Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 1 of 55 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 1375

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    1,456
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    FAA fine against drone photographer dismissed.

    Yes, this has to do with the AMA and modeling. It simply opens up more freedoms to those who wish to purchase, and enjoy a quad copter to make some practical use out of, rather than circle flying with a quarter-scale at the local club:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovati...smissed-n46506

    Now, let's wait and see what the FAA does. If our friend with the drone prevails, then I say we're good to go, and those big huge hunks of metal you see at the airport will, for the most part, soon become obsolete!

  2. #2
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,716
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by NorfolkSouthern View Post
    Yes, this has to do with the AMA and modeling. It simply opens up more freedoms to those who wish to purchase, and enjoy a quad copter to make some practical use out of, rather than circle flying with a quarter-scale at the local club:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovati...smissed-n46506
    Very good news. I was really hoping sanity would prevail for once.

    Thanks for posting that NFS...needed something good to help my spirits.

    For the moment that is really good news... that the charges were dropped... but be fore warned, the FAA will be as any women scorned and resulting long term ramifications will be with a fervent vengeance.

    A small battle has been won but the ever greater erosion of personal freedoms continues. Freedom is a continuous fight, every single day... and "freedom fighters" are losing more ground every single day to those that can't understand the concept of true personal responsibility and real accountability.

    The precepts of the "need more laws" complacent ignorant zealot type, that is killing our freedoms now, is that more laws, rules, and regulations are always the answer...as their position can easily and effectively rationalized from the standpoint of safety...and once the "safety card" has been played any contrary argument is easily deemed impotent...even at the expense to freedom...and they know it... and the "droids" couldn't care less how it impacts freedom as long as they can maintain their errant perception that "authoritative oversight" will cause them less work or worry. They just want their happy meal at any cost...they really don't want to be bothered by all the work that true freedom presents...just much easier to be led like the sheeple they are.
    Last edited by littlecrankshaf; 03-07-2014 at 08:09 AM.
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Posts
    134
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    My Fire Department is considering using a quad copter equipped with a Go Pro camera for use during wildland fires and rescue operations. Having a birds eye view for the purpose of making tactical decisions is something we think may be helpful. The images would be used for real time operational decisions and for training. Would this be considered commercial use? Would the firefighter using the copter need to be an AMA member? Would we need permission from the land owner if we were operating on private property? This would be in a special fire district. Would we be considered a government agency and would that make any difference? Got to fly it the other day during some testing. Kind of fun. Definitely a different type of flying. We are aware that this is a hot topic but the real time images, we believe, could be life saving. Should we be expecting a visit from the FAA? I'm not sure that comparing what we want to do and what this gentleman did are the same but i have to wonder none the less. I noted while reading that the FAA is asking government and police agencies to advise them (ask permission) before testing. Does our use differ in their eyes? The images gathered would not be use for any purpose other than training and tactical decisions during any fire-ground operations.

    James
    Last edited by JW0311; 03-07-2014 at 09:52 PM. Reason: To clarify
    undesirable model airplane flying renegade

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    1,456
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    It is unfortunate, but the FAA is going for an appeal, and there is nothing the AMA will do, because it's tied in with the government agency. It is too bad that drones aren't protected by the constitution, like our important Second Amendment protects the rights of gun owners. This may end up going to the Supreme Court. And if it does, I really hope the AMA and FAA both lose the deal. The AMA does not amount to a hill of beans, in my opinion, since it decided to become a government body wannabe. An insurance underwriter (which is all the AMA is, essentially) has no business sticking its nose into people's personal affairs.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Moreno Valley, CA
    Posts
    2,311
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    The 10k fine was way to excessive especaily if this was a first offense, The FAA needs to stop delaying the proposed rules and put something in effect
    before they try to get to involved in model planes and or small uas aircraft.
    Ira d

  6. #6
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,716
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JW0311 View Post
    My Fire Department is considering using a quad copter equipped with a Go Pro camera for use during wildland fires and rescue operations. Having a birds eye view for the purpose of making tactical decisions is something we think may be helpful. The images would be used for real time operational decisions and for training. Would this be considered commercial use? Would the firefighter using the copter need to be an AMA member? Would we need permission from the land owner if we were operating on private property? This would be in a special fire district. Would we be considered a government agency and would that make any difference? Got to fly it the other day during some testing. Kind of fun. Definitely a different type of flying. We are aware that this is a hot topic but the real time images, we believe, could be life saving. Should we be expecting a visit from the FAA? I'm not sure that comparing what we want to do and what this gentleman did are the same but i have to wonder none the less. I noted while reading that the FAA is asking government and police agencies to advise them (ask permission) before testing. Does our use differ in their eyes? The images gathered would not be use for any purpose other than training and tactical decisions during any fire-ground operations.

