Drone Crashes at the White House.

[Dick Pacini]

This is sure to start something about regulation of drones.

http://isp.netscape.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/1001/20150126/8025.htm

[Perry Rose]

Now the bad guys know how close they can get.

[EddyR]

 The Dec issue of Model aviation had seven large adds and two full page adds for these TOYS. I sent a email to them and mentioned several issues about them and how they are adding to the problem. They chose to not respond to my email.
 Also I didn't get my Dec issue until last week.
Ed

[FLOYD CARTER]

They are not "toys" when you can order one custom-built with camera and GPS for about $1000 or more.

F.C.

[Tim Wescott]

And we don't fly toy airplanes?  A quadcopter that can film a wedding or survey a farmer's field is far less of a toy than a control line stunt plane that can only entertain it's pilot and a few onlookers.

[Dennis Leonhardi]

I submit that "toy" or not depends on the user.  A few days ago, an announcer on the radio station I was listening to confessed he'd paid $700 for a drone, then hit a power line on his 2nd flight and completely destroyed the drone.  No sympathy here!

What do you suppose happens if the power in the area is knocked out next time he flies?

When AMA accepts pages and pages of advertising for these ... um, er, ah ... well, "toys" in the hands of many buyers - is the Academy promoting model aviation?  I'm with Eddy on this one ...

Dennis

[Douglas Ames]

The AMA's nightmare has come to pass. ..or should I say it's members?  

I'm so glad I got back into Control Line  

[Tim Wescott]

Some of you are reminding me of a story one of my Dad's employees told me a few years back.

This guy was in the garage of one of his hot-rodding friends, helping a crew of retired guys to work on a Deuce highboy with lake pipes and all the trimmings, just like they all played with back in the day, except that it was actually safe on the road and had shiny paint.

Some kids were cruising up and down the street in a hopped-up Honda -- megaphone pipe, a stereo system that could be used as an aid to seismic mineral surveys, neon-yellow dual windshield wipers, slammed to the ground, etc.

One of the guys said something along the lines of "damned kids.  Those cars ought to be outlawed".

My friend asked "so, don't you see any irony here given what you did in your youth and the way you're reliving it?"

He got uncomprehending looks in return.

So, let me spell it out for you: a quadcopter is a small unmanned thing that flies.  In other words, it's a model aircraft.  By simple logic, then, anyone who flies it is engaged in model aviation.  The AMA is there to -- astonishingly enough -- support model aviation.  Just because quad-copters weren't available when you were a kid doesn't mean that they aren't models.  If you think differently, you need to read a dictionary.

[rustler]

They are not "toys" when you can order one custom-built with camera and GPS for about $1000 or more. F.C.

The difference between men and boys...
Is the price of their toys.

[Larry Borden]

Well said, Tim. I agree. You can't control stupidity. Also those ads some are complaining are completely legal. Capitalism at it's best. They have every right to advertise and AMA has every right to accept their money.

[Steve Fitton]

Tim there is a wrinkle here that is hard to nail down.  It used to be that model airplanes were self limiting in that you actually had to know how to FLY the model to get it anywhere.  There was even a time when you had to know how to get a tiny gas powered engine to run.  These factors tended to limit (to some degree) the number of idiots operating them.  With advances in batteries, software and sensors that allow stability augmentation or autopilot functions, any moron who can work a cell phone can operate a drone.  Its not drones that need regulation, its idiots.  I just don't know how to actually do it, but I hope somebody figures it out soon before the Govt does what it does best and hammers the law abiding while criminals and idiots operate carefree.

[peabody]

What Steve said....and we ALL should be concerned.....

[JoeJust]

They are not "toys" when you can order one custom-built with camera and GPS for about $1000 or more.

F.C.

There has been an add in MA with the price exceeding $10,000!  Locally here in the hinterlands of Eastern WA the Ag community is beginning to take classes at our local CC on how to use Quads for land management ,irragation etc.   The feeling is that Quads can eliminate a lot of time and labor costs that now involve sending someone out to check manually.
Joe

[Motorman]

We really do it to ourselves don't we. Probably just some kid that lost the signal.

