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 01-24-2012, 06:17 AM
  #176
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: Silent-AV8R


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

Unless the aircraft is actually taking a child or animal up I see no reason that it must be certified. Though the AMA should, and does have special rules for such aircraft. Why allow the FAA to control even large models when there has been very few issues in the past?
I have not seen or heard of the FAA wanting to certify airframes for models. I have heard of them wanting to do that for the commercial/public agency sUAS.


Quote:
Also just want to point out that some airports have pattern altitudes less than 1000 feet, unless that has changed since I flew full scale.
Minor point, while this is certainly true, the airspace classifications are not necessarily based on traffic patterns, per se. Class C airspace generally extends to the ground for 5NM around the main airport. Class B can extend to the ground farther out than that. Most aircraft are not in the traffic pattern that far out from the airport.
Look up the STARS and the VFR Arival routes for PHX Sky Harbor in Phoenix
http://www.airnav.com/airport/KPHX

STARs - Standard Terminal Arrivals
ARLIN THREE download (370KB)
BLYTHE FOUR download (313KB)
BUNTR TWO 2 pages: [1] [2] (369KB)
COYOT TWO 2 pages: [1] [2] (420KB)
EAGUL FIVE (RNAV)**NEW** 2 pages: [1] [2] (406KB)
EAGUL FIVE (RNAV), CONT.2**NEW** download (482KB)
GEELA FIVE (RNAV)**NEW** 2 pages: [1] [2] (373KB)
GEELA FIVE (RNAV), CONT.2**NEW** download (485KB)
JESSE ONE 2 pages: [1] [2] (290KB)
KOOLY FOUR (RNAV)**NEW** 2 pages: [1] [2] (658KB)
MAIER FIVE (RNAV)**NEW** 2 pages: [1] [2] (430KB)
MAIER FIVE (RNAV), CONT.2**NEW** download (501KB)
SUNSS SEVEN download (320KB)

IAPs - Instrument Approach Procedures
ILS OR LOC RWY 07R download (354KB)
ILS OR LOC RWY 08 download (361KB)
ILS OR LOC RWY 25L download (340KB)
ILS OR LOC RWY 26 download (360KB)
ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 07L download (295KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 07L download (267KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 07R download (272KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 08 download (289KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 25L download (292KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 25R download (269KB)
RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 26 download (279KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 07L download (295KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 07R download (296KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 08 download (275KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 25L download (303KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 25R download (287KB)
RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26 download (291KB)
FREEWAY VISUAL RWY 07L download (211KB)
POWER PLANT VISUAL RWY 25R download (220KB)
RIVER VISUAL RWY 25L download (220KB)
NOTE: Special Alternate Minimums apply download (21KB)


HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:44 AM
  #177
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?

HoundDog,

You're argueing apples and oranges here. Comparing our little VFR model operations to full scale IFR procedures does nothing but confuse the issue.

Unless, of course, your intent is to impress us with your knowledge/experience with full scale operations. If that's the case, I suggest that you proceed conservatively because there are several of us here who can easily trump your level of full scale experience.

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:47 AM
  #178
Oberst
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Lacona, NY
Posts: 1,840
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


again U are willing to throw one segment of our hobby/sport to the wolvs. There are many large Models flowen only at sanctioned AMA fields. Few are flowen very far from the pilot and not many are ever flowen very high ... they are just large scale replicas with a scale of 10 to 20 foot wing span. Where they are nomaly flowen poses no danger to general or comercal aviation. In Fact flying them below 1000 feet with in 5 miles of a towered air port is safer than farther out because except for an instrument approach path, aircraft in an airport traffic aera or just approaching to land are required to be at pattern altitude 1000 feet AGL .Now what the FAA is worried about is the UAV / sUAS that do pose a danger to maned aircraft.

Of coarse you are expressing your opinion rather than fact.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znCa-oCfacg[/youtube]

Any R/C plane bigger than the one shown in this video would have caused worse damage to the aircraft and could have resulted in injury or death. All broad classification of aircraft has the "right of way" over any R/C aircraft. Drones are usually cleared of airspace while being deployed, and usually fly higher than commercial airspace. All other info is Classified.

