Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Another Drone Pilot does it Again

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Another Drone Pilot does it Again

Old 05-03-2015, 04:16 AM
  #1226  
Rob2160
Senior Member
 
Rob2160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sportflyr
Quads are the Special Olympics of the entire RC world.
Have you tried flying one like this? It is far more challenging than flying aerobatics with fixed wing aircraft.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imqkJ28UgUY

Last edited by Rob2160; 05-03-2015 at 04:25 AM.
Old 05-03-2015, 04:58 AM
  #1227  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,354
Received 49 Likes on 43 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by HoundDog



inin:
Sure hope U are right but the real problem is that the Public and the FAA doesn't yet distinguish the AMA (Good Guys) from the Rouge Quad Pilots. (Probably more neurmous than all the AMA put together. These people don't kno it illegal to fly where they are and causing the problem. If there is a major accident or Loss of life I'm afraid the FAA/NTSB is not going to differenuate from us and the rouge Quad guys. Really all the contervercy with the FAA started when the AMAA/congress tried through ammendmant #336 what they were allowed and not allowed. This caused the FAA to say to congress U can't tell us how to accomplish the moderation of the ATC system only thing congress can do is that they are to moderinizr the ATC system.
Let's all hope and pray that no one causes any kind of accident with any R/C Fling Device. But we as Responsible R/C flyers must do every thing to nip in the bud anyone that might cause a problem and we also have to find a way to separate us from the ROUGE Quad people. We can not hope or even believe that amendment #336 is going to do anything but cause the FAA to give us grief for reasons stated above. JMHO

Hey Hound Dog ,

Look , buddy , I know you care about our hobby and I know you as well as a number of others are worried about the future . Well , I'll admit to originally having the same worries till I considered this ;

If "the powers that be" wanted us stopped , It would have happened already . The FAA is the least of our worries and our biggest threat would have come from somewhere like the "Department of homeland security" , you know them , they were the people who charged that idiot from Ashland Massachusetts with plotting to fly an RC plane full of explosives into the pentagon . That (averted) incident didn't involve quads but good ol fashioned RC planes like we were worried about of loosing the use of . And still today we fly .The rulemaking has been done , the legally required operating standards are in place , and so now "they" have solid legal footing to charge anyone who makes a menace of themselves . That's what I see as behind the rulemaking , that it was not a way to eliminate us , instead it's a way to punish bad behavior in a way that will stand up in a court of law .

Happy Flying

Last edited by init4fun; 05-03-2015 at 05:00 AM.
Old 05-03-2015, 06:10 AM
  #1228  
N410DC
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Another point to consider is that the UAVs in the Dulles and Love Field were probably flying within the confines of Class B airspace. Flying in Class B airspace requires a clearance from air traffic control, and continuous 2-way radio contact with ATC. If the FAA was able to catch the pilot of either of these quads, I think they could convince a judge or jury that the pilot was endangering full-scale aircraft, as they were not following procedures that are designed to ensure the safety of aircraft and passengers.

If and when the authorities are able to catch one of these idiots, I imagine they will prosecute him/her aggressively, in order to make a point.
Old 05-03-2015, 09:53 AM
  #1229  
HoundDog
My Feedback: (49)
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,501
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected]
i see that the people are still talking about the drones will it ever stop
The QUAD problem is the one biggest threat to our Hobby/Sport to come along in probably the whole History of R/C Flying. If we fail to convince the FAA that there is a difference between the many of us that fly responsibly and the Rouge QUAD Flyer, We will suffer the Rath of the FAA not If a serious accident happens between a maned aircraft and some R/C Toy But When it happens.
Old 05-03-2015, 10:06 AM
  #1230  
HoundDog
My Feedback: (49)
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,501
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun
Hey Hound Dog ,

Look , buddy , I know you care about our hobby and I know you as well as a number of others are worried about the future . Well , I'll admit to originally having the same worries till I considered this ;

If "the powers that be" wanted us stopped , It would have happened already . The FAA is the least of our worries and our biggest threat would have come from somewhere like the "Department of homeland security" , you know them , they were the people who charged that idiot from Ashland Massachusetts with plotting to fly an RC plane full of explosives into the pentagon . That (averted) incident didn't involve quads but good ol fashioned RC planes like we were worried about of loosing the use of . And still today we fly .The rulemaking has been done , the legally required operating standards are in place , and so now "they" have solid legal footing to charge anyone who makes a menace of themselves . That's what I see as behind the rulemaking , that it was not a way to eliminate us , instead it's a way to punish bad behavior in a way that will stand up in a court of law .

