Are you ready to register your aircraft?
10-18-2015, 03:02 PM
#76
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
The AMA has thrown almost 80 years of member support and history under the bus, just so they could embrace the drone market. It was driven by dollars, period.
I don't see that a bit, IMO
Regarding registration, I would have no problem paying a fee to a government agency in exchange for a "tail number" in exchange for being left alone to fly fixed wing, line of sight, traditional RC aircraft.
I don't see that a bit, IMO
Regarding registration, I would have no problem paying a fee to a government agency in exchange for a "tail number" in exchange for being left alone to fly fixed wing, line of sight, traditional RC aircraft.
10-18-2015, 03:08 PM
#77
That document was published by the AMA.
My question was asking whether the FAA has officially designated the AMA as CBO?
The FAA does reference a CBO in AC 91-57A, but does not specifically name the AMA.
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...mentID/1028086
My question was asking whether the FAA has officially designated the AMA as CBO?
The FAA does reference a CBO in AC 91-57A, but does not specifically name the AMA.
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...mentID/1028086
Nor will they in a document like that.
10-18-2015, 03:18 PM
#78
What's even more interesting, is look at the language used by the AMA...they call themselves "the" CBO...as if they want to be the only one. Clearly FAA doesn't think there's just one, as they use "groups" (plural)...and refer to "others that meet the statutory definition." So FAA is leaving door wide open for competitors to AMA.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_..._spec_rule.pdf
10-18-2015, 03:29 PM
#80
" Personally " speaking, I would have to say more at risk. But also I have to say and speaking from experience with the FAA, who the hell is going to police the hobby 
They can not even do the job that is assigned to them now !
Also, I really wish somebody would explain to me how what started out as QUAD COPTERS, has now spilled over to every RC model aircraft being DRONE labeled.
Quite a number of years ago I considered applying for a position that was being offered by our Federal Government / Military. They were looking for real life civilian pilots with radio controlled aircraft experience. The positions being offered was to fly " DRONES " for the military.
The DRONES that you would be flying were radio controlled AIRPLANES, not QUAD COPTERS!
So just how in the hell did this DRONE label spill over onto every type of radio controlled aircraft.
They can not even do the job that is assigned to them now !Also, I really wish somebody would explain to me how what started out as QUAD COPTERS, has now spilled over to every RC model aircraft being DRONE labeled.
Quite a number of years ago I considered applying for a position that was being offered by our Federal Government / Military. They were looking for real life civilian pilots with radio controlled aircraft experience. The positions being offered was to fly " DRONES " for the military.
The DRONES that you would be flying were radio controlled AIRPLANES, not QUAD COPTERS!
So just how in the hell did this DRONE label spill over onto every type of radio controlled aircraft.
I can only assume that I am getting stupid In my old age as this is really starting to confuse me. Perhaps I will go back to building and running radio controlled cars and boats. At least I know what their label means. 
Last edited by NorfolkSouthern; 10-18-2015 at 03:32 PM.
10-18-2015, 05:05 PM
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-18-2015, 05:14 PM
#82
My Feedback: (26)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
everything i buy is used guns planes cars women screw all our laws>>
10-18-2015, 06:12 PM
#83
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have legislatures all over the country writing and passing or attempting to pass laws regulating "drones" and tomorrow the DOT will be making an announcement about something that may well affect our hobby.
Ask yourself this? "Since AMA embraced what the public and lawmakers call 'drones' (quads) and FPV, is our hobby generally more at risk of regulation or less at risk?"
Ask yourself this? "Since AMA embraced what the public and lawmakers call 'drones' (quads) and FPV, is our hobby generally more at risk of regulation or less at risk?"
had AMA publicly shunned drones, our hobby would be "left alone"), to
put up or shut up.
What proof, or evidence, do any of you have to make that connection?
I know one or all of you will say it is obvious, but that ain't gonna cut it.
Let' see the smoking gun, not the smoke and mirrors.
10-18-2015, 06:24 PM
#84
I think it is time for franklin_m, combatpigg, or astrofog (since all three subscribe to the idea that,
had AMA publicly shunned drones, our hobby would be "left alone"), to
put up or shut up.
What proof, or evidence, do any of you have to make that connection?
I know one or all of you will say it is obvious, but that ain't gonna cut it.
Let' see the smoking gun, not the smoke and mirrors.
had AMA publicly shunned drones, our hobby would be "left alone"), to
put up or shut up.
What proof, or evidence, do any of you have to make that connection?
I know one or all of you will say it is obvious, but that ain't gonna cut it.
Let' see the smoking gun, not the smoke and mirrors.
Not possible. Sorry.
Regards,
Astro
10-18-2015, 07:35 PM
#85
My point is that by not saying "drones" are not part of our "programming", the AMA linked forever hobby flying with drone flying in the mind of the public, legislators, and/or the media. Subtle distinctions are lost on these groups, as evidenced by the sensationalized reporting. I think it would have been a much stronger public position had AMA not embraced drones, as there would be a clear bright line to the public, legislators, and the media.
Oh, and for proof of pending legislation, here's just one place to look: http://uavs.insct.org/
10-18-2015, 08:05 PM
#87
I think it is time for franklin_m, combatpigg, or astrofog (since all three subscribe to the idea that,
had AMA publicly shunned drones, our hobby would be "left alone"), to
put up or shut up.
What proof, or evidence, do any of you have to make that connection?
I know one or all of you will say it is obvious, but that ain't gonna cut it.
Let' see the smoking gun, not the smoke and mirrors.
had AMA publicly shunned drones, our hobby would be "left alone"), to
put up or shut up.
What proof, or evidence, do any of you have to make that connection?
