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

time to stop the dromes..........NOW

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

time to stop the dromes..........NOW

Old 02-13-2015, 12:25 PM
  #676  
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 chip_MG
The fact is that a drone could be used as a weapon, very easy to do in fact. That is the reason the FAA is getting involved.
Drones can also be used to invade someone privacy just as easy. We all know this if one thinks a minute before getting upset.
People use good thing for bad reason and ya cant deny that fact. So the question is how can we fix it? anyone have an ideal?
I agree it is people where the problem is at.
That's the dumbest and most inaccurate statement I've seen in this thread or on all of RCU .... The FAA Has Nothing to do with Weaponized toy airplanes ever ... The FAA's fear is they won't be able to regulate the "COMMERCIAL" DRONES so to integrate them into the Controlled air space with man carrying aircraft .... Congress said The FAA has no Jurisdiction over toy airplanes flown for pleasure when they obey the rules of a community based origination i.e. AMA guide lines and rules. Now if U had said HLS FBI ATF or some other law enforcement agency or anything but the FAA U would be more correct.
Old 02-13-2015, 12:25 PM
  #677  
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 SIX GUNS
you guys its just a mater of time when the terrorists start using some thing like one of the bigger quad copters to carry a nuke in to a stadim
and there is not much we can do about it do to the fact these things are sold every where . personally I think they should be taken off the
market
A Learjet would be a much better option for many obvious reasons.
Old 02-13-2015, 12:36 PM
  #678  
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 SIX GUNS
you guys its just a mater of time when the terrorists start using some thing like one of the bigger quad copters to carry a nuke in to a stadim
and there is not much we can do about it do to the fact these things are sold every where . personally I think they should be taken off the
market
Here's another one ...... Sixxy I'll bet U're for Gun Control or limiting the use of Box Trucks or May be they should ban all cars because they are Used as a CAR BOMBS or Taxi's and Horse drawn Carriages caus they could be used to carry explosives by a Terrorist meninate.
Anyone that wants to ban something because some one could used in a manor for witch it's not intended is a complete FOOL. Please Just say U don't like Quad copters because U don't dooooo Quads ... U aginst Fomeys and 3D or how about Pattern and IMAC?
Old 02-13-2015, 12:38 PM
  #679  
bradpaul
 
bradpaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka, FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SIX GUNS
you guys its just a mater of time when the terrorists start using some thing like one of the bigger quad copters to carry a nuke in to a stadim
and there is not much we can do about it do to the fact these things are sold every where . personally I think they should be taken off the
market
Actually a 40% conventional RC airplane would make a much better platform for that......................... by your logic giant scale RC airplanes should be taken off the market. Of course all it would take is just bigger servos and a different radio/video link to FPV remote control a Cessna so I guess light aircraft have to go away also.
Old 02-14-2015, 12:05 AM
  #680  
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 SIX GUNS
you guys its just a mater of time when the terrorists start using some thing like one of the bigger quad copters to carry a nuke in to a stadim
and there is not much we can do about it do to the fact these things are sold every where . personally I think they should be taken off the
market
I kinda doubt a Cessna 150 could carry a nuke, well maybe the smaller ones. Just the weight of the nuclear fuel would prohibit anything other than a full size quad from carrying a nuke.
Old 02-14-2015, 01:11 AM
  #681  
chuckk2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Posts: 1,247
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

"Congress said The FAA has no Jurisdiction over toy airplanes flown for pleasure when they obey the rules of a community based origination i.e. AMA guide lines and rules."
The FAA does not agree, and contends that the Congress's language only applies to new laws/regulations, not the existing ones that basically give the FAA jurisdiction over anything that "flies",
even if it's over your own property. That fight was lost decades ago. Seems that some ranchers with very large acreages were operating light aircraft without all the FAA gotta do's.
Another loss was the 1,500 foot airspace over property "belonging" to the property owner. Actually the FAA often seems to consider light aircraft more of a nuisance/inconvenience than anything else.
Just look at the loss of "uncontrolled" airspace over the last few decades, and the decline of the light plane industry.
I do think that the current FAA stance is extreme, especially when compared to some other nations.
Old 02-14-2015, 01:24 AM
  #682  
chuckk2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Posts: 1,247
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

