- Join
- Aug 16, 2019
- Messages
- 894
You may already be familiar with Kittyhawk from there role in trying to make the FAA's B4UFLY app more useful. They are one of the entities likely to operate as a USS under the FAA's proposals for remote ID, so they have a stake in how the NPRM is implemented.
I ran across this article in TechCrunch and found it interesting. I don't agree with everything that's said, particularly those things justifying the creation of USSs in general, but they do have a few points worth pondering. I appreciate the fact that they believe the what the FAA has proposed is too broad, unnecessarily complex, prohibitively expensive and needs to be broken down into a tiered system. I like that they emphasize the NPRM requires too much data based on the supposed potential for wrong doing. This is another piece of the information puzzle that can be used for FAA NPRM comment before it closes after March 2nd.
Also, DJI posted Commenting Tips for the NPRM a few days ago that are worth considering.
I ran across this article in TechCrunch and found it interesting. I don't agree with everything that's said, particularly those things justifying the creation of USSs in general, but they do have a few points worth pondering. I appreciate the fact that they believe the what the FAA has proposed is too broad, unnecessarily complex, prohibitively expensive and needs to be broken down into a tiered system. I like that they emphasize the NPRM requires too much data based on the supposed potential for wrong doing. This is another piece of the information puzzle that can be used for FAA NPRM comment before it closes after March 2nd.
Also, DJI posted Commenting Tips for the NPRM a few days ago that are worth considering.
Last edited: