combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

[QUOTE=Duncman;12101101][QUOTE=combatpigg;12101073]

Go away, please.[/QUOTE
Well, here is more fantasy and dogma for "silent" to take issue with...http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/...rnias_pho.html
Since I see advocating AMA's decision to "embrace" FPV as a liberal stance, versus being content to maintain the status quo and shunning FPV activity [a conservative position] it naturally peaks my curiosity about how this relates to the political views of both leaders and members.
If you deny the existence of this connection, you simply have your head in the sand.

Silent-AV8R

Then this will blow your mind. I am a well known Liberal Leaning person when it comes to my politics, yet I am opposed to how the AMA has embraced the MR/drone community and failed to more aggressively define the differences between us and them. See the article I linked to above.

So, looks like another generalization bites the dust.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

You must be one of those folks who thinks that a "sample size of one" is all it takes to prove or disprove a point...?

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Ok guys, I got a couple of tickets about this thread getting a bit off topic when you all got to talking debt vs. deficit which was a political discussion that isn't allowed here on RCU. However, you all police yourselves and got back on track fairly quickly and I didn't need to take any actions here in thread. I just wanted to post a small reminder here though that political discussions aren't allowed on RCU and need to be avoided here. So why am I posting this reminder when you all policed yourselves?? Because of the nature of a political discussion. They are normally so volatile and can so easily get out of hand in a huge hurry, and that is one of the reasons why we don't allow them (other than the fact that they don't have anything to do with the RC hobbies). So if politics don't have a direct impact on the RC hobby world let's stay away from discussing it here guys.

Thanks a lot guys.

Ken

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

I thought the vast majority of long range FPV equipment is operating on the ham bands. Is that not correct?

For example:

http://www.getfpv.com/ezuhf-jr-module-transmitter.html

73

Silent-AV8R

There's that for sure, but then there is this, which is directed at the far more popular DJI set of products

https://fpvlr.com/store/

Sport_Pilot

I don't see how it is either liberal or conservative. Unless you consider anything new as non-traditional and thus not conservative in the older "conservatives are traditional" view point. As opposed to the newer definition as conservatives wish to conserve (IE limit) government. But the AMA is not government.

I am conservative politically and support the AMA for protecting those who wish to fly FPV.

KC Air

Thankfully so! I like airplanes, I don't like political bickering

Duncman

I second that, save it for another political forum.

Silent-AV8R

I was responding to a comment by another person who seems to think that this is a political based issue

TimJ

You say you don't like political bickering, but yet, the bias against multi-rotor aircraft are absurd and the excuses for treating Multi-Rotor pilots poorly are ridiculous. Acting like this is no different than the wet-behind-the-ears Multi-Rotor pilot ignorant of safety guidelines and rules.

Silent-AV8R

What I've said Tim is that I do not think that my opinion, or anyone else's for that matter, regarding drones, etc. has anything to do with their personal politics.

I have never proposed that MR pilots be treated poorly. What I HAVE been saying is that I think AMA has taken a misguided course in trying to embrace this community. My experience, as a MR owner and operator, is that most within that community do not care about the AMA, or our Safety Code. I feel strongly that AMA should have done more to distance their longer term member base from the newer crop of MR operators in order to draw a clearer line between us. As it is, we are now consistently lumped in with them, to our detriment.

SB142 was a perfect example of the result of this failure.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Where are we "consistently lumped in" with MR...and when? When I see stories about MR in the news, I never see other folks in the hobby lumped in, or even discussed. Wait, I take that back, when the AMA issues a press release, they talk about AMA members being responsible operators of aircraft, and how safety is our priority.

Guess I just keep seeing people say we're "lumped in", but I'm not sure when, and by whom. So far, it looks like it's just other folks in the hobby.

Duncman

Let me get this straight. MR's fly in the atmosphere, they are radio controlled, they are sold in Hobby Shops, a lot of fixed wing enthusiast's some of which are AMA members fly them and openly discuss them. What else do you expect the general public to do, as far as they are concerned MR's are a Model Aircraft and to them it is no more complicated than that, so by default MR's become a Model Aircraft and the media is all to willing to lump them in with MA. To expect the AMA to distance themselves from MR's would be an unwise strategy, it is going to happen whether you like it or not so you might as well embrace it and deal as best you can with it. Some control is better than none.

islandflyer

Isn't that what lumped in is? (So far, it looks like it's just other folks in the hobby) As opposed to being clearly identified as a different group, which then would not be "lumped in".

Silent-AV8R

It appears that most here have completely forgotten the original point of this thread, which was the proposed SB142 in California. That law made no distinction between my glider, your .40 sized sport flyer, or a foamie and a camera carrying multi-rotor when it came to applying the law. I guess most do not see that as lumping. I do.

Perhaps you are right, at this point maybe it is hopeless, we will all be put into the same bin since we stand on the ground and hold a transmitter in our hands. I think this is not a good thing, many here seem to see no issue with that. I hope you are right, but I fear you are wrong.

BTW, half the AMA's EC feels the same way, so it's not just me.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Hmmm....Why is it that after many decades of enjoying model aviation with little to no public outcry or government legislation (other than frequency control by the FCC), that our hobby is threatened by legislation in only the last few years?

Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

And this is where we DO have some control! IF the majority of us feel like a few of us here do, we can use our vote as our voice and make sure the AMA EC is not divided on this issue.

Astro

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Missing the context much? The comment was in response to the post above me...which was talking about being lumped into a group to our detriment, so my point was to ask by whom, and where is the detriment ? Obviously it's people in the hobby, so what? How is that to our detriment? In other words...is it the general public, is it the media..etc etc? Doesn't look like it is.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

is it your position that only our hobby is threatened by legislation? You do realize things change after say, 70 years or so right? Do you realize that the law is not static, that it evolves?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Threads will meander sometimes...it happens. The original point of the thread was noting a poorly crafted and ill thought out piece of legislation that was correctly shot down by the governor. In the context of the hobby, yes it was all looked at as one, as it should be since it's all under that umbrella. The problem was the one size fits all approach, and the hastily cobbled together proposal that really did nothing good for the public. The only useful purpose it served will be for the author to go back to her constituents and say see, I'm fighting the good fight, but those (insert political party here) just keep blocking progress!

As for you noting things might be helpless at this point, I would completely disagree. All applicable means/methods of aircraft will continue to fall under AMA, but I see that as good. We have a strong (yes I know that's debateable) advocate fighting on our behalf, nobody else is.

BTW, half wasn't enough to change that tide, and that was back then anyway. Do we know if all feel the same way today? We're in it for the long haul, I don't think there is anyway past that, nor is it feasible or realistic to change course at this point. Not a fatalistic way of thinking, nor am I throwing up my hands and saying oh well, lets go fly now, it's just reality. Is energy best spent trying to work with what we have and make it as successful as possible, or fighting a battle that can't be won? Time will tell I guess.

So now, let's go fly.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I don't understand your point.

I asked a simple question, meant to illicit responses and opinions from anyone who cared to comment.

My position is this:

traditional model aviation is threatened by legislation like it hasn't seen in its 70+ year existence. This is a fact. It is irrefutable.

There have been many changes and innovations in model aviation over the past 70+ years (from free flight and control line to RC to helicopters, jets, giant scale, etc.) with nary a whisper about legislation and intervention from the FAA and the Federal Government (again, with the exception of FCC frequency control).

My simple question was, "Why now?"

Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

UMMM...SB142 "lumped us in" and the creator of that SB was not "just other folks in the hobby"

I thought that was the whole point of this thread to begin with.

Astro

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Why not now? Isn't now a good time to deal with it? Should it have been done 10 years ago before these were in the news, or perhaps 10 years from now when the technology is even more amazing than it is now?

islandflyer

Keeping the whole quote so I don't get accused of removing the context. nor is it feasible or realistic to change course at this point
Is there any supporting evidence for declaring such a thing as a fact with such authority?
Many of us are of the opinion that this absolutely can be changed (and must be changed) with the appropriate changes in the composition of the elected positions in the AMA. It really is not that hard. The AMA is not such an great institution that it makes immovable decisions forever and ever! The Berlin wall fell, the USSR is gone, and changing the AMA's current misguided policy is minute next to these events, if there is a will to do so by the members.