FAA Issues "Interpretation of the special rule for model aircraft"
#726
My Feedback: (2)
Nothing like having a moderator with an obvious political bias weighing in.
Anyway... as for as the radio frequency stuff goes...I hear tell it was Hoss that met with the FCC in a dark, smoke filled room to administer a bribe of $10,000 to an agent of the FCC, and that bribe instantly saved us all, if my memory serves... Heck, maybe ole Hoss will weigh in and give us a refresher for old times sake.
Anyway... as for as the radio frequency stuff goes...I hear tell it was Hoss that met with the FCC in a dark, smoke filled room to administer a bribe of $10,000 to an agent of the FCC, and that bribe instantly saved us all, if my memory serves... Heck, maybe ole Hoss will weigh in and give us a refresher for old times sake.
Funny,
I am asked for information. Rather than give my interpretation of the information, I provide the source so anyone can read it and draw their own conclusions. And, because I am a moderator my action presents an obvious political bias? I feel bad for you.
Last edited by aeajr; 08-20-2014 at 11:25 AM.
#727
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting,
Funny,
I am asked for information. Rather than give my interpretation of the information, I provide the source so anyone can read it and draw their own conclusions. And, because I am a moderator my action presents an obvious political bias? I feel bad for you.
Funny,
I am asked for information. Rather than give my interpretation of the information, I provide the source so anyone can read it and draw their own conclusions. And, because I am a moderator my action presents an obvious political bias? I feel bad for you.
Anyway I remeber an article you wrote for the AMA rag...gave me some real insight about. I can only paraphrase now but exact words shouldn't be hard to find. In that article you were talking about flying at your site. You said something like "an occasional roll well over the tress is allowed but aerobatic maneuvers are generally discouraged"... It occurred to me you are one of those that appear to want a common denominator no greater than yourself...If true that is exactly what I despise in so many within AMA...that's the problem within AMA but not of AMA itself.
#728
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who are uninformed about the efforts AMA has put forth around government relations over the past few years I would point you to the AMA government relations blog. If you are really interested, I am sure you will find this very informative.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/
AMA has a long history of advocating for the model aviation community with the FAA and the FCC. It was partially through the efforts of AMA that we have had designated frequencies for flying over the years.
...............
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/
AMA has a long history of advocating for the model aviation community with the FAA and the FCC. It was partially through the efforts of AMA that we have had designated frequencies for flying over the years.
...............
#729
My Feedback: (3)
Come on now...your posts are full of your opinions...get real!
Anyway I remeber an article you wrote for the AMA rag...gave me some real insight about. I can only paraphrase now but exact words shouldn't be hard to find. In that article you were talking about flying at your site. You said something like "an occasional roll well over the tress is allowed but aerobatic maneuvers are generally discouraged"... It occurred to me you are one of those that appear to want a common denominator no greater than yourself...If true that is exactly what I despise in so many within AMA...that's the problem within AMA but not of AMA itself.
Anyway I remeber an article you wrote for the AMA rag...gave me some real insight about. I can only paraphrase now but exact words shouldn't be hard to find. In that article you were talking about flying at your site. You said something like "an occasional roll well over the tress is allowed but aerobatic maneuvers are generally discouraged"... It occurred to me you are one of those that appear to want a common denominator no greater than yourself...If true that is exactly what I despise in so many within AMA...that's the problem within AMA but not of AMA itself.
Dennis
#730
My Feedback: (3)
Somewhat limited by the lack of transparency, I think I'm as well informed about AMA government relations as the next Joe member. I don't question the efforts, or the $1,000,000 expended on it so far. I do question what has resulted from investment of those resources. We have lost some freedom to enjoy flying model airplanes to government control by federal statute (not FAA regulation that might be tempered via the NPRM process), and abandoned advocacy for the great majority of the model aviation community by limiting it the small subgroup that are AMA members. To me, those are additional and very substantial 'costs' to modelers, not benefits. What have we gained?
