Proposed Drone Law in California
09-24-2015, 07:30 PM
#203
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
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.
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.
See the part of the sentence that says "I think"....that means it's my opinion, I didn't state it as fact as you did repeatedly in other threads. If you and the other one want to try to hone in on the word fact and context going forward, and distract from the conversation have at it. Guess the other threads died down eh?
I
09-24-2015, 07:33 PM
#204
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
There is another proposed drone law in California sitting on Browns desk awaiting his signature, if he hasn't already signed it. It provides a $5,000 fine and 6 months incarceration for anyone caught operating a Drone in a TFR. It also provides Law Enforcement release from liability from shooting a Drone down that threatens or enters a TFR area. There was not one dissenting vote in the legislature, so this one will likely fly. Though I'm not as well versed on the law as I should be, some of the concern's I have heard is that it is not definitive when that Drone can be shot done, that is left to the LEO's discretion. Our flying field is in the dry N. Calif. foothills, fire is a constant threat, does that mean that if one of our neighbors fields goes up and emergency personnel are on site that the local Sheriff can start blasting away at our airplanes since the FAA says all unmanned radio controlled aircraft are Drones and he has the law on his side that says it is his discretion if it is a threat? Personally I think this law a good thing, gives the authorities' the teeth they need to deal with this problem at the local level and if the Feds want a bite of the apple also, then fine, but what about Sheriff Bubba blasting away at a $4,000 IMAC Bird just because he thinks it a threat, or so he says, when all he is really doing is engaging in some expensive skeet shooting. Just a thought.
09-24-2015, 08:02 PM
#206
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
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
Ever hear of technology? In 70+ year period you're referring to in which period could you purchase an 8 core microcontroller running at 80MHz for $8 in single quantitiy? How about precision GPS devices that weigh less than 2oz and cost less than $100? How about inexpensive long range radio radio equipment? Considering Moore's law, it's intuitively obvious what the key drivers are here.
09-24-2015, 08:06 PM
#207
Not sure what you think you're going to change. The FAA has alredy defined model aircraft operations. The AMA can't chage that.
09-24-2015, 08:10 PM
#210
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the constant use of the word "fact" now when trying to rebut me, it's cute.
See the part of the sentence that says "I think"....that means it's my opinion, I didn't state it as fact as you did repeatedly in other threads. If you and the other one want to try to hone in on the word fact and context going forward, and distract from the conversation have at it. Guess the other threads died down eh?
I
See the part of the sentence that says "I think"....that means it's my opinion, I didn't state it as fact as you did repeatedly in other threads. If you and the other one want to try to hone in on the word fact and context going forward, and distract from the conversation have at it. Guess the other threads died down eh?
I
"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"
I see a lot more clearly how these debates are so rarely going in an intelligible direction: too many understand and and state things in an approximate manner...
If you really meant "I think", it should have read: "We're in it for the long haul, I don't think there is anyway past that, or that it is feasible or realistic to change course at this point"
Anyway, there are definitely ways to reverse the direction, provided the membership clearly declares its will to do so, and appropriately reminds the AMA leadership of the fact that the AMA is and association of members: this means the leadership is elected to represent them, and not to deliberately lead in a direction they chose unilaterally (especially with such a slim margin).
If there is any evidence anywhere that the membership at large has chosen or approved this direction by a majority, I will absolutely accept that as a legitimate representative choice of policy.
Based on the many conversations I have had, such is simply not the case, but I am certainly open to any evidence to the contrary.
In the mean while, I will return to where my time can be spent more productively, advocating:
1- for the members to gain more awareness in AMA's misguided direction (my opinion share by many - apparently including Silent Flyer).
2- for the members to vote for VP's who actually represent them, their interests and concerns (which is not the case presently based on the many conversations I have had with many members)
09-24-2015, 08:15 PM
#211
OUR hobby (traditional aeromodeling), is no more a threat to the safety of the public now as it was 40 years ago. That is why I think it is ludicrous for the AMA to try and embrace this NEW technology. Having internal struggles and prejudices INSIDE our hobby when new technology surfaces (i.e control line vs. RC and fixed wing vs. rotary wing) is one thing, when these new technologies put our issues on the six o clock news because they are infringing on others' rights, it becomes a whole different issue! (AND a different hobby, IMO).
Astro
09-24-2015, 08:22 PM
#212
See, that is my point!
OUR hobby (traditional aeromodeling), is no more a threat to the safety of the public now as it was 40 years ago.
What a load of total BS. How many 200mph turbine jets were there 40 years ago?
That is why I think it is ludicrous for the AMA to try and embrace this NEW technology. Having internal struggles and prejudices INSIDE our hobby when new technology surfaces (i.e control line vs. RC and fixed wing vs. rotary wing) is one thing, when these new technologies put our issues on the six o clock news because they are infringing on others' rights, it becomes a whole different issue! (AND a different hobby, IMO).
That sounds like a great idea. Lets regulate model aircraft based on public perception.
Astro
OUR hobby (traditional aeromodeling), is no more a threat to the safety of the public now as it was 40 years ago.
What a load of total BS. How many 200mph turbine jets were there 40 years ago?
That is why I think it is ludicrous for the AMA to try and embrace this NEW technology. Having internal struggles and prejudices INSIDE our hobby when new technology surfaces (i.e control line vs. RC and fixed wing vs. rotary wing) is one thing, when these new technologies put our issues on the six o clock news because they are infringing on others' rights, it becomes a whole different issue! (AND a different hobby, IMO).
That sounds like a great idea. Lets regulate model aircraft based on public perception.
Astro
09-24-2015, 08:28 PM
#213
Ever hear of technology? In 70+ year period you're referring to in which period could you purchase an 8 core microcontroller running at 80MHz for $8 in single quantitiy? How about precision GPS devices that weigh less than 2oz and cost less than $100? How about inexpensive long range radio radio equipment? Considering Moore's law, it's intuitively obvious what the key drivers are here.
Regards,
Astro
Last edited by astrohog; 09-24-2015 at 08:53 PM.
09-24-2015, 08:36 PM
#214
Yes, technology advances. It has advanced so far and so fast that in just a few years, anybody can fly a powerful computer whenever, wherever and however they like. For the life of me, I still cannot figure out how this is considered model aviation and why the AMA thinks it should be embraced by them.
Regards,
Astro
Regards,
Astro
09-24-2015, 08:43 PM
#215
What a load of total BS. How many 200mphturbine jets were there 40 years ago?
That sounds like a great idea. Lets regulatemodel aircraft based on public perception.
Did you just crawl out from under a rock? That is precisely what is happening right now!
Astro
09-24-2015, 08:50 PM
#216
I will not repeat myself AGAIN for your pleasure, Crispy. You simply can't, or refuse to, comprehend the written word.
Astro
09-24-2015, 09:40 PM
#218
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. Not sure why you are trying to get me to answer any questions about any FAA AC numbers. Quid quo pro bro, show me where I ever referred to any FAA AC docs or said the AMA was embracing anything outside the scope of any of them.
I will not repeat myself AGAIN for your pleasure, Crispy. You simply can't, or refuse to, comprehend the written word.
Astro
I will not repeat myself AGAIN for your pleasure, Crispy. You simply can't, or refuse to, comprehend the written word.
Astro
09-24-2015, 11:32 PM
#219
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-24-2015, 11:36 PM
#220
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contact your District VP. Ask him directly if the AMA EC is considering a category of membership to cover "intentional pilots". People who plan to operate their RC aircraft not for purely hobby or recreation but rather for a commercial non-hobby use. That is clearly outside both the scope of Section 336 and AC 91-57A.
09-24-2015, 11:52 PM
#221
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And some fun tid-bits from the past few EC meetings:
Here's their website, notice the complete lack of anyone who is even remotely associated with traditional RC modeling: http://uavus.org/about-uavus/
Just a few more data points in the wind.
During a conference call with CLS it was noted that AMA is not positioning themselves in the small UAS community as the guys with the solution. We are still getting lumped in with the “bad actors”. Hanson feels the best tool we have to counter this is the KBYF program. Nothing has ever given AMA the kind of standing in the communities (political and aviation) as this campaign; we must continue to waive this banner. May 16, 2015 meeting
a. Special Interest Groups (Appendix)
The committee received a request for special interest group status from the Association of small Unmanned Aerial Systems (AsUAS). A. Argenio and E. Williams are personally involved and have spoken with numerous EC members. They would like to bring these individuals into the community, engage them more, give them the opportunity to develop competitions, and the ability to participate in the governance of their community. May 16, 2015
The committee received a request for special interest group status from the Association of small Unmanned Aerial Systems (AsUAS). A. Argenio and E. Williams are personally involved and have spoken with numerous EC members. They would like to bring these individuals into the community, engage them more, give them the opportunity to develop competitions, and the ability to participate in the governance of their community. May 16, 2015
Here's their website, notice the complete lack of anyone who is even remotely associated with traditional RC modeling: http://uavus.org/about-uavus/
Just a few more data points in the wind.
