AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

View Poll Results: A poll
Yes, our self-policing efforts (i.e. AMA Safety Codes) aren''t working.
4.81%
Yes, the world has changed considerably since 9/11.
15.96%
I''m not sure.
5.58%
No, the FAA has no business regulating "hobby" airplanes.
34.62%
No, we are fully capable of policing ourselves.
12.69%
No, the perceived threat to society doesn't exist!
13.85%
I hate polls like this!
12.50%
Voters: 520. You may not vote on this poll

Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Reply
Old 01-26-2012, 04:41 PM
  #276
AugerDawger
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 154
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

link

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirh...vers-of-blood/
AugerDawger is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 05:54 PM
  #277
HoundDog
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,456
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: AugerDawger

Plenty of youtubes of flyers fpv waaaaay away from home and LOS.

Take a look.

One private fpv just found a river of blood at a meatpacking plant recon far from his FOB as reported on yahoo yesterday and turned footage he captured over to epa types
Most are idiots that fly with no regard to anyone's safety or regard to property including their own ... They should all be locked up for their own safety ... Sorta like the nitwits that used to fly ultra lites (or should I say ) Try to fly at the full scale Private-Restricted airport 0WI8 look it up in the federal data base.. It's amazing non of these neanderthals killed them selves. Even though it seams many of them tried very very hard.
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 07:14 PM
  #278
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: HoundDog
Most are idiots that fly with no regard to anyone's safety or regard to property including their own ... They should all be locked up for their own safety ...
Hound,

That's kind of an extreme statement don't you think?

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 07:19 PM
  #279
HoundDog
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,456
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Nope ... Been there and I've seen it a lot ... you can tell when one of these guys shows up at an AMA field ... it's all in how they present them selves and how they fly. As for the Ultraliters most I've seen ar just a bunch of HOT DOGGERs.
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 07:27 PM
  #280
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

With an attitude like that, I don't see how can you call yourself a liberal!



Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 07:37 PM
  #281
HoundDog
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,456
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

With an attitude like that, I don't see how can you call yourself a liberal!



Harvey
Harvey what's Liberal, conseritive or any thing else got to do with weather some one has the comon sence to fly RC or anything else in a safe prescribed manor and not indanger them selves or others. I really have no tollerance for these types.
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 07:50 PM
  #282
KidEpoxy
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

H5487
Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487
Quote:
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
Now, can we say the same about recreational non-commercial autonomous aeromodeling hobbyists?
Kid-E,
That lable's quite a mouthful and I'm not sure who these guys are or what/how they're flying. Would you mind filling me in?

Harvey

The short answer-
The fellow aeromodelers that Hound is insulting,
are the aeromodelers that Hound & the AMA have already abandoned,
yet it was Hound that brought up trusting that folks wont get abandoned.


The extended answer-
"recreational non-commercial autonomous aeromodeling hobbyists":
Folks that play with toy airplanes, "aeromodeling hobbyists"
not for any commercial or public (aka gov) use, "recreational non-commecial"
that use FPV/Goggles/Autonomous/OnbardNav/BeyondLoS, "autonomous"
like the infamous hobby modeler Maynard Hill and his TransAtlanticModel toy airplane,
aka Our Aeromodeling Hobby Brethren (that some folks in the hobby have disowned/abandoned not long ago).
KidEpoxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 08:05 PM
  #283
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
The extended answer-
''recreational non-commercial autonomous aeromodeling hobbyists'':
Folks that play with toy airplanes, ''aeromodeling hobbyists''
not for any commercial or public (aka gov) use, ''recreational non-commecial''
that use FPV/Goggles/Autonomous/OnbardNav/BeyondLoS, ''autonomous''
like the infamous hobby modeler Maynard Hill and his TransAtlanticModel toy airplane,
aka Our Aeromodeling Hobby Brethren (that some folks in the hobby have disowned/abandoned not long ago).
Sounds like they could also be classified as "Non-commercial sUAVs" (although I don't think that the actual category exists at this time.) Why has the AMA disowned them?

