Why the FAA needs Remote ID: A Deep Dive into Unmanned Traffic Management 

Great explanation Greg! Thank you for what you do to keep us informed, I appreciate you!

When the FAA begins attaching transponders to Canadian geese weighing over .55 lbs, then I'll know their efforts are honest.

Greg, thanks for keeping us all up to date! I really like what you were saying about Shielded OPS -- it seems silly to ask for clearance every time I want to hover a small heli around in my garden (

Thanks for this video. It is good to get the facts out there and understand the reasons behind these rules and proposals. Well Done!!

I just got to say something that I realized a while ago but I truly grasp the realization that this man Greg truly cares about what he is doing here. I am very happy that I took his class at the Pilot Institute and got my FAA certification for UAS, for more than one reason but in the end the main reason is because I know that Greg here takes what he is doing very seriously. If you were looking for taking a class to get your FAA UAS certification, I would urge you to take Greg’s class at the Pilot Institute online not only for the class itself but to become a student of a teacher that is truly passionate Helping you and his many people become the most efficient and safe legal drone pilots.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Seems there is some really cool tech that UTM/Remote ID will eventually enable, even though it often seems that its just the man cracking down on our fun.

Great Video! Thank you for all the information!

You explained that very well and simple. I thank you for your knowledge.

yes i am following along. thanks for asking randomly in the video.l

Another consideration in bvlos should be when the line of sight is not interrupted by an object or weather but the Drone is too far to be seen. For example if you start from the beach or some high ground and fly straight out a mile you can't see most suas but you could still easily see any manned aircraft. Below 400 ft uas should be permitted to fly in that situation.

You provide the most thorough information on any topic I have watched! I don't think the delivery drones will be feasible until one of two things happen: Battery life gets better and batteries get much smaller or Hydrogen fueled (fuel cell) drones are available. BVLOS perhaps using IOT network as primary or back up means of tracking and controlling. IOT is a low power LongFi network

Thank you for the update!

Greg, I just caught this (a year later) and it was a great presentation of UTM. Traffic Separation and airspace interaction is a very big issue for UAS and manned aircraft working in the same environment. I took a lot of notes from this for our Idaho Public Safety UAS Council meetings. We are very interested in UAS and FAA interaction. We are also interested in the Public Safety side of this as well. I am reading through the ConOps as well, and your presentation brought some great understanding, but also opened up more questions. Thanks for your explanations and looking forward to working in partnership in this endeavor.

Hey Greg. It is going to be fun to watch this play out. Thanks for the info. I have the COP V2.0 open on the other monitor and ready for reading. (I am a little late to the game.) Best, ~greg

Hi Greg, (81%-reviewing my weak areas) Great presentation. Thanks for the possible details of our drone flight future.

I'm glad this came up on my recently subscribed RU-vid feed. Thank you. I know this is only 3 months old but I am interested and will be watching for updates. I heard that some people are worried that the operator's location will be made available. I am not worried about that myself but others who want to "hide" from those who "want to find out who is buzzing their house or activities". I myself will not be doing such things intentionally. So, my question is are they contemplating operator location sharing? Another item related and could be like to UTM. I am a boater and we use AIS to know where other boats are and their direction and speed etc. Good thing. This a good thing in fog etc. I know that around New York City they have traffic control in the busy harbor which is much like ATC and very helpful to those huge ships, barges etc that really need to be controlled so they don't crash into each other. These ships don't stop and turn on a dime.

Great video, wealth of information from an expert on unmanned and manned flying. However, I still see potential issues with remote I.d. Being shared with the public. I’m private pilot and a part 107, so I’m aware and responsible when I fly any of my Drones.

Excellent comprehensive presentation- thank you. I think remote ID and and the network concept is a general step in the right direction -especially in being able to ID the few "bad actors" that spoil it for the rest of the community, and creating greater visibility for everyone that shares the airspace. During flight training in a Cessna within Class Bravo airspace between 2500 and 3500 MSL, a UAV flew past us (head on) multiple times at approximately the same altitude with very little separation during 2 recent training sessions. I literally turned my head to see it zip past the cockpit window within a few wing spans. It was very difficult to spot due to its relatively small size and and the glare of the sun. I doubt that we could have performed an evasive maneuver in time to avoid a collision should the UAV pilot strayed into our direct path. I also pilot a small UAV (below tree-top levels) for fun and I can't even imagine being that reckless with my drone around manned aerial vehicles.

