FAA intentionaly hyping up Drone News. AMA needs to go to WAR!
08-19-2014, 11:21 AM
#176
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
08-19-2014, 11:32 AM
#177
Thread Starter
+1 Propworn. Hysterical the sky is falling ain't never gonna happen comments like this:
"Manufactures will not be able to test their product. So the customer will test them and they may fall apart and crash. Then people will not buy them".
are just plain silly as statements of fact. As opinion, fair enough. Classic case of reductio ad absurdum though. As someone already correctly noted, most testing happens outside of this country. But lets say someone from the states creates a new plane, goes outside and tests it, then packages it up and sells it, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
"Manufactures will not be able to test their product. So the customer will test them and they may fall apart and crash. Then people will not buy them".
are just plain silly as statements of fact. As opinion, fair enough. Classic case of reductio ad absurdum though. As someone already correctly noted, most testing happens outside of this country. But lets say someone from the states creates a new plane, goes outside and tests it, then packages it up and sells it, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
08-19-2014, 04:05 PM
#179
+1 Propworn. Hysterical the sky is falling ain't never gonna happen comments like this:
"Manufactures will not be able to test their product. So the customer will test them and they may fall apart and crash. Then people will not buy them".
are just plain silly as statements of fact. As opinion, fair enough. Classic case of reductio ad absurdum though. As someone already correctly noted, most testing happens outside of this country. But lets say someone from the states creates a new plane, goes outside and tests it, then packages it up and sells it, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
"Manufactures will not be able to test their product. So the customer will test them and they may fall apart and crash. Then people will not buy them".
are just plain silly as statements of fact. As opinion, fair enough. Classic case of reductio ad absurdum though. As someone already correctly noted, most testing happens outside of this country. But lets say someone from the states creates a new plane, goes outside and tests it, then packages it up and sells it, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
You are absolutely right no different than building testing and selling your personal models or a hobby shop owner/manufacturer that brings new items to the field to show them off or display them. As long as he is not charging a fee for flying a demonstration I don’t see how it could be classed as commercial.
I think the problems start when trying to combine two totally differing arenas of operation. Those falling under the AMA umbrella and those outside the AMA. Take the commercial aspect only. If you fly under the AMA umbrella (guidelines and field) there are definite physical boundaries you must operate within. You are not allowed to charge for any services you have to fly as a pure hobby. No charge for pictures, instruction, demonstrations, introductory flights etc. Even then the AMA has limited options to discipline the transgressor.
Outside this AMA umbrella at present the AMA has no authority and no ability to enforce or discipline anyone. Even in the future the only roll I can see them is in an advisory capacity.
Do the commercial operators want the AMA to influence how they might operate or would they rather negotiate their needs themselves?
Do the non AMA flyers want the AMA to make the rules they will have to follow?
Do you get good well intentioned members by forcing an AMA association on them?
There is this fellow Bruce Simpson from New Zealand he has done exactly what I am talking about. He has open stated he is making a living testing and writing reviews, posting videos on you tube etc as well as openly breaking just about every rule at a sanctioned field that also happens to be a full size airport. He openly defies a cease and desist order from the modeling as well as the full size aviation authorities, admits he’s making money while flying under and using the aero modeling insurance coverage and benefits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKKNRvsduUQ
If you watch the video Google “The truth about Bruce Simpson”
Is this the future if hobby and commercial can not be kept separate?
08-19-2014, 09:15 PM
#180
Thread Starter
You are absolutely right no different than building testing and selling your personal models or a hobby shop owner/manufacturer that brings new items to the field to show them off or display them. As long as he is not charging a fee for flying a demonstration I don’t see how it could be classed as commercial.
The person testing the model is paid by the manufacture. No different than a test pilot for a company that must have a commercial rating. They do not have to charge the customer for the test flight to be a commercial rating. The test is if the pilot is paid for it. And no it does not matter if the pilot is paid for by salary with other duties.
08-19-2014, 09:32 PM
#181
Thread Starter
Here is the paragraph from FAA interpretation,that would make it illegal for a paid employee to test a model airplane without a commercial license. Testing would be incidental to operation of the business.
