Remote ID Compliance Research

Quick Summary

There appears to be a large number and large percentage of registrations that are non-compliant with the regulations. This is ONLY of the Part 47 N number registration database and NOT the Part 48 Drone Zone method.

I picked DJI, XAG, EA Vision, and Talos. I picked those off the top of my head. Those are the top 4 manufacturers I deal with on a daily basis.  These numbers below are ONLY for those 4 aircraft. I didn’t do a total population of the ALL drones or all spray drones. I’m doing this for free so I’m not getting paid to do a complete study of everything everywhere. Here are the 3 major points.

• Total Number of All Registered DJI, Talos, EA Vision, and XAG Aircraft that Appear Non-Compliant  4,739
• Of the 4757, only 18 (0.38%) had their broadcast module serial number on their registration.
• Percentage of All Part 47 Registered DJI, Talos, EA Vision, and XAG Aircraft that Appear Non-Compliant   63.53%

Background

The FAA created the remote identification regulations. It requires that drones manufactured in the United States are produced to standard remote ID specifications. Part 89 also applies to the end operators.

If you have a standard remote ID aircraft, 14 CFR 89.110(b)(4) says, “The Certificate of Aircraft Registration of the unmanned aircraft used in the operation must include the serial number of the unmanned aircraft, as per applicable requirements of parts 47 and 48 of this chapter, or the serial number of the unmanned aircraft must be provided to the FAA in a notice of identification pursuant to § 89.130 prior to the operation.”

If your aircraft is not standard remote ID-equipped, you can retrofit it with a broadcast module. 89.115(a)(1)(ii) requires of the operator “The Certificate of Aircraft Registration of the unmanned aircraft used in the operation must include the serial number of the remote identification broadcast module, as per applicable requirements of parts 47 and 48 of this chapter, or the serial number of the unmanned aircraft must be provided to the FAA in a notice of identification pursuant to § 89.130 prior to the operation.”

Either way, you have to put a remote ID number on the registration paperwork.

Some manufacturers have gone to great lengths to obtain standard remote ID declarations of compliance with the FAA to comply with the Part 89 regulations. Others have not. People are importing in and selling non-compliant drones in the United States. At that point, it’s up to the operator to understand this and correctly register the drone to a broadcast module.

14 CFR 47.17 says you have to put the unique remote ID number on the registration application.

Furthermore, in the future, Part 108 is going to require all of the Part 108 aircraft to have standard remote ID (NOT broadcast module ID).  Proposed Part 108 NPRM.  § 108.200 says, “(a) Remote Identification. Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no operator may operate an unmanned aircraft under this part unless all the following requirements are met: (1) Standard remote identification. The unmanned aircraft must meet the requirements for a standard remote identification unmanned aircraft under part 89 of this chapter.”

Important point: I want to be clear here….there are compliant Chinese and Non-Chinese manufacturers and there are non-compliant Chinese and Non-Chinese companies. It is not a Chinese vs non-Chinese discussion we are having here.  It’s a compliant versus non-compliant discussion.

How well has it turned out?

Findings:

The spreadsheet file I have of the raw data, my formulas, etc. is located here. Please check my homework.  Let me know if I did anything incorrectly.

Why This Matters

• The playing field is NOT level. All sorts of manufacturers are putting effort into being compliant with Part 89 and obtaining remote ID declarations. They have HIGHER costs due to regulatory compliance and are still competing against manufacturers who have not put in the effort to have their drones be compliant.
• I think large chunks of these operators are clueless as to all of this. They assume the manufacturer did everything correctly. They register their drones to the aircraft’s airframe serial number instead of the remote ID number.
• The manufacturer should be the one to fix this instead of pushing it to the end customer to purchase a broadcast module and make it all compliant.  Most are clueless to this.
• With Part 108 coming out sometime soon, it requires the aircraft to be standard remote ID aircraft.  Why are we letting the entire industry continue on like remote ID does not matter, or the registration does NOT matter?