Happy Flying Too Winday today Sunday 5/3 but I just noticed the sun is back out so maybe just before sundown will work better.
INIT:
Man I pray U are right ...but think about the saying "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of Cure". If we don't make sure the FAA knows the differance from the "Rouge Quad Flyer" and those of us that mainly fly "On the Reservation" i.e. AMA Fields then we have no one to blame if your point of view proves to be WRONG. JMHO
Old 05-03-2015, 01:46 PM
  #1231  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,354
Received 49 Likes on 43 Posts
Default

Hi Hound Dog ,

But you see my Friend , the FAA has already made the distinction . Anybody who flys under the CBO (AMA) safety code , will never have to worry because as I mentioned earlier , they won't be getting in the way of full scale or otherwise making a menace of themselves . The legal UAS guys who are doing it for profit and follow all the FAA's more stringent rules of commercial UAS operations will likewise file their flight plans , get their clearances , and legally fly their paid for missions . Now the rogue , the idiot , the dolt who follows neither the CBO nor the commercial rules , will be in a world of poop when the FAA catches up with them , as the rules of safe operation for each class of flying have already been clearly established . Now it's just to be learned exactly what the penalties for non compliance will be . I'd imagine they'd be pretty harsh , and rightfully so . Once they "throw the book" at a couple or few of the "hey , lookie the video I got of me chasin down a jet" morons , word will get out that the penalties just aren't worth the 30 seconds of video , and then all that will be left are the folks who do follow the rules .

And remember , anyone who flys a quad equipped with FPV , and perfectly follows AMA doc. #550 to the letter , really ARE our fellow aviators and deserve all the support we traditional fixed wing flyers can give them . Just as we have a duty to shun the unsafe flying of even our fixed wing brethren if they make a habbit of stepping outside the rules . It's not the type of aircraft , it's the way it's flown , that determines the difference between a good Pilot and a dolt who's gonna meet the long arm of Mr. FAA some fine day ....
Old 05-03-2015, 02:01 PM
  #1232  
FLAPHappy
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (209)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected]
i see that the people are still talking about the drones will it ever stop
If this subject matter bothers you, why continue to read about and post about it. "Just quit reading about this", and bingo, your problem is solved.
This subject is on many peoples minds at the moment "FAA-AMA and it's members. We would like to discuss it, and possibly find a solution if possible. If you like to stick your head in the Sand, be my guest.
We will continue to discuss this problem boring as it is, and are trying to avoid future problems of regulation by the FAA and the AMA which nobody wants.
Have a great day.......
Old 05-03-2015, 02:39 PM
  #1233  
FLAPHappy
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (209)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun
Hi Hound Dog ,

But you see my Friend , the FAA has already made the distinction . Anybody who flys under the CBO (AMA) safety code , will never have to worry because as I mentioned earlier , they won't be getting in the way of full scale or otherwise making a menace of themselves . The legal UAS guys who are doing it for profit and follow all the FAA's more stringent rules of commercial UAS operations will likewise file their flight plans , get their clearances , and legally fly their paid for missions . Now the rogue , the idiot , the dolt who follows neither the CBO nor the commercial rules , will be in a world of poop when the FAA catches up with them , as the rules of safe operation for each class of flying have already been clearly established . Now it's just to be learned exactly what the penalties for non compliance will be . I'd imagine they'd be pretty harsh , and rightfully so . Once they "throw the book" at a couple or few of the "hey , lookie the video I got of me chasin down a jet" morons , word will get out that the penalties just aren't worth the 30 seconds of video , and then all that will be left are the folks who do follow the rules .