So if this happened to let's say, 20' wingspan model- what do you think would have happened?

So yes, some sections I'll give to the "so called" wolves. The FAA has done some good in keeping aviation safe. I know because I'm a pilot myself. If you don't believe me, go to a Country that has no regulations. Most all of them have a not so safe record, and as a pilot I wouldn't want to fly any of their aircraft.

All it takes is one death from a irresponsible R/C pilot with a responsible pilot and you don't have to worry about partial rulings coming down to us from the FAA. That's not opinion- it is fact. So lets regulate what needs regulating and leave others alone.

Quote:
The FAA feel they have a mandate from congress to control every thing that Flys in the NAS and protect man carring aircraft from each other and anything that flys
Again that is not fact, but based on biased paranoia. Many FAA members are in this hobby and don't want to see their agency involved. I talk to them on a regular basis and you can find some at any large or well known R/C events. I had a nice chat with a inspector at my last clubs airshow event last year. However, if need be depending on us they can and will crack down on us if rules are continously broken.

The FAA does want to start regulating 107 ultralights because of so many people with little or no flying experience has gotten into these things and gotten themselves killed. We lost a guy up here this year because he was flying too low and a down draft knocked him in the trees. But that's another topic for a different place. But I think it should be mandated that all 107 pilots have at least a solo permit and it should be enforced.

Quote:
again the FAR's are mearly a set of laws governing who what where and how, one is allowed to fly in the NAS, National Air Spase . The FAA only inforces after the infaction is commited, just like any traffic law that is broken. If we as AMA members fly under the "Special" created to be an alternet to the FAR's I don't believe much will change for us
True. But it is up to us to stop the infraction before it happens if we can. Because I am a AMA member, therefore I am responsible when it comes to R/C aircraft infractions. If I see a infraction at my club, I tell the guy what he's doing is not cool. If he continues the infractions then I will warn him or her that if they didn't stop I'd fill out a grievance, then the club committee would decide his or her fate. It's the non-AMA members I'm more worried about. There's nothing out there that can keep them in line. We have to wait for a accident to happen in order something can be done about it.

Let me reiterate- it's about stopping the infraction before it happens.

Quote:
Oberst

Last but not least, law enforcement has better things to do.
Quote:
HoundDog

"Last but not least, law enforcement has better things to do." Don't bet on it.
So you can show me anywhere that law enforcement got involved with any R/C aircraft infractions? Again they have better things to do and I stand by that statement. However when someone gets seriously hurt or killed from any type negligence by the R/C pilot, only then will law enforcement get involved and will have their own investigation.


Pete
Oberst is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:53 AM
  #179
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: Oberst

So you can show me anywhere that law enforcement got involved with any R/C aircraft infractions?

The Van Nuys airport police show up regularly at the Sepulveda Basin field whenever the Tower gets reports from aircraft operating out of VNY.

The Costa Mesa police used to come out to the RC field at Fairview park. Their helicopter used to come over the field and orbit at 400 feet agl. The aviation unit has been suspended due to budget cuts so they are less of an issue now.

Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:57 AM
  #180
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: Sport_Pilot
Private airports are not required to follow rules.
HOLY CRAP, where did you come up with this? There is NOTHING in the FARs that says such a thing!

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:02 AM
  #181
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?

Regarding the FAA mission:

Quote:
Birth of Federal Aviation Agency

On May 21, 1958, Senator A. S. "Mike" Monroney (D-OK) introduced a bill to create an independent Federal Aviation Agency to provide for the safe and efficient use of national airspace.

http://www.faa.gov/about/history/brief_history/
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:04 AM
  #182
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: Silent-AV8R
The Van Nuys airport police show up regularly at the Sepulveda Basin field whenever the Tower gets reports from aircraft operating out of VNY.

