Fear mongering? AMA members with airman certificates?
#26
As much as I'd like to give a simple answer as you request, privilege based reality isn't so simple...Let's say John keeps speed dialing FAA about a modelers actions that he considers unsafe...and at some point the FAA contact feels he must investigate to shut him up... The agent may very well tell the suspect modeler to cease or face further actions...The modeler says hooey...and just continues...The FAA agent then may decide to take retaliatory action based purely on his personal perception of defiance of his order... Now, some case may be made that his "privilege(s)" should be revoked, it will then depend highly on the defense the accused can afford... Bottom line; in a privilege based society your privilege is highly dependent on what you can afford. That's where we are now...The Pirker (sp) case should have made that point abundantly clear for those that are really paying attention. Fortunately he got some pro bono service but most won't be so lucky.
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , ON, CANADA
Posts: 974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see both sides of this.
I mean, if you've been given the privilege to fly privately, be it with a sport, recreational, or private licence, you should know well enough if you are violating airspace or posing a threat to full-scale aviation. It shows a clear disregard for full scale aviation safety, and like anything in that regard, can warrant an investigation and penalties, regardless if it involves a model aircraft or not.
We don't have a "God Given Right" to fly models, nor to fly full scale, and if we are showing that we don't care about its safety, why should we be allowed that privilege?
I doubt that this will be a huge deal, though - there's so much rhetoric going around now that until the FAA actually uses this tactic, I'd consider it nothing more than sensationalism...
Still, it's something that I doubt many of us would have considered on their own, so bringing it up with this community was a good choice.
I mean, if you've been given the privilege to fly privately, be it with a sport, recreational, or private licence, you should know well enough if you are violating airspace or posing a threat to full-scale aviation. It shows a clear disregard for full scale aviation safety, and like anything in that regard, can warrant an investigation and penalties, regardless if it involves a model aircraft or not.
We don't have a "God Given Right" to fly models, nor to fly full scale, and if we are showing that we don't care about its safety, why should we be allowed that privilege?
I doubt that this will be a huge deal, though - there's so much rhetoric going around now that until the FAA actually uses this tactic, I'd consider it nothing more than sensationalism...
Still, it's something that I doubt many of us would have considered on their own, so bringing it up with this community was a good choice.
#28
For Sure !!! If I could import some of the smart politicians from NH to here I'd do it in a heartbeat ! Do you know that something like the last 4 or 5 Massachusetts Speakers of the House have left after convictions for one felony or another ? It's political Hell here but I'm stuck here pretty much forever . Anyway , back to your topic ,sure I'll give you a straight answer here ; Yes ! , I do believe it to be sensationalist on the AMA's part , but I also see the very real possibility of the future having such laws in place . I was blown outta my shoes when I read the newspaper article about the whole drunk boating/car license thing , could'nt believe it was true , and did further research with our RMV (Registry of Motor Vehicles) that proved it to be true . I only use this example to prove that when these guys (the govt) run unchecked , it's these kinds of "out there" laws that result .
PS , I have no Pilot's rating to loose , but I do have a long inactive A/P rating that they can have if'n they want it ......
#29
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: , CA
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK so let's see if I've got this right. If I'm drunk riding with a friend at the airport, and I put the gps in his face and he swerves and hits an airplane that takes off damaged and crashes into a boat, the national boating safety commision can petition the AMA to revoke My AMA turbine waiver? LMAO
#30
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Whitewater,
CO
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK so let's see if I've got this right. If I'm drunk riding with a friend at the airport, and I put the gps in his face and he swerves and hits an airplane that takes off damaged and crashes into a boat, the national boating safety commision can petition the AMA to revoke My AMA turbine waiver? LMAO
Viper, I think you nailed it.
James
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yet, under FAR §61.15, your airman's certificate can be revoked for an offense involving driving a car under the influence of alcohol or a drug, even though (sport pilot certificate aside) you don't need an automobile driver's license to fly, and even if you did, §61.15 doesn't turn on whether the motor vehicle offense cost you your license.. But they probably can't ding you for driving an RC car badly. Yet.
Originally Posted by JohnShe
I find every one of AMA's seven points to be filled with misinterpretation and scare mongering.