Im learned a lot. Thanks Thanks

Actually that network is already in place. I was flying my drone from a parking lot nearby, and I saw there was another pilot, and I went over there and told him what I was doing and for how long and at what altitude and direction,and he told me the same about what he was doing. It worked fine.

Thanks, good job

Thank you so much Greg for the work you put into your research for these videos. Here's a question regarding shielded ops. The way I understand it is that this will only come into play for drones weighing over 149 grams? We're still talking about sub 250 gram drones being exempt from the remote ID regulations, and I'm guessing this will be the same for shielded ops. To put it another way, I'm thinking the shielded ops would exempt drones weighing over that 250 gram limit from having to comply with the upcoming remote ID regulations for such flights, thus allowing larger drones to circumvent the remote ID regulations for extremely low altitude flights. I guess that that would be one of the few ways current drones weighing above 250 grams could be more than an expensive paper weight. That is unless the operations with such drones are limited to designated areas. I guess the best way to go for non commercial UAV pilots such as myself is to consider drones such as the Autel Nano plus or the expected DJI Mini 3. Anyway; love your videos. Keep them coming.

YES! That's the first time I've heard a serious discussion that mentions "shielded ops" and "local BVLOS". That's EXACTLY what I need so I can legally fly FPV by myself in my back yard (away from neighbors, below tree level), or other safe locations (e.g. a large empty field). That type of drone flying is very low risk. Yet the current FAA proposals would outlaw it. It is critical that the FAA addresses this somehow - if they don't their drone regulations will be a failure.

Thank you

Great video Greg - Anything that helps us all fly safer without to much intrusion is Ok with me. Steve

Excellent detailed explanation and discussion. Remote ID is closer than 2023. Manufacturers are required to comply and start building remote ID enabled UAS in 11 short months, by mid September 2022. In an effort to jumpstart the process, Remote ID, already enables some flight over people. So Remote ID could be available today. It would be interesting to know where manufacturers are with their plans. How will this affect current models? You would think Remote ID would be a necessary future proofing for new models. No add-on modules announced yet? Thanks again Greg for shedding light on the topic.

GOLDEN

Thanks for all the great info. I agree with and support the concept of Remote ID for the UAS, but do not understand why the FAA in getting stuck on wanting the location of the operator. Is this to be able to prove VLOS?

Excellent video thankyou! Totally agree with shielded operation exemptions. The more I hear about this, the more it is obvious that UTM and remote ID should apply to commercial operations and bvlos recreational only. A much better solution for vlos recreational uav is mandatory carriage of adsb detector and, in busier sites, an aircraft radio in addition to compliance with existing rules. One thing the FAA has forgotten is that the industry talent pool starts with recreational flying. To regulate and charge money for flying a foamie at the park will only be detrimental to the industry PS. The only serious uav/manned aircraft collisions have been with commercial drones or bvlos uavs. Still, no one died. UAV multi rotors still have a perfect fatality record

I am knew to drone operation. I have a Skydio 2 and just got my remote controller. I just started looking at your videos and wanted to ask you how to go about getting ready to use my drone in the US and in Iceland and then Denmark and thru the rest of Europe and the UK. I plan on doing a youtube channel. I am interested in doing this next year when things are hopefully safer. Thanks. Love the videos that I have viewed so far.

How will amateur drone pilots connect into the system when operating in locations beyond cellular coverage? An answer of “they can’t without cell service, or without a 4/5G capable device to connect in an area with cell service” would be unacceptable. I already have that problem trying to use my iPad without built in 4G unless I’m within range of an accessible WIFI signal. I hate to be a whiner, but here it is: there are actual problems, there are perceived problems, and there are irritations. All this would go down better if an actual, demonstrated problem could be defined that logically and statistically demanded a solution at this level, or any level for that matter. But to me, and presumably many other drone pilots, this is just misguided politics where an irritation has been red-tagged. I’m also a multiengine instrument private pilot, and I don’t see it from that perspective either. Thank you for all the work in being the middleman. You are doing a great job for both camps.

I don't have a problem with UTM. I have a real problem with every gomer with a smart phone on tablet/phone seeing where I am while I fly. Code it so only law enforcement, FAA and other traffic sees the information.

