Matt Kirsch

My Feedback: (21)

Think our hobby is not under any direct, immediate threat?

This afternoon, I returned to my desk to find a voicemail on my cell phone from a member of the NY State Police "Counter Terrorism Unit". He wanted to ask me the usual questions, like how big, how much weight could they carry, could they be used to deliver a chemical or biological weapon... Yikes, scary stuff. Answer wrong, and I could be responsible for getting R/C banned, or at least seriously regulated in NY State.

When I returned the call, I gave him my DVP's phone number, then gave Dave Mathewson a call to give him a heads-up.

Dave advised me that in these situations, you should refer the person to Jay Mealy at AMA HQ. For future reference, his number is (765) 287-1256 x270.

TNRabbit

These questions are being driven by events currently being looked at by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and others. There will be a more definitive answer to this question in probably the next couple of months. IMHO, I don't think we'll see major changes.

TNRabbit

Here's some news articles explaining some of the reasons this is being looked at:

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=32550

http://www.ifapray.org/Homeland_Secu...4,%202003.html

8178

My Feedback: (17)

In my wildest imagination I cannot picture that this could ever be a problem for a bunch of R/C enthusiasts like us. My 61 size pattern aircraft can barely carry enough fuel to fly the pattern let-a-lone any kind of pay load! I would think the AMA will be involved in this for our best interest and at the same time the safely of our nation. I realize we are on the President’s war footing and they need to look at all potential issues but this sounds like way far out. I suppose they might be able to make a case on the really big R/C aircraft that could carry a pay load, but the average R/C stuff would be a hard sell. The scary part about this type of thing is when people cannot understand something (like our R/C hobby) they can make some very, very odd decisions. How would they ever be able to enforce a ban on R/C aircraft? Background checks and special licenses? You turn in your R/C stuff at an R/C receiving station? Do they store it and you get it back someday? The whole concept is amazing!

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

Let me tell you, I was in Toldeo for the big Weak Signals show recently. Before going to sleep in my hotel room I was channel surfing, and on the 11:00 o'clock news I hit a big headline piece "Toys or Terrorists" (!!)

Seriously, the piece went on for about 10 minutes, with a lot of shots in the background of the indoor flying at Toledo, meanwhile the voice over, and everyone they interviewed were answering the question about terrorism. Mealy, a couple of reps (Barbee?) some other guys were all trying to explain the safety and lack of terrorist potential for our hobby...very disheartening.

Their position was that the RC community is very tight, and that if anyone tried to use our technology for "evil" they would be found out and reported. Not as much that the equipment could not be used mind you, just that we would all catch it before it was too late.

Sobering

8178

My Feedback: (17)

Like I said "The scary part about this type of thing is when people cannot understand something (like our R/C hobby) they can make some very, very odd decisions." I cannot picture the 40 - 60 size and down aircraft being a threat to anyone.

TNRabbit

The FARC in South America were caught with .60 size aircraft loaded (1-2 kilograms) with explosives and a plot to fly them into government buildings there...

The real threat is from larger UAV's (unmanned aerial vehicles) with GPS navigation and onboard cameras.

smokingcrater

for under $500, you can easily make a plane that will lift 5-6 pounds or more. so if you really wanted to do some damage and had a budget of a couple thousand, yes the possibility exists.

rcmiket

And Lets ban all Gas and Propane Semis..........Get a grip guys.........Oh yea and charcol grills...and potatoe guns........and while were at run hide Duck and cover....... and ...........

Hossfly

In my wildest imagination, I cannot picture any adult in this time in this country that fails to see and understand how politicians work these programs so they can stand up and spout, "Look what we done did to enhance all yo' folks' safety and well-being. Yes we did yo' real good, we did!"

Model airplanes would be so easy to restrict:

Eliminate all public flying sites.