And remember , anyone who flys a quad equipped with FPV , and perfectly follows AMA doc. #550 to the letter , really ARE our fellow aviators and deserve all the support we traditional fixed wing flyers can give them . Just as we have a duty to shun the unsafe flying of even our fixed wing brethren if they make a habbit of stepping outside the rules . It's not the type of aircraft , it's the way it's flown , that determines the difference between a good Pilot and a dolt who's gonna meet the long arm of Mr. FAA some fine day ....
TOUCHE!!!, You are gettin the drift, now how can we convince the AMA and FAA we are not all bad Pilots, that is the question? As these rogue pilots " beginners to the Hobby" not knowing the rules, tarnish our good standing with the recent and increasing numbers of near misses caused by a few, we could be faced with more regulation, which nobody wants.
I would like to ask three questions, "How do we Resolve this in a reasonable way without more regulation rules imposed?" Can it be done and how? Register every Drone sold? That to me is extreme, but maybe necessary.

Last edited by FLAPHappy; 05-03-2015 at 02:44 PM.
Old 05-03-2015, 05:32 PM
  #1234  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,249
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FLAPHappy
TOUCHE!!!, You are gettin the drift, now how can we convince the AMA and FAA we are not all bad Pilots, that is the question? As these rogue pilots " beginners to the Hobby" not knowing the rules, tarnish our good standing with the recent and increasing numbers of near misses caused by a few, we could be faced with more regulation, which nobody wants.
I would like to ask three questions, "How do we Resolve this in a reasonable way without more regulation rules imposed?" Can it be done and how? Register every Drone sold? That to me is extreme, but maybe necessary.
The FAA IMO already knows that the people they have the problem with are not the ones that are following the rules be it theirs or the AMA. They also trying to shut down or severely restrict
the hobby as a whole would do no good but just create more problems and lawsuits. As for the rest of us I don't see a lot we can do other tan educate if we come across someone flying in the
wrong place if they are willing to listen. I think the ball is in the FAA's court to deal with the rogue flyers.
Old 05-04-2015, 04:47 AM
  #1235  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

One problem with the FAA is that while I agree that they really do not want to intentionally harm our hobby, they also do not really understand it, so they end up doing things that are harmful. When the AMA sat down with the FAA to discuss the FAA's "Interpretation" of Section 336 I was told that the FAA was shocked that the AMA, or any modeler, would be unhappy. They simply did not understand the hobby or how their simple "interpretation" was harmful to the hobby.

Hopefully they will amend their interpretation after reviewing the 30,000+ comments they received. It is interesting to note that they received well over 4 times the comments on their interpretation of the Special Rule for Models than they did for the NPRM proposing new rules for unmanned aircraft. Many of the comments they got on the PART 107 NPRM came from the modeling community as well. Hopefully our voice will be heard by them.
Old 05-04-2015, 05:18 AM
  #1236  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d
I think the ball is in the FAA's court to deal with the rogue flyers.
Maybe not your intent but characterizing non-AMA modelers as "rogue" is very disturbing and counter productive to the hobby as a whole. FWIW AMA modelers can be "rogue" as well...
Old 05-04-2015, 06:24 AM
  #1237  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,249
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
Maybe not your intent but characterizing non-AMA modelers as "rogue" is very disturbing and counter productive to the hobby as a whole. FWIW AMA modelers can be "rogue" as well...
If you read my post in it's entirety I said the people that the FAA has a problem with are not those that follow the rules be it theirs or the AMA. My definition of a rogue flyer is one
who does not follow the rules set in place for modelers by the AMA or the FAA.
Old 05-04-2015, 06:31 AM
  #1238  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d
If you read my post in it's entirety I said the people that the FAA has a problem with are not those that follow the rules be it theirs or the AMA. My definition of a rogue flyer is one
who does not follow the rules set in place for modelers by the AMA or the FAA.
I read your post...I guess you missed the part where I said "Maybe not your intent"... AMA is just a membership organization... Whether or not one belongs to AMA has no bearing on being "a rogue modeler" that is my point.
Old 05-04-2015, 06:42 AM
  #1239  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by N410DC
Another point to consider is that the UAVs in the Dulles and Love Field were probably flying within the confines of Class B airspace. Flying in Class B airspace requires a clearance from air traffic control, and continuous 2-way radio contact with ATC. If the FAA was able to catch the pilot of either of these quads, I think they could convince a judge or jury that the pilot was endangering full-scale aircraft, as they were not following procedures that are designed to ensure the safety of aircraft and passengers.

