“I have been interested in Remote Control (RC) since I was in the 4th grade. I have always loved aviation which led me into a career in aviation. I did not have the money to do any RC as a young kid. That did not stop me from wanting RC aircraft. So, I flew the sheet balsa chuck gliders that you just threw into the air. I learned how an aircraft’s flight was affected by their flight surfaces from those simple 10 cent gliders. That led me into the rubber band powered aircraft. Again, more learning in the aerodynamics world. I built several balsa and plastic models through the years. In 1978, I built a RC transmitter, receiver, and servos from a kit because it was affordable. In 1997, finally made Captain at my airline job. Which gave me the financial means to afford my wish to fly RC aircraft. I now have 22 flyable aircraft. 14 of those would fall into the category of needing RID. I have more than 30 kits that are waiting to be built. Some are foam, most are a box of balsa and a set of plans. I really enjoy my RC hobby, the building and the flying, especially now that I am retired. I am concerned that this new rule will (RID) my hobby out of existence. The costs involved in this hobby, are considerably less than when I first started in 1997, but are still something to be considered. Adding an as yet undetermined expense to our hobby, especially if EVERY aircraft I own must have its own RID, will make this educational hobby a little more out of reach for some people. And possibly even me, depending on the costs involved to equip all of my aircraft and pay the associated fees for data services and tracking for each flight. I am also concerned that FRIA’s will no longer be available after 3 years. That doesn’t really make any sense to our model aircraft community. Especially, since some of these established Club flying fields have been in existence for more than 40 years. These flying fields could be geofenced to keep the commercial UAS’s informed and hopefully out of conflict with the model aircraft flying in their designated area. I am concerned that my model aircraft that are flown Visual Line Of Sight (VLOS) have been defined to be the same as the autonomous Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS) that these rules seem to have been written to try to control. VLOS model aircraft and First Person View (FPV) are directly controlled by a pilot and not by a computer. These two classes of aircraft should not be defined to being the same. The transmitter and the particular aircraft I am flying are “bound” together as part of the control systems that we use. They use some unique ID so that the transmitter and the receiver “know” each other and will only respond to each other. So, it seems there is a way to make the transmitter that we use transmit a unique ID that can be used to identify if someone is flying. And since model aircraft are flown VLOS, the pilot will only be maybe a thousand feet to either side of his/her aircraft. Thank y’all for taking one of the leaders in trying to get this NPRM modified. Also, thanks for reading my comments.”