Oberst

Screw the Republican Debate. I find this thread more entertaining!

MAX HEADSPEED

The FAA already dictates restrictive operation directives through the AMA who then notifies, through e-mail, all members in that area of concern of these NOTAM.
Of course, there will always be quite a few RC fliers 'outside' the sphere of information and will never hear about, or ever be affected unless they bounce their RC airplane off the belly-pan of AF-1.......ooopsie!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOTAM

http://www.modelaircraft.org/members...bs/notams.aspx

H5487

I take that to mean that there's nothing exciting on Jerry Springer today?

Harvey

cfircav8r

My Feedback: (1)

The FAA came to be to protect the general public from Aircraft. Our models are aircraft and the FAA is very concerned about "model vs. bystander" issues. Any activity that they feel causes an unreasonable threat to the general public will be restricted in some way. The hope is that the restrictions will be something that most of us can live with. We will have a chance to have our opinions heard after the initial release, and hopefully they will stay as reasonable as they have been historically.

Silent-AV8R

The FAA issues a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) which are then communicated to the aviation community by way of a Notice To Airmen (NOTAM). The AMA monitors the TFR and NOTAMS and as a service to their members sends out a notification to those who will be affected. The FAA does not contact the AMA directly nor do they develop the TFRs in cooperation with anyone other than the Secret Service, Forest Service or other government agencies (and very rarely private groups for things like the Reno Air Races, Super Bowl, etc.).

This is a handy page to bookmark:

http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html

It lists all the TFR.

This site also shows all TFRs on a map that can be switched to various views, including a satellit view so you can tell exactly where you are relative to the TFR:

http://www.runwayfinder.com

Look for the RED circles.

H5487

I must admit that I've never seen or heard of the FAA investigating an accident where a model airplane hit a bystander, damaged a parked car, etc. Of all the incidents that I'm aware of, such things have been handled by the local police.

While it is true that our models are "aircraft" by definition, we are definitely not a priority with the FAA. Like I mentioned in an earlier post, the FAA is already overworked just dealing with the airlines and general aviation. They just don't have the time or manpower to deal with models and you can bet that they're not excited about having to include UAVs in their workload in the near future. And to address a question that's bound to come up, the FAA is already scrambling to pay the current staff and is in no position to hire additional inspectors needed to handle UAVs.

Harvey

H5487

Silent,

Excellent post, mah man! Good info for the guys as well as good-to-have links.

Harvey

MAX HEADSPEED

"....to protect the general public from Aircraft...." Yes, from ballistic debris from said aircraft, and/or aircrafts.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

OK! OK! Ya got me there I mean clubs then ....

ira d

As promised here is my take on this whole deal.

1. The FAA very much wants to regulate models if they didn't they would leave things just as theyhave beenthat being pretty much problem free.

2. The FAA is not having a problem defining what a recreational model is I think that is very easy to define.

3.The so called defult path is just a tool todrive most modelers to the CBO aka AMA.

4. The AMA has become a partner with the FAA in this endeaver the AMA gets more members and the FAA gets a watch dog group to inform them as to what modelers
are doing.
5. It seems that the FAA does not want us to know they are calling the shots but would rather we think that all pending rules comming are from a CBO not the FAA
I say this because any rules put forth by a CBO will have to be approved by the FAA, IMO the FAA already knows what they want and any proposed rules will have to
be in line with what they want.

Thats my take on things i'm out.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Of course they know what they want ... They've been at it for almost 4 years now and the NPRM is in it's second phase ... it has been submitted to the Administrator. Next it goes to the Office of Management and Budget then is put out for public comment. I hope ya all Remember how to write with Pen and Paper I Hope.

Silent-AV8R

Not really, we are just being swept up with the main objective, commercial and public use. But since we are sUAS they need to address us. They did not set out to regulate models and tehn decide, what the heck, let's regulate commercial users too.


The issue as I see it is that their idea and our idea are two very different things.

Sorry, this is absurd. To be true it means that some how models are the main focus and the FAA wants to bolster membership in a private organization. Like I say, patently absurd propositions. This i slike saying the FAA regulates general aviation to force people to join the EAA or AOPA.

Again, simply absurd on the face of it.

I do not think there is any doubt in anyone's mind that the FAA is calling the shots. I agree however that they likely know what they want. However they will not tell the AMA so they are left to guess and hope they hit the mark. Sort of like shooting an arrow in a dark room. You are not even certain what wall the target is on.

Later.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

So... I was right...AMA has no idea what it is doing...No telling what they might hit with that arrow...