Any operation not conducted strictly for hobby or recreation purposes could not be operated under the special rule for model aircraft. Clearly, commercial operations would not be hobby or recreation flights. [SUP](5) [/SUP]Likewise, flights that are in furtherance of a business, or incidental to a person's business, would not be a hobby or recreation flight. Flights conducted incidental to, and within the scope of, a business where no common carriage is involved, generally may operate under FAA's general operating rules of part 91. See Legal Interpretation to Scott C. Burgess, from Rebecca B. MacPherson, Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations (Nov. 25, 2008). Although they are not commercial operations conducted for compensation or hire, such operations do not qualify as a hobby or recreation flight because of the nexus between the operator's business and the operation of the aircraft. See, e.g., Legal Interpretation to BSTC Corporation, from Rebecca B. MacPherson, Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations (June 22, 2009) (noting transportation of mining employees and guests appears to be incidental to and within scope of operator's geological business); Legal Interpretation to Scott C. Burgess (Nov. 25, 2008) (noting transportation of automotive dealership employees and guests must be incidental to and within scope of operator's real estate development business).
08-20-2014, 04:59 AM
#183
My employees are well paid to design, cut out and package kits and other products from 9 till 5. If they choose to use/build/fly/evaluate these products on their own time without pay it’s a hobby.
I know full size commercial pilots and AME’s who fly recreational and/or have even been asked for their opinion on aircraft for possible purchase. As long as they’re not receiving compensation for this it’s not commercial.
An employee who asks permission to take a kit home and build and fly it on his own time and not during the hours of his employment or as part of his job description is engaging in a hobby endeavor. That’s how it’s always been and will continue the same.
My employee who happens to be in the hobby as a pilot attends non flying events to stand at my booth and promote my products. He appears in adds as per his scope of employment and whatever other non-flying events I choose to have him attend this is what he is being compensated for. As compensation/or part thereof he may receive certain product which become his property same as if he had gone to the store and purchased it. What he does with that product is his choice. I would hope when he enjoys his hobby on his own free time he would make use of the products he has earned. If he enters contests I cannot pay his entry fee or compensate him for his time or performance. Any flying he does is on his own time at his own expense.
On my own time I fly my own designs and I am always evaluating everything I fly/use that is part of this hobby.
Dennis
08-20-2014, 05:41 AM
#184
Thread Starter
My employees are well paid to design, cut out and package kits and other products from 9 till 5. If they choose to use/build/fly/evaluate these products on their own time without pay it’s a hobby.
I know full size commercial pilots and AME’s who fly recreational and/or have even been asked for their opinion on aircraft for possible purchase. As long as they’re not receiving compensation for this it’s not commercial.
An employee who asks permission to take a kit home and build and fly it on his own time and not during the hours of his employment or as part of his job description is engaging in a hobby endeavor. That’s how it’s always been and will continue the same.
I know full size commercial pilots and AME’s who fly recreational and/or have even been asked for their opinion on aircraft for possible purchase. As long as they’re not receiving compensation for this it’s not commercial.
An employee who asks permission to take a kit home and build and fly it on his own time and not during the hours of his employment or as part of his job description is engaging in a hobby endeavor. That’s how it’s always been and will continue the same.
You may not have liked my hyperbole, but it did get attention. And from your and other's description of what is going on then the AMA is, in a sense, going to war.
08-20-2014, 06:27 AM
#185
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's so dang funny is your post seems to jive with the admonishments gleaned via Sport's perspective...all the while making noise of argument...your words agree... hilarious stuff right here.
08-20-2014, 06:36 AM
#186
The FAA would not accept that they are testing for free. Aircraft companies have tried to say that private pilots transporting people on weekends were exempt. The FAA would have none of that. They had to be commercial rated pilots. To fly for free was a reward to fly someone elses plane with no expense for the plane and that was compensation enough. If you can force your employee's to pay for the models tested, then perhaps that would stick.
You may not have liked my hyperbole, but it did get attention. And from your and other's description of what is going on then the AMA is, in a sense, going to war.
You may not have liked my hyperbole, but it did get attention. And from your and other's description of what is going on then the AMA is, in a sense, going to war.
Again there is no service provided and no compensation for what an employee does on his/her own time especially flying models that are their own personal property and hobby. If that were the case the employer would have to provide compensation coverage as well as company liability insurance. They would have to also provide their own flying site as the AMA expressly prohibits commercial flying at AMA sites.
None of the employees are forced to buy or fly/use any product. Certain items are made available for any who wish to make use of them we just ask that they not be resold in respect for our dealers. Choosing to give feedback is no different than what any other customer may do at any given time.
Name one model manufacturer in North America that has paid test pilots on their payroll. To be considered a paid test pilot on payroll it must be part of their job description and they have to be compensated while doing the test flights.
