KidEpoxy

Speedy
oh, if you are saying that you can find some way to show a cost for anything folks say,
of that I have no doubt.
Within your open ended parameters, then sure, everything can have a cost claimed to it
... even a monthers love for her child can have costs found for it if folks are just trying to make a point.
I sure you could find a cost for zen 'inner peace at one with the universe' if I mentioned that.

Heck, even the government cant make stuff free that is required to be free,
such as the court saying you cant charge folks to vote (polltax), yet we can find that there are costs to that as well if we dig deep enough


However, your fixation on semantics aside,
that dont change the issue-
That its wrong for the Fed to require folks
to pay for a membership in a private org to play with a toy airplane a certain way.

KidEpoxy

meanwhile, back on the thread topic-



Lemme try-

You know whats better than "Getting CBO Modeling Exempted" for yourselves?
"Getting CBO and Non-CBO Modeling Exempted" for everyone.

yup, that would be MUCH better,
harder to do,
but better when done

But a half a glass is plenty, right

Speedy-Gonzales

My Feedback: (202)

[quote]ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

Does your mother love you??????

Educated or uneducated...you are an idiot pretending to be an intellect. Your self logic does not impress me. It is a shame that the RCU forums have to be polluted with your rubbish. You can twist it and turn it like smoke and mirrors but you can not blow that same smoke up my *****. I have no idea who you are or where you came from but I do hope we never meet. I have been reading your crap here in RCU forums for quite some time and your comments seem to always be directed at more harm than good. Your comments can not be avoided since you take it upon yourself to spread your insight like a manure spreader in a plowed field.

Feel free to reply but you have turned away another lifelong modeler. Your reply will fall on deaf ears and your conspiracy crap don't cut it with me. I truely don't care to be lectured by a fool.

bradpaul

ROFLMAO......... you can always count on the Kid for comic relief.

I pay my $58.00 to Muncie and find it to be a great bargain as they look out for their membership.

Proud AMA member.

Brad

Howard

My Feedback: (55)

To: AMA Leadership

Thanks to all of you - thanks for the vision, thanks for taking calculated risks, thanks for the leadership.

Howard

Stickbuilder

Amen.

Bill, AMA 4720

chris923

My Feedback: (53)

DITTO!

Chris923

K-Bob

My Feedback: (1)

Amen and hallelujah!

We should all pray for the Kid. His head must have be ready to explode when he read the news.

Nitro-Tom

Well said.....and there are some folks here that really need to get a life[X(]......go freaking build something or do something.......all this speculation and negativity around a press release and some proposed legislation that is obviously good news to aero modelers ........is ridiculous.....it makes me sick that you have nothing else to do but speculate and whine…really…if you don’t like the AMA don’t join…[:-]but stop posting here just to stir things up……please…!!!

If you were NOT flying at my field because you are too cheap or whine about the AMA like a little child it is fine with me…don’t fly…but please don’t post here if you have nothing constructive or productive to contribute……to our cause as aero-modelers.[:@]

Like one person said.....if we posted all modelers get $1 million dollars some of these people would whine about that.....it is embarrassing for me...... to be associated with a group that behaves like some in here (No names mentioned - you know who you are)

I am sure many of the whiners have NO IDEA what it means to be in a real legal fight for a grass roots cause for years……and if you think it is so easy……why don’t YOU run for office or try to get elected into the AMA, or even better, form your own organization and show us how it is done…please…

I have posted what we need to do in other threads (in significantly more detail), as I have many years of grass roots efforts for the marine industry in south Florida (The yachting capitol of the world) as well as other interests…and several times we have won major victories for our cause……

1 - We wait until the notice of proposed rule making (Yes wait, not post “What if� rants all flipping day)

2 – We comment (Remaining Civil which will be a challenge for some)

3 – We get behind the AMA as our voice, because that’s what we have

There really is nothing else to it at this point……all this bashing and whining from a select few who have no idea how hard it is and the progress the AMA has made……makes me sick.[:'(]

If the AMA is so bad, please, why don’t you guys show us how it is done and form you own organization since you know so much…… or put a sock in it……

From my seat the AMA has done nothing but help advance aero-modeling and provide members necessary insurance and assistance to allow them to enjoy this wonderful hobby…for 75 years…

Go ahead and bash me if you wish, but in the end.....we will see who is really "Helping" our cause and who is just releasing alot of hot air into the atmosphere.....and a select few in here are definitely guilty of contributing to global warming with all the green house gassess they are spewing[X(]

Thomas B

My Feedback: (4)

All of that and let me add...thanks for the very hard work. I know for a fact that AMA leadership has been working EXTREMELY hard on this battle for all modelers, reguardless of membership or not.

Woody218

My Feedback: (24)

How sad for someone to be so full of vitriol that they cannot say one good thing about the ONLY national organization that is doing something good for model aviation. When good news like this surfaces, it's business as usual, negativity and argument.

KE...In your mind, I'm sure you think you are quite brilliant. But, as others have summed it up so succinctly...you are a fool.

My thanks to the leadership of the AMA for taking a proactive approach! Good on you!!

