News:




  • October 20, 2018, 12:17:57 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Here we go again  (Read 10185 times)

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 9047
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #150 on: May 02, 2018, 02:50:47 PM »
Sounds more like the FAA has their collective heads up their buttholes. If it is controlled by the "tethers", then it is NOT RC nor a drone.  The RC portion of the tethered model is only for accesories such as landing  gear, bomb drop or leaf toss, smoke generation, tail hook, etc.. NOT flight control. Thus it is NOT an RC plane, thus NOT a drone.  Have any of them ever seen a controline model,ever??? H^^

  Just to clarify, there are definitely items that look and act exactly like your typical quadcopter drone that work via a trailing wire system rather than RC, but otherwise precisely identical in function and given a sufficiently long tether (which is what they typically have) can act more-or-less the same way. I think those *are* a reasonable target for this registration/etc, if you get past the premise that the FAA should not be permitted to exist in the first place.

  Brett


Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #151 on: May 02, 2018, 05:14:25 PM »
There was an article in Flying Models and also reprinted in Stunt News about some self professed yokels flying a control line plane in the park right across the street and visible from the White House during Bill Clinton's reign.  They were asked to leave.

So, flying for politicians has been done, just not in a productive way.

I used to fly across "the Potamac Sewer" from the Lincoln Memorial as a kid.  Flew my first pattern there that included a landing.  Kennedy was president.

Ken
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Dan McEntee

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2902
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #152 on: May 02, 2018, 07:38:59 PM »
  Just to clarify, there are definitely items that look and act exactly like your typical quadcopter drone that work via a trailing wire system rather than RC, but otherwise precisely identical in function and given a sufficiently long tether (which is what they typically have) can act more-or-less the same way. I think those *are* a reasonable target for this registration/etc, if you get past the premise that the FAA should not be permitted to exist in the first place.

  Brett

    I believe it was this type of UAV quad copter that enabled some communications to be restored in Puerto Rico after the hurricane wiped out their electrical grid. I don't remember where I read it, but they were quad copters or conventional set up helis with relay equipment on board, and power for the controls and power plant was provided via the tether so that they could maintain altitude and position for an extended length of time. Might have been the first time these were used extensively but I don't think they got a lot of press. Might have read that in Smithsonian Air or Sport Aviation.
   Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Offline Silver Dart

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #153 on: May 02, 2018, 09:15:46 PM »
If anyone is interested, some of the relevant text of the house bill that was passed last week can be found here, SEC. 343. SPECIAL RULES FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4/text?r=4#toc-HFEC15A21824F420AAE391308BC2AEE02

And here, § 45509. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4/text?r=4#toc-H356B69DA624A44FFA53A216AFE5A3376


Paul Emmerson
Spinning electrons in circles in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Offline Mike Scholtes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #154 on: May 02, 2018, 10:45:58 PM »
Paul, thanks for posting the actual text of the law. Nothing like having the rules book when having a discussion about what the rules are.

If I interpret 45509(a) correctly, what we understand as model aircraft, and which are defined in Section 343 "Special Rules for Model Aircraft," are entirely outside the scope of FAA regulation and oversight. There are conditions, basically that we adopt an honor system and operate within the rules of the AMA for our particular branch of the hobby and operate safely. Within what used to be called uncontrolled airspace (Class G) up to 400 feet AGL there is no regulation. Close to an airport you have to alert the tower, though how is not specified.

45501(5) defines "model aircraft" as being flown for hobby or recreational purposes, so this will require commercial quadrotor flyers (or any other commercially flown model aircraft) to register and be subject to regulations (as yet unwritten).

Section 343(a) even prohibits the FAA from adopting regulations for "model aircraft" as defined. This was in the prior version of the law, but the fact it is re-authorized is reason to hope the congress will abide by what it says.

So, from this I conclude (1) that our control line models, even scale and carrier using remote throttles, are entirely unregulated by the FAA, and (2) conventional  model aircraft including all recreational RC (and yes, the cheapo Walmart quads) are also outside the purview of  FAA regulation.

I think this is a pretty good result, and to the extent the AMA had a hand in achieving this, kudos to them.

And PLEASE anyone reading this or the statutes themselves, don't go off on some rant about the jackbooted thugs from the unelected unconstitutional gummint agencies ignoring these limits and stomping all over your freedoms. If you feel that way, you can go fly models in Galt's Gulch with the other libertarian escapists. These laws were passed by a solidly and deeply conservative Republican Congress and will be signed into law by a Republican president. The law is up for re-authorization in five years. If it hasn't worked to your/our liking, vote.


