be misinterpreted. Obviously, if taken literally, it makes no logical sense, and hence, it is not exactly what the narrator had intended to communicate. However, ignoring the semantics of the statement, there is a more subtle potential issue with what the narrator had wanted to express, and what his words actually state. In order to gain comprehension of what the narrator is communicating to us, we must ignore the literal meaning of the sentence as it is constructed because obviously not all drones need to be in compliance based solely on the fact that one is a commercial pilot of drones. A safe assumption to make would be to interpret it as not "all drones", but instead "all drones flown by said commercial pilot" because the child down the street from the commercial drone pilot does not have to comply with registration if his drone weighs 200 grams. According to what the statement communicates, the child would have to register his drone, but that is not my issue here, for I believe most of us can easily determine that the literal translation of the narrator's statement is not what was meant. (The majority of English speakers are semantically oblivious, and therefore they will never reach the literal meaning of most communications they create, or absorb, and being that most people communicate in a similar fashion, such a nonspecific construction of generalities expressed loosely will tend to suffice most of the time.) The literal translation won't even be considered by most people, or if they have the lingual awareness to consider such a translation, they will likely reach the conclusion that the narrator is not speaking in any strict, literal sense, and therefore, they will interpret the narrator's words loosely, and not literally. Yet, even without a literal translation, there is something about the statement that bothers me because I can not determine from the narrator's words how to interpret them as applied to a commercial drone pilot. Now, a commercial drone pilot must register their drones with the F.A.A., even the ones that weigh under the 250 grams limit, the limit where noncommercial drone pilots are not required by law to register their drone when it weighs under said limit. That much is understandable, but what about the commercial drone pilot's leisurely flying time? What about their drones that weigh less than 250 grams, and which they never utilize for commercial purposes? Is the commercial drone pilot required to register their drones weighing less than 250 grams, and which are never piloted for commercial use, and only for personal, recreation? Or does it not matter, and because the commercial drone pilot has a license, are they then required by law to register every one of their drones regardless of weight, and type of usage? If a commercial drone pilot owns the same type of drone as Timmy, the neighborhood brat down the street, and it weighs under 250 grams, and neither of their drones are being flown in any commercial capacity whatsoever, then what would be the logic behind making the commercial drone pilot register their drone, but Timmy is not required to register, especially when Timmy is more likely to cause problems with his drone than the highly skilled, and knowledgeable commercial drone pilot with a license? How would such a scenario be justified? Basically, I can understand that a commercial drone pilot being required by law to register all of their drones that are used commercially, but I can not form any logical basis for a commercial drone pilot to register their drones that are only used for personal, and noncommercial, purposes when any noncommercial drone pilot would not be required to register the same drone.
Also, regarding of flying drones in prohibited areas, I thought they had some system of invisible, electronic fences that would prevent any commercially available drone from entering into said prohibited areas.
You might be thinking of DJI's geofencing. The drone will not take off and is locked until you go through a process of unlocking it through the app and getting approval.
While the FAA and others are calling the required remote ID a "license plate" for drones, an automobile or truck license plate does not broadcast the location of the vehicle.
Don't engage with the truth please... (heavy sarcasm). ---- They say its a license plate...it is not. There's one of those lies the tell us as truth...But if you call them on it @v1rotation then your not grown up.
I don’t even really care about RID anymore, I just wish I could fly BVLOS in the very “remote” rural areas near me, particularly over forests and swamps that are nearly inaccessible on foot. That’s the whole reason to fly drones there..
While it may seem safe to operatie BVLOS in a remote area, there are still helicopters, inspections, other drones, and agricultural aviation going on in those areas just above the ground or tree levels below 400 feet..@@SkyFireDrone2022
@@SkyFireDrone2022I cannot comply with this rule. Idiotic. My vision is not great.
3:39 3:45
It should also be noted that it is a violation of the FAA regulations to fly beyond visual line of sight (and that doesn't mean being able to see a tiny spec on the horizon that is your drone). Also, none of these regulations are NEW; then have been in effect since at least 2018 including all of the Part 107 and Recreational Exemption regulations. All of that said, GOOD VIDEO and good explanation of the parts covered.
It should also be noted that you have no clue what you are talking about. If you can see it, you can see it. End of story. There is no "size" determination. You can even use a strobe light to extend the distance you can still SEEEEEEE the drone. Remote ID was just a couple month ago. Geez, why do you post things that are simply not true? Where are you getting your bad information? Fox News? Maybe if you had a Part 107 you would know what you are talking about? I see no record of "Buddy Adkins" being a registered 107 pilot at the FAA's Airmen Lookup Page. Side note: UAV Coach never said this video was about "new" rules. It very clearly states "Latest FAA Rules". RemoteID is literally the "latest FAA rule" for drones. Looking at your two posts.... you are wrong about everything. Holy Cow!
Good summary video! Dave Messina
Appreciate it!
This is really great information for me to continue ignoring! Thanks!
