Aerial Photography and Video Discuss the growing field of aerial photography and aerial video right here!

New AMA rules for 2004

Reply

Old 11-09-2003, 09:02 PM
  #1  
dave jones
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Palmetto, FL
Posts: 84
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default New AMA rules for 2004

The AMA has finely done done it to us this time. Take a look at the new AMA rules that will take affect on 01-01-2004 on page 163 of MA.

Look under the general part in paragraph 7 in the bold type.

What I like is the part where it states that. The operators of radio control model aircraft shall control the aircraft from the ground and maintain unenhanced visual contact with the aircraft throughout the entire flight operation.

I know that this was put in to prevent guys from flying from a video screen. But if you take the unenhanced visual contact part literally and if you require eye glasses then you will not be aloud to fly models under the new rules.

Then there is the part about. No aircraft shall be equipped with devices that would allow for autonomous flight.

Now read rule #4 it states The maximum takeoff weight of a model with fuel is 55 pounds, except models flown under Experimental Aircraft rules, Document Number 549*.

Now read the rules for free flights (there are only 3 rules for free flight)
FREE FLIGHT
1) I will not launch my model aircraft unless at least 100 feet downwind of spectators and automobile parking.
2) I will not fly my model unless the launch area is clear of all persons except my mechanic and officials.
3) I will employ the use of an adequate device in flight to extinguish any fuses on the model after it has completed its function.

Now read read rule #5
5) I will not fly my model unless it is identified with my name and address or AMA number, on or in the model. Note: This does not apply to models while being flown indoors.

So if I comply with rules # 4 and 5 then I can build a 55 lb Free flight model and if I put my name and address or AMA number, on or in the model I can then fly it under the new AMA rules and I will be covered by there insurance.
Now this 55 lb model can go where ever the wind takes it and that is ok, and if it hits someone or something it is still covered by my AMA insurance.
But if I install a GPS in a 3 lb model and program it to orbit the model field then I will not be covered by the AMA insurance.
Can you please tell me where the HELL the logic is in that?

And how about this part
8) I will not consume alcoholic beverages prior to, nor during, participation in any model operations.

It says prior to, but it does not how long prior to, so it if you go by there rules it could be that if at any time in your life you have ever consume an alcoholic beverage prior to the operation of a model then you are in violation of the rule #8.
If you have ever consume an alcoholic even if it was 20 years ago then you can not operate a model under the described AMA rules.

Dave Jones
dave jones is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2003, 09:17 PM
  #2  
Geistware
Senior Member
My Feedback: (16)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 12,942
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

Other than the eyeware, I don't see where I will ever have a problem.
If they want me to fly blind (without glasses) then they will have to give me the plane because I am not going to crash my plane!
Geistware is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2003, 09:40 PM
  #3  
Skycam
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Loraine, IL
Posts: 49
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

Dave the AMA actually did us a favor. Since 911 we all knew things would change
so they gave up autonomous flight with copilots and were able
to keep everything else. The copilot will take a hit
by all in all I think we did pretty good.

John
Skycam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2003, 10:24 AM
  #4  
dave jones
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Palmetto, FL
Posts: 84
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

John
If you believe that that the AMA has done us a favor then you are right in there with those that are being brainwash by the AMA's EC
I have spoken with Mr. Fred Marks the owner of FMA direct on the phone many times and I must say that I have found him to be very nice guy, I would like to point out that I do not have any grief with him I am only using his product as an example. I do however feel that the AMA's EC has not ruled against the Co-Pilot for the simple reason that if you look on page 30 of the
December issue of MA you will find a 1/2 color page advertisement for the Co-Pilot in fact you can pickup just about any copy of MA and find a 1/2 to a full color page of advertisements for the Co-pilot and or other FMA products. Believe me the AMA does not give away a 1/2 or full color page of advertisements for free.
I believe that the Co-Pilot was excluded from the new rules for the fear of losing the thousands of advertisement dollars that FMA pays the to the MA every year for there advertisements.
Now if the AMA's EC thought that there was the equivalent amount of revenue to be made from the advertisement of autonomous devices then I believe that autonomous devices would have never been singled out in the new 2004 rules.
In the early days of turbines there was a push to try and stop the development of RC turbine powered models, that came to an end as soon as it became obvious there was and still is a great deal of money to be made by producing and selling RC
turbines.
Yes I do agree that there could be accidents with autonomous models. There have been accidents from all types of models from rubber power to free flight to turbine powered models, they are devices that have been conceived, designed and built by humans and they will never be 100% reliable this is why we have to have a good set of rules or guide lines to follow.
I feel that we should have the same opportunity to setup these guide lines for autonomous models and I have no problem with placing some restriction on where they can and can not be flown but I do have a problem with the double standard that the
AMA's EC has implemented in the rule change. It was ok for Dave Brown to go to Ireland and be part of as he put history being made, but Dave Jones can not fly an autonomous model because it bad for the hobby and that the federal government will stop all flying of models in the U.S.
What a crock of BS that is.
Dave Jones
AUAV
dave@auav.net
1-941-723-9058

Please read the following.