« Last Edit: May 03, 2018, 05:58:54 PM by Mike Scholtes »

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 9047
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #155 on: May 02, 2018, 10:51:12 PM »
Paul, thanks for posting the actual text of the law. Nothing like having the rules book when having a discussion about what the rules are.

If I interpret 45509(a) correctly, what we understand as model aircraft, and which are defined in Section 343 "Special Rules for Model Aircraft," are entirely outside the scope of FAA regulation and oversight. There are conditions, basically that we adopt an honor system and operate within the rules of the AMA for our particular branch of the hobby and operate safely. Outside what used to be called uncontrolled airspace (Class G) up to 400 feet AGL there is no regulation. Close to an airport you have to alert the tower, though how is not specified.

45501(5) defines "model aircraft" as being flown for hobby or recreational purposes, so this will require commercial quadrotor flyers (or any other commercially flown model aircraft) to register and be subject to regulations (as yet unwritten).

Section 343(a) even prohibits the FAA from adopting regulations for "model aircraft" as defined. This was in the prior version of the law, but the fact it is re-authorized is reason to hope the congress will abide by what it says.

So, from this I conclude (1) that our control line models, even scale and carrier using remote throttles, are entirely unregulated by the FAA, and (2) conventional  model aircraft including all recreational RC (and yes, the cheapo Walmart quads) are also outside the purview of  FAA regulation.

I think this is a pretty good result, and to the extent the AMA had a hand in achieving this, kudos to them.

And PLEASE anyone reading this or the statutes themselves, don't go off on some rant about the jackbooted thugs from the unelected unconstitutional gummint agencies ignoring these limits and stomping all over your freedoms. If you feel that way, you can go fly models in Galt's Gulch with the other libertarian escapists. These laws were passed by a solidly and deeply conservative Republican Congress and will be signed into law by a Republican president. The law is up for re-authorization in five years. If it hasn't worked to your/our liking, vote.

   This is exactly what the AMA hoped for (and are now claiming credit for, whether true or not). It is the ideal situation for us. Whether it gets adopted as shown, modified, or not passed remains to be seen.

     Brett

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1582
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #156 on: May 03, 2018, 08:47:19 AM »
I personally don't think the AMA did a great job in getting any outcome. They initially welcomed multi rotors with open arms, which i think was a mistake.
If things go our way, it will be a welcomed surprise.
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 9047
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #157 on: May 03, 2018, 08:59:00 AM »
I personally don't think the AMA did a great job in getting any outcome. They initially welcomed multi rotors with open arms, which i think was a mistake.
If things go our way, it will be a welcomed surprise.

   Hard to say, and it is not over yet. I am sure they will claim credit for success and avoid blame for failure by claiming that the members didn't "make their voices heard" if it goes awry.

    Brett

Offline Mike Scholtes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #158 on: May 03, 2018, 09:16:34 AM »
As of today the House-passed version (see above) is in the Senate for review. People who track this stuff give it a 79% chance of passing the Senate as-is, which means it is not very controversial. Believe it or not, most FAA regs have nothing to do with model aircraft so it seems unlikely there is a big lobbying push to wipe the skies clean of model planes, tethered or not. Regardless of what you feel the AMA's role has been, it is the only organized advocate for keeping model aviation (all forms) free from regulation. It is the only Community Based Organization with coherent and comprehensive rules for safe operation of model aircraft. I too would like to see the AMA promote "traditional" model building but for now, having an advocate for keeping us free of inappropriate regulation, or any regulation, is a plus.

Offline Fredvon4

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1603
  • Central Texas
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #159 on: May 03, 2018, 10:32:21 AM »
I must be thick....

Way back in 2012 the Congress carved out a exemption
 inside a bill mandating DOT and FAA do SOMETHING....where oh where have we seen this before...oh yes ever time there is some crisis...in that case the on and on examples of drones impeding emergency crews in Cal fires and some anecdotal near crashes with commercial flight

Congress demanded DOT do something and as they did the demand they tryied to carve out Hobby flight....

