Its hardly baseless, since just a few posts up yesterday, you describe that there is no regulation that says you can't fly within 5 miles of an airport, and it's only a guideline that you stay below 400' AGL as a hobbyist. Both are 100% incorrect, which is why I questioned the misinformation.
It was baseless, as it assumed / implied I did such things, specifically fly above 400 feet AGL or, illegally, within 5 miles of an airport. To date I have tried to avoid doing those things illegally, and followed the necessary processes. I did not say there was no restrictions on flying within 5 NM of an airport, I said there were restrictions to both distance to an airport and altitude, however I said they were both guidelines, vs regulations. At the time I wrote that that was, as you pointed out, incorrect. They both became regulation 9 days prior, a change of / to regulations I pointed out myself before you had a chance to. I came back to review what I had posted, realized the wording was poor / incorrect and the change date was passed, however it was after the edit period, so I could not change what I had posted.
Yes, I had forgotten, until an hour or so after posting, the new regs went into place 9 days before I made that post, I knew they were coming, but they really do not impact the way I fly, much, so I was less diligent about exactly when they started.
To be clear, I try to always fly within the rules, even before the rules were rules and only suggestions. I will, occasionally, fly at low level over my own property, for example to inspect antennas. Technically illegal today, or at least it is at the front of my property, 150 meters inside the mapped 5 NM radius, the back of my property is "legal" as it is beyond 5 NM, I am sometimes not diligent about staying only at the back half of my property. However if an aircraft hits my drone at 40 feet over my property he is below the tops of my trees, below 7 large antennas on top of towers, and below several thousand feet of wire in my three Rhombics and various other wire antennas. He has bigger problems than my drone. So yeah, if I did that today it might be a technical violation of the reg, but I am quite certain it is no threat to aviation.
The new regulations are not the same limitations at all. LAANC requests require approval by the FAA and any ATC facilities involved, which is vastly different than a simple notification. It's no longer a matter of going out with your drone, calling the tower, and telling them that you're going flying. The 400' AGL "guideline" is also no longer a guideline. It is regulation. Of course, the 5NM rule can be waived at the fixed RC parks and such, but that's neither here nor there.
You and I are interpreting things differently. I see the new regulations as the same limitations to operations that existed before, only now they are better defined and have, potentially, more teeth behind them. If you were in compliance before you are today, with the exception of now, today, there is no process to add to the existing approved flying areas within 5 NM of an airport. There may, or may not, be such a process in the future.
The LAANC, and how it will be used for hobby drone operations, will be interesting to see. Yes, it is not the same thing, not as simple in some cases, as notifying the airfield. But to be honest, some airfields were impossible to notify, and some airfields felt they should always tell the drone operator "no", regardless of where or when or even if they could say no. With any luck the LAANC will result in more uniformity and less ambiguity.
I guess I can see your point with DJI including it, and it's probably a noble gesture in an attempt to make things look safer, but I still contend that it's a solution in search of a problem. Since each drone has to now be registered and receive a reg number, it would make WAY more sense to me to require UAS to have ADS-B transmitters on board as well, and perhaps be automatically activated over a certain altitude, say 50-100' or such. While there are a lot of drones in use, I'm sure it's not enough at any given time to cause significant clutter to aircraft displays, and if it is, they can always be filtered by altitude. Airliners, for example, would not see the UAS when they're cruising at FL350 or such.
For hobby use each drone does not have to be registered, that part is unchanged. For commercial use each drone must be registered, but for hobby use the operator must be registered and each drone (over 0.55 lbs and under 55 lbs) must bear the operators registration number. For example, all of my drones / RC aircraft carry the same number. Over 55 lbs each drone must be individually registered, hobby use or not.
While it may make more sense for a drone to carry an ADS-B transponder, I rather doubt such a thing will happen. At least, any time soon. I am not sure how small and light such a system (transponder and separate from flight systems battery) could be made and still be useful, but I would bet not much under 200 grams in itself. For a small drone half its weight might be transponder in such a case.
The 250 gram (0.55 lbs) limit is interesting. Initially all you found in this weight category (250 grams or less) were low cost "toys", but that is changing. An entire new group of under 250 gram drones are starting to pop up, and they are becoming quite capable. Further, the FAA web site has dropped some of the "under 250 gram" wording, it is less clear about there being a 250 gram lower limit to registration, although most guides still say there is.
The other issue with the registration process and weight limits is that some people assume the rules don't apply if the drone or pilot do not have to be registered. Below 250 grams (maybe) you don't have to register the pilot or put a number on the drone. But does that mean the rules don't apply? Is a 12 year old flying a 4 ounce mini drone in his back yard 2 miles from an airport in violation? More to the point, is he a danger to aviation?
I feel this "yard flying" issue will have to be specifically addressed at some point, and probably not too far in the future. I am not saying make it illegal, I am saying clearly state if it is legal or not, and what restrictions apply. As I interpret it today it is not legal, but that is probably needlessly restrictive.
This is a tough nut to crack meaningfully. It is easy to go over the top with restrictions, it is very hard to put the minimum possible restriction in place while still providing the required level of safety and control. 30 years ago this was a non-issue, despite the fact that RC aircraft were potentially just as much a danger to aviation. 30 years ago any Joe Blow off the street could not go out, buy an aircraft for the first time and with no experience, and 2 hours later have it cruising around in the LAX traffic pattern. It took time, effort, and expense to get to the point you could keep an RC model in controlled flight in a dangerous to aviation area. This was a natural filter of sorts.
T!