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 08:17 PM
  #284
KidEpoxy
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Quote:
Sounds like they could also be classified as "Non-commercial sUAVs"
uh, that particular designation is what WE are,
which is why (as SilentAv keep having to remind folks) the FAA has to specificly grant NonCommercial NonPublic sUAS aka "ModelAircraft" exemption from the sUAS regulation.... because we in AMA do indeed fly sUAS- a particular type of sUAS with purpose as part of defining type. Recall the LA Sheriffs trying to use a model with a camera and claiming they were flying under AC91-57? It was perfectly legal for Hobby Use, but forbidden when used for Public(gov) or Commercial..... that one particular model was legal or illegal depending on WHY you fly it.
KidEpoxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 08:27 PM
  #285
HoundDog
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,456
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Posts: 6286
Score: 400  < any one know what this means        
Joined: 10/14/2004
Last Login: 1/26/2012
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
Status: offline

HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 08:49 PM
  #286
KidEpoxy
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Score?
idk, maybe thats the number of times I quoted AMA leaders or cited ama documents to support what I say.

of course, the better question about the user score is not 'What is score', but
How is pointing at another users score even close to being on topic for the thread?
KidEpoxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 09:08 PM
  #287
HoundDog
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,456
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Sorry bout that ... thought right after I posted it mine is 140 but was just wondering where it comes from and what it means ... Hope i didn't offend you. Do U have any idea what it is?

osts: 311
Score: 140
Joined: 10/31/2003
Last Login: 1/26/2012
From: Apache Junction, AZ, USA
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 09:09 PM
  #288
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Quote:
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
It was perfectly legal for Hobby Use, but forbidden when used for Public(gov) or Commercial..... that one particular model was legal or illegal depending on WHY you fly it.
Kid E,

Differing regulations based on how or why we do something is acceptable throughout our society. A Chevrolet SUV is classified as non-commercial when driven by a housewife but an otherwise-identical vehicle, and its driver, are regulated quite differently when operated as a taxicab. Same with a full-scale Cessna 210 that is flown privately vs flown as a Part 135 Air Taxi. Your dad can teach you how to drive the family car without special training, additional insurance, or recordkeeping but a driver training school is regulated quite differently. Your wife can fix your family's meals without the government getting involved but operating a restaurant is an entirely different matter. And there are many other examples of products or services that are regulated according to how or why they're used.

Our own model airplane hobby is presently expanding and morphing in ways that our fathers and grandfathers never imagined. The dividing line between models and small commercial airplanes isn't nearly as clear as it used to be and those who control our airspace (the FAA) are trying to figure it out right now. And I imagine that the AMA is just as confused as the rest of us. I'm glad that I'm not being relied upon as the one to sort it all out!

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 09:31 PM
  #289
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Quote:
ORIGINAL: HoundDog


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

With an attitude like that, I don't see how can you call yourself a liberal!



Harvey
Harvey what's Liberal, conseritive or any thing else got to do with weather some one has the comon sence to fly RC or anything else in a safe prescribed manor and not indanger them selves or others. I really have no tollerance for these types.
Calm down HoundDog. I was just yanking your chain (er...leash).

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 09:57 PM
  #290
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
It was perfectly legal for Hobby Use, but forbidden when used for Public(gov) or Commercial..... that one particular model was legal or illegal depending on WHY you fly it.
Kid E,

Differing regulations based on how or why we do something is acceptable throughout our society. A Chevrolet SUV is classified as non-commercial when driven by a housewife but an otherwise-identical vehicle, and its driver, are regulated quite differently when operated as a taxicab. Same with a full-scale Cessna 210 that is flown privately vs flown as a Part 135 Air Taxi. Your dad can teach you how to drive the family car without special training, additional insurance, or recordkeeping but a driver training school is regulated quite differently. Your wife can fix your family's meals without the government getting involved but operating a restaurant is an entirely different matter. And there are many other examples of products or services that are regulated according to how or why they're used.