DOT/FAA set some new rules and a comment period then made a final rules....to this day that has NOT been challenged......the fact that DOT/FAA  insisted under their mandate they have full authority to regulate EVERY thing that flies

Congress read and accepted the NEW DOT/FAA ruling AS WRITTEN....much has been said pondered if the ruling  ( a federal Law with real penalties).. AND still in effect, applied to Control Line...AMA sez NO! some low level employee of FAA sez NO!----- but the Federal rule still has language that sez YES!   I say  that is all a LEO, Judge, or Lawyer will ever consider if YOU are charged with this Felony

This new Re-authorization does not change the current status quo....We must wait to see after it passes IF the DOT/FAA changes their position...I do not feel confident that THEY will hold a different position...exception the slight possibility that they have 5 years of history now of non compliance   ( modelers getting Licensed)  -----and I am sure THEY might NOT want to pursue prosecution in the courts POLITICALLY since congress has express twice the Hobbyist Carve out....

So if the DOT / FAA proposes a NEW rule change...will we get more that the 4800 respondents as happened in 2012?   or was it 2015?  to old to remember right now

"A good scare teaches more than good advice"

Fred von Gortler IV

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 9047
What the AMA is up against
« Reply #160 on: June 07, 2018, 08:17:13 AM »
Note this article and picture:

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-officials-warn-congress-risks-drones-seek-powers-101645306.html

This is the fight the AMA is going out of its way to pick, and why their attempt to tie model aviation inextricably to drones is almost certain to screw us all.

    Brett

Offline Mike Griffin

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1319
  • LA Wing Asst Director of Communications
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #161 on: June 07, 2018, 08:41:13 AM »
When these things first made their debut a few years ago, I said is was only a matter of time until a terrorist will fly one of these things into a crowd at Disney World or some other mass gathering and release a chemical or biological agent to kill masses of people. Frankly, I am surprised it has not happened already. 

The absolute insanity for the AMA to continually include these things and keep them connected to the model avaiation sector is complete lunacy and will, as Brett said, take us down with them.

Mike 

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: What the AMA is up against
« Reply #162 on: June 07, 2018, 08:53:38 AM »
Note this article and picture:

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-officials-warn-congress-risks-drones-seek-powers-101645306.html

This is the fight the AMA is going out of its way to pick, and why their attempt to tie model aviation inextricably to drones is almost certain to screw us all.

    Brett

I could not agree more.

Ken
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Jim Damerell

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #163 on: June 07, 2018, 09:20:44 AM »
I guess they have to crack down on Stunt Kites next.

Online john e. holliday

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 19726
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #164 on: June 07, 2018, 12:07:37 PM »
Just like gun control,  unless they start cracking down on the violaters it will get worse as only the honest people respect laws.   When some body does use a drone to inflict damage and harm people there are so called lawyers out there that will get them off with a slap on the hands.  Just like guns, the gun didn't kill it was the person holding the gun that killed that should have been executed instead of us taking care of them in a so called prison for the rest of their life.  It doesn't matter how a person kills some one else they should be done away with permanently.   This getting off on a mental plea is a farce as well as their upbringing should not let them off the hook.   But we have all these do gooders that look the other way until it hits home with some one close getting killed. S?P

John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530

Offline Out of the Loop

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • You shake my nerves and you rattle my brain ......
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #165 on: June 07, 2018, 12:16:19 PM »

Offline Mike Scholtes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #166 on: June 07, 2018, 12:36:52 PM »
Thanks for locating and posting this discussion of the Special Rule. However, it was issued in June 2014, four years ago and not as part of the current reauthorization of the FAA. If it is adopted as current thinking, great. It does track with the current definitions discussed above that virtually exempt all model aircraft used for hobby and recreational purposes from FAA rulemaking. It appears we model builder/flyers are safe for at least another 5 years.

Offline Gerald Arana

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #167 on: June 07, 2018, 01:28:38 PM »
  There is no limit to government stupidity. 


BINGO! You have that right Jim.

I am a former govrn'mt employee i.e., I worked for the county, and I can tell you that the way they get rid of an incompetent worker is to promote them!

I personally was an out cast because I couldn't wrap my head around their way of thinking and when I passed the state Surveyors exam, I soon went into business for myself.

Never been happier to leave a job in my life!

Jerry

PS: I won't be registering any model.  HB~>

Offline Randy Cuberly

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #168 on: June 07, 2018, 04:23:24 PM »
So the way I see it from that description they have limited the FAA from regulating Model aircraft BUT...They have not limited the FAA from regulating model aircraft if the FAA wants to regulate model aircraft...