This is great news, but my issue is that I really don't know what areas are legal to fly ... state and local laws seem to change weekly. Can't fly in any state or fed parks, ok so that cuts out about 90% of the locations where I would want to fly my drone.
B4UFLY doesn't have ANY data regarding local state laws or even city laws ... for example you can't fly a drone in any part of the Cannon Beach city limits here in Oregon even though B4UFLY shows no issues. Same with Oregon coast, 95% of the coast is prohibited ... then they added during specific times of year, then they add none of the Islands of the coast ... What NO ONE is really addressing is the integration of state/local laws into mobile apps like B4UFLY. I have my Trust certificate and a Remote ID for my DJI Mini 4 Pro and I'm working on my part 107 but that isn't really relevant ... 107 or not, if one is flying in a prohibited area without knowing because information to "know" is not easily available, I'm still subject to a fine and/or arrest?
Gets even worse when there are people looking for a fight that aren't qualified but pretend to be ... anything from idiots shooting at drones to people calling the cops making false claims I attacked them with my drone. It's insane and the responsible drone pilots are getting step one in every sense of the word, we have ZERO rights and NO ONE is fighting our battle at either local, state, or federal level.
Flying recreationally? Stay under 400 feet and use LAANC ALOFT APP system to ensure you are safe, beyond that ignore everything else. Flying part 107 or commercially follow all the FAA RULES
Unfortunatly for those of us who fly responsibly and obey the rules, there are bad apples who could care less. Recently more bad press for us came from some idiot who flew in the no fly zone at the kc Ravens football game. Welcome remote ID it just might be the thing that will save us from a lot more restrictions from local rules. Those who are complaining about Remote ID probably are the bad apples who aren't following the rules.
I really used to love flying drones, now it is a nightmare...no thanks
So also for under 250 grams flying recreationally, is it still not necessary to register with the FAA?
If the drone is under 250 grams and you are flying recreationally, you do not need to register it with the FAA.
@uavcoach And just to clarify, it does not need remote id under 250 grams flying recreationally? I couldn't find this information at the FAA website but alot of people are saying this. The FAA website makes it sound like all drones have to have remote id and be registered with the FAA. I started to register my but deleted the application in fear registering would now require me to install remote id on my sub 250 gram drone. Most of the time I'm just going to be flying in my back yard.
Drones where fun now its just a pain in the .
Excellent video! I just purchased a Roku F11Gim2. This drone comes with Remote ID and GPS navigation. Does this mean I can fly Beyound Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS)? If not, can I fly on my own property BVLOS?
Umm... NO!!!!!! Please go take your FREE REQUIRED TRUST test. It has RID so I assume its over 250grams, so make sure you register it as well. Happy Flying!
License work nothing like remote ID
You show Zoroe in the FPV FC lol....This is all BS and the people who think it's not are fooling themselves and telling lies.
What many do not realize is that ALL drone flights whether money is involved or NOT are Part 107 including flights for charitable purposes, inspecting one's own property, or providing any benefit to anyone including posting to a monetized platform such as UA-cam; even getting a "like" is promoting one's personal business. Those that are collecting or providing content are Part 107. ALL drone flights are Part 107 UNLESS (key word here) the flight legitimately qualifies for the recreational exemption (no one benefits and don't post the video).
@buddyadkins2432 Complete nonsense. Anyone can buy a drone and "inspect" their own gutters or roof. You do not need a Part 107 for that. "Providing Benefit" is subjective and not something mentioned in Part 107. "In furtherance of a business" is the exact term the FAA uses. Monetized YT would be a business. Flying for a non profit organization with no money exchanging hands is still in furtherance of a business albeit a non profit business. Offering to help a neighbor find their lost dog = not in furtherance of a business and no Part 107 required. Educate yourself before posting please. One other thing, if you can "SEE" a tiny little spec, that is still "SEEING". Once you can no longer "SEE" the spec, then it becomes BVLOS. It's not "when you can only see a tiny spec". Who would determine what is a "spec"? You really need to educate yourself before posting BS on a Drone Learning YT Channel. Just wow. And finally... Remote ID is a new rule that took effect in Sept. (although the FAA has delayed most enforcement until March 2024). I would love to know where you got such ridiculous information!
@@WOTHFPV What ever you think. I have seen these very examples from the FAA; exactly. The FAA mentioned the gutters that is NOT something that I made up. Maybe watch some videos with FAA representative Kevin Morris. You forget, it is not what we think or believe, it is how the FAA interprets it. Yes, the language is "in the furtherance of a business", but that is not interpreted as a formal, for money business. The FAA's interpretation is that furtherance (or benefit) to any "concern" including one's self. Maybe send an email to the FAA and ask them. I got all of this ridiculous information from the FAA, from reading the regulations, watching FAA Kevin Morris, and from folks who have gotten hammered. Maybe you should actually check up on that before you chastise me.
@@buddyadkins2432 LOL You keep posting, nothing will ever change the FACT that you are wrong. Kevin knows who I am. We've met twice at conventions. ANYONE can go to Best Buy and buy a toy drone. Reg it if its over 250gr. Take the Trust and pick their CBO. Now, if they want to fly up and take photos of their roof, that is legal. They can email those photos to anyone or post online. If they choose to call those photos a "roof Inspection" that changes nothing and its 100% a non-commercial drone operation.
YOU don't even know what a roof inspection is. You think its just taking pictures? A roof inspection gives a printed report to clients that shows not only damage, but angles, lengths, material estimates, thermal photos with radiometric data, etc.... When the FAA talks about roof inspections, they are talking about professional inspections, not 12MP photos taken with a DJI mini drone flown by a kid. But even those would be in violation of part 107 if they were used in furtherance of a business, for profit or compensation of a commercial enterprise. If your own gutters or grandma's gutters are clogged and you want to fly your toy up there to "inspect" them. No 107 is required. If you take photos of granny's gutters and then give those to a gutter company, that changes everything and of course a 107 is required. Plus the toy drone would also need to be reg'd as a commercial aircraft.
Here is Kevin's email address: kevin.morris@faa.gov Here is Kevin's personal cell number: 612-360-0493 Give him a call, tell him Woth (Doug) sent you for a free education. Make sure you ask about seeing your drone when its only a "spec" and ask about "inspecting" one's own roof/gutters. Copy/Paste his emailed response for everyone to see.
How about you post a link to a FAA UA-cam video where they tell everyone that taking photos of your own roof or gutters requires a commercial suas license. Good luck with that.
Merry Christmas Buddy!
You not only need to be able to see the drone but need to know it's direction and attitude according to the rules which makes logical sense in order to be in complete control of your aircraft.@@WOTHFPV
1:45
"If you are a commercial pilot, all drones, regardless of weight, must comply."
The structure of that statement carries a high potential for it to be misinterpreted. Obviously, if taken literally, it makes no logical sense, and hence, it is not exactly what the narrator had intended to communicate. However, ignoring the semantics of the statement, there is a more subtle potential issue with what the narrator had wanted to express, and what his words actually state.
In order to gain comprehension of what the narrator is communicating to us, we must ignore the literal meaning of the sentence as it is constructed because obviously not all drones need to be in compliance based solely on the fact that one is a commercial pilot of drones. A safe assumption to make would be to interpret it as not "all drones", but instead "all drones flown by said commercial pilot" because the child down the street from the commercial drone pilot does not have to comply with registration if his drone weighs 200 grams. According to what the statement communicates, the child would have to register his drone, but that is not my issue here, for I believe most of us can easily determine that the literal translation of the narrator's statement is not what was meant. (The majority of English speakers are semantically oblivious, and therefore they will never reach the literal meaning of most communications they create, or absorb, and being that most people communicate in a similar fashion, such a nonspecific construction of generalities expressed loosely will tend to suffice most of the time.) The literal translation won't even be considered by most people, or if they have the lingual awareness to consider such a translation, they will likely reach the conclusion that the narrator is not speaking in any strict, literal sense, and therefore, they will interpret the narrator's words loosely, and not literally.
Yet, even without a literal translation, there is something about the statement that bothers me because I can not determine from the narrator's words how to interpret them as applied to a commercial drone pilot. Now, a commercial drone pilot must register their drones with the F.A.A., even the ones that weigh under the 250 grams limit, the limit where noncommercial drone pilots are not required by law to register their drone when it weighs under said limit. That much is understandable, but what about the commercial drone pilot's leisurely flying time? What about their drones that weigh less than 250 grams, and which they never utilize for commercial purposes? Is the commercial drone pilot required to register their drones weighing less than 250 grams, and which are never piloted for commercial use, and only for personal, recreation? Or does it not matter, and because the commercial drone pilot has a license, are they then required by law to register every one of their drones regardless of weight, and type of usage? If a commercial drone pilot owns the same type of drone as Timmy, the neighborhood brat down the street, and it weighs under 250 grams, and neither of their drones are being flown in any commercial capacity whatsoever, then what would be the logic behind making the commercial drone pilot register their drone, but Timmy is not required to register, especially when Timmy is more likely to cause problems with his drone than the highly skilled, and knowledgeable commercial drone pilot with a license? How would such a scenario be justified?
Basically, I can understand that a commercial drone pilot being required by law to register all of their drones that are used commercially, but I can not form any logical basis for a commercial drone pilot to register their drones that are only used for personal, and noncommercial, purposes when any noncommercial drone pilot would not be required to register the same drone.
Also, regarding of flying drones in prohibited areas, I thought they had some system of invisible, electronic fences that would prevent any commercially available drone from entering into said prohibited areas.
You might be thinking of DJI's geofencing. The drone will not take off and is locked until you go through a process of unlocking it through the app and getting approval.