Riddle me this: I recently flew a UAV on the edge of a Class D with a LAANC reservation. Concurrent with my flight, an aerial spray helicopter transited my area on a return trip to the airport from a neighboring township while indicating approximately 500 MSL on ADS-B. My drone was at 375 AGL and ground elevation is about 100. The heli passed within 1000 feet laterally. I was monitoring tower and heard the heli pilot call for and receive Class D clearance. But ATC uttered not a word about potential conflict with a UAV. Had a Part 91 or similar flight been anywhere as near the heli as the drone, the controller would certainly have issued a traffic advisory. As a prudent Part 61 pilot I certainly would have climbed to at least 1000 and/or changed course in response. So the open questions are: Is the tower controller actually advised of LAANC reservations in their airspace, and if so, why don’t they apprise pilots accordingly? There seems to be a gap between FAA pronouncements and FAA intentions regarding UAV regulation.

Basically, Class G is going to become controlled airspace. They are currently talking about "informed air space" it seems, but with CBOs and the various levels of UAS Service Providers, and that they are already talking about "drone zones" that schools and other places can establish, they are planning to set up controls within this currently uncontrolled air space. Like there are remote airplane clubs now that have clear places to fly but they are more likely to get crowded. You can't see someone in a clearing a couple of miles away from your clearing in the forest or foothills. But it would be nice to be aware that you have fellow PICs around to help avoid conflicts. They envision that the drone craze will eventually expand enough that it will create conflicts for flight space likely in the areas of cities or where there are enough people to make such conflicts. Such would not be necessary in those so called sparsely populated places. I suspect there will be rules for that too. Logically you should get permission to fly in someone's field (not your own.) They would codify this. In Canada already you have to put out cones. The idea of making people aware of drones around will created the need for signs or designated spaces. Right now, this seems like overkill, and to some, overreach. But in the future, this could be a problem. Behind my house I have ponds and forests. I can fly from my back yard. That's fun, but what about new vistas and new adventures? Competition for flight space could happen....eventually. And like every government, if it could possibly will exist sometime we must make rules for it. And like all rules made for issues not yet in existence, they will have to be modified so often it will make people dizzy.

Excellent update Greg! Most grateful! Tony :-)

For the most part, I think Remote ID is a good thing. Other aircraft should know where my drone is flying; it helps keep the airspace safe. I also love all the concepts Greg talked about in this video; it's really cool how it could possibly work in the future. I think the biggest issue most people have with RI is ole Jim Bob knowing where I am standing, so he can come hassle me during a mission. That part is not only stupid but dangerous. Hopefully, the FAA will limit that information to only LEOs and other public service agencies that might actually need to know that information.

I agree with the remote ID . What I don't agree with is the general public having access to find out where the drone pilot is unless I can have a shotgun in hand

Greg, question about the current LAANC: when a pilot obtains authorization for "xyz" grid, does LAANC send that authorization to the local tower (in my case, KPRC) and they can see that there's "x" number of UAVs flying in that grid area, and for how long?

Greg. Can "Shielded" operations include mountainous terrain, canyons, etc...? How constrained (width and length) should the canyon have to be before it is considered "shielded?"

Should I worry about my pigeons requiring remote ID collars in the near future? They often fly above 400 feet. Could I be fined?

If I missed it, I apologize, but where do things like ultra-lights and balloons fit into this? I would expect them to "participate", but I know nothing about how such are slotted into the FAA's overview.

How would such a system work in remote areas where there is no network? I have had issues with manned aircraft in remote Utah locations that have come to ground level sight seeing (at least that's what it looked like they were doing) and there was no cellular network service.

One of the things I don't understand with Remote ID is this. Why are drones required to have transponders, when not all manned aircraft are required to use them?

I get the broadcast requirement but the network requirement for everyone and takeoff point is ridiculous. Network coverage should be applied only to services that require BVLOS such as delivery services. Autonomous missions that works require that network connection should also be restricted to a higher AGL than hobbyists.

Thanks Greg. I appreciate you helping us understand.

FACTS!

