time to stop the dromes..........NOW
03-07-2015, 07:31 PM
#826
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, all one has to do is comply with all of the above statutory criteria. You and your fellow travelers just do that, John.
03-07-2015, 08:08 PM
#827
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-07-2015, 09:05 PM
#829
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Within the programming of (AMA)." The AMA Government Affairs guy says that requires being a member of AMA. Or so says a toad. I don't recall him saying it publicly, just via toad mail. I suppose that makes it deniable. Toads are expendable.
03-07-2015, 09:40 PM
#830
We tried and experiment at our field, put an altitude sensor in models to be flown and then just flew them as they normally would, foamies, larger ARFs, those built from kits, glo and electric and some giant scale. Out of 16 different flights, none exceeded 400 feet. I suppose the jet guys and the large 3D flyers exceed it, but seldom do the regular sport flyers. Sailplanes perhaps being an exception.
03-07-2015, 09:42 PM
#831
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
03-07-2015, 09:56 PM
#833
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cj:
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
03-07-2015, 10:19 PM
#834
Most of my planes have at least a HiTec GPS in them and I have two GPS set ups that is completely independent and portabil i.e. I can place it in any plane that has room or it and read their GPS altitude and Ground Speed. Believe me 400' can easily be exceeded by almost anything flying to day. Especially Pattern, Imac, Jets, and Quads, just to see if they will come back by them selves. just as a side note that Return to Home crap isn't all it's cracked up to be ... Although it works exceedingly well most of the time it's not fool proof I personally have seen 2 quads just fly away when the RTH was activated.
Serfice it to say 400' is not that high. If it does become mandatory to stay under some ceiling radio manufactures will be adding it right into recovers and either activating an alarm on the transmitter or simply programming in the radio system that refuses th plane to be flowen over any set altitude limit... Some Quads already have this programming in their software.
Serfice it to say 400' is not that high. If it does become mandatory to stay under some ceiling radio manufactures will be adding it right into recovers and either activating an alarm on the transmitter or simply programming in the radio system that refuses th plane to be flowen over any set altitude limit... Some Quads already have this programming in their software.
03-07-2015, 10:39 PM
#835
cj:
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
like in full scale no CBO is required so common sense would dictate that none should be required for RC either.
Last edited by ira d; 03-07-2015 at 10:50 PM.
03-08-2015, 05:42 AM
#836
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMA membership is not in the statutory criteria. The AMA idiot is wrong. Within the programming means following the rules for the type of aircraft, technology or flight plan, nothing more.
03-08-2015, 05:46 AM
#837
Originally Posted by HoundDog 
cj:
What's wrong with anyone that flies anything in the NAS having to have the proper credentials that proves they know and will abide by the rules and regulations of said NAS. If flying under the guidance of the AMA as the only CBO then so be it. My $48 per year is well spent. 99% of flyers I have met that do not belong to the AMA or some who do not participate at some organized level.and just fly openly seem to fly Willy Nilly all over the place with no regard for the safety of property and others. This 99% needs discipline and and /or at least prove they know , When, where,when and How to operate the things they fly in the NAS Safely.
If U don't want to be part of the only CBO at present in the USA please feel free to start your own CBO and make it free to all that would Join U in believing that no one needs training or knowledge of where when and how to use the NAS.
Originally Posted by i[COLOR=#b22222
ra d;11997931]I think most would agree that there needs some training on safe RC operations and since the FAA wants to get in on discipline part then that training would be their responsibility, Just
like in full scale no CBO is required so common sense would dictate that none should be required for RC either[/COLOR].
like in full scale no CBO is required so common sense would dictate that none should be required for RC either[/COLOR].
I'd say under this senerio (that is what the FAA is going to do) the only CBO in town today i.e.the AMA seems like a pretty good Idea. Besides if the AMA increased it member ship by 3 fold I'm sure the annual fee would drop significantly. JMHO
As long as I'm on my soap box, it's my opinion that the AMA and clubs in general are too lax in who they let fly with out proper instruction and guidance. There too many dangerous people flying things they have no business attempting to fly. There are many AMA members (Some have been flying 30+ years) that should not be allowed to solo a KITE because they are just plane dangerous. Every AMA club, has at least one if not several incompetent and dangerous flyers. You know the ones that when they get up to fly everyone heads for cover of the shelter. If U say that U don't know anyone like that U are lying to your self. again JMHO.
03-08-2015, 06:10 AM
#838
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good idea, HoundDog. The gummit should wake up to this Commune Business Opportunity scheme and and apply it to other DOT regulations than just those administered by FAA. Everybody riding a motorcycle should be required to join Hell's Angels. Those things are as dangerous as model airplanes.
03-08-2015, 06:16 AM
#839
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PUBLIC LAW 112–95—FEB. 14, 2012 126 STAT. 77
SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
So if the CBO requires membership as mandatory in their program that is their right to do. Don't like it? Just join a different CBO
Does the AMA (CBO) require membership to be within the "programming of the CBO (AMA)? Not that I know of other then Rich Hansen 's statement. I would read carefully the published minutes of upcoming EC meetings to see if this becomes a requirement.
Last edited by bradpaul; 03-08-2015 at 06:18 AM.
03-08-2015, 07:33 AM
#840
Good idea, HoundDog. The gummit should wake up to this Commune Business Opportunity scheme and and apply it to other DOT regulations than just those administered by FAA. Everybody riding a motorcycle should be required to join Hell's Angels. Those things are as dangerous as model airplanes.
U miss the point all together ... What I am trying to explain to U is that if the FAA determines that even any (R/C model / Quad) flyers must poses and Prove that they have the Knowledge and skills to operate any thing in the NAS because with out the knowledge and skill they will / might endanger others using the NAS. The alternative to proving U have the knowledge and skills would be to Join a CBO / AMA till U start your own. For this the AMA would have the responsibility thru their INTRO PILOT PROGRAM to administer or provide the knowledge and skills to operate any R/C craft Safely in the NAS. This could be at a chartered AMA facility or anywhere the Intro Pilot determines to be suitable for said purposes. Of course the Intro would be prohibited from accepting compensation for Hire.
This Unless the Intro Pilot is a FAA certificated sUAS / R/C instructor.
In my opinion the AMA and the R/C industry as a whole have been way to lax in who is allowed to purchase and use in the NAS without the proper training. I for one believe that the FAA overbite of sUAS / R/C in general.has been needed for years. I also thing/believe that it should be made mandatory and retroactive for everyone wanting to fly any thing not tethered to the ground.
How U like them apples, all U o'l gezzers that can't fly worth a CRAP and are a danger every time you attempt a flight.
Example:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXxCaupAQ8Q
This is the guy that ounce told me in no uncertain terms "I don't need no stink'n rudder except on the ground" and he is/was dead serious.
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-08-2015 at 07:40 AM.
03-08-2015, 08:03 AM
#842
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CJ:
U miss the point all together ... What I am trying to explain to U is that if the FAA determines that even any (R/C model / Quad) flyers must poses and Prove that they have the Knowledge and skills to operate any thing...
How U like them apples, all U o'l gezzers that can't fly worth a CRAP and are a danger every time you attempt a flight.
Example:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXxCaupAQ8Q
This is the guy that ounce told me in no uncertain terms "I don't need no stink'n rudder except on the ground" and he is/was dead serious.
U miss the point all together ... What I am trying to explain to U is that if the FAA determines that even any (R/C model / Quad) flyers must poses and Prove that they have the Knowledge and skills to operate any thing...
How U like them apples, all U o'l gezzers that can't fly worth a CRAP and are a danger every time you attempt a flight.
Example:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXxCaupAQ8Q
This is the guy that ounce told me in no uncertain terms "I don't need no stink'n rudder except on the ground" and he is/was dead serious.
Just wondering how merely paying AMA automatically instills all this knowledge...
03-08-2015, 08:25 AM
#844
I see a lot of discussion about operations to 1000' etc., such as pattern box, jets, etc. Those operations would seem to be in direct violation of paragraph 3c of 91-57, which is very specific with respect to maximum altitude. If someone can point to a section of law or federal policy where this has been waived, I'm interested to read it.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...ular/91-57.pdf
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...ular/91-57.pdf
Last edited by franklin_m; 03-08-2015 at 08:29 AM.
03-08-2015, 08:35 AM
#845
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see a lot of discussion about operations to 1000' etc., such as pattern box, jets, etc. Those operations would seem to be in direct violation of paragraph 3c of 91-57, which is very specific with respect to maximum altitude. If someone can point to a section of law or federal policy where this has been waived, I'm interested to read it.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...ular/91-57.pdf
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...ular/91-57.pdf
1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular outlines, and encourages voluntary compliance with, safety standards for model aircraft operators.
03-08-2015, 08:39 AM
#846
My Feedback: (551)
Hound Dog:
Watched the video. Clearly the guy does not have flying skills, but at no time did I see him endanger anyone (including himself) or anything (except his airplane). It appears that he follows the safety rules just fine. He would not be considered a danger to the NAS either.
Your posting it here is more than a bit unfair.
Watched the video. Clearly the guy does not have flying skills, but at no time did I see him endanger anyone (including himself) or anything (except his airplane). It appears that he follows the safety rules just fine. He would not be considered a danger to the NAS either.
Your posting it here is more than a bit unfair.
03-08-2015, 08:46 AM
#847
I saw that, but after the FAA's interpretation of the special rule, and the NTSB's decision, ops above 400' would seem to risk attention. if folks want to hang their hat on voluntary compliance as a way to defend against FAA/NTSB, I wish them luck.
03-08-2015, 08:51 AM
#848
U better believe it especially without the Only CBO / AMA the FAA/NTSB would be all over us.... As I see it the AMA/CBO is the lesser of the evils that could bestow out hobby/sport.
When U gona get it it's the lesser of two evils and until all the AMA haters start their own FREE CBO the AMA is the only game in town.
Get it now the
"Lesser of 2 Evils"
Temp 70 going to 81 wind 2 mph from the north east I'm Going flying ...
buy.bye by.
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-08-2015 at 08:54 AM.
03-08-2015, 08:54 AM
#849
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again did you miss the part:
(a) IN GENERAL.— Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—
03-08-2015, 09:03 AM
#850
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your assessment is 100% spot on. I keep seeing people talking about the "400 foot limit" which is a fantasy, there simply is no such thing for operations under section 336.