Our own model airplane hobby is expanding and morphing into things that our fathers and grandfathers never imagined. The dividing line between models and small commercial airplanes isn't nearly as clear as it used to be and those who control our airspace (the FAA) are trying to figure it out right now. And I imagine that the AMA is just as confused as the rest of us. I'm glad that I'm not being relied upon as the one to sort it all out!

Harvey
The dividing line between models for recreation and uas systems for commercial use is very clear and very easy to define, quite simply put with reacation use
you fly in a very limited area and only overfly areas that are intended for that use. IMO anyone that is operating a model outside of those parameters should be
looked at by the FAA but if it's determined they aren't causing any harm or breaking any laws they should be left alone. AlsoI think the FAA needs to come up
with some guide lines for all modelers butnot one set of rules for AMA members and another set for for non members.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:07 PM
  #291
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
The dividing line between models for recreation and uas systems for commercial use is very clear and very easy to define, quite simply put with reacation use
you fly in a very limited area and only overfly areas that are intended for that use. IMO anyone that is operating a model outside of those parameters should be
looked at by the FAA
but if it's determined they aren't causing any harm or breaking any laws they should be left alone.
Ira,

Are you saying that the ONLY defining criteria between recreational and commercial aircraft is WHERE the plane is flown? Also, by your statement above, a 3oz Air Hogs foamie being flown in a school gym by a sixth grader should be investigated by the FAA.

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:33 PM
  #292
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,308
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
Also I think the FAA needs to come up with some guide lines for all modelers but not one set of rules for AMA members and another set for for non members.
They are coming up with but a single set that any and all modelers can follow in order to comply with the Rule. However, they are also allowing CBOs to propose alternative operating standards that may also be used as a means of compliance with the Rule. They have clearly stated that they cannot force anyone to join the AMA in order to use the AMA standard (assuming it actually gets accepted by the FAA). In fact, there can in theory be a virtually unlimited number of alternative standards and there will always be the default path as defined by the FAA.

Any and all alternative standards will be generated outside the FAA, so they are not forming multiple paths for compliance. But they will allow for more than one path. That is an important difference.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:41 PM
  #293
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Silent,

What is "the AMA standard"?

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:51 PM
  #294
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
The dividing line between models for recreation and uas systems for commercial use is very clear and very easy to define, quite simply put with reacation use
you fly in a very limited area and only overfly areas that are intended for that use. IMO anyone that is operating a model outside of those parameters should be
looked at by the FAA
but if it's determined they aren't causing any harm or breaking any laws they should be left alone.
Ira,

It looks like you're saying that modelers who are not flying at an approved R/C field (an "area that is intended for that use") should be investigated by the FAA. (Or put another way, only members of R/C clubs qualify as recreational operators.) What about those of us who live out in the country and fly our models on our own land? Are you saying that we won't qualify as recreational and will fall under commercial rules just because our property isn't "intended for (R/C) use"? And does it matter if the plane is only a 3oz Air Hogs foamie with a motor that develops the thrust equivalent of fourteen butterfly sneezes?

On the other hand, what about getting paid to fly a 200mph 400lb aircraft equipped with sophisticated cameras and sensors? According to your "easy to define" statement, as long as these planes stay over areas intended for recreational models, then they're not commercial.

So, as you can see, this stuff isn't that easy to define.

Harvey
I doubt you will find many people that will pay you to fly a model around in a circle at a rc field soI dont think that is a issue. As far as someone who has their ownproperty
of course you should be allowed to operate your models there as long as you aren't a safety threat to anyone such as workers or your neighbors.

