This was sent to me by Aloft Hobbies
Not sure of the truth
But the CAA likes to follow the FAA



The FAA's proposed Remote ID will decimate the RC Model Hobby
If you are like me and love flying remotely controlled aircraft,  or would like to see the hobby continue to be an affordable and enjoyable, or just want to see its educational value continue for future generations, then you need to take action right now.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) not only makes it nearly impossible for some to fly, it will also make it very expensive for those that try. The requirements for the manufacturer's to meet these requirements are so complex that they financially threaten the model aviation industry. The requirements in many ways are beyond what a licensed pilot is required to do to fly a full scale aircraft.

When it comes to flying at approved fields, you basically have one chance to get your field approved, after that no new fields can be approved, but existing fields can be removed. The FAA does not want to get into the workload of approving fields, so they simply will not. Ultimately this looks like a method to end the hobby in its tracks.

I would like to share an article by our good friend Scott Page that he wrote about this threat from the FAA:

The FAA published their plan requiring broadcast from all aircraft weighing over 250 grams (0.55 pounds) on Dec 31. Don’t be misled by the term “drone” in the NPRM. The FAA uses the term “drone” to apply to all Unmanned Aircraft Systems(UAS), this includes everything we fly via remote control and may even include free flight and control line.

Once one dives into the 319 page NPRM in depth it details how the FAA is proposing to progressively annihilate the hobby. This NPRM proposes to make it illegal for a landowner to fly over their own land in the short term, and eventually eliminate model flying fields. There are many many levels of concern. Grouping Line of Sight (LOS) modeling in with the regulations of Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS) operations is a one size fits all solution that is inappropriate. Making it impossible to establish new flying fields, or even move an existing club flying field to a new location is well beyond what Congress mandated in the FAA reauthorization act of 2018.

It’s seriously imperative that all interested reach out to the FAA and to all elected representatives.

This NPRM is ONLY open for public comment until March 2. The AMA, AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association), and EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) as well as others petitioned in vain for an extension to the comment period. In response to the requests the FAA replied on January 28:

“...the need for remote identification of UAS increasingly has become important as new public safety and national security concerns arise regarding the use of UAS. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that any extension of the comment period, and the subsequent delays in promulgation of a final rule implementing remote identification of UAS, would not be consistent with the safety and security objectives of the proposed rule.
Therefore, your request to extend the comment period for the Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems NPRM is denied. The comment period for the NPRM closes on Monday, March 2, 2020.”
Sorry, this just doesn't compute. When ALL of the MAJOR aviation associations are asking for an extension, why aren't they listening?

Hey, why are all of the major aviation associations siding with the RC Model Hobby?
Because they know the majority of their members started right here in the hobby, and many are still very active. Maybe the FAA just doesn't understand how much education comes from these models. Maybe they don't understand that the majority of pilots and aviation professionals started off flying RC planes? Maybe they don't care about STEM programs and the promise they have for the nation?