Your DJI account
You will be required to register your Remote ID details on the CAA web site if / when this all goes live.
3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Apps and utilities to view drones that broadcast Drone ID and Remote ID data
7 posts were merged into an existing topic: Apps and utilities to view drones that broadcast Drone ID and Remote ID data
Personally I don’t have much of and issue with RID but I do have issue with all and sundry being able to to see where I am with the Direct Method. Everyone needs to read in detail the consultation document recently put out by the CAA. It seems that when this goes ahead the drone will have to be connected somehow to the RID system (network or direct) before it can even take off. This is ridiculous and I can’t see it working in practice but it will certainly waste time and use up precious battery power. Reading between the lines in the consultation in seems to me that they are really trying to put people off having a drone and leave the airspace open for large organisations. Drones will also have to have Geofencing built in and active (not a problem with me so long as it is accuurate, unlike the DJI rubbish) and also have warnings when the drone approaches a FRZ. All this is based on very dodgy statistics that are bandied about as good reasons for more regulations. 18290 reports to the police of drone problems in the past three years. Equates to an average of sixteen a day over the forty two police forces in the UK. More than likely a lot of these are just people complaining about a drone as they are wont to do. Hardly a basis for all the regulation that’s on it’ s way. Please everyone make sure you answer the consultation questions and make your opinions clear to the CAA.
2 Likes
Yep my only worry is if we have to get permission via either wifi or mobile data before we can fly ( because that’s basically the way they apparently want to implement it) it’s going to leave vast swathes of open countryside, unflyable. If you’re in the middle of nowhere and can’t get a mobile signal, you’re up sh*t creek without a paddle.
Edit, what would happen if you’re flying your drone and the RID stops being networked over your mobile phone data? Would it just stop flying ?
There will be thousands of drone owners who haven’t bothered to get an operator ID. “Register your drone so that we can issue you with fines” is even less likely to happen than “Register as an operator so that we can relieve you of £10 every year”.
No one has seen my Operator ID or Flyer ID since I got them, there is no enforcement.
2 Likes
I agree with all the sentiments expressed above. The problem I see is that in 5 days time, thousands of young boys will receive drones as presents. If they are the “toy” variety, there is nothing about restrictions and/or permissions in the instruction, or paperwork. No IDs, no supervision, no guidance. I love you, take this, go and play.
3 Likes
And by Boxing Day, they’ll be consigned to the bin, or stuck on a neighbours roof or up a tree 
@JockyB made a related comment in another thread about flying beyond 500m with a tiny drone that CAA will question your ability to see.
I’ll provide another potentially negative scenario of Remote ID here.
But that ANPR database doesn’t issue me with a fine for driving at 33mph in a 30mph zone 
Will CAA come knocking on my door “after the fact”, if I do something wrong while flying my drone? 
If I’m too busy staring at my drone in the sky (because that’s what CAA want us to do) and if I’m not looking at my controller, I might not notice that I’ve climbed to 130m instead of 120m 
Of course, I’ll quickly descend to 120m, but it’ll be too late, my crime has been broadcast to the entire world in real time.
CAA now have a permanent record of my infringement.
Will they want to take me to court and prosecute me because they have evidence of my (albeit accidental) crime? 
Or will they just issue a Fixed Penalty Notice of £1,000 and give me a slap on the wrist?
My bigger concern however, would be the false positives from this “after the fact” type of data collection, and potential prosecution.
Consider the scenario:
-
I launch my drone from half way up the side of Winter Hill
– A large hill in the NW region, approx. 1,400ft ASL
– I’m half way up, so I’m taking off from roughly 700ft ASL -
I ascend to 200ft and take some great photos
– My drone is now 200ft above the ground and 900ft above sea level
– The Remote ID in my DJI firmware is reporting me as being 200ft above the ground
– All good -
I start walking up the hill
– You can probably guess where this scenario is going already…
– While walking, I’m keeping my drone within VLOS at all times
– I walk 200ft up Winter Hill
– I keep my drone in front of me, at a steady 200ft above the ground at all times -
I’m now stood at 900ft ASL
– My Remote ID is now reporting that my drone is at 400ft
– Because my drone is now 200ft higher than its original take off point
– Yet it’s still only 200ft above the ground
– All good (but only just) -
I walk another 200ft up Winter Hill
– I’m now stood at 1100ft above sea level
– My drone is still 200ft above the ground and still in VLOS
– My Remote ID is now broadcasting to the entire world that my current altitude is 600ft above the ground
– All bad.
This false-positive infringement is now stored permanently on a database.
I’ve done nothing wrong.
CAA say I have done something wrong. After all, they have “proof” in their database.
1 Like
This is what makes me concerned,
“excuse me sir but Karen over there thinks your taking photos through her bedroom window half a mile away, we have pulled your data from 3 months ago and it seems you went above 120m to 121m, we are going to have to fine you for that”.
1 Like
Rich @PingSpike
Any chance you can get this thread in front of sensible eyes at CAA?
Without any drama or ranting, this is exactly what they need to see to understand hobbyist legitimate concerns
2 Likes
That is very much our intention 
At the moment all we can see is negatives - because that’s largely what this is.
But there’s still time for someone to highlight a positive though
Surely they’ll just compare the GPS co’ords of the drone with their database of topography and calc the agl? … problem solved.
I’m sure they wouldn’t crudely implement some automated fine system based on barometric height measurement …
Would they?
Okay so playing devils advocate…
Aircraft avoidance. If our drone position was able to be received by GA aircraft then there is less chance of collisions. (Yes this is achieved already by VLOS, much like most GA operate under VFR)
Prevention of drone mis-use (yes, those who mis-use will just bypass the system though)
Easier to address privacy concerns / accidental mis-use - i.e. I know my uncle regularly has a drone flying over his property, if RID was active he’d be able to find out who it is and/or the authorities would be able to pay them a visit. Similarly, if a member of the public had a safety concern, they’d be able to find the operator to be able to raise the concern with them.
I can’t see that holding up. The barometers on our drones are not calibrated in any way.
Much like a police car or speed enforcement camera cannot issue you with a fine unless their equipment is calibrated - I don’t see why it would be any different for the baro in our drones.
1 Like
A positive? … hmmm.
How about we can drop our Airdata subscriptions, as we can just get all our flight data from a simple personal info request to the CAA?
2 Likes
How so?
Would a Boeing 737 be able to change course quickly enough to avoid a drone that was 400ft in front of it? I’d guess not.
Is that illegal?
A reminder from CAA’s own words as to why they want this:
with the intention of improving the ability to identify individuals misusing UAS and enabling enforcement
Ahh but we have that covered. They also know the position of the controller and will see that relative to the drone, the controller is never more than 200ft away from the drone. Because Lat and Long are recorded, they can easily look on Google Maps and concur you followed the drone up the side of Winter Hill.
A B737 isn’t GA though, and isn’t flying at 500ft, nor is it a military helicopter flying at 50ft AGL. Those are the sorts of aircraft I’m talking about.
Yes - if it is low enough so as to be considered tresspass, or if it is considered a ‘nuisance’ (which in my Uncle’s case, it is).