What a load of pure unadulterated Bull @#$% from a load of legal lawyers that really don't want to do anything about anything, but want people to think they are!

Now Somebody please try to tell me that they really understood what was in that document!   ::)

Randy Cuberly

Randy Cuberly
Tucson, AZ

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #169 on: June 07, 2018, 04:39:42 PM »
So the way I see it from that description they have limited the FAA from regulating Model aircraft BUT...They have not limited the FAA from regulating model aircraft if the FAA wants to regulate model aircraft...

What a load of pure unadulterated Bull @#$% from a load of legal lawyers that really don't want to do anything about anything, but want people to think they are!

Now Somebody please try to tell me that they really understood what was in that document!   ::)

Randy Cuberly

They really understood what was in that document.
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Out of the Loop

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • You shake my nerves and you rattle my brain ......
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #170 on: June 07, 2018, 05:19:53 PM »
House of Representatives version of recently passed 2018 FAA authorization     Now on to the the US Senate      Then to committee to hammer out the final result     All of this before Sept 30th ??
https://rules.house.gov/sites/republicans.rules.house.gov/files/115-2/HR%204/HR%204%20Section-By-Section.pdf

AMA response
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2018/04/27/house-of-representatives-passes-faa-reauthorization-act/

Offline Randy Cuberly

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #171 on: June 07, 2018, 10:46:04 PM »
They really understood what was in that document.

When I used the Pronoun "They" in that context I was referring to You and the rest of the people that read the document, not the politician lawyers that wrote it.  Of course they understood it because they deliberately made it completely Not Understandable so they can do whatever they want and still be within the context of the document!

In other words a bunch of ordinary lying, cheating Politicians!

On the other hand the AMA response was exactly what I expected.  They truly do not understand what was written and don't care as long as they can rake in the money and take a bow!

Randy Cuberly
Randy Cuberly
Tucson, AZ

Offline Frank Imbriaco

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 660
  • At the 69 Willow Grove NATS with J.D. FALCON II
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #172 on: June 08, 2018, 06:03:55 AM »
The current  interim(and possibly future) Executive Director of the AMA is Chad Budreau.(see interview, page 148 June 2018 Model Aviation)
In his former capacity with the AMA as Gov't Relations Liaison, he was "in charge" of handling a problem we unfortunate control line devotees had in August 2017. A Stunt contest was blocked because it was being held at an R/C flying field within 5 miles of Trump's weekend home- Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, NJ. Assurances  given that there would be no R/C flying that day.
 Kudos to CD Jim Vagani  for finding another venue at the eleventh hour and fifty-ninth minute.
Mr. Budreau claims in his interview that he occasionally flew CL as a youngster.
Can anyone say "Mr. Potato Head " ?

Offline peabody

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2542
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #173 on: June 08, 2018, 06:39:37 AM »
Frank.....I heard about your situation.
Dou you think that the guys with guns ever READ the rule about flying?
More than likely they just wanted to enforce "no drones or model airplanes" within 5 miles....something they no doubt learned on TV....
The guy in charge of them more than likely knew of the RC club's location and sent the goons with guns to make sure the no fly was being adhered to.

I receive quite a few communiques from the FAA as well as the AMA, and they are TRYING to get along.....negativity does NO ONE any good.

Have fun....

Offline Fredvon4

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1603
  • Central Texas
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #174 on: June 08, 2018, 11:27:14 AM »
Precedent is EVERY THING in law and rule making... in the past the Congress created a group: DOT and FAA to to be a layer between them and the public. They (the Congress) gave this un-elected Agency very broad powers: Prosecution under Federal law, fines, and even imprisonment.

Later the Congress mandated the DOT/FAA do something about the "Drone problem" .... in the legislation they attempted to "Carve out" a special class for Hobby Aero modeling.......

The FAA under DOT proposed a new set of rules with public comment period and then ENACTED the new rules. They went to great pains and a lot of convoluted wording to insist THEY (DOT/FAA) had the authority to INCLUDE hobby model aero flight. The Rules were written.....and CONGRESS DID NOT object or reign in the DOT/FAA rules

This latest round of Congressional legislation had the same, or similar "Carve out for Hobby Aero Modeling"   

I read up, and study Congressional action VS DOT, or FCC, or BATF a lot in my research on Aero Modeling, HAM radio, or Gun Rights

Since congress authorized these agencies they have direct over sight....In the last 30 years, the congress has never resisted or reigned in the over reaches...EVER!