The Costa Mesa police used to come out to the RC field at Fairview park. Their helicopter used to come over the field and orbit at 400 feet agl. The aviation unit has been suspended due to budget cuts so they are less of an issue now.
I suspect that the non-FAA police (a.k.a the "airport police") are enforcing county or city laws since they would have no jurisdiction in enforcing the FARs. However, they would have the authority to stop and cite somebody who is violating a local ordinance. While the local police would have the authority to stop any person or activity that clearly poses a threat, only the FAA could bring charges against that person for violating any FARs.

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:07 AM
  #183
littlecrankshaf
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
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




The Costa Mesa police used to come out to the RC field at Fairview park. Their helicopter used to come over the field and orbit at 400 feet agl. The aviation unit has been suspended due to budget cuts so they are less of an issue now.

Sounds like we need more budget cuts!!!!
littlecrankshaf is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:13 AM
  #184
Oberst
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Lacona, NY
Posts: 1,840
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: littlecrankshaf


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R




The Costa Mesa police used to come out to the RC field at Fairview park. Their helicopter used to come over the field and orbit at 400 feet agl. The aviation unit has been suspended due to budget cuts so they are less of an issue now.

Sounds like we need more budget cuts!!!!

Yes, it would have been cheaper just to send a squad car. No wonder California is broke.

Pete
Oberst is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:22 AM
  #185
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: Silent-AV8R

Regarding the FAA mission:

Quote:
Birth of Federal Aviation Agency

On May 21, 1958, Senator A. S. ''Mike'' Monroney (D-OK) introduced a bill to create an independent Federal Aviation Agency to provide for the safe and efficient use of national airspace.

http://www.faa.gov/about/history/brief_history/
Hmmm, that's true but somewhat deceiving. The 1958 FAA was actually the reformation (not a new agency) of the old CAA, which was initially formed to PROMOTE aviation AND improve its safety. The CAA was renamed the FAA in 1958 in order to improve its credibility (by changing its name from "Civil" to "Federal") and to reflect its increasing role in governing the rapidly expanding nationwide commercial air travel industry. "Agency" was then changed to "Administration" by the Johnson administration when all federal agencies were upgraded to "administrations" to improve their legal clout.

In its role of promoting aviation, the CAA did a lot of research and experimentation during aviation's infancy. That part of the CAA eventually became NASA.

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:28 AM
  #186
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,030
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: Silent-AV8R
The Van Nuys airport police show up regularly at the Sepulveda Basin field whenever the Tower gets reports from aircraft operating out of VNY.

The Costa Mesa police used to come out to the RC field at Fairview park. Their helicopter used to come over the field and orbit at 400 feet agl. The aviation unit has been suspended due to budget cuts so they are less of an issue now.
I suspect that the non-FAA police (a.k.a the "airport police") are enforcing county or city laws since they would have no jurisdiction in enforcing the FARs. However, they would have the authority to stop and cite somebody who is violating a local ordinance. However, only the FAA could bring charges against that person for violating any FARs.

Harvey
Any officer can enforce any laws be it local state federal dont believe it just rob a bank the local cops will pick you up but the feds will prosecute
same goes if you interfere with a flight crew on a airplane.
ira d is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:29 AM
  #187
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

HoundDog,

You're argueing apples and oranges here. Comparing our little VFR model operations to full scale IFR procedures does nothing but confuse the issue.

Unless, of course, your intent is to impress us with your knowledge/experience with full scale operations. If that's the case, I suggest that you proceed conservatively because there are several of us here who can easily trump your level of full scale experience.

Harvey
Not really just expressing that it is safer to fly closer to towered airports and smaller ones to if the FAR's are observed by the full scale pilots and do what they are supposed to. Where I fly in Apache junction 25 miles from Skyh Harbor the bace of the class B is 5000' msl ground 1710 msl and the loewst leagle altitude is 500' above the highest obstical person or dwelling with in 2000' horizontal distance. This because it's considered sparsely populated area. this allows private and military and law inforcement and medical aircraft to fly right over our field at 500 AGL. There are 2 RC fields in northern Phoenix that have all ready been limited to 400' because of their proxmity to Deer Vally Airport. Any way Those who plan not fly under the AMA Special better learn how to read and understand the new FAR's concerning sUAS's, or suffer the rath of the FAA. is that enough said? Sorry if I offend anyone but facts are facts. Let's all come back to these fourms a year or so from now and see who had the best predictions. Won't mean much then, but might be interesting though
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:30 AM
  #188
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,889
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

Yes but Kalifornia is a totalitarian state!
Sport_Pilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:33 AM
  #189
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,889
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: Sport_Pilot
Private airports are not required to follow rules.
HOLY CRAP, where did you come up with this? There is NOTHING in the FARs that says such a thing!

Harvey
Find a FAR on airport requirements and show me where it says that private airports must follow the rules. Sorry, that should have been private airports not open to the public.
Sport_Pilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:33 AM
  #190
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,758
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

I suspect that the non-FAA police (a.k.a the "airport police") are enforcing county or city laws since they would have no jurisdiction in enforcing the FARs. However, they would have the authority to stop and cite somebody who is violating a local ordinance. However, only the FAA could bring charges against that person for violating any FARs.

Harvey
The City laws regulating use of Fairview Park placed a limit on altitude of models flown there. Why? Because FAAasked them to. There were/are no FARs regulating MA. FAAs 'enforcement' against those that endanger public safety in the airways (like one Hugh 'Bromo-seltzer' did flying gliders from Fairview) is limited to what is implied in AC91-57 ("If you modelers continue to behave yourselves, we won't need to regulate you") FAA has tried twice to make AC91-57 enforcible by incorporating it by reference in interim UASguidance regulatory material. I think it would be good for FAAto have the means to take action against modelers that can't respect safety of others - AMAdidn't ("the ACis voluntary"), so it follows that FAAhas been been pushed to impose regulation on all of us.

cj_rumley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:37 AM
  #191
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

HoundDog,

You're argueing apples and oranges here. Comparing our little VFR model operations to full scale IFR procedures does nothing but confuse the issue.

Unless, of course, your intent is to impress us with your knowledge/experience with full scale operations. If that's the case, I suggest that you proceed conservatively because there are several of us here who can easily trump your level of full scale experience.

Harvey
H5487 ... Have you drawen the 5.75 statuted mile circle around your R/C facility yet.
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:42 AM
  #192
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


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Private airports are not required to follow rules.
HOLY CRAP, where did you come up with this? There is NOTHING in the FARs that says such a thing!

Harvey
WHAT ??? Flying under a sport pilot certification has more restrictions by FAR's than regular pilots certification and all airports are governed by the same FAR's ... I'd like to talk to your instructor if you are certified under Sport pilot or trying to be.
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:42 AM
  #193
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
Any officer can enforce any laws be it local state federal dont believe it just rob a bank the local cops will pick you up but the feds will prosecute
same goes if you interfere with a flight crew on a airplane.
Hi Ira,

I agree and I was in the process of changing the wording of my original post while you were responding to it. ANY law enforcement officer (or private citizen, for that matter) can intervene in an activity that is clearly illegal or life threatening to others. However, if those officers are out of their jurisdiction, they can only stop/detain the perpetrator until a representative of the agency that has jurisdiction can take over. In the case of aviation, only the FAA can enforce the FARs (and it vigoriously defends its sole authority to do so on a regular basis.)

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:49 AM
  #194
bradpaul
 
bradpaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka, FL
Posts: 1,367
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

BTW....... you all realise that the AMA Headquarters and International Flying Center borders on Reese Airport in Muncie,IN........

