init4fun

On the registration ? I agree 100% that anything capable of flying LOS only shouldn't need it , and that #336 should have been adhered to .

And yes I also agree that birdstrikes are , per man hours flown , thankfully fairly rare .

But I still assert that if a metal & plastic UAS was substituted for the bird in each of Franklin's examples , that the damage would have been far worse and possibly risen to the level of having been catastrophic for the flight .

Hey , just like the MeatLoaf song , , , Two oughta three ain't bad !

Sport_Pilot

IMO its like the frozen or thawed chicken. There was no difference in the two despite the difference in hardness. Only one year of Mythbusters left so this will likely not be tested by anyone we can trust.

rgburrill

And once again you come up with stupid diversions to turn the discussion away from the real problem. You are the real problem.

init4fun

Aw , Come on RG , Don't see it that way . The thread topic of any thread is usually fairly well played out by page 9 or 10 , and then the rest is just BSing back and fourth picking a point apart till there's nothing left of it . Sport does , indeed , play well "the devil's advocate" but isn't that what examining an issue inside and out really requires ? To consider every word and see where the lawyers are gonna twist and tuck them so they fit neatly up our butts , like the FAA did with #336 ?

A while ago I came to the realization that if I hate everyone out here who I disagree with about one point or another , that pretty soon I'd hate EVERYBODY and wouldn't that be a shame to go hating a bunch of folks with the same interest you have just over a difference of opinion on this or that issue ?

We will never all agree on everything , But I'd buy each one of you a Beer at the end of a day's flying , if our paths ever met in real life ......

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Thanks for the answer.
If U had all the time in the world U flew Your self ... Strangely enough I waited for weather much more after obtaining My Instrument ticket than just a private VFR Only Certificate. With out an Instrument rating is was a no brainer if it wasn't forecast for a week before and a week after as CAVU U just drove. With the IFR ticket U sat waiting for Flyable IFR. No T-Storms in the summer and No Ice in the winter.

Sport_Pilot

I kinda decided it was poor transportation when stranded out of town for a few days. I had to land in Habersham airport on the way from Huntsville, Al to Myrtle Beach, SC. Was socked in for 4 days, originally thought it was for one day, and we rented a car to vist my father in law near Waynesville NC. When we got back my friends at work had a tracking map showing where I had been!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

At about 500 hours total time in my log book and VFR only. Tried to go out to Washington DC. Left at noon got as far as Lorain County OH. Stayed there 3 days for the weather to be Legal VFR. It was clear and 2-1/2 miles in haze and the Cleveland TCA was in my way. 3 days of watching the weather On "teletype" we went back to Wisconsin. That's when I started my IFR training in earnest. I Guess we all have war stories. Some you remember some U wish U could forget. I'll never forget the dumb ones though.

Now what thread are we Hijacking now? Sorry.

rt3232

My Feedback: (6)

The dumb one's are the ones that make an impression in your brain and your hart pumping.

Cheers Bob T

PS I hope all of you had a safe holiday

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/158133383" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's $3,000 down the drain.

N410DC

Well, the camera continued to work underwater, at least for a while. Not bad!

acdii

Guy has good aim, nailed it!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

And if he's getting paid from U-Tube for each viewing he'll make more then enough to replace it. Hope he's got his Federal JUNK all in order. Soon Quads will out number all otherforms of R/C flight .. If they already don't, We got to get used to it.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

OK Guys, it has happened again!!! This one was close but one day it will happen, then kiss RC Good by.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/03/18...?intcmp=hplnws

Sport_Pilot

You can already kiss it goodby if the present Senate bill is passed. You will have to have to pass a written test and new models will have to be tested for airworthyness. No going over 400 feet under any circumstances.

Silent-AV8R

Senate just published their final bill after markup. It retains the 400 foot altitude cap and testing requirement. Now our last hope is these two items drop off during the conference committee process where the Senate and House versions are reconciled:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...8C075B8DA13ABA

See Section 2129

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

And I believe this because wheres the pics or video???

Sorta like the Chief Pilot Instructor at the local air port was over heard by an R/C club member (EX airline captain) ... telling his instructors if U see anything out there Meaning our field, report it as a near miss. I called him and ask him to check on FAR 91.119(b) Specifically the "Over an Open Air assembly of People" and that we have a 300' tall High line just 1250' to our south. I also i formed that the Scottsdale FSDO determined that an "Over an Open air assembly of People" could be a stadium full of 32,000 people or as few as a couple on a blanket having a picnic. Haven't seen 3 planes a week fly directly over our field and if I do I have a range finder that is good to 500 meters and can tack pictures thru it with my cell.

§ 91.119Minimum safe altitudes: General.

§ 91,119(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
You can already kiss it goodby if the present Senate bill is passed. You will have to have to pass a written test and new models will have to be tested for airworthyness. No going over 400 feet under any circumstances.
Section 2129 subpart (6) & (7)

“(6) the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet in altitude; and
“(7) the operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test administered by the Federal Aviation Administration online for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems subject to the requirements of section 44809 and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.

Now Silent U could have done this instead having every one look it up and half never find what U actually meant. get with the program.

Silent-AV8R

Gee, sorry. I never realized what a burden it was to go to a link and find the section I pointed to in my post. SO I take the time to find this information and share it, but you have to take me to task because I did not make it even easier for you. How about next time I just let you do the leg work yourself and track these things.

BTW - follow you own signature line and stop sniveling!!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

It makes sure to others EXACTLY what U are revering to no questions. Period

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Reminds me of all the UFO sightings....lots to talk about, no proof. How fast were they going at 5000 feet, and still managed to see a "drone" 200 feet above them? Doubtful.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Here is anoth news article about the same sighting at LAX. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/lufthansa...--finance.html

Ok , No video of this, not needed. If the pilot reports it to the tower and debriefing, it is recorded. They do not any video or proof it happened. With over hundreds of sightings with airline pilots that were flying, why would they need proof? You know and I know, this is exactly why the FAA has required the Registration process. Will it cure this, No it will not.
The Idiots that do break the rules is the problem, and it casts a black shadow on all RC and if the sad days occurs when one of these things hits an airliner, it will be over for sure for RC except flying indoors or ground control hobbies.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Right, there are tons of reports from different news sites about the same "sighting", they all say the same thing. As of yet, there hasn't been a single confirmed sighting with evidence nor has anyone been caught. That's not to say it isn't happening, but this call for "it's going to happen someday " has been going on for what, 3 years now? Meanwhile, how many bird strikes do we have, or better yet civilian and military aircraft crashing?

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

I may be mistaken, there was one person caught, it was maybe last year, can't remember. The point being is it still happening, registered drone or not, it's happening. Bird strikes are always going to be a problem, but these quad copters have created a major problem for the RC community and the FAA regarding flight safety, you know that. My question is how do honest and rule abiding RC pilots, avoid prosecution from the FAA regarding this now current ongoing problem with quad copters? Never before, that I know of has this been a problem for traditional aircraft.
Yes, it has been going on for the last 3 years when these things became the problem. I am just saying, if one of the quad copters ever hits an airliner or even a civilian aircraft, the FAA registration process has failed.. The FAA can not make the Idiots obey the rules.
Then they (FAA) will take much stronger action regarding this problem. It only takes one collision to a full scale aircraft, to cause a fatality and then look out, military or not.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

OK Here ya go! Take a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE34BJYmLm8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgXd0nIo784


Watch the other videos on the right side of the screen.

Rob2160

If one drunk driver hits and kills a pedestrian does that mean drink driving rules are a total failure and should be abolished entirely?

Please look at the big picture. No law on Earth is 100% effective all the time.

Registration will stop "some" of the idiots and when one crashes into an aircraft it will be argued that registration has prevented it from happening more often.

I agree with you here.