Dennis
#731
RCU Forum Manager/Admin
My Feedback: (9)
Ken
#732
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
All of the Moderators of RCU are able to give their opinions on any subject that they wish. There is no reason whatsoever that they shouldn't be allowed to. The only thing I ask my Moderators to avoid is taking moderating actions in discussion that they are participating in. I ask that so that they can remain neutral in taking actions. Many of they long time members of RCU will remember the mess the AMA forum here was when I took it over and vowed to clean it up. At that time I told you that I would not participate in any of the discussions here so that I can remain absolutely neutral when I take moderation actions here. The only time that I will enter there is if it's to point people to a specific place or thing like documents or people at the AMA. So Aeajr's status as a moderator of RCU has nothing to do with his participation in this discussion and using it to attack his position is a low blow.
Ken
Ken
#733
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#735
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#736
My Feedback: (2)
Come on now...your posts are full of your opinions...get real!
Anyway I remeber an article you wrote for the AMA rag...gave me some real insight about. I can only paraphrase now but exact words shouldn't be hard to find. In that article you were talking about flying at your site. You said something like "an occasional roll well over the tress is allowed but aerobatic maneuvers are generally discouraged"... It occurred to me you are one of those that appear to want a common denominator no greater than yourself...If true that is exactly what I despise in so many within AMA...that's the problem within AMA but not of AMA itself.
Anyway I remeber an article you wrote for the AMA rag...gave me some real insight about. I can only paraphrase now but exact words shouldn't be hard to find. In that article you were talking about flying at your site. You said something like "an occasional roll well over the tress is allowed but aerobatic maneuvers are generally discouraged"... It occurred to me you are one of those that appear to want a common denominator no greater than yourself...If true that is exactly what I despise in so many within AMA...that's the problem within AMA but not of AMA itself.
It is unfortunate that our complying with the requirements of the landowner, to maintain this as a thermal soaring flying site, somehow offends you. There is nothing I can do about that. We would rather keep the flying site than address your feelings.
If you would like to fly thermal glides you would be welcome at our field. If you want to fly something else I believe there are 11 other clubs in the area. I am sure some of them would welcome the type of flying you enjoy.
In any case, this has absolutely nothing to do with AMA, but I am sure you know that too. But if you want to try and make it an AMA issue, far be it from me to try to force you to base your opinions upon facts.
Last edited by aeajr; 08-20-2014 at 11:08 AM.
#738
My Feedback: (2)
It is not a waste of my time if I can help people understand what is going on with the FAA, which is after all the core of the topic of this discussion.
If I can inject some facts to offset some of the rhetoric than I feel that is worth my time.
It is up to each of us to decide if we want to be proactive in defending our ability to fly model aircraft. Or if we want to sit back and let the government tell us what we should be able to do. I prefer to be proactive rather than sit around and gripe about how the world is doing me wrong.
By choice, I support the only organization that is out there working on my behalf, AMA. And I will do what I can to insure that that effort is known so that others can make informed decisions about whether to join the effort. Some will see the value and add there voices and their dollars to the fight and the chance of success will go up.
Others will sit by and complain about how they are being victimized by an oppressive world, and do nothing about it, all the time fully expecting that they will reap the rewards of those who actually do the work. Sound familiar?
So, I will try to inject some facts or provide authoritative references to offset some of the rhetoric. If I am stating a personal opinion I will say so.
People can draw their own conclusions.
If I can inject some facts to offset some of the rhetoric than I feel that is worth my time.
It is up to each of us to decide if we want to be proactive in defending our ability to fly model aircraft. Or if we want to sit back and let the government tell us what we should be able to do. I prefer to be proactive rather than sit around and gripe about how the world is doing me wrong.
By choice, I support the only organization that is out there working on my behalf, AMA. And I will do what I can to insure that that effort is known so that others can make informed decisions about whether to join the effort. Some will see the value and add there voices and their dollars to the fight and the chance of success will go up.