How do we fix this? My suggestions

Mitigation 1. Don’t add the aircraft to the FAA-2023-1271 docket until a standard remote ID DOC.

Have the Section 44807 guys NOT approve an aircraft to the FAA-2023-1271 docket until the aircraft has a standard remote ID. Pushing compliance onto the operator results in less than 1% compliance, based on my numbers.

It’s WAYYYY easier to make a small check box on their checklist for them to review than have the registration branch examiners or the FAA inspectors issuing the Part 137 operating certificates check for this ONLY.  Sure the other guys should check also but it’s wayyyyy easier to check by just memorizing a couple manufacturer codes off the top of your head. For example, my staff and I know 1581F is DJI, 1863F is XAG, etc.  It take like 5 minutes of effort to memorize the top 5 brands for their ICAO codes.

That would be an extreme amount of waste of FAA resources to have ONLY the registry branch of the Part 137 operating certificate guys do this. That all being said, I think the FAA registry branch and AFS760 issuing Part 137 operating certificates should also independently check to make sure everything is correct, but it’s a quick eyeball to know the top so many manufacturer codes.

Note. If you are FAA, you can copy-paste my table of broadcast module codes down below. You can then use it to create your own ICAO manufacturer codes cheat sheet.

Mitigation 2. Have Registration Check for Compliance Remote ID Serial Numbers

Yes, I understand that it’s annoying and one more thing for them to check but a quick checklist can screen out a bunch of these non-compliant serial numbers.

Mitigation 3. Have AFS760 Gate Keep the Part 137 Operating Certificates.

Don’t issue a Part 137 operating certificate unless the aircraft is compliant with its registration and has a remote ID serial number.

Methodology of How We Did It

Step 1.

We lawfully obtained a copy of the FAA Part 47 registry database. Opened in Excel. This shows the manufacturer, model, and aircraft serial number.

Deleted Columns D,E,F,I, M, N, O, R-AC, AF-AI to make things faster. Later deleted

to just clean it up more.

Step 2.

I went to https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Search/MakeModelResult and search for a specific manufacturer. I got to the top left and copy to the bottom right of the table. I then paste in a new excel.  I searched XAG, DJI, EA Vision, Talos.   XAG had 1 page of codes. DJI have like 5 pages. I copied the tables into it’s own spreadsheet. I formatted column A so that it is in the text format.

I cleaned up some of the entries that were not applicable.

I ran a formula to find manufacturer code’s based upon Sheet 1. If it we have a hit, it says “drone”.

I sorted based upon “drone” and deleted the rest. Only “drone” remains.

Step 3.

On 12/11/2025, we went to the FAA DOC list and searched for the manufacturer codes for the following manufacturers:

• DJI – 1581F
• XAG – 1863F
• Talos – 2104F
• EA Vision – Unknown. There is no remote ID DOC to find out this information.

Step 3.

We searched on the FAA DOC list  for broadcast module manufacturers to identify as many of the extra ICAO codes we could screen for, just to rule out any of these broadcast module-only options.  I went to the DOC website. I looked only for RID, accepted, and broadcast module only.

I went through each of the entries to find the manufacturer code which is the first 4 numbers of the remote ID serial range according to the ANSI standard.

Here is the list of the manufacturer codes we found that made broadcast modules so you can independently verify me.

Step 4.

In Column N, I created a formula so that it checks Column C for the manufacturer code and matches it up with the manufacturer name.

In Column O, I wrote a formula so that if DJI, then it checks first 4 letters of column B. If yes, then displays yes. If no, displays no.  Does the same pattern for Talos and XAG.

In column P, it checks O and if no, checks to see if first 4 letters in column B match up with the remote ID codes we pulled from all of the broadcast module DOCs at the FAA’s DOC website.  Put all of those manufacturer codes in their own tab.

Step 5. Created a summary page to show total numbers and percentages.

Jonathan Rupprecht

Aviation Attorney. FAA Certificated Commercial Pilot and Flight Instructor (CFI/CFII). Contributor at Forbes.com for Aerospace and Defense.