time to stop the dromes..........NOW
03-08-2015, 10:28 AM
#853
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bear in mind that the replies you got assume operation in compliance with Sect 336, and fwiw it is unlikely IMHO that most modelers will buy into that. If one chooses to operate without the the sanction of the AMA (which may or may not have price tag attached to it, depending on who is speaking for the AMA), then he is subject to Part 107 in the proposed sUAS rules. Among all the rest of the horse manure therein is an altitude limit of 500' AGL.
03-08-2015, 10:48 AM
#854
Bear in mind that the replies you got assume operation in compliance with Sect 336, and fwiw it is unlikely IMHO that most modelers will buy into that. If one chooses to operate without the the sanction of the AMA (which may or may not have price tag attached to it, depending on who is speaking for the AMA), then he is subject to Part 107 in the proposed sUAS rules. Among all the rest of the horse manure therein is an altitude limit of 500' AGL.
03-08-2015, 10:54 AM
#855
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bear in mind that the replies you got assume operation in compliance with Sect 336, and fwiw it is unlikely IMHO that most modelers will buy into that. If one chooses to operate without the the sanction of the AMA (which may or may not have price tag attached to it, depending on who is speaking for the AMA), then he is subject to Part 107 in the proposed sUAS rules. Among all the rest of the horse manure therein is an altitude limit of 500' AGL.
So to be clear in order to "operate" under Sec. 336 you need to:
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;
(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;
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport)).
(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;
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport)).
(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
Just don't endanger the NAS and have fun.
03-08-2015, 10:59 AM
#856
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
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.
03-08-2015, 11:24 AM
#857
My Feedback: (551)
It is clear that we do not know what "within the programming of" means. Does anyone know of another activity that operates "within the programing of a CBO" for federal purposes? Has congress used that language before? What has experience shown that it means in that circumstance?
03-08-2015, 11:54 AM
#858
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct...but terms have to have their origin somewhere...AMA invented this term(poof...smoke a and mirrors) to benefit themselves despite the negative effect it might have on the model aviation community as a whole...Now we are just waiting to see how it sticks...sure stinks though...
03-08-2015, 11:56 AM
#859
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is clear that we do not know what "within the programming of" means. Does anyone know of another activity that operates "within the programing of a CBO" for federal purposes? Has congress used that language before? What has experience shown that it means in that circumstance?
As a hypothetical, say there were three CBO's that meet the FAA standard.
CBO 1. Requires membership in the CBO to be within the programming of.
CBO 2. Requires membership and a pilot training/certification to be within the programming of.
CBO 3. Says just follow our published "safety code" to be within the programming of.
Why would not all three be good for the purpose of Sec. 336?.
The issue is lack of choice and that could lead to exploitation by a monopoly CBO.
Last edited by bradpaul; 03-08-2015 at 03:16 PM. Reason: for clarity
03-08-2015, 12:39 PM
#860
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep in mind that Sec 339 does not set to requirement for "within the programming of" it leaves that up to the CBO.
As a hypothetical say there were three CBO's that meet the FAA standard.
1. Requires membership in the CBO to be within the programming of.
2. Requires membership and a pilot training/certification to be within the programming of.
3. Says just follow our published "safety code" to be within the programming of.
Why would not all three be good for the purpose of Sec. 336?.
The issue is lack of choice and that could lead to exploitation by a monopoly CBO.
the lSome ha
As a hypothetical say there were three CBO's that meet the FAA standard.
1. Requires membership in the CBO to be within the programming of.
2. Requires membership and a pilot training/certification to be within the programming of.
3. Says just follow our published "safety code" to be within the programming of.
Why would not all three be good for the purpose of Sec. 336?.
The issue is lack of choice and that could lead to exploitation by a monopoly CBO.
the lSome ha
"
1. Requires membership in the CBO to be within the programming of.
2. Requires membership and a pilot training/certification to be within the programming of.
3. Says just follow our published "safety code" to be within the programming of.
"
The decision is made and it favors free will. Except, of course, we may not endanger the NAS.
03-08-2015, 02:03 PM
#861
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Original post edited for clarity. BTW the AMA along with other groups has taken the FAA to court over "the interpretation".
Last edited by bradpaul; 03-08-2015 at 03:19 PM.
03-08-2015, 02:26 PM
#862
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with JohnShe, I couldn't take this guys post serious. I get so tired of people that post questions/ concerns that are so pooly written or confusing that its not even clear what they are asking! People are here to genuinely offer help, so respect that by taking an extra second to proof read your post for clarity before submitting it!
03-08-2015, 02:37 PM
#863
HoundDog, if you want pilot certification for modelers I don't understand why you would want people to operate under Sect 336, which disallows FAA from requiring it. AMA doesn't provide or require any remote semblance of pilot certification, unless you count the ability to send them a check or credit card number as qualifying. The other option magnanimously provided by FAA is to operate under Part 107, and that does require pilot certification, aircraft registration, etc., that you deem should be required for flying a model airplane in the NAS. Which way do you want it?
CJ:
Ounce again I'm advocating that people not flying under the CBO/AMA Prove they know the LAWS/RULES and prove it. This is to be sure if they aren't flying at a chartered club with guidance from other members so as to keep these individuals from interfering with maned air craft causing all of us to feeling the Rath of the FAA/NTSB. Nothing more nothing less.
2. AMA doesn't provide or require any remote semblance of pilot certification.
But on the other side of the coin Simply Put they should require at least some semblance of competency, because too many AMA members are not only Incompetent but down right "DANGERIOUS" when it comes to their ability to control their air craft. Again JMHO But U all know of whom I speak. Every club has a few. Their the Crashes, The bashers, and the guy every one talks about every time they get up to the flight line.
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-08-2015 at 03:05 PM.
03-08-2015, 04:19 PM
#864
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, a hypothesis is a testable supposition based on sound reasoning and evidence. Your hypothesis fails on reasoning and evidence.
03-08-2015, 07:22 PM
#865
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, it is not a suit. They have asked the court to review the interpretation. I expect nothing to come of it. Instead, it will be another waste of our membership dues.
Oh, a hypothesis is a testable supposition based on sound reasoning and evidence. Your hypothesis fails on reasoning and evidence.
Oh, a hypothesis is a testable supposition based on sound reasoning and evidence. Your hypothesis fails on reasoning and evidence.
hypothesis |hīˈpäθəsis|noun ( pl. -ses |-ˌsēz|)a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation : professionalastronomers attacked him for popularizing an unconfirmed hypothesis.• Philosophy a proposition made as a basis for reasoning, without any assumption of its truth.
Seems Brad's use passes the smell test...close enough is good enough...LOL
03-08-2015, 10:43 PM
#866
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is what the AMA has done:
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...rpretive-rule/
Here is the actual filing:
http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/upl...A_Petition.pdf
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...rpretive-rule/
Here is the actual filing:
http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/upl...A_Petition.pdf
03-09-2015, 05:05 AM
#867
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I looked...
hypothesis |hīˈpäθəsis|noun ( pl. -ses |-ˌsēz|)a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation : professionalastronomers attacked him for popularizing an unconfirmed hypothesis.• Philosophy a proposition made as a basis for reasoning, without any assumption of its truth.
Seems Brad's use passes the smell test...close enough is good enough...LOL
hypothesis |hīˈpäθəsis|noun ( pl. -ses |-ˌsēz|)a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation : professionalastronomers attacked him for popularizing an unconfirmed hypothesis.• Philosophy a proposition made as a basis for reasoning, without any assumption of its truth.
Seems Brad's use passes the smell test...close enough is good enough...LOL
03-09-2015, 06:39 AM
#868
I think Brad has presented his view in a well thought out and logical manner , and posts like yours do nothing to enhance the discussion . Is recreational trolling just a pastime for you , or are you some kind of professional ? Really John , I think we all know that words can be picked apart and parsed to misrepresent just about any viewpoint that the picker looks to push , but Brad's meaning and intent of his posts are crystal clear to me .
03-09-2015, 07:06 AM
#870
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be clear, I personally do not think it would be a good idea for the AMA to require membership as part of "within the programming of". However based on the wording of Sec. 336 their decision to make.
As stated previously the problem is lack of multiple CBO's so a modeler can make a choice based on competition in the marketplace.
As stated previously the problem is lack of multiple CBO's so a modeler can make a choice based on competition in the marketplace.
03-09-2015, 07:55 AM
#871
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Brad has presented his view in a well thought out and logical manner , and posts like yours do nothing to enhance the discussion . Is recreational trolling just a pastime for you , or are you some kind of professional ? Really John , I think we all know that words can be picked apart and parsed to misrepresent just about any viewpoint that the picker looks to push , but Brad's meaning and intent of his posts are crystal clear to me .
03-09-2015, 08:04 AM
#872
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not a suit for damages, merely a request for the court to review the FAA interpretation. But no matter what you call it, it is moot, pointless and a waste of our dues.
03-09-2015, 08:06 AM
#873
Not to worry , John , the ol sense of humor is doin just fine , thank you .... 
I just see no reason to behave like a kid who can't stop tellin fart jokes in biology class . Do you really see the need for comic relief while discussing toy airplanes ? 
you must be a REAL hoot at funerals , eh ???
03-09-2015, 08:39 AM
#874
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think John got his hypothesis confused with his theorem...LOL Just like he got confused about the hole in the ground... Now there is some humor...I just kill myself sometimes...
03-09-2015, 09:07 AM
#875
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to worry , John , the ol sense of humor is doin just fine , thank you .... I just see no reason to behave like a kid who can't stop tellin fart jokes in biology class . Do you really see the need for comic relief while discussing toy airplanes ? you must be a REAL hoot at funerals , eh ???