Follow the noise trails to where activity is being done. RC Is visible and mostly noisy, so it cannot be hidden like the *pusher* at the school yard. Besides RCers are cheap and unlike the schoolyard pushers the rcer ain't gonna' give the local gendarmes their percentage of the take which there is none.

Just pass a ruling that RC cannot be done. By the time the constitutionality is worked out the entire RC industry and AMA will long be dead-broke.

To me it is like slipping onto posted property to hunt or fish. In those cases I simply cannot enjoy the activity. Some fun happens behind closed doors but either RC or outdoor sports ain't one of them.

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

Hi,
There was a segment on model rocketry on Fox News. Seems that, in order to buy rocket engines, you must have a federal permint issued by the Tabacco, Alcohol and Firearms dept. As part of the application process there is a background check required. Part of the check is someone visits your house for an inspection. As one rocketeer said, the government is making it very difficult on the manufacturers, on the people who sell the motors and the people who use them, thereby decimating the hobby. The only reply from the Feds was something along the lines that after 9/11, even innocent things can be used for evil purposes.
It would be pretty easy to pass a Federal regulation, or the FAA issue a directive, banning the flying or operation of any unmanned aircraft, which, of course would include models of any size.
As we continue to loose freedom and rights under the guise of "security", this would go almost unnoticed by the general population.
Jon

Erich_F

Geez, all this talk is making me glad I work in the UAV industry for a Defense Contracter. At least I will still get to fly RC if any of this happens (and be paid for it). In reality, as long as we mind our senses, and lobby hard in defense of the hobby, I think we don't have much to worry about. It's all about education. We also have to police our own. Report any supsicious RC activity, no matter if you feel it my have adverse effects on the hobby. If they realize we can honestly keep ourselves policed, they may back off. AOPA started it with the Airport Watch Program at GA airports around the country, and the DHS is responding favorably. I think we can be much more effective, since we mostly know everyone we fly with, or are at least familiar with them. As a full-scale pilot, I'm not so sure as to who is allowed on the flightline and not. I know when someone at the field doesn't belong. Also, some burden may fall on Hobby Shop Owners. It will be up to them to gain a sense on what they are selling to who, and how much. If Haji comes in to buy 10 Sig Kadets and 50 oz fuel tanks, that should set off on alarm in someone's mind. Of course, some operations may be more subtle, and more over time. We can't see it all. Just don't close your eyes to the obvious, and that's a start.

Erich

rw Guinn

We are dealing here with the mentality and pseudo-science that causes 6000 people to get up early in the morning and camp out beside a road, waiting to stop a semi with 60 grams (Less than 2 oz) of low-level radioactive waste (encased in vessels that will survive intact a drop from 50 feet onto nasty, sharp rocks) from using the road. These same people will patiently wait while more explosives than were dropped during WW I, WW II, Korea, and Vietnam pass them on the road in the form of single-shell gasoline tanks in automobiles and trucks, and Tanker trucks.
Facts and science have no place in modern society.
We are easy targets because we are mostly law-abiding citizens.

Roger

rcmiket

And we are not a land of people who will cave in and let the low lifes run our lives or our country.Running scared and overreacting is just what they want.

rw Guinn

True, on both counts. The problem is that we generally, as law abiding folk, tend to work through the system, which takes time and money (Which could be better spent on radios, engines and airplanes!).
We have to fight with what we have, and at all levels. There are way too many folks out there willing to give up my rights and priveleges to satisfy their own need for some nebulous "Security"

Roger
"Freedom times Security equals a constant. Unfortunately, that constant is different for all individuals" Larry Niven

Sport_Pilot

Looks like they are a lot bigger than our models. 10 meters is the same size as a full scale light plane.

Sport_Pilot

So why are they not inspecting every Ryder truck, or every seed store selling fertilizer?

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

Because the model airplane industry is very small and banning the activity would have no impact on the economy, unlike the fertilizer industry. And, being the mindless bureaucrats that they are, it's much simpler to ban all models than it is to think about ways of solving the problem.

