As the US RID compliance date is soon approaching (Sept 16, 2023), I was wondering how users that need to deal with this are managing? What hardware are you using? What problems have you encountered? Are there any easy and affordable solutions?
The Cube ID is a very affordable option, but (for me at least ) the installation instructions and video are a little complicated. I am also uncertain how to install with boards other than the Cube Orange. I don’t think it is yet FAA compliant?
The UAVSystems module looks good also, offers support, but more pricey.
The RID requirements although maybe good for commercial projects, really stomps over the poor recreational and educational users that build there own vehicles and fly at very low altitudes, not to mention the whole privacy thing. But being the good citizen I am, here I go.
I see it is also required in the UK, EU and Switzerland (soon Oz?). How goes it there?
Tracking #: RID000000223
Created: 4.27.2023
Remote ID Declaration of Compliance
Declaration For: Broadcast Module
Make:UAS
Model:RC
FCC Identifier:NRF52840
Hardware Specification Cube ID Specification
Type
Parameter
Bluetooth chip
Nordic NRF52840 (Bluetooth 5.2 )
Frequency
2402MHz ~ 2480MHz
Operation Temperature
-40°C ~ 85°C
Dimension
25mm * 13.75mm * 3.5mm
Weight
10g (with cable and antenna)
Protocol
Serial
And here are two others:
Note that all of the above use opendroneid (Ardupilot) firmware, which seems to be preferred to “no name” firmware.
And I find it hilarious that someone took the time to send the DOC on the “Cubepilot” module to the FAA but was apparently not interested enough to name it something that end users like you and me might actually find it (or maybe buy it). And that MRO’s website has said " manual will be forthcoming" for at least three months.
I don’t think the dust has settled on Remote ID yet, as I think it will ultimately fail and prove to not be all that useful. And at least in the US where at least half the people have a strong dislike and contempt for government control of anything, people won’t comply with it and will just fly their drones anyway. The Feds and law enforcement don’t have the time, the budget nor the resources to enforce it in the face of mass non-compliance. Plus they’ll reach the realization they can’t tell the difference between a Mavic 3 Pro that shows up on their phone app vs a Mini 2 that doesn’t because it’s under 250 grams. So what are they gonna do? Call the FBI to chase down the Mini 2 pilot because he/she didn’t show up on their phone app? At which point the whole concept becomes useless.
This doesn’t exist because of the aviation authorities. It exists because of politicians that are scared of “drones” and they invented it to “save us all”. The aviation authorities have just been tasked with enforcing it.
For now I’m just parking the big ones in the hanger and flying my sub-250gr DJI Mini 2, which doesn’t need to be registered or have Remote ID. As the technology has improved in the sub-250 class to where a Mini 2 or Mini 3 outperforms the original Phantom-series at less than half the price, they have become the best-selling class of drones for a reason.
They have to catch them first. The FAA does not have enough field inspectors to check every drone pilot. And unless somebody crashes one thru somebody’s house window local law enforcement is not going to mess with it. It will be no different than registration - only Part 107 complied with it for the most part and it ultimately got struck down in court. Now they’re back with registration and Remote ID, they’ll get new drones 250 grams and over to comply with it, but pretty much the rest of the recreational flyers that build their own aircraft won’t. The entire local RC club isn’t going comply with it. They can’t get a FRIA because they aren’t AMA and not a single one of them have any intentions of buying Remote ID modules and gluing them to their airplanes, helicopters and drones. And not a single one of them is even remotely (pardun the pun) worried about it because in 47 years that the club has existed a FAA inspector has never showed up at a club meet with the nearest FSDO 250 miles away.
And further, the little devices are FCC Part 15 radios so there’s nothing illegal about anybody operating one, including gluing one to their car for the fun of it so their buddies can see if they can track their car with a phone app. And there’s plenty of people doing that too. There’s even people strapping 7 of the things to a Phantom 4 to see what happens and putting the video on YouTube. The whole thing is a joke.
So I talked to three different Part 107 pilots in the area here to see what they are doing. All three use DJI aircraft and some of them have had Remote ID enabled with a simple firmware update. The older ones that aren’t supported with a firmware update, the dronetag BS was the module that two of them plan on using. But apparently those are out of stock and difficult to get on a timely basis. The third pilot is agricultural, she has five P4 aircraft outfitted with multi-spectral cameras, and she is simply upgrading her fleet to new Mavic 3M multispectral models that have Remote ID built-in. She felt it was better to upgrade the aircraft to the newer model that already has it and also has greatly improved flight time over her old ones. She said she can sell her used aircraft pretty easily to people who want to outfit them with standalone modules, so she was looking at it as an opportunity to upgrade.
So may not be representative of the general Part 107 community in the US, but it appears the ones I talked to will try to get these standalone modules, others will upgrade their aircraft fleet to newer models.
Personally, I no longer fly Part 107 since I’m retired and my use is purely recreational. I do not plan on complying with it for right now by adding on modules. I’m going to park my larger aircraft and see how it all shakes out in the long run. I got a DJI Mini 2 that I’ll fly for fun since it is not affected by the requirement and is basically more than capable of doing anything I want to do with a RC aircraft.
I’ve got two drones, both over the limit requiring registration and thus remote ID. I only use one of the craft at this time, so I installed a cube id can module and have it technically capable of complying. Testing has yielded results that show up in the phone app showing my and my drones location. My concern is around the firmware itself. I’ve had some, uh, interesting results and an actual crash that I cannot explain except that I was running odid enabled firmware & bootloader (4.3.7). I’m not saying ODID was the cause of the crash, but I can’t tell what happened - and it wasn’t tuning or mechanical failure.
I do not like the idea of being non-compliant. That said, I think we need better solutions for those of us flying homemade craft. I definitely don’t want to go buy a DJI drone just because I want to be compliant. I want to buy a DJI drone because of that Hasselblad camera, let’s be real.
I called mRobotics and they didn’t have any information regarding when their product will be sold and have an accompanying instruction manual. They told me to email for an answer. I’ve emailed twice and still no answer. Why do you list a product that is essentially vaporware?
If I had to do it right this hot second, I’d recommend a strap on module that doesn’t require any integration work on the drone or ground station. And I might wind up going that route anyway.
They’re just too expensive. I am going to wish on a star that the FAA gets over their fever dream and calls the whole thing off for the US.
I have some DOC paperwork in to the FAA for (essentially) home-built Part 107-use drones. In an e-mail exchange, I asked them directly about super small-scale (e.g. less than five drones) and they were quite firm that all of Part 89 applies (audits, paperwork, plus the [easy!] electronics) even if you build a single (Part 107) drone. The scale issue is also addressed in the comments on the rule, where the FAA says the benefits of the rule outweigh the costs.
In my case, the FAA has sent back questions on how OpenDroneID works with regard to emergency status (that is requiring some digging in the Mission Planner code, maybe I’m missing something. If you use nightly builds, QGC has a nice big red button for this, though the releases don’t); real-time GCS location; and preventing take-off if the module doesn’t work at that time. I’m proposing to use a Bluemark transponder.
So, this looks mostly like a GCS project rather than a hardware project.
If you buy one of these and put it on a home-built aircraft, it is up to YOU to get your aircraft legally registered, and obtain the FAA DoC for your Remote ID. Cube ID is not legal out of the box. It might meet the specification but it is not registerable without that FAA DoC certificate.
If you are Part 107 and need this, my opinion is that it would be advisable to buy one that is listed in the FAA database and has the Declaration of Compliance.
) the installation instructions and video are a little complicated. I am also uncertain how to install with boards other than the Cube Orange. I don’t think it is yet FAA compliant?