If and when the authorities are able to catch one of these idiots, I imagine they will prosecute him/her aggressively, in order to make a point.
Pretty sure that radio communication is not a requirement for sUAV. But no matter if not recreational they were not supposed to be there radio or not. If recreational then they were supposed to be below 400 feet if less than 3 miles, soon to be 5 miles.
Old 05-04-2015, 06:47 AM
  #1240  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

TOUCHE!!!, You are gettin the drift, now how can we convince the AMA and FAA we are not all bad Pilots
By bad pilots you mean we follow the rules right? Cause I see a lot of bad pilots (Crashalot pilots) at the field.
Old 05-04-2015, 07:55 AM
  #1241  
HoundDog
My Feedback: (49)
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,501
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
By bad pilots you mean we follow the rules right? Cause I see a lot of bad pilots (Crashalot pilots) at the field.
Gota have YOUR version of "Bad Pilots" the Crash-A-Lots. ... Else Places like Hobby King, Horizon & places like Tower would go out of business. Much less the LHS. Man can U imagin ordering From China a mail order $3.89 prop wait 7 to 10 weeks and but U get free shipping mot the $7.50 shipping You'd pay if thy were available some Place in the USA.
God Bless the Crashers they support the hobby. For all it's worth, Again JMHO
Old 05-04-2015, 08:11 AM
  #1242  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,249
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
I read your post...I guess you missed the part where I said "Maybe not your intent"... AMA is just a membership organization... Whether or not one belongs to AMA has no bearing on being "a rogue modeler" that is my point.
No problem, But yes I know that being a AMA member or not has no bearing on being a rogue modeler. And yes I know the AMA is just a membership org with no way to enforce rules
other than the threat to deny insurance claims.
Old 05-04-2015, 08:18 AM
  #1243  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,249
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by HoundDog
Gota have YOUR version of "Bad Pilots" the Crash-A-Lots. ... Else Places like Hobby King, Horizon & places like Tower would go out of business. Much less the LHS. Man can U imagin ordering From China a mail order $3.89 prop wait 7 to 10 weeks and but U get free shipping mot the $7.50 shipping You'd pay if thy were available some Place in the USA.
God Bless the Crashers they support the hobby. For all it's worth, Again JMHO
I think thats places like Tower and Horizon would go out of business if the FAA was to put severe restrictions on the RC hobby as a whole and I don't think they would
go down without a fight. That is why I don't think the FAA wants to go down that road.
Old 05-04-2015, 08:54 AM
  #1244  
Papa51
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Port Allen, LA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Quote:

"Have you tried flying one like this? It is far more challenging than flying aerobatics with fixed wing aircraft."



Yeah, I see that every day when I sit on my front porch and watch the carpenter bees dog-fight.

Last edited by Papa51; 05-04-2015 at 08:58 AM.
Old 05-04-2015, 09:57 AM
  #1245  
ramboamt
My Feedback: (36)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
No! Don't put words in my mouth. I only stated that the airline pilot should be trying to avoid the sUAV. Not that he did not have right of way. In the first instance it is unknown if he had time, the second it looks like they did not. But there have been others where they had time but the article did not say they aborted or otherwise avoided the sUAV. Just pointing out that even if you have right of way you have the duty to see and avoid. BTW in the PSA flight 182 the airline pilots were ruled as violating the "see and avoid" statute even though they had the right of way.
PSA Flight 182 NTSB transcripts: The PSA pilots reported that they saw the Cessna after being notified of its position by ATC, although cockpit voice recordings revealed that shortly thereafter the PSA pilots no longer had the Cessna in sight and they were speculating about its position. Lindbergh tower heard the 09.00:50 transmission as "He's passing off to our right" and assumed the PSA jet had the Cessna in sight.Actually, the Cessna was directly in front of and below the Boeing, and the PSA plane was descending and rapidly closing in on the small plane, which had taken a right turn to the east, deviating from the assigned course. According to the report issued by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the Cessna may have been a difficult visual target for the jet's pilots, as it was below them and blended in with the multicolored houses of the residential area beneath; the Cessna's fuselage was yellow, and most of the houses were a yellowish color. Also, the apparent motion of the Cessna as viewed from the Boeing was minimized, as both planes were on approximately the same course. The report said that another possible reason that the PSA aircrew had difficulty observing the Cessna was that its fuselage was made visually smaller due to foreshortening. However, the same report in another section also stated that "the white surface of the Cessna's wing could have presented a relatively bright target in the morning sunlight."
A visibility study cited in the NTSB report concluded that the Cessna should have been almost centered in the windshield of the Boeing from 170 to 90 seconds before the collision, and thereafter it was likely positioned on the lower portion of the windshield just above the windshield wipers. The study also said that the Cessna pilot would have had about a 10-second view of the Boeing from the left-door window about 90 seconds before the collision, but visibility of the overtaking jet was blocked by the Cessna's ceiling structure for the remainder of the time.
Flight 182's crew never explicitly alerted the tower that they had lost sight of the Cessna. If they had made this clear to controllers, the crash might not have happened. Also, if the Cessna had maintained the heading of 70 degrees assigned to it by ATC instead of turning to 90 degrees, the NTSB estimates the planes would have missed each other by about 1000 feet (300 meters) instead of colliding. Ultimately, the NTSB maintained that regardless of that change in course, it was the responsibility of the crew in the overtaking jet to comply with the regulatory requirement to pass "well clear" of the Cessna.
Approach Control on the ground picked up an automated conflict alert 19 seconds before the collision but did not relay this information to the aircraft because, according to the approach coordinator, such alerts were commonplace even when there was no actual conflict. The NTSB stated: "Based on all information available to him, he decided that the crew of Flight 182 were complying with their visual separation clearance; that they were accomplishing an overtake maneuver within the separation parameters of the conflict alert computer; and that, therefore, no conflict existed." They can only avoid what they can see or believe they see.
Old 05-05-2015, 06:00 AM
  #1246  
[email protected]
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hemet , CA
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

why all talk and no action on the drones
Old 05-05-2015, 10:44 AM
  #1247  
JohnShe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected]
why all talk and no action on the drones
Nice question. What would you do?
Old 05-05-2015, 12:53 PM
  #1248  
[email protected]
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hemet , CA
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

john she>>>i have heard if you stop talking and for get it it will go away>>>maybe iam wrong>>
Old 05-05-2015, 02:01 PM
  #1249  
FLAPHappy
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (209)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected]
john she>>>i have heard if you stop talking and for get it it will go away>>>maybe iam wrong>>
No, it won't just " Go AWAY" and yes you are wrong. Drones are not the problem in case you have not noticed. It is the irresponsible idiots that IGNORE the flight safety rules, that the FAA and the AMA have set. I am not saying ALL drone pilots are bad, it's just the few that fly within 3 miles of an active airport and over 400 ft. AGL. and most likely are not AMA Members, or they would know the rules, RIGHT? Those are the types of people that have created this problem. It continues to be more of a problem as the news broadcasts these events, near misses etc.
I wish it would just Go AWAy, but it will not, and that will continue to create more problems involving full scale aircraft which in turn will involve the AMA, then us as members. Again, as I stated earlier, if you do not like hearing about this, than just ignore this thread unless you have any positive input on this subject. If you have the answer, lets hear it?????

Last edited by FLAPHappy; 05-05-2015 at 02:06 PM. Reason: spelling
Old 05-05-2015, 04:01 PM
  #1250  
JohnShe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected]
john she>>>i have heard if you stop talking and for get it it will go away>>>maybe iam wrong>>
Right, stick your head in the sand and let the problem come up behind you and kick you in the but.

Ground Hog, advises education for the drone operators. I strongly support the AMA and FAA efforts to do that. It woulod be helpful for manufactures and hobby stores to also educate the buyers. Some manufactures already do that. Every model airplane product that I have purchased included useful safety advice. But, I do not but just anything. I don't have a clue what it says in the multirotor instructions, do you?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.