I believe that the AMA is using the OHS and 911 as a leverage tool to take total control over all modeling activities in the US.
And that there long term plan is to make it so that you must be a member of the AMA to own, build, and fly any type of model airplane there by making there monopoly bigger and stronger. It is my feeling the first part of this plan to plant the seeds of fear into the minds of the AMA members that Autonomous flight is BAD and that by allowing us to have models with the capability of Autonomous flight that it will be the end of modeling forever by clamming that the FAA, OHS, FBI all have major concerns that a model equipped with autonomous capabilities could be used by a terrorist group. I believe that this is just the leverage that they have need to accomplish this.

Back in May of this year I received a visit from the U.S Department of Justice the agent that was here was told me that he was a U.S. Marshal assigned to the FBI and working under the OHS.
He and I had a very extensive discussion about (1.5 hours) on my building, flying and selling autonomous aircraft, during the discussion I point blank ask him who I could and could not sell my aircraft to, his reply was that there was no restrictions as long as it was not to a country that was on a do not sell to list.
He told me that he was not aware of any plans to restrict the building and flying of autonomous and or RC model aircraft by any of the agencies that he was involved with.
This is what leads me to believe that if the FAA, OHS, FBI or any other agencies was overly concerned with the building and flying of autonomous aircraft then don't you think that I would have been told to stop or face the possibility going to JAIL by now after all I have been working on building and flying autonomous aircraft for along time. Other than this one time I have never heard from any government agencies indicating that I should stop, nor have any of the guys that I correspond with.
Dave Jones
AUAV
dave@auav.net
1-941-723-9058
dave jones is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2003, 11:26 PM
  #5  
PLANE JIM
My Feedback: (109)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: AT THE AIRPORT
Posts: 1,976
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

Hello Dave-I think you are missing the intended meaning of the new rules and also being pretty silly about your 55 lb. free flight story-I do not think that AMA is trying to control anything other than the safety for everyone and the advancement of the hobby. We have all seen the dangerous acts that take place at times at some flying fields and and there are some flying fields that I refuse to fly at because of no enforcement of the AMA rules or guidelines. This was taught to me as a hard lesson. Earlier this summer my new truck was hit by a out of control pilot. The model was airworthy but this pilot had been drinking all day and as usual and flying reckless. Guess what-no AMA insurance. He also does not own any real property and in my opinion probaly has never paid for any of consequences for his behaviour towards other people. It gets worse-as he was driving off-he nailed three other planes that were being assembled in the parking lot behind another guys vehicle. The police were called and they laughed. They said this was a civil matter not criminal. Who is accountable here-guess what "we all are". This jerk should have never been allowed to fly at this club, also myself being a AMA member should have said something about no AMA card on pin board. and the guy in the parking lot should have had his planes in the pits. Not a AMA rule but club rule. So remember when bashing the AMA remember that they are the only one on our side at all political levels.
PLANE JIM is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2003, 07:19 PM
  #6  
aeroview
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Brockton, MA 02301
Posts: 6
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

The AMA may be receptive to the idea that an exemption to the new rule could be made for anonymous return of an aircraft to base upon loss of contact (either deliberate by shutting off the transmitter or power failure). A problem with anonymous flight is that there is no collision avoidance whatsoever and is also a potential for misuse of the technology. The FAA requires that a waiver be issued for any model rocket that is to fly in excess of 1 mile altitude. The FAA limits the altitude that a tethered balloon or a kite can legally fly. No such requirement exists for model aircraft due in part to the fact that a modeler can take evasive action if a full scale aircraft appears.

The FMA co-pilot may be exempted because it is not a device that provides the aircraft with true autonomous flight: it can hold attitude but not direction.
aeroview is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2003, 07:49 PM
  #7  
bman1128
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Maria, CA
Posts: 43
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

There is a new trainer out ... Nexstar Select... that comes with an "auto-pilot" feature... meaning if you let go of the controls the plane supposedly will right itself and fly level.

Would this be considered "autonomous" flight or does auto-pilot remain in controlled flight category?
bman1128 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2003, 11:15 PM
  #8  
Flight Risk
My Feedback: (1)
 
Flight Risk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Rocky Flats, CO
Posts: 735
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

One problem with flying by video could be the temptation to fly beyond the range of the transmitter. Also, the statement about unenhanced visual contact could include binoculars or telescopes which would have the same problem of going out of range.

FR
Flight Risk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2003, 09:48 PM
  #9  
Laser200
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vero Beach, FL,
Posts: 5
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

In my opinion, the AMA has not done anything to any of us. The "rules" that they set in place are really just the terms of the insurance policy they sell. I don't think they really care if we fly autonomous aircraft; they just won't pay on a claim involving one.
Laser200 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2003, 11:00 PM
  #10  
The_Matrix
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Red Springs, NC
Posts: 134
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: New AMA rules for 2004

Bman, most trainers already have this function, but it has nothing to do with an auto-pilot or autonomous flight. It is simply the flight characteristics of the trainers. high wing, and dihedral. I have an Extra easy 2 Trainer that does exactly that, no matter position your in, if you let go of sticks, the plane will level itself out and fly straight and level. And from my understanding of it, for an R/C plane to be truly autonomous, it must be capable of taking off, fly a preset course, and then land by itself, without any control from any outside source. So, even a co-pilot is not autonomous.
The_Matrix is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service