We will outnumber but still compete for air space with "sport pilots". My dad grew up in the barnstorming era, was a sport pilot before there was such a term, and preferred to scare the pants off of anyone who dared to ride with him. His idea of fun was to fly down levee roads and then move below the cars as they went by above, gathering corn tassels in the landing gear, etc. My point is that he lived in a small town, flew out of a farmer's grass field and that "airport" is still there, they still fly Breezys and other odd configurations of home-built "aircraft" and to many of them, 500' or so is the maximum ceiling they chose to fly. I live in a suburb with a small airport and they fly Piper Cubs, Aronicas, etc, and also don't fly very high. I once had to RTH as one was flying toward where I was flying the drone. (Fortunately, they fly slow.) I prefer to fly when camping and in rural areas where this is rarely an issue, and I am sure most don't have this problem, but we will have to be alert at all times unless flying at or below treetop level! I am starting to see other drones in areas where I thought no one else was around, so...

To have as an option for compliance and cooperation, just using Aloft Air Control instead of an additional module would be nice. Not saying it should be required though, since it would need internet access, just an optional alternative for us hobbiests that are wanting to be responsible and complie.

Thank you for translating UTM into something understandable!

There are always "good reasons" for bad ideas. If you give authority to a government they WILL abuse it.

All these rules they sure know how to take the fun out of drone flying.

Can you please explain if amazon is temporarily blocking a certain amount of air space for deliveries they can control the air space from a hobbyist that flying recreational so how is that fair to when they delivering in different area all day.

Yeah I really need remote ID to be able entertain myself flying around below 400 AGL around my 5 acre property out in the desert, at least 10 miles away from any of the controlled airspaces on shown on my DJI app. TFR's show up on the weather app that I check multiple times a day and before I fly.

Yeah I’m just concerned about FPV, and always having a visual observer. They need to fix that!

FAA does NOT need RID. We (unmanned) stay under 400ft, manned aviation stays above 500ft, within 5 miles from an airport. It's so simple. We already have rules and laws that work fine. Nobody has ever been killed EVER from the recreational use of a multirotor Quadcopter in the history of all time. This is not needed. This is more about money and government overreach.

UTM and RFID is going to end recreational flying as we know it today. First, 44809 pilots are going to have to be and demonstrate education beyond TRUST and may be confined to community based facilities such as AMA RC parks. In any event, penalties for “wreckless “ operations and violation of the rules will become stiffer. I see way too many “showboats” flagrantly violating VLOS and altitude restrictions on RU-vid and don’t take their privileges seriously, basically thumbing their noses at the FAA. As a retired Part 61 private and current Part 107 pilot, I have great respect for the rules and understand the need for them.

On most farms and ranches the nearest neighbors are miles apart, VLOS prevents any safety issues yet each and every farmer/rancher must spend the time and money on a FAA license then register and label the aircraft before they can 'legally' check farm/ranch operations. The only people that benefit from the FAA rules are the FAA built infrastructure that was originally put in place to promote producing pilots, something it now fails at. There is no reason why I should have to drive to a location, 3 hours one way in my case, to take a computer based test other than keeping the testing sites in money. As far as Remote ID, a waste of power and for aircraft without RID, money, less performance with a module added that no one can receive the RID signals from. The problem with government has always been one size fits all along with selective enforcement. There are no UTM issues for most farms and ranches, most flights are less than 50 feet AGL and the only aircraft around are aircraft that are ordered for crop dusting or surface treatment. When the FAA enforces Network RID the cost goes up, each NRID device has a monthly cost for the cellular service plus whatever the FAA middle operation charges, and this doesn't take into account the cellular devices battery suck broadcasting every second nor the fact there is many areas devoid cellular coverage for CAT M1 devices..

I really do not know when you find the time to do all that you do. So THANK YOU for all that you do for the sUAS community. In your presentation, unless I missed it, you did not comment on the ADS-B system and how it would fit it the UTM concept. What are your thoughts?

What frequencies will be used to transmit remote ID and what will the transmission range be?

Is DJI mini 3 pro remote-id compliant ?

Outstanding contribution!!

Thank you Greg. Great presentation of UTM. I love your course-I'm 55% done. Have you/ will you speak/spoken about rogue drone flights (unregistered, uninformed, arrogant) that fly w/o regard to safety or FAA guidelines? Specifically, my Eye Dr mentioned a drone buzzing over children's soccer, baseball, rugby, etc. that distracted players and was dangerously close. How can sports groups work to educate and maybe geo-fence areas when games, practices are happening? Then, the other issues are about UAS flights over airports 2000-6000ft that could cause an accident.