Frank
#32
My Feedback: (6)
I'm aware of that and that includes any kind of drug or alcohol offense, not just a drug or alcohol driving offense.
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse me, you quoted init4fun and myself in this thread and I did not realize your comment was only specific to the text quoted. Do you have an opinion on the original topic of this thread?
Frank
#34
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Palm Beach,
FL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So there you are with your pilot certificate in your back pocket, flying your 100-150cc whatever (with a spotter), doing rollers 5 ft off the ground having a great time, when an FAA guy drives up and says you are acting with "reckless endangerment"...hmmm...
#35
My Feedback: (19)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hold several Certificates with the FAA. I firmly believe they would take a look at any full size license or priviledge you may hold. And I agree with their right to do so.
Furthermore don't get a DUI in you car or boat with an FAA medical, if you do present policy makes it very difficult to renew said medical certificate
In other words respect the privilege and you won;t experience the FAA very much at all.
#37
The attitude of many pilots only makes matters worse. I think some (not many) would like a police state run by the FAA.
#39
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1
I hold several Certificates with the FAA. I firmly believe they would take a look at any full size license or priviledge you may hold. And I agree with their right to do so.
Furthermore don't get a DUI in you car or boat with an FAA medical, if you do present policy makes it very difficult to renew said medical certificate
In other words respect the privilege and you won;t experience the FAA very much at all.
I hold several Certificates with the FAA. I firmly believe they would take a look at any full size license or priviledge you may hold. And I agree with their right to do so.
Furthermore don't get a DUI in you car or boat with an FAA medical, if you do present policy makes it very difficult to renew said medical certificate
In other words respect the privilege and you won;t experience the FAA very much at all.
Frank
#40
You should not lose your license but the full scale pilot will likely lie and say he was above 500 feet and the FAA will believe him because he had an altimeter.
Let's not forget that every aerobatic contest breaks the 400 foot altitude limit as the box is about a thousand feet high. So we don't want limits outside of airports.
#41
I have not read the document IN FULL nor do I have a full-scale license but I have been following this issue for the larger implications. First, this thread so far is full of misconceptions, miscommunications and downright intentional diversion from one ***** in particular. What I have read from of the document, the AMA and others is that any serious RC incident MAY affect a person's full-scale license. Yes it's fear mongering, but it may be rightly so based on the actions of this current administration. It is the same type of fear mongering that gun enthusiasts have when saying that gun registration leads to gun confiscation - except that is a much more valid point.
Remember what started this whole mess. The commercial drone manufacturers were ticked that RC drones where taking money out of their pockets without any sort of licensing or flight operations control that they were subjected to. They went on a rampage to get their requirements cut back. The FAA was between a rock and a hard place and Congress certainly didn't help, nor did AMA. To cut back commercial requirements would mean creating a whole new class of commercial drone with the attendant regulations, studies, impact statements and documentation. The use of hobby drones in commercial endeavors was already illegal but totally unenforceable since even the AMA backed off from pressure on the manufacturers and sellers and even decided to go along with it. FAA as left with only one option, to treat RC as a subset of full-scale operations. And that meant that a severe violation in that subset must spill over into the overarching requirements.
Thank you lilcrankshaft.
Remember what started this whole mess. The commercial drone manufacturers were ticked that RC drones where taking money out of their pockets without any sort of licensing or flight operations control that they were subjected to. They went on a rampage to get their requirements cut back. The FAA was between a rock and a hard place and Congress certainly didn't help, nor did AMA. To cut back commercial requirements would mean creating a whole new class of commercial drone with the attendant regulations, studies, impact statements and documentation. The use of hobby drones in commercial endeavors was already illegal but totally unenforceable since even the AMA backed off from pressure on the manufacturers and sellers and even decided to go along with it. FAA as left with only one option, to treat RC as a subset of full-scale operations. And that meant that a severe violation in that subset must spill over into the overarching requirements.
Thank you lilcrankshaft.
#42
The FAA was between a rock and a hard place and Congress certainly didn't help, nor did AMA. To cut back commercial requirements would mean creating a whole new class of commercial drone with the attendant regulations, studies, impact statements and documentation. The use of hobby drones in commercial endeavors was already illegal but totally unenforceable since even the AMA backed off from pressure on the manufacturers and sellers and even decided to go along with it.
#43
My Feedback: (6)
I have not read the document IN FULL nor do I have a full-scale license but I have been following this issue for the larger implications. First, this thread so far is full of misconceptions, miscommunications and downright intentional diversion from one ***** in particular. What I have read from of the document, the AMA and others is that any serious RC incident MAY affect a person's full-scale license. Yes it's fear mongering, but it may be rightly so based on the actions of this current administration. It is the same type of fear mongering that gun enthusiasts have when saying that gun registration leads to gun confiscation - except that is a much more valid point.
Remember what started this whole mess. The commercial drone manufacturers were ticked that RC drones where taking money out of their pockets without any sort of licensing or flight operations control that they were subjected to. They went on a rampage to get their requirements cut back. The FAA was between a rock and a hard place and Congress certainly didn't help, nor did AMA. To cut back commercial requirements would mean creating a whole new class of commercial drone with the attendant regulations, studies, impact statements and documentation. The use of hobby drones in commercial endeavors was already illegal but totally unenforceable since even the AMA backed off from pressure on the manufacturers and sellers and even decided to go along with it. FAA as left with only one option, to treat RC as a subset of full-scale operations. And that meant that a severe violation in that subset must spill over into the overarching requirements.
Thank you lilcrankshaft.
Remember what started this whole mess. The commercial drone manufacturers were ticked that RC drones where taking money out of their pockets without any sort of licensing or flight operations control that they were subjected to. They went on a rampage to get their requirements cut back. The FAA was between a rock and a hard place and Congress certainly didn't help, nor did AMA. To cut back commercial requirements would mean creating a whole new class of commercial drone with the attendant regulations, studies, impact statements and documentation. The use of hobby drones in commercial endeavors was already illegal but totally unenforceable since even the AMA backed off from pressure on the manufacturers and sellers and even decided to go along with it. FAA as left with only one option, to treat RC as a subset of full-scale operations. And that meant that a severe violation in that subset must spill over into the overarching requirements.
Thank you lilcrankshaft.
Of course the FAA can pull your certificate if your use of a model endangers full-scale flying. They've had that power in the past, they should have that power, and nothing has taken it away. That by itself isn't the danger: The danger is that the FAA's notions of "endangering the airspace" may expand to include normal modeling activities. Their apparent belief that a statute (the 5-mile thing) about notifying airport operators and sometimes ATC means getting permission to fly from airport operators and sometimes ATC shows that this is potentially a serious threat. Perhaps the AMA has exaggerated some of the dangers, but even if so, the dangers are there. Simply saying "no danger" or arguing that there can't be a danger because they haven't yet taken my old certificates (!) isn't going to change my mind or, I suspect, anyone else's.
#44
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(C) allow a government public safety agency to operate unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 pounds or less, if operated—
(i) within the line of sight of the operator;
(ii) less than 400 feet above the ground;
(iii) during daylight conditions;
(iv) within Class G airspace; and
(v) outside of 5 statute miles from any airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location with aviation activities.
but I'm not sure of the "commercial" classification.
True, they are not illegal however where and how they are flown is the issue.
Frank
(ii) less than 400 feet above the ground;
(iii) during daylight conditions;
(iv) within Class G airspace; and
(v) outside of 5 statute miles from any airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location with aviation activities.
but I'm not sure of the "commercial" classification.
Frank
#46
My Feedback: (19)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, however did you read anything in the PL 112-95 SEC 336 or the FAA's interpretation that could be perceived as a threat to an individual’s airman certificate like the AMA is implying? Do you feel any of your certificates are threatened by the FAA for flying models?
Frank
Frank
#47
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is your yard right at he end of an airport runway? That is one way that your scenario could happen. I suppose there are other scenarios where a full size plane might have to fly that low. But, it might or might not be in violation of FAA regulations for full scale aircraft. If you had a spotter on hand, you might have avoided the collision. In any event, you are talking about a long complicated investigation, in which your need for legal advice would likely impoverish you, So don't worry about your license.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really? That sounds more paranoid that reasonable. Usually the FAA would not get involved until after a complaint is filed. The only question that the FAA guy could ask is, "Are you endangering the NAS in some way?" If you aren't, then you have no problem or concern.