    James
    Your post is exemplary of our future going forward. We've become to expect un-ending impacts to our freedom...up to the point we really aren't sure what we are allowed to...even if for the best of causes...
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  7. #7
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,716
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by NorfolkSouthern View Post
    It is unfortunate, but the FAA is going for an appeal, and there is nothing the AMA will do, because it's tied in with the government agency. .
    I think AMA will continue to side with the Romans...as the fellow was being horse whipped while dragging his cross, AMA threw a rock or two and spat at him to show allegiance...and most of the crowd cheered with great acceptance.
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Granger, IN
    Posts
    1,169
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    On the off chance that anyone cares what this case actually held, it doesn't say the FAA can't regulate unmanned aircraft. It just says they need to issue regulations to do that. If they get serious, they could issue emergency regulations next week, though they probably won't. This is not an important case, and it doesn't involve any supposed constitutional right to fly anything without the FAA's permission. We've all known that regulations are coming. This case has nothing at all to do with what those regulations will or can provide.
    Al Gunn
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood No. 9

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aguanga, CA
    Posts
    960
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JW0311 View Post
    My Fire Department is considering using a quad copter equipped with a Go Pro camera for use during wildland fires and rescue operations. Having a birds eye view for the purpose of making tactical decisions is something we think may be helpful. The images would be used for real time operational decisions and for training. Would this be considered commercial use? Would the firefighter using the copter need to be an AMA member? Would we need permission from the land owner if we were operating on private property? This would be in a special fire district. Would we be considered a government agency and would that make any difference? Got to fly it the other day during some testing. Kind of fun. Definitely a different type of flying. We are aware that this is a hot topic but the real time images, we believe, could be life saving. Should we be expecting a visit from the FAA? I'm not sure that comparing what we want to do and what this gentleman did are the same but i have to wonder none the less. I noted while reading that the FAA is asking government and police agencies to advise them (ask permission) before testing. Does our use differ in their eyes? The images gathered would not be use for any purpose other than training and tactical decisions during any fire-ground operations.

    James
    What you are considering is a "public" use, rather than commercial, ("civil" in topical FAA releases). I don't think your FD differs from other "public" users of unmanned aircraft you have read about as to being required to ask and be granted permission from FAA. Not easy, but doable, given that hundreds of public service agencies have obtained the necessary certification to use them on an experimental basis, while only 2 commercial users have.
    Your application of the technology is a natural, but FAA has lagged badly on getting the regulatory provisions in order that will allow it......they have spent years "getting ready to get ready," and only recently came out with a 'roadmap' for getting the job done.
    I don't know what costs are involved in pursuit of getting FAA permission to operate, but expect that it may be a significant burden on your FD budget. Vendors of such systems of course have a vested interest in equipping you, and so are a probably your best source of advice on navigating the regulatory process.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Aurora, CO
    Posts
    1,152
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    [QUOTE=NorfolkSouthern;... An insurance underwriter (which is all the AMA is, essentially) has no business sticking its nose into people's personal affairs.[/QUOTE]

    Right on!!! NorfolkSouthern is right on! (Never mind that I was born in Norfolk). I agree with everything you wrote.

    Kurt

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    1,456
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    I have been putting a little more thought into this. The ability to see, and observe, is a basic human right. If a doc writes a prescription for eyeglasses, then you have the right to have the prescription filled, to aid in vision. A drone, when equipped for FPV, aids in vision. It allows the operator to "see and observe" his or her environment. As long as the privacy of individuals is protected (no flying over people's back yards, or around someone's home with the purpose of snooping, harassment, or taking photos/videos, etc, for example) then perhaps, owning an enjoying a drone should be a fundamental right. An amendment to the Constitution, adding drones to parts that guarantee the right to pursue liberty and happiness, including having an aid of vision available to view landmarks, could be added, perhaps.

    Then, mandate FPV as a required safety feature, along with a transmitter/receiver that allows full control of the drone even if it goes beyond line of site, along with a "return to home" fail safe. I would be all for it. Green and red navigation lights and little white blinkers are fine with me. People can purchase a nicely manufactured and safety tested drone at retail, and enjoy it freely, without having to resort to an improvised device made from a multitude of parts. We can all be FREE from having to spend BIG money for a pilot and Cessna just to take pictures of a friend's horse stable.

    From all the videos I've watched of multi-rotors, along with videos of demos when flown indoors, I have reached the conclusion that drones with FPV are actually SAFER than a standard model plane, when set up properly. They are just more controllable, and predictable, with far better safety options. I say, run roughshod over the FAA and AMA with a Constitutional amendment. Neither of them will do a dang thing to allow technology to take its course, and improve our lives.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by NorfolkSouthern View Post
    I have been putting a little more thought into this. The ability to see, and observe, is a basic human right. If a doc writes a prescription for eyeglasses, then you have the right to have the prescription filled, to aid in vision. A drone, when equipped for FPV, aids in vision. It allows the operator to "see and observe" his or her environment. As long as the privacy of individuals is protected (no flying over people's back yards, or around someone's home with the purpose of snooping, harassment, or taking photos/videos, etc, for example) then perhaps, owning an enjoying a drone should be a fundamental right. An amendment to the Constitution, adding drones to parts that guarantee the right to pursue liberty and happiness, including having an aid of vision available to view landmarks, could be added, perhaps.

    Then, mandate FPV as a required safety feature, along with a transmitter/receiver that allows full control of the drone even if it goes beyond line of site, along with a "return to home" fail safe. I would be all for it. Green and red navigation lights and little white blinkers are fine with me. People can purchase a nicely manufactured and safety tested drone at retail, and enjoy it freely, without having to resort to an improvised device made from a multitude of parts. We can all be FREE from having to spend BIG money for a pilot and Cessna just to take pictures of a friend's horse stable.

    From all the videos I've watched of multi-rotors, along with videos of demos when flown indoors, I have reached the conclusion that drones with FPV are actually SAFER than a standard model plane, when set up properly. They are just more controllable, and predictable, with far better safety options. I say, run roughshod over the FAA and AMA with a Constitutional amendment. Neither of them will do a dang thing to allow technology to take its course, and improve our lives.
    So you think that any moron, with no training or practice, can take a camera equipped toy multirotor and fly it wherever he wants for any reason.

    Should he be allowed to fly it over people or automobile traffic, or homes or buildings?
    Should he fly it as far as he wants? What about range limitations?
    What about wind conditions?
    What about the reliability of the toy multirotor?
    Tell me, from your vast store of knowledge, does the camera provide the full range of vsion that humans have?
    How far around his toy can he peer?
    How high up can he see?
    What about seeing below or behind the toy?
    Do you comprehend that a real reliable and safe commercial drone has never been built or certified?
    Do you comprehend, that when such systems are available, they will cost thousands of dollars or more?
    Do you understand that the necessary training to operate the drones successfully and safely will cost thousands of dollars and take hundreds of hours both in classroom and in the air?

    I don't think you realize that military drones are being operated right at the ragged edge of our technological capability. There are hundreds of problems being overcome constantly. They are incredibly difficult to build, maintain and operate. They crash far more often that you realize. they completely miss their targets. They are costing us millions perhaps billion of dollars to develop,. maintain and operate. And, they are not toys.

  13. #13
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,716
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
    So you think that any moron, with no training or practice, can take a camera equipped toy multirotor and fly it wherever he wants for any reason.
    You're right...we should only use slow sticks...or maybe those inexpensive RTF foam FVP planes...those multi-rotor flying machines are just plane evil, I tell you...

    We need to get busy with tons of new laws and restrictions instead of simply holding people responsible for their actions.
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf View Post
    You're right...we should only use slow sticks...or maybe those inexpensive RTF foam FVP planes...those multi-rotor flying machines are just plane evil, I tell you...

    We need to get busy with tons of new laws and restrictions instead of simply holding people responsible for their actions.
    Yup, just about any of those toys carries about the same amount risk when flown irresponsibly.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aguanga, CA
    Posts
    960
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf View Post
    You're right...we should only use slow sticks...or maybe those inexpensive RTF foam FVP planes...those multi-rotor flying machines are just plane evil, I tell you...

    We need to get busy with tons of new laws and restrictions instead of simply holding people responsible for their actions.
    Oh, they've been very busy making rules for accommodation of morons at all levels of governance, including our private organization and many of its associated clubs. Morons rule in our society. People responsible for their own actions have become a shunned fringe group, usually living out in the boondocks.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Here is afloowup story related to NS's original post;

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...s-flying-high/

    I find the reporting to be substandard. It attempts to equate model aviation with commercial drones. It doesn't differentiate between irresponsible behavior and responsible behavior. It seems to glorify these idiots and sociopaths.