I know one or all of you will say it is obvious, but that ain't gonna cut it.
Let' see the smoking gun, not the smoke and mirrors.
This is where you can find irrefutable proof about things that have never taken their course in our reality.
Otherwise, you will need to exercise some degree of common sense to believe in what I do.
Since you were an outspoken supporter of the PPP, let that speak for itself your powers of reason, forward thinking and judgement.
10-18-2015, 08:36 PM
#89
10-18-2015, 08:51 PM
#90
Nope, I refuse to believe they are that stupid or immune to public ridicule. Not the folks who they ultimately answer to, at least.
Nobody with a room temperature IQ and any self respect could confuse what I fly with a drone.
You can make a drone out of a large Party Balloon or a discarded cardboard box, but that does not make balloons and common household garbage, DRONES.
Nobody with a room temperature IQ and any self respect could confuse what I fly with a drone.
You can make a drone out of a large Party Balloon or a discarded cardboard box, but that does not make balloons and common household garbage, DRONES.
10-19-2015, 03:13 AM
#91
Hi Mongo , While I will preface this with the statement that I know the news usually gets the facts mixed up , Both CBS and NBC reported this morning that it is the FAA who is enacting the registration requirement with no mention of the DOT .
Have anyone of you gents seen news reports naming the FAA rather than the DOT as being behind this ?
10-19-2015, 03:48 AM
#92
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
804...do you believe in "Anti Matter" and "Alternate Universes"...?
This is where you can find irrefutable proof about things that have never taken their course in our reality.
Otherwise, you will need to exercise some degree of common sense to believe in what I do.
Since you were an outspoken supporter of the PPP, let that speak for itself your powers of reason, forward thinking and judgement.
This is where you can find irrefutable proof about things that have never taken their course in our reality.
Otherwise, you will need to exercise some degree of common sense to believe in what I do.
Since you were an outspoken supporter of the PPP, let that speak for itself your powers of reason, forward thinking and judgement.
You've got nothing.
As always.
10-19-2015, 04:00 AM
#93
Nope, I refuse to believe they are that stupid or immune to public ridicule. Not the folks who they ultimately answer to, at least.
Nobody with a room temperature IQ and any self respect could confuse what I fly with a drone.
You can make a drone out of a large Party Balloon or a discarded cardboard box, but that does not make balloons and common household garbage, DRONES.
Nobody with a room temperature IQ and any self respect could confuse what I fly with a drone.
You can make a drone out of a large Party Balloon or a discarded cardboard box, but that does not make balloons and common household garbage, DRONES.
Read their record of controller reports of UAV violations. Plenty of model airplanes mentioned in that. They understand your distinction, they just don't care.
10-19-2015, 04:01 AM
#94
Hi Mongo , While I will preface this with the statement that I know the news usually gets the facts mixed up , Both CBS and NBC reported this morning that it is the FAA who is enacting the registration requirement with no mention of the DOT .
Have anyone of you gents seen news reports naming the FAA rather than the DOT as being behind this ?
10-19-2015, 04:11 AM
#95
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What? That there are possible state and location actions in work to regulate drones? Heck, AMA admits that on their website. As for other connections, I merely asked a question. Do people feel better about the future of the hobby since AMA chose to allow FPV and embraced drones or do they feel about it's future? Simple question, no "proof" required.
My point is that by not saying "drones" are not part of our "programming", the AMA linked forever hobby flying with drone flying in the mind of the public, legislators, and/or the media. Subtle distinctions are lost on these groups, as evidenced by the sensationalized reporting. I think it would have been a much stronger public position had AMA not embraced drones, as there would be a clear bright line to the public, legislators, and the media.
Oh, and for proof of pending legislation, here's just one place to look: http://uavs.insct.org/
My point is that by not saying "drones" are not part of our "programming", the AMA linked forever hobby flying with drone flying in the mind of the public, legislators, and/or the media. Subtle distinctions are lost on these groups, as evidenced by the sensationalized reporting. I think it would have been a much stronger public position had AMA not embraced drones, as there would be a clear bright line to the public, legislators, and the media.
Oh, and for proof of pending legislation, here's just one place to look: http://uavs.insct.org/
Your question is not just simple, but simple minded. "People", as in the"public", don't know about the
AMA. No connection there. Sorry.
To this day, I have still not seen any
media or public or legislative or regulatory action
linked specifically to AMA's position on drones.
AMA says to fly drones safely , that's the position.
The drone problem is because some people don't
follow that advice.
Any new regs are because of that, not AMA's
"embracing" of drones.
Again, I challenge you, combatpigg, or astrofog
to prove otherwise.
10-19-2015, 04:14 AM
#97
And to the public, and to legislators, and to the media. On the other hand, had AMA not linked "hobby" flying and quads by embracing them, it would have been much easier to draw a distinction. AMA went after membership $$. I expect that by this time next year we'll see tens of thousands of drone buyers become AMA members. Yeah right.
10-19-2015, 04:14 AM
#98
It is either the lamestream media's attempt to sensationalize the story stating the DOT is registering, instead of the FAA, or just their own ignorance in not knowing the facts.
Although it's not hard to imagine the government wasting millions of dollars to "create" another agency/department within the DOT to address this.
Although it's not hard to imagine the government wasting millions of dollars to "create" another agency/department within the DOT to address this.
10-19-2015, 04:21 AM
#99
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-19-2015, 04:45 AM
#100
And to the public, and to legislators, and to the media. On the other hand, had AMA not linked "hobby" flying and quads by embracing them, it would have been much easier to draw a distinction. AMA went after membership $$. I expect that by this time next year we'll see tens of thousands of drone buyers become AMA members. Yeah right.