Thus, my belief is DOT and FAA, what ever new rules they propose, will be the de facto Law of the Land----despite any Carve out

During the last proposal I commented, as did 4500 other citizens...a dismally small amount

I also wrote my House and Senate guys....in both cases getting back a boiler plate "thanks for your input"; BUT then went on and on, and on about totally unrelated stuff MY representative was working on....same when I write them on FCC or BATF....

Congress IS NOT LISTENING to any of us

"A good scare teaches more than good advice"

Fred von Gortler IV

Offline Randy Cuberly

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #175 on: June 08, 2018, 11:56:20 AM »
Precedent is EVERY THING in law and rule making... in the past the Congress created a group:
…………..
…………..
…………..

Congress IS NOT LISTENING to any of us

You said it!  Congress speaks but never listens to anyone except the "BANKERS".

I'm terribly afraid the situation has become untenable and hopeless!  Congress has become a bloated body that rolls around, makes a lot of noise, and does precisely nothing except inhale money!

A sad state indeed!

Peabody:

I differ with you in the value of negativity.  It often serves to remind us when we are being made fools of!
This is definitely one more of those times!

Randy Cuberly
Randy Cuberly
Tucson, AZ

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #176 on: June 08, 2018, 12:52:45 PM »
You said it!  Congress speaks but never listens to anyone except the "BANKERS".

I'm terribly afraid the situation has become untenable and hopeless!  Congress has become a bloated body that rolls around, makes a lot of noise, and does precisely nothing except inhale money!

A sad state indeed!

Peabody:

I differ with you in the value of negativity.  It often serves to remind us when we are being made fools of!
This is definitely one more of those times!

Randy Cuberly

I think your response is understated.
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Frank Imbriaco

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 660
  • At the 69 Willow Grove NATS with J.D. FALCON II
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #177 on: June 08, 2018, 01:46:49 PM »
Frank.....I heard about your situation.
Dou you think that the guys with guns ever READ the rule about flying?
More than likely they just wanted to enforce "no drones or model airplanes" within 5 miles....something they no doubt learned on TV....
The guy in charge of them more than likely knew of the RC club's location and sent the goons with guns to make sure the no fly was being adhered to.

I receive quite a few communiques from the FAA as well as the AMA, and they are TRYING to get along.....negativity does NO ONE any good.
 
Rich : 
 Hope you're not implying that I'm being negative. To the contrary.
Every model flyer within the 50 mile ring of Trump's Bedminster, NJ  summer weekend retreat is trying to be positive . There are some CL guys who also fly RC and from June through Sept last year we were grounded nearly every week, Wed eve to Sun nite.  Last August, we were grounded for almost the first 3 weeks.
AMA has in writing that CL and FF is exempt. Not so. AMA's Prez , District II VP and Chad Budreau have yet to come up with some relief(as promised verbally and in the pages of MA).
The same thing in DC and Mari-largo, FL.
We are to be congratulated for being so patient- don't you think ??
 

« Last Edit: June 09, 2018, 02:19:44 PM by Frank Imbriaco »

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1582
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #178 on: June 08, 2018, 10:59:06 PM »
I personally think that government stupidity needs to be spotlighted. Ignorance of details in enforcent is not a satisfactory reason. Just like ignorance of the laws isn't a satisfactory reason to break them (just ask LEO's and judges).
So a focused dose of negativity or embarrasment hopefully might just cause a positive reaction to occur. That is my positive hope.

R,
Target
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Offline MnBoy57

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 480
  • AMA 353
    • AirClassix on eBay
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #179 on: June 09, 2018, 01:56:21 AM »
I appreciate the efforts made by several here to share viewpoints, experiences and facts.  And I’d like to add a few comments.

Brett, there have been times I’m not sure you and I could agree on what day of the week it is, but you’ve hit it way out of the ball park here!  Seems to me even a moron could see where mass-market drones would take us …

Yes, AMA leadership is the bad guys.  I don’t pay dues to the FAA, have never voted on their leadership, and don’t need their insurance to fly at any club field.  And the AMA leadership as it now exists surely doesn’t represent me!

Too often folks in a position of authority busy themselves creating and expanding a fiefdom for themselves rather than focusing on the reason they’ve been placed in that position …   

And I can’t resist quoting the AMA notice reproduced in the original post: “More than that, this long-standing hobby has been passed down from generation to generation and is a tradition for many American families.”

