stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Scott Richlen on May 19, 2017, 01:24:39 PM
-
Check this out: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2017/05/19/federal-appeals-court-voids-faa-registration-rule-for-model-aircraft/
This was the result of the initiative of one person, not the AMA. A big "Hip, Hip, Hooray" and deepest thanks to John A Taylor!
Notice that the definition of model aircraft includes "flown within visual line of sight". So, if the Dodo birds at AMA continue to promote FPVs, they'll also manage to undercut that definition of model aircraft and adroitly (!) throw us all under the bus again. These guys are getting to be the definition of "if they say head south, you know to head north".
Appropriate AMA mascot?
-
You should send a link to your post direct to the AMA President and all the VP's. y1 Steve
-
Words from the link above:
"In a stunning David versus Goliath case, John A. Taylor, a model aircraft enthusiast and insurance lawyer, beat the Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Justice in a case challenging the legality of a December 2015 FAA rule requiring model aircraft to register like manned aircraft. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the FAA's registration rule, as it applies to model aircraft, "directly violates [a] clear statutory prohibition."
The statute that the Court refers to, and that Mr. Taylor relied on in his challenge, is Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. That statute prohibited the FAA "from promulgating any rule or regulation regarding model aircraft." The Court found that Congress had "weighed in" on the issue of the regulation of model aircraft and the law codified "the FAA's longstanding hands-off approach to the regulation of model aircraft." The statute defines model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft that is capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere, flown within visual line of sight and flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
The Court expressly states in its decision: "The FAA's Registration Rule violates Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act." The Court further vacated the registration rule to the extent this applies to model aircraft. According to aviation attorney, Loretta Alkalay, it is possible that the Department of Justice will appeal this decision but she believes it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would grant an appeal. "We should know in the next couple of weeks how the US government plans to implement the Court's decision, if it decides not to appeal," she said."
My thoughts:
When the Government does not follow the laws that the Government creates.......
And so now they might appeal?
I wish I could remember or find the weasel words they used back then to get around Section 336. Something like: Model airplanes are by their very definition airplanes, so FAA authority applies to models as well.
Mr. Taylor deserves a medal for being a great American and fighting tyranny.
The AMA deserves a B-slap for chasing the money and not even attempting what Mr. Taylor got done.
-
and,
Flying cameras (drones) look like they would be really fun and there is lots of advertising money to be had. Maybe a Special Interest category of the AMA and their own AMA magazine?
It would be good, though, for the AMA to separate them from Model Airplanes. Stop calling them Model Airplanes. When they get banned because of surveillance or bomb carrying misuse, at least true Model Airplane enthusiasts will not get lumped in as bad apples.
-
Here's a nomination for Mr. Taylor becoming the next AMA President. When that happens, I'd consider rejoining.
-
Lumping all Model Airplanes with "drone" multirotor platforms is ignorant and disgusting! Now most authorities, news media and the public follow that ignorance. drone toys are NOT Model Airplanes!
-
And our so called leaders will try and take credit for this. Look at all the money they wasted in stead of using common sense. I too want to thank Mr. Taylor for doing what he did. #^ #^ H^^
-
Great news guy's congrats! y1