A Cessna 150 or other light aircraft might, in theory, carry a Nuke.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48)
The cost of the material is a bit prohibitive,
not to mention how to obtain it and construct such a bomb.
It's more likely that something like a "dirty bomb", or a biological weapon
would be more practical.
Old 02-14-2015, 07:04 AM
  #683  
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 Sport_Pilot
I kinda doubt a Cessna 150 could carry a nuke, well maybe the smaller ones. Just the weight of the nuclear fuel would prohibit anything other than a full size quad from carrying a nuke.
You never heard of a suitcase sized dirty bomb?
Old 02-14-2015, 07:08 AM
  #684  
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 chuckk2
"Congress said The FAA has no Jurisdiction over toy airplanes flown for pleasure when they obey the rules of a community based origination i.e. AMA guide lines and rules."
The FAA does not agree, and contends that the Congress's language only applies to new laws/regulations, not the existing ones that basically give the FAA jurisdiction over anything that "flies",
even if it's over your own property. That fight was lost decades ago. Seems that some ranchers with very large acreages were operating light aircraft without all the FAA gotta do's.
Another loss was the 1,500 foot airspace over property "belonging" to the property owner. Actually the FAA often seems to consider light aircraft more of a nuisance/inconvenience than anything else.
Just look at the loss of "uncontrolled" airspace over the last few decades, and the decline of the light plane industry.
I do think that the current FAA stance is extreme, especially when compared to some other nations.
Actually, congress gave the FAA authority to regulate anything that flies when they created the FAA. However, in the 2012 modernization act, they told the FAA that they may not regulate recreational model airplanes as long as operators obeyed a reasonable set of safety rules developed by a nationwide community based organization.
Old 02-14-2015, 07:30 AM
  #685  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorym...g-regulations/
Old 02-14-2015, 08:32 AM
  #686  
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 porcia83
\

Thanks. Hopefully there actually will be a bit of sanity in all this after all.
Old 02-14-2015, 09:11 AM
  #687  
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 porcia83
That sounds very similar to the current rules in Australia… Good to see the FAA being pragmatic about this.
Old 02-14-2015, 10:09 AM
  #688  
DeferredDefect
Senior Member
 
DeferredDefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , ON, CANADA
Posts: 974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Aaaand everyone posting in this thread is now on a list somewhere.
Old 02-14-2015, 03:05 PM
  #689  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

as long as it's the good list......
Old 02-15-2015, 09:01 AM
  #690  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

So anyone get a chance to hear the call this morning from the FAA? I'll be interested to hear from all those folks who have been talking about the end of the hobby as we know it since "quads" have become popular...and how the hobby will never be the same, and how they will control us etc etc etc.

I know it's going to be a long wait.
Old 02-15-2015, 10:12 AM
  #691  
JohnShe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

What call?
Old 02-15-2015, 11:45 AM
  #692  
corch
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: grand rapids, MI
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This call

http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releas...8295&cid=TW299
Old 02-15-2015, 12:12 PM
  #693  
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 corch
Oh! He meant press release. Why didn't he say so?


Actually, it is almost good news for us. They make it clear that they will honor section 336 to the fullest. The only remaining issue is getting them to revise some of the onerous issues in the interpretation. To me, those are the FPV restriction, for those that fly FPV by AMA rules, and the commercial use issue for the model plane industry, demonstrating their toys..
Old 02-15-2015, 12:57 PM
  #694  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnShe
Oh! He meant press release. Why didn't he say so?


Actually, it is almost good news for us. They make it clear that they will honor section 336 to the fullest. The only remaining issue is getting them to revise some of the onerous issues in the interpretation. To me, those are the FPV restriction, for those that fly FPV by AMA rules, and the commercial use issue for the model plane industry, demonstrating their toys..
Your are correct, It is good for most of us, though it isn't over for AMA. I think you will find when the rules are released - today?) that the FPV restriction is not a ban, but a requirement for 'see and avoid' that can be met by other means, i.e., use of a spotter. AMA' position is "Campaigns such as “Know Before You Fly” and AMA’s long-standing community-based safety programs are the best, and perhaps the only, ways to effectively manage the recreational community." AMA isn't going to let the CBO gravy train go away without a fight, and FAA has not interpreted (and IMHO never will interpret) Section 336 to require membership in a CBO, but only operating in accord with the CBO safety guidance. Meanwhile modelers will retain the freedom to enjoy the hobby/sport, whether AMA member or independent. I'm good with that.
Old 02-15-2015, 12:57 PM
  #695  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

double post - del
Old 02-15-2015, 12:58 PM
  #696  
NorfolkSouthern
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,588
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Looks to me like it'll be easier to get a drone certificate than a pilot's license, no medical required. That's something I think we can all live with. More people can make a living doing what they enjoy.
Old 02-15-2015, 04:29 PM
  #697  
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 porcia83
So anyone get a chance to hear the call this morning from the FAA? I'll be interested to hear from all those folks who have been talking about the end of the hobby as we know it since "quads" have become popular...and how the hobby will never be the same, and how they will control us etc etc etc.

I know it's going to be a long wait.
LOL…

I listened to it and have been following this very closely. For those who missed it…


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXtjvjmr5XY Basically all good however one part is more restrictive than current rules for model aircraft.

Operations in Class B, C, D and E airspace are allowed with the required ATC permission.

This means outside 5 miles but inside Class B, C, D or E airspace a "licensed" Drone operator will not be allowed to fly without first calling ATC and getting permission. (Does it have to be in writing? - I don't know.)

But a "recreational" RC modeller flying the same equipment (Drone and Camera) in the same area for private use can take off and fly under 400 feet all day without permission.

No logic in that.

There are hundreds of places in the USA where this could occur, mostly within 10-15 miles of an airport (IE major population areas )

Here are just two examples. Tucson and Monterey, in both images, if you are located at the red star a recreational pilot can fly without permission but a licensed operator cannot under the proposed ruling.











Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	photo 1.PNG
Views:	56
Size:	338.0 KB
ID:	2073512   Click image for larger version

Name:	photo 2.PNG
Views:	48
Size:	393.5 KB
ID:	2073513  

Last edited by Rob2160; 02-15-2015 at 04:33 PM.
Old 02-15-2015, 05:10 PM
  #698  
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 cj_rumley
Your are correct, It is good for most of us, though it isn't over for AMA. I think you will find when the rules are released - today?) that the FPV restriction is not a ban, but a requirement for 'see and avoid' that can be met by other means, i.e., use of a spotter. AMA' position is "Campaigns such as “Know Before You Fly” and AMA’s long-standing community-based safety programs are the best, and perhaps the only, ways to effectively manage the recreational community." AMA isn't going to let the CBO gravy train go away without a fight, and FAA has not interpreted (and IMHO never will interpret) Section 336 to require membership in a CBO, but only operating in accord with the CBO safety guidance. Meanwhile modelers will retain the freedom to enjoy the hobby/sport, whether AMA member or independent. I'm good with that.

Bet U will either belong to a CBO or pass some sort of Test to assure u under stand the proper places to fly and rules of the road.
JMHO
Old 02-15-2015, 05:11 PM
  #699  
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 cj_rumley
Your are correct, It is good for most of us, though it isn't over for AMA. I think you will find when the rules are released - today?) that the FPV restriction is not a ban, but a requirement for 'see and avoid' that can be met by other means, i.e., use of a spotter. AMA' position is "Campaigns such as “Know Before You Fly” and AMA’s long-standing community-based safety programs are the best, and perhaps the only, ways to effectively manage the recreational community." AMA isn't going to let the CBO gravy train go away without a fight, and FAA has not interpreted (and IMHO never will interpret) Section 336 to require membership in a CBO, but only operating in accord with the CBO safety guidance. Meanwhile modelers will retain the freedom to enjoy the hobby/sport, whether AMA member or independent. I'm good with that.

Bet U will either belong to a CBO or pass some sort of Test to assure u under stand the proper places to fly and rules of the road.
JMHO
Old 02-15-2015, 05:37 PM
  #700  
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 HoundDog

Bet U will either belong to a CBO or pass some sort of Test to assure u under stand the proper places to fly and rules of the road.
JMHO
You will lose that bet.

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.