Any of you know families that have passed on drone flying “from generation to generation”?  I sure don’t, and would think that alone separates us!

Dennis
Dennis Leonhardi
New Prague, MN
http://stores.ebay.com/airclassix

Offline MnBoy57

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 480
  • AMA 353
    • AirClassix on eBay
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #180 on: June 09, 2018, 02:28:30 AM »
Things evolve.....
Were early Ignition free flighters frowned upon by the rubber powered guys as "not true modelers"?
Were the early Control Line flyers not "pure modelers"?
Were those of us that flew, or tried to fly, the Cox plastic models not "air modelers"...
Are composite planes, be it radio, free flight or control line, not flown by "air modelers"?
How about helicopter enthusiasts?
Quad flyers (not drone flyers, because 95% or so airmodelers fly drones) are a new and different form of airmodeling.
Quad races are amazing, as are the tricks that they are capable of....
As to the fact that they are not AMA members and don't follow rules, how many of us flew in schoolyards? Or joined the AMA when we got our Cox PT 19's?
We evolve


Airmodeling?

A couple of years ago I checked out some FM radio stations in my area and was treated to an announcer joyfully describing his (very brief) “airmodeling” experience:

He purchased a drone for $700, took it out on the street, and on his 2nd flight crashed into parts of the power grid - thereby knocking out power in his area.

Unfortunately, similar situations have been all too common with drones.  And that’s exactly why I feel our AMA should stay 10 miles away from the drone scene.

Let commercial (and/or responsible) users form their own association.  If they are to have the impact that many predict, they might soon outnumber us.

Surely we don’t need them to help with the functions we expect of AMA leadership.

Dennis
Dennis Leonhardi
New Prague, MN
http://stores.ebay.com/airclassix

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1582
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #181 on: June 09, 2018, 08:07:27 AM »
FPV RC flying should be completely separate from Line Of Sight Traditional RC and C/L, FF, etc.

The distinction of not having to physically see your model is where OUR problems lie.


As I said before, the only registration with the FAA should be those people that have FPV systems. Traditional model flying has never caused problems with full scale aircraft or been considered a threat to security.
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 9047
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #182 on: June 09, 2018, 10:50:44 AM »
FPV RC flying should be completely separate from Line Of Sight Traditional RC and C/L, FF, etc.

The distinction of not having to physically see your model is where OUR problems lie.


As I said before, the only registration with the FAA should be those people that have FPV systems. Traditional model flying has never caused problems with full scale aircraft or been considered a threat to security.

   Absolutely, but Budreau, et. al, are dedicated to linking them together.


    Brett

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1582
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #183 on: June 09, 2018, 11:34:04 AM »
It's a sad state of affairs.
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Offline Randy Cuberly

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3611
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #184 on: June 09, 2018, 01:33:36 PM »
   Absolutely, but Budreau, et. al, are dedicated to linking them together.


    Brett

I believe they're only dedicated to linking to the MONEY!  So far they haven't even done a very good job of that!

Randy Cuberly
Randy Cuberly
Tucson, AZ

Offline Mike Griffin

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1319
  • LA Wing Asst Director of Communications
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #185 on: June 09, 2018, 02:16:52 PM »
I do not pretend to be knowledgeable enough to answer the question I am going to ask and it probably has been asked before but I will go ahead and ask it again.

What would be involved in pulling the CL, RC, FF segments out of the AMA and starting a new and TRUE flying model stand alone association? 


I can imagine it would be a huge undertaking to establish but I would think not impossible. 


Mike

Offline peabody

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2542
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #186 on: June 09, 2018, 02:36:41 PM »
Hi Mike
Besides losing FAI/Worlds opportunities?
Years ago there was an outfit called the Sport Fliers Association....attracting RC flyers and using a commercial magazine as their information and attraction communicator.
Bombed big time.
Turns out most homeowners policies DID NOT cover air models (I wager this has gotten to be even more of an issue). Landowners were very reluctant to lease to any groups that couldn't provide an umbrella. Government agencies were even more so.
A (knowledgeable) friend looked at the AMA's insurance, and there is a LOT more than what they state.
Litigious Society....