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=200717360595310567090.000463afe4cb50 b745530&hl=en&ie=UTF8&vpsrc=0&ll=40.167723,-85.322742&spn=0.022038,0.023517&source=embed

Brad

bradpaul is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:49 AM
  #195
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


Quote:
ORIGINAL: ira d
Any officer can enforce any laws be it local state federal dont believe it just rob a bank the local cops will pick you up but the feds will prosecute
same goes if you interfere with a flight crew on a airplane.
Hi Ira,

I agree and I was in the process of changing the wording of my original post while you were responding to it. ANY law enforcement officer (or private citizen, for that matter) can intervene in an activity that is clearly illegal or life threatening to others. However, if those officers are out of their jurisdiction, thy can only stop/detain the perpetrator until a representative of the agency that has jurisdiction can take over. In the case of aviation, only the FAA can enforce the FARs (and it vigoriously defends its sole authority to do so on a regular basis.)Not So As a liscenced pilot one must show their ID to any leagle law inforcment officer, including city, state, or federal law inforcment. Just fly too low over a housing aera and see who shows up to talk to you after you land at your local airport.

Not here in Arizona ... The Feds took away Sheriff Joe's right to enforce federal imagration law .... the one of the few in the USA doing so. But then that has nothing to do with this fourm Sorry ......


Harvey
HoundDog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:57 AM
  #196
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: bradpaul

BTW....... you all realise that the AMA Headquarters and International Flying Center borders on Reese Airport in Muncie,IN........

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=200717360595310567090.000463afe4cb50b745530&hl=en&ie=UTF8&vpsrc=0&ll=40.167723,-85.322742&spn=0.022038,0.023517&source=embed

Brad


Now wouldn't that be a twist!! Hopefully any restrictions will only be around busy airports with at least an active control tower.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:00 AM
  #197
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: cj_rumley
AMA didn't (''the AC is voluntary''), so it follows that FAA has been been pushed to impose regulation on all of us.

It is simply wrong to imply that anything the FAA is doing with respect to sUAS regulations has anything to do with what the AMA has done.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:02 AM
  #198
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: H5487

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R

Regarding the FAA mission:

Quote:
Birth of Federal Aviation Agency

On May 21, 1958, Senator A. S. ''Mike'' Monroney (D-OK) introduced a bill to create an independent Federal Aviation Agency to provide for the safe and efficient use of national airspace.

http://www.faa.gov/about/history/brief_history/
Hmmm, that's true but somewhat deceiving. The 1958 FAA was actually the reformation (not a new agency) of the old CAA, which was initially formed to PROMOTE aviation AND improve its safety. The CAA was renamed the FAA in 1958 in order to improve its credibility (by changing its name from ''Civil'' to ''Federal'') and to reflect its increasing role in governing the rapidly expanding nationwide commercial air travel industry. ''Agency'' was then changed to ''Administration'' by the Johnson administration when all federal agencies were upgraded to ''administrations'' to improve their legal clout.

In its role of promoting aviation, the CAA did a lot of research and experimentation during aviation's infancy. That part of the CAA eventually became NASA.

Harvey

I excerpted one small line but included the entire link for those that want the full history. The point is that the FAA is charged with air safety.
Silent-AV8R is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:05 AM
  #199
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: Sport_Pilot


Quote:
ORIGINAL: H5487


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Private airports are not required to follow rules.
HOLY CRAP, where did you come up with this? There is NOTHING in the FARs that says such a thing!

Harvey
Find a FAR on airport requirements and show me where it says that private airports must follow the rules. Sorry, that should have been private airports not open to the public.
"...private airports not open to the public." That would be Restricted airports (useable only by prior permission or for a bonafide emergency) but they would still have to abide by the FARs.

Sport, we are likely talking about two different things here. When you said that "Private airports are not required to follow the rules", that left too much open for debate. The FAA has jurisdiction over privately-owned airports served by Part 121 air carrier ops. However, it can only advise other airports. (Please note that many airports served by Part 121 ops are actually "privately" owned. By definition, "privately owned" includes those airports owned by corporations, as opposed to being owned by the governing body in which they're located.)

Of course, I am hesitant to use such words as "all" or "every" since exceptions do occur.

Harvey
H5487 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:07 AM
  #200
corch
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: grand rapids, MI
Posts: 313
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?

But looky how we can help the EPA, TDEQ, FDA, LMNOP!


And, as the article points out, it was a legal flight
corch is offline  
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 01:02 AM.