Others will sit by and complain about how they are being victimized by an oppressive world, and do nothing about it, all the time fully expecting that they will reap the rewards of those who actually do the work. Sound familiar?
So, I will try to inject some facts or provide authoritative references to offset some of the rhetoric. If I am stating a personal opinion I will say so.
People can draw their own conclusions.
Last edited by aeajr; 08-20-2014 at 11:46 AM. Reason: fixed some typos
#739
My Feedback: (6)
There is a clause about flying within 5 miles of an airport. Based on what that says, a letter to an airport informing them that a model aviation flying field exists and where it is would seem to be enough to meet the requirement. Doesn’t imply need for permission. Of course if the airport wanted you to not fly then it might create an issue, but I don’t know how that would be addressed.
The link in your post doesn't work. The text of the FAA "interpretation" is here:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documen...2014-0396-0001
It's certainly true that the AMA is trying to save the hobby. I wish them well. I also wish that they were doing it more adeptly. By drafting a sloppily worded "exemption" for some modelers, and then getting a senator who had a personal feud with the FAA because of his landing at a closed airport to get that "exemption" put into a law, the AMA seems to have annoyed the FAA, which is retaliating by proposing rules which, if adopted, will have serious effects on most modelers.
#740
My Feedback: (2)
Sorry that link did not work. It worked when I first posted it but it did not work when I just tried it. I fixed it in the original post, but let me repost it here.
My comments were only related to what is on this page at the FAA site. Let's hope it works this time.
http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/...aft_operators/
Here is the main text of the page:
[h=1]What Can I Do With My Model Aircraft?[/h][h=1]Hobby/Recreational Flying[/h] Having fun means flying safely! Hobby or recreational flying doesn't require FAA approval but you must follow safety guidelines. Any other use requires FAA authorization.
Avoid doing anything hazardous to other airplanes or people and property on the ground.
[h=2]"Dos"[/h]
The FAA welcomes comments from the public on its Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, which may help further inform its interpretation of the statutory language in Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 regarding Model Aircraft operations. Please visit the Federal Rulemaking Portal and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
My comments were only related to what is on this page at the FAA site. Let's hope it works this time.
http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/...aft_operators/
Here is the main text of the page:
[h=1]What Can I Do With My Model Aircraft?[/h][h=1]Hobby/Recreational Flying[/h] Having fun means flying safely! Hobby or recreational flying doesn't require FAA approval but you must follow safety guidelines. Any other use requires FAA authorization.
Avoid doing anything hazardous to other airplanes or people and property on the ground.
[h=2]"Dos"[/h]
- Do fly a model aircraft/UAS at the local model aircraft club
- Do take lessons and learn to fly safely
- Do contact the airport or control tower when flying within 5 miles of the airport
- Do fly a model aircraft for personal enjoyment
- Don't fly near manned aircraft
- Don't fly beyond line of sight of the operator
- Don't fly an aircraft weighing more than 55 lbs unless it's certified by an aeromodeling community-based organization
- Don't fly contrary to your aeromodeling community-based safety guidelines
- Don't fly model aircraft for payment or commercial purposes
The FAA welcomes comments from the public on its Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, which may help further inform its interpretation of the statutory language in Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 regarding Model Aircraft operations. Please visit the Federal Rulemaking Portal and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Last edited by aeajr; 08-20-2014 at 12:55 PM.
#741
My Feedback: (6)
OK, but that page is complete nonsense. And it is not what this thread was originally about. Take the part about notifying an airport if you are flying within five miles. No law or regulation requires that, and they can't (yet) possibly penalize anyone for not doing it. The five-mile thing comes from the text of the 2012 law on FAA regulations, which purports to limit what they can regulate. It imposes no duties whatever on modelers. What we have to worry about is not this nonsense, but what the FAA will do when it writes the regulations, which will impose limits on us. So far, the only real clue about what those limits will be is their "interpretation," which is far from encouraging.