KidEpoxy

Silent
yeah, +1



no qualifiers, no "mostly but", I just plain agree with all the points you hit
... wow, kinda freaky when that happens

cj_rumley

Long thread, lots said. Ilearned some things, that's why I'm here. I've been swayed some...........but not from the basic beliefs I had coming in.
- FAA is in the regulating business, AMAis not
- FAA has shown they can do something right by scuttling the pipe dream that membership in AMAcan be required for citizens to enjoy
fllying model airplanes
- AMA , contrary to assurances given after the ARCRecommendations were released to keep the members informed as to how they will
respond, have not given so much as a hint of what they (WE) want instead. Aconstant flow of tweets relaying TFRs doesn' cut it

Far better to focus on the FAAplan in the NPRM release (eventually) and review and comment on it than to continue on the nonsensical CBO alternative standards (a euphemism for regulation, by US (a euphemism for some controlling folks with ambitions at AMAHQ)) make-work.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

That just about sums it up.

cfircav8r

My Feedback: (1)

Yes the FAA is very overworked, yet there are a multitude of regs for non-commercial aircraft operations that they expect to be followed to protect the general public, yet do not actively insure are being followed. In the over 2000 hrs of flight time I have, most on the commercial side, I have not once had an interaction with an "administrator" aside from pilots exams. As far as not being concerned with models, they are very aware that many individuals and companies are using the guise of "model aircraft" to perform services and research for commercial gain while enjoying the lack of confining regulations. This necessitates the need to regulate all aspects of model aviation to prevent commercial activities from threatening public safety and close the loop holes that excluding model aviation may allow. So while they most likely will not send out the "model police" to our local fields it does give them the teeth needed to go after individuals, companies, and organizations that may pose a threat to public safety. All of this makes us a priority by default.

Silent-AV8R

No surprise that is your take away from my statement. Not being told explicitly by the FAA what they want to the standard to say is nowhere close to having no idea what they are doing. But like I said, zero surprise that you would take it that way.

Silent-AV8R

Non-sensical only to those who do not fly gliders, pattern, IMAC, pylon, turbines, etc. Odd how after all the lip service to "serving all modelers" how easily it seems so many will simply abandon those who do not fly what they fly.

davedontflymuch

My Feedback: (1)

To whom it may concern:

I have been reading the current discussion concerning the proposed regulation of our beloved hobby by the federal government. I would like to begin by stating that we , as mere hobbyists, will probably have little if any recourse once uncle sam begins trampling on our "unregulated" activity.

I would would also like to point out that the FAA is already supposed to be regulating the commercial aviation industry whose mishaps, accidental or otherwise, actually result in injury or death. Sometimes on a massive scale.


It should be noted most fervently that the FAA has very little impact on the huge companies whose negligence ends up killing people. The FAA basically ends up making recommendations to air carriers who aren't actually required to follow them.

I just thought someone should point this out to our community before this issue becomes so divisive that our interests are already dismissed by our overreactive legislators.

What we need is some unity is all I'm saying. The airline industry has a pretty powerful lobby you know.

Tarasdad

Why don't all you "AMA is the debbil" and AMA/FAA conspiracy theorist just f- off. Its people like you who do this hobby more harm by spouting your nonsense than anything. I am sick and bloody tired of every thread that tries to present accurate information being dragged down to the level of dog crap by idiots who have nothing better to do than spew anti-AMA diatribe.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Just going with one of your super bright analogies... sorta like shinning a light in the eyes of oncoming traffic...I guess you are the responsible party.

So, from what you just said, FAA wants the AMA is to shoot an arrow and AMA knows not exactly what arrow or at what... I guess a bit of an upgrade from your previous post. Maybe little by little, post by post you can inch it back to “AMA knows exactly what they are doing and they are right on target”...

KidEpoxy

Silent
once again you forgot to mention out Goggle/FPV hobby brethren,
I am starting to think you are intentionally leaving them out when talking about all the modelers we should be protecting.

Is that the case Silent?
Are you intentionally choosing to leave out our Autonomous Hobby Modeler brothers,
cause then that bunch of folks doing the "lip service" you mention, well that group would include YOU too, right?

Yes or no Silent,
when 'serving all modelers", that means ALL hobby modelers without exceptions?

This is the second time recently that you call out folks that choose to ignore protecting the parts of the hobby they dont do.
Seems you need to come out and say/prove you are not doing exactly like those you condemn
in regard to YOU choosing not to protect the HeadsDown/Autonomous disciplines of our hobby.

KidEpoxy

DaveDFM
please read up on SenateBill 223 Amendment 86,
where the US Senate voted UNANIMOUSLY to include the amendment
that told the FAA to sit down and shut up regarding toy airplanes

Dave, if you had a half page of text that protected aeromodeling from FAA regulation,
that the senate approved UNANIMOUSLY and DID put it on a bill that passed the senate,
wouldnt you consider that to be having some pretty decent ringers in our corner against the FAA


Now, I bet you thinking,
Hey, if the senate unanimously told the FAA to sitdown and shutup, then arent we golden?
No, we are not.
Because our lobbyist didnt put up our 1/2page as a stand alone bill to become a very simple law by unanimous passage,
instead our lobbyist chose to have our 1/2page stapled to the back as the 86th add-on to a multiBillion dollar highly contested spending bill, which if you have been watching the news you would know that once again the FAA got a temp workaround funding passed rather than having the actual contested spending bill ratified.... thats the political dead-ending to force concessions by a multitude of small deals rather than just passing the monolith bill (that we stapled our salvation to)


Dave, why are we ignoring the US Senate being UNANIMOUSLY in our hip pocket, willing to squelch the FAA for us,
and instead we focus entirely on plodding along with the PublicSerfs vs CBOmasters tier plan

Silent-AV8R

The "etc." was intended to include all those that I did not explicitly mention. Understanding the meaning of what I actually wrote renders the rest of your post irrelevant.