MM

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Tim there is a wrinkle here that is hard to nail down.  It used to be that model airplanes were self limiting in that you actually had to know how to FLY the model to get it anywhere.  There was even a time when you had to know how to get a tiny gas powered engine to run.  These factors tended to limit (to some degree) the number of idiots operating them.  With advances in batteries, software and sensors that allow stability augmentation or autopilot functions, any moron who can work a cell phone can operate a drone.  Its not drones that need regulation, its idiots.  I just don't know how to actually do it, but I hope somebody figures it out soon before the Govt does what it does best and hammers the law abiding while criminals and idiots operate carefree.

Tim (and others), a few more years of experience is sometimes better than a dictionary.

The "devices" being sold today are being equipped and advertised as so easy to fly that a complete moron can do it.  And therein lies the problem - as Steve so aptly writes.

Some, like me, have been around a hundred years give or take, and the legislative/regulatory reaction is quite predictable - if this continues, you very well might not be able to buy balsa anymore.  Just like the kids who could no longer buy Ambroid glue at the hobby shop.  It's just a matter of time ...

Your dictionary might be wonderful, but John Q. Public doesn't want to endure a power outage because some moron bought a "model aircraft", as you describe it.  'Nuf said.


Dennis

[Garf]

This is my take on this:

It finally happened. The fools flying drones have invaded the security of the White House. It doesn't matter to the secret service that this one was harmless, probably just wanting a close look at the inhabitants of the White House. The security of the White House has been breached. It could have just as easily been an explosive attack. This will result in legislation that could affect all of us across the board. At the very least, all R/C could be affected. I worry that the government uses a simple shotgun approach to laws and will ban all model airplanes because they know nothing about aeromodeling and could care less about learning. Time will tell.

[Mike Keville]

Those @#$% things aren't 'model airplanes'.  They're expensive toys in the hands of clueless morons.

[Dan McEntee]

A government employee has taken responsibility for it.  Stated it was a recreational activity that went bad.   Now what?

   I hope he's now a "former government employee." But with the way things are today, he'll probably get a promotion.
     We sold a TON of these things in all price ranges for Christmas gifts. I am amazed at over hearing conversations by people that have lost their air frames by flying them when weather conditions aren't right!
   And like last night bad dinner, this to shall pass! Somebody just needs to think up the next big thing!
   Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee

[Brett Buck]

What Steve said....and we ALL should be concerned.....

   Correct. Note this is a direct relationship to all the "we have to grow the events at all costs" argument in stunt and to BOM. The AMA long ago surrendered to the manufacturers and the "run it like a business" approach that many in PAMPA have always fought. This is the end result - wall-to-wall ads for non-modeling toys, marketed to the instant gratification crowd, and, ironically, less and less influence. Almost no one buying a quadcopter wants to join or even knows about the AMA, and it offers nothing for them. The AMA has become ever more desperate to attract this crowd, first with Park Fliers and now with quadcopters, and gotten absolutely nowhere. I can sort of understand their desire to maintain their influence on the government to the extent they can, but if you have to turn yourself into a quadcopter sales paper, maybe they shouldn't have any influence.

    This is what our fights are about, and what one of the most unpleasant/painful  moments in my time on the EC was about (and it wasn't about, or directly about, Brodak). I fought, and many others fight, to keep an emphasis on *servicing the original purpose* more than "marketing the event". PAMPA should be run, and mostly is, in a very businesslike manner, but *IT IS NOT A BUSINESS*, and it cannot act successfully by using business tactics or count on continual expansion like a successful business does. Because if you do, you lose the point of the organization. Just like the larger AMA seems to have.


     Brett

[Brett Buck]

The Dec issue of Model aviation had seven large adds and two full page adds for these TOYS. I sent a email to them and mentioned several issues about them and how they are adding to the problem. They chose to not respond to my email.

