Flyfast1

My Feedback: (1)

What is a drome?

-Ed B.

cj_rumley

Is that offered as a reason why AMA should get involved with representing civil/public UAS interests?

bradpaul

Just an observation......... $84 for a magazine and some discount cupons?

bradpaul

So franklin_m which way do you want it?

In this post:


You want a smaller headquarters staff ..............................

In this post:


You want the creation of AMA Police................ Just how many AMA Police would be needed to cover all the AMA Club flyers and non Club flyers?
Great idea create a model aviation equivalent of TSA...........

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

well

franklin_m

I don't recall saying anywhere about a smaller HQ staff. I recall saying that I want less put into Muncie flying site, less into competitions, and less into the museum. As to the enforcement piece, the simple observation is that either AMA is going to do it, or in the absence of AMA doing something, the FAA will. And I guarantee we won't like the way the FAA does it. So, for the AMA to have credibility with the FAA as a CBO, then there has to be more than what they have. For example, look at SCUBA diving. There are two major certification agencies out there, PADI and another. Each has a management system that creates minimum standards for each certification, tests to those standards, and standardizes instructors. It also means that those who don't meet the standards don't get to dive.

What would that look like in model aviation? Well, the CBO would set minimum standards required to fly, which would probably include some sort of test, along with a practical demonstration of skills. Sounds easy, but it's not. First you have to agree on standards, both for the test content and the practical skills. Then you have to ensure that your instructor cadre interprets and enforces these standards uniformly. Then of course, just like diving, there were be various advanced certifications. And all of those have to be standardized as well. I submit that's what a CBO really looks like, and the enforcement comes through the certification process mostly, with a few having certifications revoked when they do something dangerous.

Both aspects of enforcement are required - certification structure that means something (i.e. fogging a mirror doesn't mean you get certified) and pulling certifications if required. The CBO can do it or we'll end up with the FAA doing it, and I guarantee we won't like the way the FAA does it.

Maximilionalpha

Have you guys even thought about it like this, in the case that the FAA and AMA, started setting standards, for what it takes to fly your rc planes/quads/heli's, that they end up putting an age cap(both minimum and maximum) somewhere in the writings? Then, would you be so happy with their interference?

JohnShe

It sounds like you are saying that you don't like the AMA safety guidelines. What do you think is wrong with the guidelines? I ask this with the certain knowledge that most AMA flyers like them, the FAA likes them and they have been working fine for over 75 years.

robbinsp

My Feedback: (10)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSIBsJk1bKw

there are more important things to worry about.

be wise, reflect on what matters to the heart. if you have an hour, this documentary may be the most valuable hour of your life if you are in contemplation.

JohnShe

Were you sleeping when we wore that joke out?

Maximilionalpha

Well, not so much the AMA, as opposed to the FAA involving itself into the hobbyist past-time, entertainment.

JohnShe

Well, the FAA has not, is not and will not involve itself in true recreational activities so you have nothing to worry about.

Maximilionalpha

Do you promise me, John? Please tell me that you, promise John!?

JohnShe

The facts are the facts whether you believe them or not.

Maximilionalpha

Lighten up! Get a sense of humor! And I thought Pennsylvanians had a rye sense of humor...

JohnShe

In VA (Virginia) we like irony.

That's why we believe that facts have liberal bias.

phlpsfrnk

Okay, if I understand this correctly Raphael Pirker lost his last appeal on the basis that the FAA did not have regulatory authority over model aircraft and he is now appealing on the basis that he is a “foreign person” and this is his “Third Affirmative Defense.” Have I got that right?

[ATTACH]2055795[/IMG]

I’m not going to speculate on his chances this time, but one has to wonder what he has paid in legal fees thus far? After all is said and done paying the $10,000 fine may have been the cheaper alternative.

Frank

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

I had a friend that spent probably over $100.000 1968 dollars going all the way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court over a few thousand dollars with the IRS. Long story short He said was a Manufacture buying and cutting up steel and selling Steel and they said he was a processor. The problem was they could tax his equipment as personal property or something like that. But it was the PRINCIPLE of the thing not withing over the next 30 years his taxes would have been much more than the 100K. If Raphael Pirker gives up what do U think is going to happen to all of us? Principle does have it's plane

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

He had paid nothing for his defense, it's being done pro bono. I don't know if when he set out going about his business he expected to the test case, and had funds ready for either a fine or legal fees, but it seems to have worked out for him in either case. So far. There were probably better ways to go about effecting change (or getting closure scrutiny), but he seems to be the poster child for the issue, for better or worse.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

He had paid nothing for his defense, it's being done pro bono. I don't know if when he set out going about his business he expected to be the test case, and had funds ready for either a fine or legal fees, but it seems to have worked out for him in either case. So far. There were probably better ways to go about effecting change (or getting closure scrutiny), but he seems to be the poster child for the issue, for better or worse.

phlpsfrnk

Pro bono or not, somebody is paying the bill for his defense and it is us tax payers that are paying for the prosecution. He was operating a commercial enterprise in the USA and in the process operated an unauthorized "drone" in a careless and reckless manner. Who pays the fine after all his appeals have failed? Did his "foreign company have the proper permits to operate in this country? Did his company pay taxes on its earned income? Did he? Has the IRS looked into this yet?

Frank

phlpsfrnk

Nothing!

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

For sure on that one. as of now, probably more money spent trying prosecute and fine than any fine will ever amount too. Sad to say the very least.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Frank quit your winning them POOR Lawyers have to eat too LOL

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Bet your Life and the Life of this hobby on that ... I'm not willing to. Only a fool takes chances like that.