WHAT HAPPENS TO all those 200 gram drones that will now weigh in at 300-350 grams?

How heavy are these broadcasting modules going to be?

Do you think the FAA will use remote ID as an enforcement tool? I can see where this is going. If you go 410 ft. you get a ticket in the mail. I realize, the importance of a system as you described, but with that, comes big brother putting his boot on the back of our necks!!! Manned aircraft must always come first. Their rear end is in the seat. With drone deliveries gaining speed, something has to be done, but i fear more government overreach.

Are users willing to pay for data to broadcast their signal to a cloud? What if FAA set up a system with cell phone providers that in controlled airspace around airports, maybe 0-200 ft AGL grids?) they would receive any signals operating in that area? If a LAANC or other approval was granted then it all should be good right? Drones could have Remote ID receive with existing tech right? Beyond controlled airspace around airports, is another nationwide network necessary? However is Amazon, UPS, and other companies want to start flying their own fleets, then perhaps. But with all of this comes $ needed from us who needs to pay for it. Basically, there are probably existing networks in place or going up that can handle this. Drone apps could automatically transmit LAT/LONG to an FAA database that could populate a map with a 1-2 mile caution radius of that location. I see that already in DROTAMS on charts.

All of the future goals sound great: weather and traffic alerts, cooperation with manned aircraft, BVLOS, shielded operations. I just don't see how broadcast remote ID is even a stepping stone in that direction. Requiring LAANC for every flight everywhere would make more sense, because then you're at least building a connected database system. Short range broadcast doesn't seem like it builds any useful connections or relationships, and if it's used at all, most drone pilots will just be sending info and not listening. It's not for sense and avoid. There's no information distribution network. It doesn't make sense. It's only a burden with no benefit.

Hello Greg, I have one question which is, Will remote I.D. will share any personal information or is it just information on the type of drone that you are flying at the time?

I feel as if UAS should not have the burden to give way to manned aircraft if they are operating near a structure. For example, In the utility industry, we conduct inspections of smoke stacks, communication towers, etc. and are always within 100-200 ft max. I know that manned aircraft are supposed to avoid these structures by at least 500 - 1000 feet vertically/ 2000 ft horizontally; however, this isn’t always the case. Who is to blame if hypothetically a manned aircraft does collide with a UAS operating within this volume of space? Seems to me like there should be an exception.

I got two mini in December 2021

Nah. Anonymous beacon technology like flarm is just fine to broadcast to prevent collisions.

Drones, like the Mavic Air 2, have obstacle avoidance systems built in. Why not further develop that into the TCAS system that private and commercial aircraft have. In that system two aircraft in an impending collision conflict "see" each other and automatically maneuver to avoid each other.

For these potential temporary airspace restrictions, will geofencing be put in place?

Not wishing more regulation on them, but wouldn't it be more important to implement remote ID on paramotors and other ultralights flying under part 103 long before worrying about small uas?

As always, great video. I understand that it's all abut safety and i support this system. I just don't understand what is the use of aPIC LOCATION is needed for non government services . Keep them videos coming and again thank you.

Why does the faa hate fpv so much. Millions of flights ZERO casualties. Safest aircraft ever flown but the Karen's have the loudest voice. National parks for example. Sleeping bear dunes in Michigan, drones not allowed but you can rip a oil and gas filled dunebuggy all over. NPS policy makes no sense. My loudest drone doesn't even come close to the sound of Harleys. But often I'm in the woods and the only sound is nature, airplanes and Harleys. Maybe if all of these rules were fair and made sense the FAA wouldn't experience such pushback. I'm interested to see if the non elected FAA choses to create a bunch of non violent offenders or they decide to work for the people who actually pay them. Stop picking on FPV IT'S NOT A CRIME... YET. Truth is, its very safe.

Lots more alphabet soup to remember for the test. I must admit, aloft has been amazingly fast whenever I have used it. I envision that low flying manned aircraft will have to avoid the designated unmanned aircraft flight areas or treat them like we treat the parachute, glider and other fun zones.

This is an edit: This guy is a supper FAN BOY of the FAA. all of these regulations further his business. more regulation less people coming into the business is good for him

Funny how the Manned aircraft tha fly around with a motor and I guess a part parachute require ZERO registration and license, not even a radio.