#742
My Feedback: (49)
Model Aircraft Operations Limits
According to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 as (1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use; (2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization; (3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization; (4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; (5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower…with prior notice of the operation; and (6) the aircraft is flown within visual line sight of the operator.
These are not FAR's YET There is nothing that says anything about getting Approval to fly when with in 5 miles of a controled airport with an active control tower. Just " prior notice of the operation"
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Oc...2f7545fd?hl=en
We fly here for the last 44 years and have never had so much as any conflicts. In the summer when we are surrounded by 10' corn, we station a person by the Wind Tee, that watches for aircraft coming from the hangers to the north and departing on runway 18.
According to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 as (1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use; (2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization; (3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization; (4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; (5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower…with prior notice of the operation; and (6) the aircraft is flown within visual line sight of the operator.
These are not FAR's YET There is nothing that says anything about getting Approval to fly when with in 5 miles of a controled airport with an active control tower. Just " prior notice of the operation"
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Oc...2f7545fd?hl=en
We fly here for the last 44 years and have never had so much as any conflicts. In the summer when we are surrounded by 10' corn, we station a person by the Wind Tee, that watches for aircraft coming from the hangers to the north and departing on runway 18.
Last edited by HoundDog; 08-20-2014 at 02:14 PM.
#744
My Feedback: (2)
OK, but that page is complete nonsense. And it is not what this thread was originally about. Take the part about notifying an airport if you are flying within five miles. No law or regulation requires that, and they can't (yet) possibly penalize anyone for not doing it. The five-mile thing comes from the text of the 2012 law on FAA regulations, which purports to limit what they can regulate. It imposes no duties whatever on modelers. What we have to worry about is not this nonsense, but what the FAA will do when it writes the regulations, which will impose limits on us. So far, the only real clue about what those limits will be is their "interpretation," which is far from encouraging.
All correct. Let's not read into things. The page is what it is and it was put there by the FAA. All I did was point out that the FAA has this page, that they make recommendations, not regulations, and that they provide a link to the AMA. They even provide a poster that you can take to your club meeting or post at your field house.
http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/...nfographic.png
What is the significance?
They have made a statement that if you do these thing, we won't bother you.
They have made the statement that the FAA recognized community based organization is the AMA. This is HUGE!
This is the first time I have seen them incorporate "line of sight" as part of the definition of recreational model aircraft flying. This is similar to what the British do.
It is my opinion, ( note that I called out that this is an opinion) that, if you follow the recommendations on the site you will be OK with the FAA. Of course it does not address pilots who are flying away from an "RC club Field". It doesn't say you can't or you shouldn't, it says that they recommend you fly at an RC club field.
Note that the model weight restriction they cite is the AMA's model weight restriction and they recognize that the AMA can provide waivers for models over this weight. They are giving a lot of credence to the AMA on this page.
On this page they ONLY ask you to notify the airport of your model flying operations. They don't say you have to get permission. That was the basis of my OPINION that a letter to the airport telling them where your flying field is would probably meet this requirement. Whether the airport has the power to tell you you can't fly is another matter.
#745
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the latest claims history on the AMA web site, the total of all liability claims for the year was about $50,000. The insurance company didn't pay a dime of it.
#746
My Feedback: (2)
AMA pays claims until a threshold of $250,000 is reached, and the insurance pays any amount of a single claim in excess of that figure (AMA still pays the first $250,000). That ain't Low Dollar to me..........
In the latest claims history on the AMA web site, the total of all liability claims for the year was about $50,000. The insurance company didn't pay a dime of it.
In the latest claims history on the AMA web site, the total of all liability claims for the year was about $50,000. The insurance company didn't pay a dime of it.
If I have an accident with my car and chose to pay for the repairs out of my own pocket does that make me an insurance company? No. If my daughter has an accident and I choose to pay for the repairs, does that make me an insurance company? No!
#747
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That may be true but it does not make them an insurance company. To be an insurance company requires very specific legal status and AMA doesn't fit.
