Description

RaceDayQuads v. FAA and the Remote ID rule, drones for law enforcement and telehealth, Russian attack drones and drones that recharge from power lines, a DARPA program for underwater drones, and finding lost hikers.

UAV News

D.C. Circuit May Blow Up the Remote Identification Rule for Drones

Oral arguments were heard in the RaceDayQuads v. FAA case where the FAA’s remote identification (RID) rule is being challenged.

In brief, the RID rule applies to small drones (0.55-55 lbs) which would broadcast a “digital license plate” over WiFi and/or Bluetooth with a unique identifier, position, altitude, velocity, control station coordinates, and other “message elements.” The broadcast would be openly accessible by anyone. 

This RID capability must be either hardwired into the drone (Standard Remote ID) or attached externally in the form of a module (Broadcast Module RID or BMID). Drones without RID can only fly in FAA-recognized identification areas (FRIAs) under the purview of community-based organizations and educational institutions.

Manufacturers have until September 2022 to comply. Drone operators have until September 2023 to comply.

RaceDayQuads (RDQ) is a large online retailer that supports first-person view (FPV) drone-racing customers. RDQ’s co-founder and CEO, Tyler Brennan said he seeks “to protect the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens to be free from unreasonable searches from the government when they are flying in their own backyards.” RDQ alleges that:

• The rule is a violation of the Fourth Amendment because it allows warrantless tracking in a backyard.
• The FAA arbitrarily and capriciously relied on undisclosed ex parte communications during the rulemaking process.
• The final rule was not a logical outgrowth from the NPRM.
• The FAA failed to comply with a legal mandate to consult with Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
• The FAA failed to address significant public comments as required by the Administrative Procedure Act. 

For its part, the Government contends:

• Merely requiring RID technology onboard a drone does not equate to an unreasonable search. 
• Planes flying in public view do not give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy.
• Even if the rule did violate the Fourth Amendment, the special needs exception would legally justify it.

A ruling is likely to come sometime in early 2022. 

Autonomous drones to respond to gunshots in new policing system

US company ShotSpotter and Israel-based Airobotics are teaming to provide Israeli law enforcement agencies with a system that detects and locates gunfire, alerts the police, and provides live drone video footage and stills of the scene. ShotSpotter would identify and locate the sound of gunshots with a network of acoustic sensors. Airobotics would deploy its autonomous drones to the ShotSpotter coordinates.

Special Delivery: Drones bring the doctor to you: Medicine’s next big thing?

Manish Kumar, Ph.D., Professor of Mechanical...