If they'd legalize long range flying, this whole RID system would be a much easier pill to swallow. I enjoy the challenge of building tiny copters, but I absolutely love remote exploration, but tiny copters and planes are limited greatly by their weight. Heavier vehicles are capable of greater speed, stronger wind resistance, and accessory payload.

we do not need to have remote id! for the hobbyist, it will only be another reason for someone trying to stop the flights, nothing else, period!

Ahhh cute

And unless you are flying in the middle of your own farm pasture, you can pretty much kiss Class 1 goodbye. Go ahead and take the 107. Why do you think it lasts only 2 years before you have to be tested again? The rules are going to change all the time. It is the nature of government to try to protect us from ourselves. Sometimes, that actually makes sense.

The situational awareness piece makes a certain amount of sense. I have two major concerns though. First, this could easily become way too much data to manage while also flying. How do I fumble with my phone to see some alert that just popped up, and likely has no impact on where I am flying without my drone falling out of the sky. Not all of us are flying DJI robots that will just hang in the sky for 5 minutes with no stick input. This is especially true for FPV (gotta take my goggles off). Second, if some Karen uses my remote ID location to come to confront me and causes me to crash who is responsible for the crash and any related damages? My spotter is supposed to be watching the aircraft, not providing security.

@12:45 Remote ID doesn't just provide information to all flying in the airspace. It provides information to everyone within range of your aircraft including personal pilot information. All pilots can understand the need for a way to manage the airspace but if they won't even enforce the rules when we're shot down now how much concern is it when we're stalked with FAA help?

This excessive risk mitigation for an already low risk activity. Remote ID will not prevent bad actors from doing bad things. It will only make it more annoying, EXPENSIVE, and difficult for the vast majority people to fly their hobby unmanned aircraft. It is just unnecessary bureaucracy for no real benefit to anyone but the FAA and their power grab.

The FAA has the app B4UFLY. No need to restrict drones outside that.

OK! So remote ID is going to broadcast the location of the pilot. It seems to me there has to be some laws enacted to protect UAV pilots from harrassment or interferance while piloting a UAS. After all it is already against the law to shoot down a drone. How about protecting the pilot.

Unless the FAA requires a satellite subscription for your satellite capable drone, remote id by cellular or internet will never be possible everywhere as the US lags so far behind in that technology. Unfortunately, it is in those areas we will likely need to be flying. So, we're back to flying inside the children's play area. For what we do, this requirement is just silly. We should just be alert to our surroundings and do what's right.

This is really neat on paper but the average person won't follow this, understand it, bother to learn it or put in the time to operate safely. Most people will see drones as toys and nothing more.

Many airports are in class G. Many GA aircraft live at class G airports!!

I feel the need to add that Amazon delivery by drone is really not gonna work I live in a major metropolitan area I have eight oak trees surrounding my house and any drone piloted by Amazon 20 miles away would have to leave a package in my driveway by the street And people steal packages from front porches why did they think packages will be safe in the middle of your driveway by the street thieves won’t even have to get out of their cars that being said I doubt drone delivery by Amazon is anywhere near in our future as well as unmanned people delivery they can barely get Uber to work in certain areas now and they’re going to stop by and pick me up in a small helicopter and take me to a bar down the street I’m not thinking that’s anywhere near in our future either

you did a great job on presentation, however this is going to be a cluster :) I follow the rules is great but there are so many that want when it becomes overly complicated. I do appreciate what you are doing though...

All about the MONEY..... Who pays for the umbrella services?

We are sending people in to space unmanned craft, knowing that you can see they are also getting ready for a day that cars, air craft of all types can be unmanned and still communicate. whether you like it or not AI has and IS going to change they way we travel.

And who is going to pay for all of this? You and I, that's who, and it isn't going to be cheap!

I just feel like, what if Russia comes here? Don’t we want our tools to be useful as required?

Well I don’t know about anybody else but I am tired of giving my rights and giving my freedoms to these unelected bureaucrats the next thing you know before you can fly your drone in your own backyard you’re going to have to call the FAA and they will send a babysitter to your property to watch you while you fly your drone I don’t know about anybody else but I do not call that freedom.

China will love having all of this info. We are being farmed.

The problem is ppl flying in controlled airspace(to close to airports) they will end up going after the wrong ppl that fly out in the country that fly a little over 400 and further than 👁 can see in other words the hobby will be trashed