“I recently started getting into FPV drones and have been captivated by the freestyle and long range cinematic capabilities of these machines. So far I’ve only been flying in a simulator, but have started to putting together a parts list for my first build. My concerns with RemoteID fall in the following categories: Flight Performance: this is especially related to freestyle where weight is a major concern and battery life is normally less than 5 minutes. Additionally, these flights are typically very low to the ground and within visual range of the pilot. Location Accessibility: Long range cinematic flying typically happens in areas that are very remote. This means limited to no cell coverage. Sometimes cell coverage is available but you may not have internet access. This means that active transponders wouldn’t be effective and posting your flying location through an app based solution wouldn’t be possible. Based on my understanding of the proposed rules, flying in these remote areas would be illegal even though there are no airspace restrictions. In these scenarios it would be beneficial for the RemoteID rules to include a broadcast solution for authorities in the area that requires no internet. Remote ID Public Information: I understand that authorities should be able to see the data of where a particular person is flying and potentially find the pilot. I do not believe that all this information should be made public. Although small, this poses potential security risks to the pilot. I have not seen justification for why this data needs to be public. OEM Implementation: This one is tricky. Without knowing exact protocols required to implement the Remote ID transmission from the UAS to the pilot the door might be opened for manufacturers to “require wholesale upgrades” of existing equipment to include Remote ID support. Generally speaking, when you put all the power in one person’s hands there is a risk they will assume ultimate control. Parts Availability: I read the DIY industry could go out the door with the proposed Remote ID changes. This would be unfortunate as many people have businesses based around aerial photography/videography using a home built UAS. It sounds like commercially sold products would be the only option. A UAS of this size is normally cost prohibitive for small businesses, potentially causing them to shut down. Lastly, in the event of a UAS crash, the owner would be required to go back to the OEM for parts. With no alternatives, the OEM doesn’t need to worry about competitive pricing. I would like to see that the rules allow for custom/DIY UAS builds allow for addition of Remote ID hardware to meet the requirements. In parting, I do believe that there is some need for a ID solution. The rules need to allow for flexibility in implementation that don’t restrict users to small confined spaces. Part of the excitement is to go somewhere new and explore. For me that is going to be in the mountains, away from people, and below the existing 400′ ceiling.”