GREAT TO WATCH You both together .. greatings from British Pole 🇬🇧🇵🇱😍 I have meet Geeksvanna last year September in London drone exhibition.. good job both 👏 👍 keep community running all over. Because of You I have end up with around 12 drones 😂 Can't wait for UK FPV fest in August - Coventry
I've got to admit I don't see how, without definite FAA changes at the very least relating to part 107 and standard remote ID, his channel can survive in its current form. Reviewing is a huge amount of what he does. I know there was that FAA bloke the other night who said "don't worry, we are clearing up this issue". But, it has to formally be done in writing, someone just gaily saying that in an interview doesn't cut it. There is also the point made some time ago that technically if one reads the rules relating to this, FPV itself is not allowed on a home built quad. OK, the FAA have said "no, definitely not what we meant, we want to protect FPV and home built", well fair enough, sounds good, but as far as I know - might be wrong, they haven't put anything out to formally change that, and it first came up a long time ago. So, the summary of that appears to be that unless the wording has actually been changed or clarifications issued, theoretically (1) JB and others like him as part 107 operators, or in fact anyone not covered by the exemption, can only review / fly standard remote ID drones such as DJI, and (2) all those home build hobbyists out there cannot actually fly FPV. Even if that is sorted out, it's still a huge problem, because if he reviews a sub 250g quad, then as it's commercial, the exemption does not apply, so it needs remote ID - let's even assume broadcast remote ID is OK for the sake of argument. You cannot put a remote ID module on a really small quad without it seriously affecting performance. Everything I do is sub 250g, the biggest being typically around 190-220g depending on the build. As performance is what I'm after , I can easily detect a 5-10g change in weight due to a different battery etc. But that, for me, is a big quad. Go down to 100g and it's a lot more noticeable and flight time also seriously goes down, go down to whoop sizes - they do get flown outside - and it probably wouldn't get off the ground, always assuming you could fit the module somewhere in the first place. So, how is he going to review those as he sometimes does at the moment? I assume he isn't. If I were in the states, which I'm not, even as someone who makes low key flights and doesn't publish them, I wouldn't be flying anything that required remote ID if I had anything like that. Reason is I wouldn't fit it on principle, and yes, unlikely to get picked up, but accidents happen - what if I do? I do not want to be the one of whom the FAA decide to make a painful example. It's just a hobby and the benefit is not worth the risk to me. That's just me as a low key private individual, JB is a lot more visible to the FAA. Depressing. I see all these interviews with officials being interviewed, and they all look jolly, helpful and reasonable. But it's not enough, as well as looking where the face is pointing, one needs to look at which way the feet are going - they do not appear to be the same. I hope I'm wrong, but if not this would be a great loss to the FPV community, and a disaster for him personally. And all to achieve what? Nothing.
Hey Geeksvana, I was wondering if you could give me some advice? I'm travelling to Gran Canaria in a few weeks to balito beach and was wondering if I would be allowed to fly my dji mini 2 se drone there near the beach. I'm new to all this so not sure. I know I have to take the test and register the drone but am I actually allowed to fly it there? Thanks.
A sequel with Nick Burns to demonstrate the absolute stupidity of it - a clip of him trying to review a tiny whoop with a remote ID module on it maybe!!!!
@geeksvana A splendid Blend to make the perfect cocktail for both FPV and Camera Drone enthusiasts to consume. You know you have a true love for the hobby when you spend hours on end editing and splicing video to get it right. It's not cut and dried. But oh! The feeling of accomplishment makes it all worth it! Now! If we can just get the law makers to stop comparing DJI Drones to TIK-Tok and wanting to ban sales in the US when the American companies are just trying to clear the field.
I laughed at the bit where the FAA said they won't enforce TRUST because they need to get the message out. I've had my drones registered with the FAA for several years now and have yet to receive one email from the FAA even making me aware of Remote ID. If it wasn't for RU-vid i would have no clue.
See what it says here: www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_flyers. As far as I can see they could well argue uploading takes you out of the exemption. They give the example of posting to a school website, not much difference. The two points they make there are firstly that financial gain is not the only key criteria, it's why you are doing it, but also they say, if in doubt, part 107. Whether they would argue that might depend on how often you upload.