J_R

Let's not lose sight of the original post by Matt Kirsch. It makes good sense.

Hossfly

106, in many less words, said what I said in my post and what R. Guinn also stated in very eloquent terms.

That all seems to be adding background to MK's basic thesis. SP needs either additional BG or very detailed explanations and then maybe read them.
Understanding the economy as it relates to POLITICIANS provides one with a much better general understanding of things far beyond the garbage spread by the liberal socialistic propaganda spread by 100% of the so-called news-media that controls the minds of far too many people in this country.

Kind of like when the $100,000 annual (max. by law?)contributor to G. Bush Sr., Frank Lorenzo took down Eastern Airlines and Congress passed a law to check all that out which GB promptly vetoed. Congress said "we tried,". Looked Good!! GB stopped it and the big-money boys stayed intact and all the losers were the 50,000 employees that lost nearly everything. 180,000 modelers are a drop in the bucket and they will not have any chad to hold on to. Look at Enron. All same. It is all about $$$$$$ and Power, and not the power in the latest .46.

scottrc

So, if they make illegal for commercial use of RC, how are they going to make movies????? And why limit it to commercial use? Again, more "Sky is falling" BS from our Department of Bonehead Security.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

As much as I hate to say it clearly we AND the AMA might be our own worst enemies with this particular issue. Take a realistic look at the FACTS and present them to those asking questions and most action will move elsewhere rather than try to justify what we do for a hobby.


"Facts?" you say. Yes, FACTS. They are simple, available to any who are willing to engage their grey matter instead of running around shouting "The sky is falling DHS wants to stop us!" I hope someone in the AMA figures this one out before we are put out of business because of laziness.

Look at things from the goals desired by the terrorist and the tools R/C might be able to provide, but do it looking at the actual targeting and damage desired instead of the what if game. The goal of the terrorist is twofold, first to kill as many PEOPLE as possible and second to terrorify our complicit media into suggesting surrender. A 'device' that misses its target is a waste of time, effort, money, and exposes the cell to possible scrutiny. That is one of the limits on the use of R/C planes (of ANY size) that many seem to be ignoring.

Assume that as the base for all possible R/C borne attacks. Now look at what it will take to make some attack successful. First problem is that the target has to be known in advance or the terrorist must be in the target area. This limits the use of R/C equipment further because the success becomes very questionable. However, there ARE folks playing around with 'autopilots' and GPS systems which APPEAR to solve some of the problems. Let's talk about the use of those systems for a moment.

It IS possible to use a GPS to guide the aircraft to a target, sort of. If a 'guided' plane is launched at a target in a city, it must pass many structures before arriving at it's target. The obvious choice is to climb to altitude and dive on the target. Now the autopilot effort becomes more significant because the altitude issues are non trivial.

The next less than obvious issue is the 'weapons load' possible. Looking closely at that issue it becomes ludicrous that the AMA has apparently failed to communicate the lack of risks correctly. Look at the risks for yourself.

I am fairly sure we can forget HE because most models capable of gaining the altitude to get into the city would not be able to carry as much explosive as a small car bomb so would be ineffective. That exposes the terrorist cell to retribution with little damage done to the target.

We can forget chemical agents because they must be released in enough concentration at the target area to be effective and we KNOW there are not very many noses at 10 + feet. That means there will be very significant dilution unless the release point is on the ground, which is NOT on an R/C plane. The more obvious the attack is, the less damage it might do. That leaves biological which has more problems with contamination by the exhaust of the power plant and all the other problems with a chemical attack.

Anyone see any other observations I have missed?



Flame suit on!

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

R/C exhaust neutralizes biological weapons??[sm=bananahead.gif]

Live Wire

It seems no one cares until it happens to them. Then they blame it on some one else. I hope people wake up and smell the ROSES.

TNRabbit

...EXACTLY what has been discussed by the folks at TSA & DHS...

That's why I stated my opinion in Post #2...