    These scam artist are operating machines of unknown reliability using questionable flying skills, if any all. They are a danger to us all.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    1,456
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
    Here is afloowup story related to NS's original post;

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...s-flying-high/

    I find the reporting to be substandard. It attempts to equate model aviation with commercial drones. It doesn't differentiate between irresponsible behavior and responsible behavior. It seems to glorify these idiots and sociopaths.

    These scam artist are operating machines of unknown reliability using questionable flying skills, if any all. They are a danger to us all.
    I truly don't see how the commercial operator was doing anything wrong. I watched the video, and he was far, FAR away from any populated area. He was in the middle of a field of sunflowers. The FAA wants to make criminals out of people who are merely making a living, doing their work in places that a HUGE hunk of full-scale metal can't reach anyway. Was he chasing an airliner with his 48 ounce quad copter? I think not. Would you like the AMA to join up with Moms Demand Action and MAIG? Seems like there are some Fuds who would like that.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by NorfolkSouthern View Post
    I truly don't see how the commercial operator was doing anything wrong. I watched the video, and he was far, FAR away from any populated area. He was in the middle of a field of sunflowers. The FAA wants to make criminals out of people who are merely making a living, doing their work in places that a HUGE hunk of full-scale metal can't reach anyway. Was he chasing an airliner with his 48 ounce quad copter? I think not. Would you like the AMA to join up with Moms Demand Action and MAIG? Seems like there are some Fuds who would like that.
    Good one, you pick out one instance that suits your argument and fail to acknowledge the existence of the guys flying their toys over your house, your school, your workplace your streets and roads. Yeah, toy flying is safe anywhere. And pigs can fly them.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    25
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2014/03/10/592573/



    Clear to make drone deliveries by a federal judge .
    Your move FAA .

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by smeckert View Post
    http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2014/03/10/592573/



    Clear to make drone deliveries by a federal judge .
    Your move FAA .
    All the FAA has to do is wait for someone to be injured, killed or some serious property damage and say "I told you so!" But the FAA has too much of a sense of responsibility for that. They will contest the decision, work faster to produce rules that will satisfy the judge and continue protecting our nations air space.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aguanga, CA
    Posts
    960
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
    Good one, you pick out one instance that suits your argument and fail to acknowledge the existence of the guys flying their toys over your house, your school, your workplace your streets and roads. Yeah, toy flying is safe anywhere. And pigs can fly them.
    Well, that same instance is one that you condemned as glorifying idiots and sociopaths and scam artists with questionable flying skills that are a danger to us all. You saw a whole lot of malice in that video that I (and NorfolkSouthern) somehow missed.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    777
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by cj_rumley View Post
    Well, that same instance is one that you condemned as glorifying idiots and sociopaths and scam artists with questionable flying skills that are a danger to us all. You saw a whole lot of malice in that video that I (and NorfolkSouthern) somehow missed.
    Not malice, just incredible stupidity. These idiots are playing with matches and they either don't realize it or don't care.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    lisle, IL
    Posts
    55
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    The faa posted their position on feb 26, and just revised it on March 7, presumably now reflecting their position after the ruling.


    http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240
    Brotherhoods P51-#16 , P47-#15, P-39 #12, Glow Head-#25

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Hobe Sound, FL
    Posts
    100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Are any of you commercial pilots that are for this? This UAV/UAS pilot (oh by the way he is not a US citizen) got lucky. The fine should have stuck. I hope the FAA's appeal goes thur and the fine sticks! He is careless and was compensated for the video from this flight. Therefore the FAA should regulate it. Flying a drone/UAV/UAS/RC aircraft in a commercial operation should have standards above what us hobbyist have. IMHO there should be at a minimum some sort of training and licensing requirements for the pilot and inspections for the aircraft. Go ahead and flame me. But until you have been involved in a near miss between a full scale and drone/UAV/UAS/RC aircraft you really don't have a leg to stand on. I don't want any more regulations but you have a bunch of idiots pushing the limits with what they can get away with flying.
    Last edited by brn2fly; 03-10-2014 at 06:38 PM.
    Andy Snow, AMA 6972, IMAC 4860
    Fly it like you stole it!

  25. #25
    Silent-AV8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    4,838
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Team Futaba - RClipos.com


Page 1 of 55 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:32 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.