What I ment was if the FAA should become aware of rc plane activity outside of what would be a normal place for such activity they should look into it I also said
if the rc flying was not breaking any laws or a threat to anyone then the person should be left alone.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:55 PM
  #295
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
The dividing line between models for recreation and uas systems for commercial use is very clear and very easy to define, quite simply put with reacation use
you fly in a very limited area and only overfly areas that are intended for that use. IMO anyone that is operating a model outside of those parameters should be
looked at by the FAA
but if it's determined they aren't causing any harm or breaking any laws they should be left alone.
Ira,

Are you saying that the ONLY defining criteria between recreational and commercial aircraft is WHERE the plane is flown? Also, by your statement above, a 3oz Air Hogs foamie being flown in a school gym should be investigated by the FAA.
Harvey
If the flyer has permission to use the gym then the gym becomes a rc flying site for the amount of time he is allowed to fly.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:58 PM
  #296
H5487
Thread Starter
 
H5487's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
What I ment was if the FAA should become aware of rc plane activity outside of what would be a normal place for such activity they should look into it I also said
if the rc flying was not breaking any laws or a threat to anyone then the person should be left alone.
So, by your statement above, a 3oz Air Hogs foamie being flown in a school gym by a sixth grader without permission should be investigated by the FAA?

(I can do this all day! )

Again, my point is that this stuff isn't all that easy to define because not all R/C flying can easily be classified into a few convenient bins.

Harvey
H5487 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 11:04 PM
  #297
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R


Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
AlsoI think the FAA needs to come up with some guide lines for all modelers butnot one set of rules for AMA members and another set for for non members.
They are coming up with but a single set that any and all modelers can follow in order to comply with the Rule. However, they are also allowing CBOs to propose alternative operating standards that may also be used as a means of compliance with the Rule. They have clearly stated that they cannot force anyone to join the AMA in order to use the AMA standard (assuming it actually gets accepted by the FAA). In fact, there can in theory be a virtually unlimited number of alternative standards and there will always be the default path as defined by the FAA.

Any and all alternative standards will be generated outside the FAA, so they are not forming multiple paths for compliance. But they will allow for more than one path. That is an important difference.
In my neck of the woods the definition of multiple is more than one check the Webster Dictionary for your self, As for the single set of standards we all know
they will put many modelers out of business like maybe 70 to 80%
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 11:09 PM
  #298
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
What I ment was if the FAA should become aware of rc plane activity outside of what would be a normal place for such activity they should look into it I also said
if the rc flying was not breaking any laws or a threat to anyone then the person should be left alone.
So, by your statement above, a 3oz Air Hogs foamie being flown in a school gym by a sixth grader without permission should be investigated by the FAA?

(I can do this all day! )

Again, my point is that this stuff isn't all that easy to define because not all R/C flying can easily be classified into a few convenient sets of criteria.

Harvey
I think we all know the FAA will not bother with a 3oz foamie in a gymfor one thing if its inside a building they could care less.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 11:10 PM
  #299
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
What I ment was if the FAA should become aware of rc plane activity outside of what would be a normal place for such activity they should look into it I also said
if the rc flying was not breaking any laws or a threat to anyone then the person should be left alone.

Again, my point is that this stuff isn't all that easy to define because not all R/C flying can easily be classified into a few convenient bins.

Harvey
IMO it is easy as abcto define.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 11:27 PM
  #300
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,031
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R


Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
AlsoI think the FAA needs to come up with some guide lines for all modelers butnot one set of rules for AMA members and another set for for non members.
They are coming up with but a single set that any and all modelers can follow in order to comply with the Rule. However, they are also allowing CBOs to propose alternative operating standards that may also be used as a means of compliance with the Rule. They have clearly stated that they cannot force anyone to join the AMA in order to use the AMA standard (assuming it actually gets accepted by the FAA). In fact, there can in theory be a virtually unlimited number of alternative standards and there will always be the default path as defined by the FAA.

Any and all alternative standards will be generated outside the FAA, so they are not forming multiple paths for compliance. But they will allow for more than one path. That is an important difference.
I will also add it really does not matter if the FAA forms multple paths them selfs or let someone else do it the effect is the same, But whatever paths or standards
that anyone comes up with will have to beapproved by the FAA anyhowand modelers will have to follow one or more of them.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

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



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:30 AM.