KidEpoxy

Tom
I dont 'bash' people, I disagree with them.
I present information that supports what I say, and information that contradicts what they say.
I dont call folks 'whiner' or 'idiot' or 'bedwetter', cause I dont think folks are whining, idots, or bedwetters... they just have a different opinion or interpretation than I do.


This is not about the sUAS NPRM in any way,
it is about Senate bill s223 and a particular amendment to that bill.
It is already written and part of senate history.
We dont have to wait to see what will be in it.... we have already posted what WAS in it and voted as a accepted amendment to the bill.
Its a question of 'Will that text pass the US House?', not a speculation as to 'What will the Senate text say?'
A complete EndRun bypassing whatever will end up in the sUAS NPRM.

Tom, if you have read the text that was amended to the senate bill,
what is your interpretation of the new way they phrased the Infamous ParticipatingWithIn text?

bradpaul

[quote]ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

Infamous?????? Only in the strange world of KidEpoxy

Again thanks AMA for all the effort in behalf of the membership.

Brad

Bob Pastorello

My Feedback: (198)

Here's the text of Amendment 84 to the Senate Bill....note that the bill was "passed" by Senate majority vote, with amendment as stated, *prohibiting* the Administrator "shall not promulgate rules" (of the FAA) from regulating model aircraft.  We should send thank you notes to Sen. Jim Imhofe, for sure!!!!!!!!

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r112:3:./temp/~r112kfUMcE:e0:

warningshot

The time to give thanks is after BOTH houses pass the bill AND the prez signs it into law.

MTK

Bobby,

Hmmmmm....I read what it said and I'm including the 3 pertinent provisions below regarding Model Aircraft definition:
************************************************** ***********
(A) flown strictly for recreational, sport, competition, or academic purposes;

(B) operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization; and

(C) limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program currently administered by a community-based organization.
************************************************** *************
A 55 lb pound restriction makes some sense to me for a model airplane and is directly allowed in this amendment. The vast majority of AMA's members can't handle a 55 lb model but a small percentage can.

A 125 lb "Model" airplane limit (prop driven) makes no sense. A 100 lb "Model" jet limit makes even less sense. And there is supposed to be a witnessed flight test and one of the witnesses can not be the pilot. The percentage of AMA's members that can handle a plane like either of these (the cost of building and powering (what control systems?)and then flying), dropped to a pretty small number, however, it would be open to anyone whether capable or not

After successful flight test (witnessed), then what? I presume the builder and pilot will be allowed to fly the crate wherever and whenever they please. I wonder if anyone within the AMA's rule approving body understands the Physics and Material Science behind such a move

The AMA ruling on new weight limits has "Disaster Waiting to Happen" written all over it.....

KidEpoxy

MTK
Dont forget,
you are considering just one of potentially many CBOs sets of rules.
When a GiantModel cbo forms and starts holding its own nationwide inspections of hobby models
they can set their limits to 500lb PropModels & 300lb TurbineModels if that org wants to

Nowhere in the s233 amendment does it specify what is required to be a CBO, other than just being "national".
What it does say however is that the FAA cant create regs on model aircraft
... and isnt that what it would be doing if it tried to regulate models by regulating the Model CBOs

Oberst

If you want it from the horses mouth and not anywhere else, read what's going on here in the Warbird Forum. Seems like this topic is going on in every Thread.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_10...mpage_8/tm.htm

I know Dave, he's from my home town and he's aware I'm Posting the correspondence between us on this subject.



Pete

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

Thanks for posting that, it's exactly what thought it would be and what I said in an earlier post. While everyone was busy running victory laps chanting "up yours FAA!!!" the truth is that law only made sure the FAA does not have the power to decide we are lumped in with sUAV. If people read the language of the bill it's obvious Model Aircraft WILL be regulated by the FAA. The FAA will probably write some very restrictive regs, then groups like the AMA will have the opportunity to present safety "guidelines" that allow us to fly with less restrictions IF the FAA approves those guidelines. So, still not out of the woods yet.

KidEpoxy

"If people read the language of the bill it's obvious Model Aircraft WILL be regulated by the FAA."
Yup, thats what I figured when reading s233 amendment

"The FAA will probably write some very restrictive regs, then groups like the AMA will have the opportunity to present safety "guidelines" that allow us to fly with less restrictions "
yeah, I got that impression too

... "IF the FAA approves those guidelines."
??? say whaaaa?
Where in the senate bill amendment do you see that 'Faa Approve' condition on cbo exemption?

if you search for the word 'approved' (as in 'FAA Approved CBO Standards'), it aint in there

KidEpoxy

If the FAA (sUAS 107 junk) puts a 100mph speed limit on modal aircraft,
anyone see a problem with AMA CL Speed contests when they read the s223 CBO exemptions for RadioControl only models?

ira d

I wonder if the bill might be premature in light of the fact that most folks dont know for sure what is in the proposed FAA rules.

cj_rumley

Perhaps what is premature is the euphoria.

blhollo2

My Feedback: (278)

That sir is what i pay the AMA fee for...good job!

Silent-AV8R

Nope, none at all. A control line model is tethered to a person on the ground and is not a sUAS according to what the FAA folks have said. Problem solved before it became one.