If I have an accident with my car and chose to pay for the repairs out of my own pocket does that make me an insurance company? No. If my daughter has an accident and I choose to pay for the repairs, does that make me an insurance company? No!
If I have an accident with my car and chose to pay for the repairs out of my own pocket does that make me an insurance company? No. If my daughter has an accident and I choose to pay for the repairs, does that make me an insurance company? No!
#748
My Feedback: (6)
On this page they ONLY ask you to notify the airport of your model flying operations. They don't say you have to get permission. That was the basis of my OPINION that a letter to the airport telling them where your flying field is would probably meet this requirement. Whether the airport has the power to tell you you can't fly is another matter.
Furthermore, this recommendation is not the first time they have incorporated "line of sight" in the definition of recreational model flying. That, too, was in their "interpretation."
#749
My Feedback: (3)
Don’t see anything that one can point to specifically that has been taken away. In fact the post that Aeajr (post 740) made looks like it’s very much the same as it’s always been. I can see them getting a little more restrictive around airports. Perhaps it’s because of an attitude many seem to have that no one can tell me what I can and cannot do. When outright defiance occurs often times the result is more rules. I can see where its going to be a nightmare to enforce but I would bet those who get caught up in the system will be made an example of and it may be costly win or loose.
Thank goodness I live and fly mostly in Canada, 7.5 million first party liabilities, excellent rapport with Transport Canada, 75lb limit, many clubs fly from small full size airports without any drama. The only restriction we have is we cannot participate by flying at full size air shows and that isn’t something that Transport Canada has decreed our insurance placed that condition because of damage to a Harvard that occurred during a RC demo flight at a full size air show.
Dennis
Thank goodness I live and fly mostly in Canada, 7.5 million first party liabilities, excellent rapport with Transport Canada, 75lb limit, many clubs fly from small full size airports without any drama. The only restriction we have is we cannot participate by flying at full size air shows and that isn’t something that Transport Canada has decreed our insurance placed that condition because of damage to a Harvard that occurred during a RC demo flight at a full size air show.
Dennis
Last edited by Propworn; 08-20-2014 at 04:02 PM.
#750
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don’t see anything that one can point to specifically that has been taken away. In fact the post that Aeajr (post 740) made looks like it’s very much the same as it’s always been. I can see them getting a little more restrictive around airports. Perhaps it’s because of an attitude many seem to have that no one can tell me what I can and cannot do. When outright defiance occurs often times the result is more rules. I can see where its going to be a nightmare to enforce but I would bet those who get caught up in the system will be made an example of and it may be costly win or loose.
Thank goodness I live and fly mostly in Canada, 7.5 million first party liabilities, excellent rapport with Transport Canada, 75lb limit, many clubs fly from small full size airports without any drama. The only restriction we have is we cannot participate by flying at full size air shows and that isn’t something that Transport Canada has decreed our insurance placed that condition because of damage to a Harvard that occurred during a RC demo flight at a full size air show.
Dennis
Thank goodness I live and fly mostly in Canada, 7.5 million first party liabilities, excellent rapport with Transport Canada, 75lb limit, many clubs fly from small full size airports without any drama. The only restriction we have is we cannot participate by flying at full size air shows and that isn’t something that Transport Canada has decreed our insurance placed that condition because of damage to a Harvard that occurred during a RC demo flight at a full size air show.
Dennis
" Model aircraft that do not meet these statutory requirements are nonetheless unmanned aircraft, and as such, are subject to all existing FAA regulations, as well as future rulemaking action, and the FAA intends to apply its regulations to such unmanned aircraft."
So I submit that something of considerable value has been taken away from modelers that are not CBO members (a condition in the statute for being excepted from regulation) that were excluded from AMA's advocacy, the freedom to fly as indies sans undue FAA regulation. We're talking about a large majority of modelers here, far outnumbering AMA members. Is that specific enough for you?
Good for you on flying in Canada. I presume Transport Canada doesn't require modelers to be MAAC members to fly model airplanes unfettered by such as "all existing FAA regulations."