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #187 on: June 09, 2018, 06:48:13 PM »
Hi Mike
Besides losing FAI/Worlds opportunities?
Years ago there was an outfit called the Sport Fliers Association....attracting RC flyers and using a commercial magazine as their information and attraction communicator.
Bombed big time.
Turns out most homeowners policies DID NOT cover air models (I wager this has gotten to be even more of an issue). Landowners were very reluctant to lease to any groups that couldn't provide an umbrella. Government agencies were even more so.
A (knowledgeable) friend looked at the AMA's insurance, and there is a LOT more than what they state.
Litigious Society....
It would be far simpler to parse out Drones into a "sister" organization still under the AMA and have separate insurance, etc.  Membership would be separate so that we don't have to bare what must be the enormous cost for liability insurance for the drones.
Convincing them to do it would be next to impossible.
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Matt Spencer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 3134
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #188 on: June 09, 2018, 11:25:43 PM »


 :-\

Be a bit off a worry if it got a blocked carb jet .  :-X
« Last Edit: June 10, 2018, 02:57:56 AM by Matt Spencer »

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #189 on: October 03, 2018, 11:51:27 AM »
Looks like the AMA did it again, or should I say didn't do it again.  Senate passed the reauthorization with the 400' rule in it.  Well that kills free flight and most of sailplanes and about 1/2 of the rest of RC.  Looks like CL comes out OK except that I won't be able to use my 450' lines.   I think it was the Hillarymaster that scared them.

Ken
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.

Offline Jim Kraft

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2901
  • AMA78415
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #190 on: October 03, 2018, 03:29:49 PM »
In the works is a test one has to take and have an authorization card to prove you have passed the test. They will be required to be able to show law enforcement when ever asked for. The penalty for not having the required card has not been discussed.

In the bill they have essentially removed the part covering drones and now have full control to do as they wish. Confiscating drones or shooting them down is within there discretion. A Frisby is a drone. A kite is a drone. If it leaves the ground it is a drone.

Go to you tube and type in FAA regulations. There is a guy there that has all 1200 pages and picks out what he believes will apply to us. Mostly what ever they want as far as I can see. They have full jurisdiction to pretty much make up the rules as they go. I believe they will have the test requirements finished before the end of the year.
Jim Kraft

Online Dave_Trible

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #191 on: October 03, 2018, 04:06:10 PM »
Of what I've read we in CL are in good shape-don't even have to register.  The RC and Free Flight guys will be screwed though.  Maybe we can recruit some of them over to, or back to CL.  The really worst part I think though is that what's left of the hobby industry depends on RC money.  Some of that will remain (pylon for example) but it can't be good news.   There will need to be many rules changes coming for these groups in the effort to make them comply.  Also some means to measure altitude at contests.   I believe we can thank the drone culture for this new scrutiny and pressure on our hobby. 

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1582
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #192 on: October 03, 2018, 05:42:58 PM »
The thing that floors me is that the guys responsible for all the crap coming down will hardly be effected. Most Droners fly lower than 400' AGL. And they are the "threat".

The ones most effected will be those that fly RC thermal sailplanes. Those are over 400' on almost any winch launch and hopefully go up from there. a typical F3B sailplane winch launch on mono line is 900-1200'....
This is why I started into C/L in the first place a few years back. I knew it was immanent.
Discus Launch Gliders (DLG) might have a chance to continue, but even those easily go up to 750' or higher in a thermal.

It totally sucks. :(
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Offline Dave Harmon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • Tulsa Glue Dobbers C/L and R/C Clubs
Re: Here we go again
« Reply #193 on: October 03, 2018, 07:06:29 PM »
Chris....you're right....it DOES suck....totally!!
BUT......hard to "keep positive"!!
Here is something I snagged from the NSRCA (Pattern) listserver.

>>>Here is some info I got from Tony Stillman at AMA.  I had asked about the hard limit in Class G airspace (unrestricted) which is where my flying field is located.    This is what he replied.     Lets keep positive.

As a matter of fact, the FAA told us it could be weeks or even years before the law is enacted.  Our Gov relations team is in DC RIGHT NOW working on this issue with the FAA.  The FAA has the authority to modify this and has told us as well as sent letters to us to say that they have no problem with AMA flying above 400’.  We are very hopeful that they will resolve this issue way before the laws become enacted.

So… nothing changes today or even when Pres. Trump signs the bill (probably tomorrow)…. Keep flying like you always have… I know I will!

Tony Stillman
Flying Site Assistance Coordinator/Competitions-Technical Director
Academy of Model Aeronautics<<<


Tags: