ira d

I see no need to outlaw RC flying within 5 miles of a airport, It may be a good idea to not let a new RC field be formed within 3 miles of larger airport but for the most part models and
full scale have got along well together. I do think the FAA needs to find out where all the RC sites are and let airports and pilots know where they are.

rgburrill

AMA should have kept it's position on FPV - that's what is causing all this mess and the llegal fees.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

A fence around a small airport is as useless as a "Screen Door in a Submarine". I'v never seen any small airport deny anyone the gate combo. U just have to say U want in to see some one, any and all requests are never denied. I'll bet if one were to look into who in congress authored the fence deal, they received a large campaign donation from the likes of Century Fence. JMHO and lots of time spent at a number of small airports.

OliverJacob

My Feedback: (12)

A fence would keep the deer out, we have quite a few here. So in the name of safety, they could really justify this.
I agree - the airport usually welcomes people. They are often potential customers or friends of customers. The FAA on the other hand would like to keep anybody out who has not been approved by them.

But a fence wouldn't keep bad guys out. It is pointless. And our rc planes can get stuck in it.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

O.J. I'm very familuar with Reedsburg airport (Right in Town) We did a lot of Owner assisted Annual Inspections an Toms Aviation right on the North side along Hwy 33. We also would go to Longleys resturant for some place to go for the proverbial $50 Burger. Their Buffet was great. Any way Reedsburg Wi Airport (C35) already has 3 miles of fencing around it

What Chartered AMA field do U fly at. only two found within zip code 53959

[TABLE="width: 700"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]-4106
[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



[TABLE="width: 700"]
[TR="bgcolor: #5D7B9D"]
[TD]Name[/TD]
[TD]Number[/TD]
[TD]Members[/TD]
[TD]Contact[/TD]
[TD]Info[/TD]
[TD]District[/TD]
[TD]*Intro Pilots[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #F7F6F3"]
[TD]REEDSBURG AREA FLYERS
Flying Site Details
0.00 miles[/TD]
[TD]1802[/TD]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD]STEPHEN HEGEDUS
Email Contact[/TD]
[TD]Phone: 262-210-5360
[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]CASTLE ROCK FUN FLYERS
Flying Site Details
17.90 miles[/TD]
[TD]3107[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]HARLOW GIERHART
Email Contact[/TD]
[TD]Phone: 608-847-4106
[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

OliverJacob

My Feedback: (12)

No, not the Reedsburg airport - there is a fence, but no rc flying field (there is a car track). The flying club is away from the airport, probably more then 5 miles.
Tom is a great guy and I got my private license at the flight school there.
I fly in Mauston (castle rock) and we are only a hand full of active pilots, the place is great because of the paved runway

Sport_Pilot

General Aviation is dying and the FAA is happy with that.

OliverJacob

My Feedback: (12)

They care more about commercial aviation, that is where the money is.
Now drones will be widely used in commercial applications soon, so there is a vast interest in these.
And our AMA wants to jump on that train, too. I hope they are not getting too far detached from rc flying

Sport_Pilot

General Aviation includes a segment of commercial aviation. They don't really care for that either.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Only because of PERCEIVED cost. I June of '70 I took my first flight lesson With the Flying Commanders out of UES. well It was $10/hr wet for an Aero Commander Darter (4 Place) plane. $5/Hr for the instructor. So it was $15/hr for instruction. Well I just went from $2.88/hr and 40 hrs / wk to $2/ hr and 55 hour weeks, Anyway when I left work as a Tool & Die Maker in Oct 2007 I was making $24+ per hour. So just checked and a 172 here in Mesa is (with sieam gages not Glass) is $130/hr and $60 for the Instructor + Tax about $220/hr. So divide $15 by $1.50 take home, and U get 1 hour of instruction for 10 hours of work back then. Now take $220 divided by $18 take home and U come up with 12 + hours of work per hour of instruction ... Back in WI it'a $107 and $46 + tax = $169/Hr 9.4 hrs for 1 hour of instruction ... So it's actually cheaper today (in the Mid West) then 45 years ago.

That's My MATH and I'm stick'n to it.

PBS_Rudder

Being a pilot retired I was on a committee involving airport problems with RC. This airport was having insurance problems. The insurance carrier stated that to acquire insurance the RCer's would have to go, so they got kicked off the airport property. This was not a AMA vs FAA problem it was a problem with an insurance carrier. I know that there is a 500 ft flying rule by FAA and the 400 ft rule by AMA standing for many years. Now modelers fly above 400 ft and the FAA can see a conflict. When I was flying my Glassair I would not want a model showing up in my wind shield so I agree with the FAA there has to be some kind of regs. on both sides to keep everything safe. Could make restricted fly zones to protect the RC and Airplanes. Just my thoughts.

BobbyMcGee

I see things differently ...

How about not allowing an airport to be built within 5 miles of an R/C field.

R/C RULES!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

If U care to See/Track planes trough the USA & the world in almost real time. There is a menu on the left and 9 down is MORE and the first under MORE is FLIGHT RADAR. It is really enlightening of the Number of Full Scale airplanes in the air every day. Check it out. Just open it around where U live and klick on any yellow plane it turns red with a tail of where it cae from then a panel opens on the left side and tells U what who altitude heading speed rate of accident/decent where coming to where going and times of depart and arriveal and which Radar which generated the info. WARNING ( can be very addicting and really consume your spare time). The second is LiveATC.met that lets U listen to tower and approach control facilities all over the world. Enjoy.

http://www.apachejctwx.com/weather2/...p?p=10&lang=en

http://www.liveatc.net/

OliverJacob

My Feedback: (12)

PBS, these regulations are already in place, as you even mentioned.
At a rural a/p - where a plane takes off or lands once an hour - there is no need to ban the rc pilots. We have a radio and a spotter.
And we do stay under 400' and we do not interfere with any plane landing, take off or in the traffic pattern.

Some pilots just make their own traffic pattern, such as flying across their runway at below 400'. You can not see them coming until they are already over our field.
Now who needs to be regulated, in your opinion?
Without creating a big fuss, I'd want our club to be in the charts. Then we could nicely talk to the person and point out why this is not a good idea

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

OliverJacob; as I've stated before Power lines/towers/ect are depicted on Sectional, WAC & on Terminal Area Charts too. Why Not R/C Fields.

But the real problem is going to and is the person flying some place other than a Chartered Field and not knowing that there are Rules/AMA Safety Rules and FAR's concerning where when wnd How TOY R/C may be operated.


I have stated this before and according to the PHX FSDO
(an open air assembly) can be as few a 2 people having a picnic.
FAR 91.119 (b) states that no plane can come closer than 1000'AGL to an occupied R/C Field.
That Said good luck getting the FAA to see your point if some Full Scale Plane at 100+ knots hits your TOY Airplane and Kills him self because he was too low over your field as stated by FAR 91.119 (b).
§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:
(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—
(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and
(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
[Docket No. 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91-311, 75 FR 5223, Feb. 1, 2010]

Sport_Pilot

The 500 foot regulation is for rural areas and is 500 feet from buildings or people. For a model field with multiple people the regulation is 1000 feet above the highest obstacle. Just as HD posted. There is no 400 foot regulation for model aircraft.

franklin_m

There are any number of Military Training Routes, VR's especially, that have aircraft on them at high speeds (420KIA or greater) and at altitudes as low as 100' AGL. Here's just three - routes can be up to 16 miles wide.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Yes there are Military Training Routes and they are well marked on Sectionals. There are also MOP's (Military Operations Areas) that cover hundereds of square miles but Every one has the freq's and phone numbers of the controling agency. With a simple phone call one can asertain weather the routes are active or Not. How many Low level training routes do U know of that come anywheres near a Chartered AMA R/C Field ... As always I say it's the R/C flyer that either (Knowingly or Un-knowling) flys at unresonable altitudes, usualy near populated and congested areas, Not out in the country side or Unpopluated areas, Is the Problem. This being the crux of the whole problem and there twice as many pepe flying some sort of R/C than there AMA members.

Being an AMA/CBO member doesn't mean U are inherently better but people that fly at AMA fields have a grater perspective of the right and wrong places and ways to fly our TOY airplanes. PERIOD again JMHO

franklin_m

I think it's an issue that (1) I wonder how many people see the line on the sectional and don't realize the actual route width can be quite a bit wider. (2) Just because there's a route width doesn't mean the aircraft are always inside it. For example, if I know I'm outside the structure (called a spillout), generally all I need to do is slow down to 250KIAS and proceed back into the structure then resume, and (3) I wonder how many folks actually call the numbers like you do.

phlpsfrnk

There's already a law;

PL-112 Sec 336 (a) (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)).

Lets try to get this one to work before we come up with another one.

Frank

OliverJacob

My Feedback: (12)

Franklin, we have some MOAs a few miles away. Needless to say that we have quite a few military aircraft flying at low altitudes, sometimes 'missing' the corridor. That is more of a reason to get an rc field marked on the charts so these guys know what area to avoid.
They do avoid flying over our airport, we are happy with them.

franklin_m

Oliver, I applaud you and your club's work to fully understand the airspace around you. Having hit a sparrow at 480KIAS, I can attest that any model aircraft can cause substantial damage to a jet on one of these routes, to the point of posing a severe risk to safety of flight (took mine in the windscreen, shattered the windscreen but didn't penetrate, made landing exceptionally difficult). I can only imagine what will happen to our hobby if one of our models is the cause of such an incident. With more of them out there, flown by people who unlike you don't do their due diligence, the risks are real and growing.

phlpsfrnk

Reese Airport (7I2), a public use airport that averages 20 operations per day. I wonder if the AMA (IAC) is in compliance with PL-112 Sec 336 and what manner of notification was provided?

Frank

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

" aircraft operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of an airport"
Frank:
With all due respect I don't believe this to be the Problem, Because everyone flying at and AMA site know the rules/SC/FAR's. The real problem is two fold
1.) The R/C flyer that either doesn't know of doesen't care that there are Rules/Safety Code/FAR's that prohibit/discourage their type and palce / Altitued of their flying of R/C TOY Aircraft.
2.) Neither the AMA nor anyone selling these R/C TOYs are trying to inform buyers/flyers that Rules/Safety Code/FAR's even exist. It's all about Sales and not that there are responsibilitys to operating R/C TOYs, much less it might end up in costly litigation or even jail time for the operator.. Again JMHO PLZ for give any spelling "errrors" as my spell checker has died.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

You can't be serious! I'll have call Bull hockey on that one.

Not sure how you come to believe that merely paying AMA $58 instills all that knowledge... must be that programming thing kicking in...

FWIW Some of the non-AMA members I know are far more knowledgeable than the average AMAers I know.