  I am the El Presidente for life of our local "club", so I get all these AMA mailings, and I had pretty much exactly the same response to this when it first started about a year ago. I had the same reaction you did - they can't claim to be a responsible "community policing" authority while they are packing their magazine from stem to stern with "no responsibility" buy-and-fly drone ads. I also didn't hear a word back on the topic, but I didn't really expect to.

   Brett

[Mike Keville]

If I flew RC (which I don't), I'd be concerned about Big Brother's reaction to that White House incursion.

Gonna' be interesting to see what 'spin' the Academy of Multirotors and ARFs puts on this one.

[Steve Fitton]

I wonder if AMA should issue a ruling that any air vehicle with more than two lifting rotary wings is a UAV and NOT a model plane.   Let the multirotor people deal with the FAA on their own.

[Mike Keville]

I wonder if AMA should issue a ruling that any air vehicle with more than two lifting rotary wings is a UAV and NOT a model plane.....

=========================================================

What, and lose all that advertising revenue?  Not bloody likely!   

[Air Ministry .]

Someones Owned Up to It .

Looks like its the Electric Chair  or Quantanamo Bay for him .

Though theres allways the posability of a Court Case , and the Media spinning it out for a year or so , so the lawyers can ' make ' their usual
million or three . Justice must be seen to be done .  

[pat king]

Some of these are toys or hobby aircraft, but when they come with programmable waypoints giving autonomous flight they are not toys they are FIRE & FORGET weapons. Advertising in Model Aviation shows some of these that are definitely NOT toys. I feel it is irresponsible to accept advertising for aircraft that do not need a pilot. I expect the excrement to hit the fan when the Secret Service realizes what is available out there without any control or licensing required to sell, or  buy and operate.

Pat

[Steve Hines]

I like flying quads and I can out fly Samantha. If you think it is easy try to fly one. I don't think that all the parts in the hobby shop are there because they are easy. If it was not for quad's, Helicopters, and car's the hobby shop in my town would be gone. Is there anything that we should not be afraid of. There are going to take the guns, the planes, the oil spill is going all the way to England. The only thing we will be able to do is say home and watch fox news and be more afraid.

I had this talk with Sam about what happened in France, and told her that more people died in Michigan in the last big snow storm than in France. So that would mean, be afraid of the snow. I was right there shutting down the east coast, because of snow. I don't understand why people care how I have fun, I can spend my money on any thing I want. I glad to see people having fun.   

I just glad there is a AMA, we have all that land to have the Nats. If the people who show up had to pay for what they use, not to many could afford to go. It was all paid for buy the people that have something to do with Modeling. It does not matter if only 10 park flyers belong to the AMA they help pay for Sam to fly at the Nats. I started out flying RTF cox planes, cars, rockets, slow rat, than RC. Because of a RTF, Sam is now the Jr. champ.  It is always how great it is to do things the way I do and bash what someone else does. Just be true to your self.  Steve

[Chris McMillin]

All of the speakers at the AMA Convention were about autonomous drones, from the Kettering Bug on up. That was all the AMA was interested in engaging for the public. Luckily there were a lot of people interested in model airplanes there.
Chris...

[peabody]

I applaud the Academy for attempting to gain as much knowledge on drones as possible.
The issue isn't whether they are "toys" but rather that they FLY. All small man made flying objects; drones, radio controlled planes and helis, free flight planes or control line planes are all painted with the same brush, according to most of those in government.
The AMA is trying to provide a set of guidelines regarding the use of all of them....it's a tough job.

As far as advertising in Model Aviation, the magazine usually goes to people that are already members and have had at least cursory introductions to the Safety Code.

I have TWO very well written pieces outlining the AMA's position on drones. The issue is that drones are morphing faster than most can keep up.....

Huge fines for the mis-use of drones (and other non-piloted aircraft) would probably serve to curtail improper us.

[Scott Richlen]

AMA's problem is that it thinks that it can supposedly represent the model airplane building and flying community to the Federal government and at the same time collect advertising revenue from the quadcopter manufacturers.  No government lawyer (or even any Federal manager worth his salt) will see this as anything but an internal conflict of interest and that AMA is simply a lobbying organization with the interests of the quadcopter community at heart.  The problem goes deeper than that.  Since they are lobbying for the quadcopter manufacturers, they will not carry much influence with the legislators they visit.  Worse, since they are a lobbying firm with little money, they will be ignored.

So, from the "inside the beltway" perspective, they really don't represent the individuals of the model aircraft community (a quick look at their advertising revenue and where it comes from tells the true story) and as a lobbying organization they'll be discounted since they also don't have much in the way of monetary horsepower.

They would have been able to have a lot more influence if they had kept "clean" and been able to truly represent the individuals of the model airplane building and flying community.  They went off in this direction when (as Brett pointed out) they became an organization concerned about their own welfare rather than those they were supposed to represent.

Scott

[Paul Smith]

Thus far six presidents has have shot with guns, of which four died.  But now the people have more guns than ever before.  Maybe we need to define model airplanes as "ARMS" so we have the right to bear them.

This was a SERIOUS attack.  They only missed Obama by 10,000 miles.

[Brett Buck]

AMA's problem is that it thinks that it can supposedly represent the model airplane building and flying community to the Federal government and at the same time collect advertising revenue from the quadcopter manufacturers.  No government lawyer (or even any Federal manager worth his salt) will see this as anything but an internal conflict of interest and that AMA is simply a lobbying organization with the interests of the quadcopter community at heart.  The problem goes deeper than that.  Since they are lobbying for the quadcopter manufacturers, they will not carry much influence with the legislators they visit.  Worse, since they are a lobbying firm with little money, they will be ignored.


<<  snip >>
They would have been able to have a lot more influence if they had kept "clean" and been able to truly represent the individuals of the model airplane building and flying community.  They went off in this direction when (as Brett pointed out) they became an organization concerned about their own welfare rather than those they were supposed to represent.

      The first part is an excellent analysis - even if every quadcopter guy signed up tomorrow, the money involved is several orders of magnitude too small to have any real influence. Particularly since almost no quadcopter guys are ever going to sign up, and they will keep crashing them into the White house grounds, Kim Kardashians wedding, etc, about once a week, indefinitely.

   The last part does not necessarily follow. It is entirely possible that everyone involved has nothing but the best interests of the modelers in mind. They just have a different vision of how to go about it than we do. I think a lot of what we see here is a classic delusion (that many people in stunt have fallen into over the years) of the big fish in the small pond. 

    A lot of people in the AMA have become relative big deals in the world of model airplanes, and many of them are successful small businessmen. They set up a situation where they can fly around to meetings, go to the giant National Headquarters with a lavish boardroom. Everybody knows them, they are big shot executives. In many cases they have the same situation in their businesses - they own relatively big businesses in small towns, etc. and can call a lot of shots in local government, and are used to being the "players". Of course, they go two towns over, and no one knows who they are, but they create power bases in their local areas of influence. They also become paternalistic, "we will take care of our people" whether they understand it or not.

    So after a few decades of this, they get the notion to do the same thing on the national level. So we have a National Flying site (bought with member money after having grossly misrepresented the entire affair - "for their own good")  with a massive HQ building for maybe 10-12 full-time employees, we have a magazine packed with big-money quadcopter ads,  they run it like a small business where they have to continually expand or die, etc. because that is the analogy they have. Of course, it doesn't scale well.

      They don't see the issue, this is their own (personally successful) slant on the world.  They have done stuff like this for years and can easily believe that they know better than a few malcontents and dismiss their inputs. If the malcontents start causing real issues, they can easily be dealt with.

      So there is no reason at all to think they are "in it for themselves", they may very well be in it for what they think is the best interest of the organization. We think they are dead wrong and borderline grandiose, but there is no reason to doubt their motives.

     Brett

[EddyR]

 I mentioned TOYS in my post above. Anthing mentioned here is like the old saying " preaching to the quire" https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070107185534AA0CVkK = incase you do not know what it means.  I expect all on here are responsible CL or RC flyers. Most people see us a playing with toys.I have seen adds on TV for TOY Quad aircraft flown in a park and then a city street.
 I was looking at MA,the last page interview with Jean Pailet,Nov issue, when I saw the full page add for a Quad next to it. The inside cover was a two page add and there were at least three more full page adds for Quads.
 Many at the RC part of our field have Quads and I have flown them with the headset on so I could see in realtime what the craft was seeing. I have nothing against Quads when used responsibly but the adds are going to bite us in the A . 
  Are you in the quire listening?
Ed

[Jim Carter]

Now I know many of you will take issue with this BUT, I honestly don't understand the anger/frustration/vehemence with the AMA and or the FAA/Fed Govt.  Assuming those people really are trying to find solutions to "present/future problems; shouldn't we, the hobbyists, be sharing "good, viable ideas and concepts" for them to consider?  Shouldn't we join with them to oppose the unregulated sale of items/devices that "could", potentially cause immeasurable harm to the general public?  I mean, the states mandate drivers licenses, insurance and so forth ( complied with by "most" good people, don't they??   Unless I'm mistaken, the "shotgun" approach to the legislation has to be imposed to protect the innocent from the "intentionally bad", am I missing something?

Based upon just a couple of the news reports I've read about, the person(s) who dropped a device on White House grounds, the person who was caught flying a device near a full-sized helicopter, the person caught videoing a neighbors yard/house, etcetera; none of these people were members of AMA, were they??  The sources where they purchased these items were not members nor was there any limitation in place requiring or even recommending the sellers or buyers membership in the AMA (if for no other reason than seller/customer awareness or safety and propriety of use) or with a local club with an authorized, sanctioned flying location, or am I mistaken.

Yes, while I dread the "shotgun" approach to legislation what do you think we, control line, free flight, r/c'ers, would be doing at this moment IF the AMA, with all its flaws, weaknesses and "mere mortal" leadership had NOT been there to lobby and "politic" on behalf of us, its membership???  I fear we would be facing one heck of a big "shotgun" like many of the modelers in other countries faced/face.  Oh, that's right .... let's blame the principle agency standing in the gate!!  Am I missing something??

[Garf]

This one needs to be made an example of and be put in the slammer for about 5 years where he can meet up with Bubba.

[Jim Carter]

I can agree with some of what you've put forth but at the same time, I've had the privilege of meeting a few of those "big shot executives" and I guess they pulled the wool over my eyes because I saw "modelers" interested in modeling as well as their businesses, as any of us would.  Yes' they were concerned for their particular interests in the hobby be it free flight, control line and so forth but we the membership were also of concern.  I remember reading the myriad articles of old when the NATS was moved from one side of the nation to the other, the search for areas where there would be sufficient housing, food, transportation, volunteers, etceteras.  I was too young to go to anywhere on my own and my folks sure as heck weren't interested in taking me to Illinois, Louisiana, California, Miami or even New Jersey!!  So, the effort to find a fixed location, Muncie!!  Now, here at age 66, I still haven't been able to attend but at least I know I'm a tiny part of something greater!!

Good .... bad, I don't know but I agree with your conclusion: So there is no reason at all to think they are "in it for themselves", they may very well be in it for what they think is the best interest of the organization. We think they are dead wrong and borderline grandiose, but there is no reason to doubt their motives."

[Douglas Ames]

As the AMA's numbers dwindle due to die-off and a shift from R/C modeling to a new generation of Quadracopters,
you can expect our dues to go up along with legislation both from the FAA and the US Govt. as to who flys what and where.

