time to stop the dromes..........NOW
#676
My Feedback: (49)
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.
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.
#677
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
#678
My Feedback: (49)
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
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
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?
#679
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
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
#680
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
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
#681
Senior Member
"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.
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.
#682
Senior Member
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.
(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.
#683
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#684
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"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.
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.
#687
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#690
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
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.
I know it's going to be a long wait.
#693
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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..
#694
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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..
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..
#696
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.
#697
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
I know it's going to be a long wait.
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.
Last edited by Rob2160; 02-15-2015 at 04:33 PM.
#698
My Feedback: (49)
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
#699
My Feedback: (49)
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
#700
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts