“I’m a designer/scratch-builder/plans designer, mostly of EDF jets. I’ve been flying rc since 1985. I’m also an Air Traffic Controller with 27 years in VFR Control Towers. Remote ID to avoid collision with commercial UAS and man carrying aircraft seems to be the driving force behind this rule. If 100% compliance is achieved, that still doesn’t guarantee that a cargo UAS wont collide with wildlife. Commercial UAS will need see and avoid sensors. If a model aircraft/UAS is broadcasting with remote ID, I see no reason to send that information over the internet, nor to communicate the location of the pilot, though that part is debatable. Any malicious use of a UAS would probably mean that the pilot/operator would not communicate their position anyway. As for communicating UAS operations without remote ID, sending this info to a website, if it’s possible, is fine, but if no real time internet is available, a simple NOTAM that describes the time and location and type of operation should be adequate. Operating a UAS in a remote location with no comm access means there’s likely little or no other activity in that area anyway. The NPRM as I reads now would prohibit scratch/home-built RC aircraft that are the bulk of my hobby activities these days. Not every UAS comes from a store (as you all at Flite Test are certainly aware). Stifling creativity is not something the FAA should be involved in any more than it already is. We used to build things in this country….creating things is a dying art. I don’t want to sound like the getting-older man that I am but it’s true. The attempt by the FAA through ill-informed rule making must be fought, and you all are making a great go of it….keep it up!”