As these devices become more prolific, peoples privacy, airspace and safety
will be invaded to the point of reactionary legislation. Congress will be forced to take up the issue under duress by the media and "victims".

And you thought the Internet was a Wild West show.

[Steve Helmick]

As with any bureaucracy, there is incentive to attain more funding and no incentives to reduce overhead or funding. If the money is in the budget, you can be certain that it will be spent, whether there is any possible chance of a payoff for the members.  Steve

[Elwyn Aud]

I do have to wonder about some idiot flying a drone in the wee hours of the morning near the White House. Makes me tend to think it might possibly have been a test of White House security.

[Mike Keville]

I do have to wonder about some idiot flying a drone in the wee hours of the morning near the White House. Makes me tend to think it might possibly have been a test of White House security.

===================================================

Aha!  Someone "gets it".

[Steve Helmick]

First pictures of the culprit just became available!  Steve

[david beazley]

The culprit was an off duty government employee who apparently had a few.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/us/white-house-drone.html
National Geospatial-Intellegenge Agency?  Really?  I guess he lost his spatial orientation while flying...

[goozgog]

Interesting that a banner ad, displayed right here on Stunthanger,
is the Canadian Government outlining the rules regarding drones.
  I'm sure the situation will evolve as s*&# happens but  at least
they seen to be thinking sensibly about it.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/general-recavi-uav-2265.htm?WT.mc_id=1zfhj#safety

[Steve Fitton]

The first thing I do when I'm drunk is pull out the quadcopter........

[Douglas Ames]

 

I do have to wonder about some idiot flying a drone in the wee hours of the morning near the White House. Makes me tend to think it might possibly have been a test of White House security.

Well, the Secret Service has been screwing up alot lately.

[mike londke]

This just hit the news. http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankbi/2015/01/28/grounded-dji-to-prevent-drones-from-flying-in-washington-d-c/

[Randy Ryan]

Regulation, all RC model/toy pilots must be registered, ie, AMA members, all aircraft marked with reg number. All traceable and accountable and nobody loses.

[Brett Buck]

Regulation, all RC model/toy pilots must be registered, ie, AMA members, all aircraft marked with reg number. All traceable and accountable and nobody loses.

   The key is that the Feds are planning to farm out the licensing system ("community-based organization" - a lot like what is done with the ARRL for amateur radio) and the AMA is trying to make absolutely sure that they are the organization. That came through loud and clear in the earlier mailings I got, but that strategy has been very downplayed (intentionally or not) in the later press releases.

     I think this is *probably* just as well, no matter what the motives might be. I certainly can't see which other organization might be a candidate. No matter what the politics might be, the AMA does a very good job in a lot of areas.

     The only issue I have with this is that, again, they can't seem to just come out and say it outright. It brings back the previous times we have been misled like with Muncie, Visalia, and some conversations I have had with AMA AVPs about "we have to do what is best for the organization overall, not necessarily what my district wants" and of course our own problems. They were back asking about grabbing more funds for a West Coast site only a few years ago, with the small print "and if we decide not to do it, the funds will revert to other AMA projects at our discretion" - just like the last time. That's really the only real problem I have with the AMA, and it's a politics issue.

    Brett

[john e. holliday]

Okay guys, I asked this on another forum,  what is the difference between a drone and a quad coptor?  When I think of drone I think of what our military personal uses to spy on our enemies.   A quad coptor is a toy to me unless you get into the big stuff that uses GPS and compoutors.

[55chevr]

I don't see what the AMA can do about this ....  The offenders aren't members and will never join ...  This is a black eye for model aviation and I expect the good senator Shumer to have an opinion but I just fail to see a solution. 

[Brett Buck]

I don't see what the AMA can do about this ....  The offenders aren't members and will never join ... 

   The AMA wants to position itself as "gatekeeper". No one will legally be able to fly without an AMA license. An analog is the "certification" to fly high-power rockets, run by the NAR and Tripoli, where you are not supposed to be able to buy or even posses engines without having passed their certification.

    Brett