You claim hyperbole then I put it to you that you are no better than the Bruce Simpson I have referred to in a previous post. Like I said before you’re not to be taken literally your intent is to inflame and evoke strong feelings without contributing anything of real value.
The definition of hyperbole: Hyperbole (/haɪˈ
pɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee;[SUP][1][/SUP] Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.[SUP][2][3][/SUP]
Dennis
08-20-2014, 07:55 AM
#188
Thread Starter
Again there is no service provided and no compensation for what an employee does on his/her own time especially flying models that are their own personal property and hobby. If that were the case the employer would have to provide compensation coverage as well as company liability insurance. They would have to also provide their own flying site as the AMA expressly prohibits commercial flying at AMA sites.
This isn't my interpretation this is the FAA's when applying their commercial flight rules.
You claim hyperbole then I put it to you that you are no better than the Bruce Simpson I have referred to in a previous post. Like I said before you’re not to be taken literally your intent is to inflame and evoke strong feelings without contributing anything of real value.
08-20-2014, 04:45 PM
#190
The service provided is testing of aircraft, the compensation is the model they are flying. If you take the model then the compensation is the free use of the model while testing it.
Come on! That little bit of hyperbole was cheering the AMA on. Or did you not know they are fighting the FAA? Its not like the recent hyperbole of "Lets kill all cops!"!
Come on! That little bit of hyperbole was cheering the AMA on. Or did you not know they are fighting the FAA? Its not like the recent hyperbole of "Lets kill all cops!"!
As to your statement about the cops I see no relevance to the topic at hand and wonder if there are other issues one should be concerned about.
Dennis
08-20-2014, 08:51 PM
#191
Thread Starter
All a manufacture has to say is he paid for the items. In fact this is what goes on most times the pilot buys the items at a nominal price.
As to your statement about the cops I see no relevance to the topic at hand and wonder if there are other issues one should be concerned about.
08-21-2014, 10:19 AM
#193
You clearly don’t have any idea how manufactures/suppliers have been supporting pilots. MAAC/AMA/World Championships (FAI) are amateur competitions. A pattern pilot is given the opportunity to purchase his top of the line transmitter well below cost; his servos and other radio gear the same. At the competition he wears his team shirt but the name of the radio company will be displayed on the model, hat what ever. If he wins or places high enough the radio company will make use of that info through ads, photos appearances etc. The pilot often wears the clothing of his preferred equipment.
Three fellows I know personally compete at a regional level in IMAC. They purchase the aircraft and associated electronics at marginal cost. If it’s an Aeroworks model the Aeroworks decal is prominently displayed on the side. His shirt and hat announce the radio he uses.
Before any charges are brought before the courts there must be a reasonable probability a case can be successfully prosecuted. You really think the FAA will bother with someone because they get to purchase their equipment below cost or are wearing a t-shirt with a manufacturers name or logo on it. Is the medical marijuana in your state especially potent this month??????
08-21-2014, 05:40 PM
#195
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: saint joseph,
MO
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the biggest online hobby shops in the US seems to be pretty alarmed.
http://www.atlantahobby.com/applicat...CategoryID=234
Also one of the largest youtube channels on rc seems to be pretty alarmed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYs815t4knQ
Hobbyking also appears to be a bit worried.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98ms_fL-2wk
http://www.atlantahobby.com/applicat...CategoryID=234
Also one of the largest youtube channels on rc seems to be pretty alarmed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYs815t4knQ
Hobbyking also appears to be a bit worried.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98ms_fL-2wk
Last edited by randall1959; 08-21-2014 at 05:42 PM.
08-21-2014, 09:25 PM
#196
Thread Starter
Can you name one company that you know of for sure that does initial testing in North America?
Balsa USA
Arizona Model
.
All make kits made in the USA and have demonstration video's. The video's themselves could be considered competition.
You clearly don’t have any idea how manufactures/suppliers have been supporting pilots. MAAC/AMA/World Championships (FAI) are amateur competitions. A pattern pilot is given the opportunity to purchase his top of the line transmitter well below cost; his servos and other radio gear the same. At the competition he wears his team shirt but the name of the radio company will be displayed on the model, hat what ever. If he wins or places high enough the radio company will make use of that info through ads, photos appearances etc. The pilot often wears the clothing of his preferred equipment.
I am wondering if you think that I believe this to be right. I do not. I am only mentioning this because the FAA could be that determined.
08-22-2014, 06:25 AM
#200
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the local RC clubs here in Central Florida has given free memberships to manufactures, hobby shop owners, well known competition pilots, etc., is that commercial compensation?
