WAKE UP AMA. Another field closed!!
11-08-2015, 12:48 PM
#1
WAKE UP AMA. Another field closed!!
Dear AMA,
How many more AMA sanctioned fields will have to be closed before you end this silly quest to protect drone flyers at all costs? Just lost NVRC because the local government can't distinguish between a drone and a model RC plane flown at an AMA field. There is a difference between these two hobbies and you need to start spending time and money differentiating between the two. Tell me, how does participating in the FAA Drone Registration ARC all last week get anywhere near us being to be able to protect the fields we fly at? It doesn't and you know it. If AMA can't even protect their own fields what's the point of membership? You're being out witted in Washington and it shows! Just look at the closed signs on the field. Yikes!! and I am not even a member of the club, but I have friends who are.... GOOD GRIEF!
Ken Dunlap
How many more AMA sanctioned fields will have to be closed before you end this silly quest to protect drone flyers at all costs? Just lost NVRC because the local government can't distinguish between a drone and a model RC plane flown at an AMA field. There is a difference between these two hobbies and you need to start spending time and money differentiating between the two. Tell me, how does participating in the FAA Drone Registration ARC all last week get anywhere near us being to be able to protect the fields we fly at? It doesn't and you know it. If AMA can't even protect their own fields what's the point of membership? You're being out witted in Washington and it shows! Just look at the closed signs on the field. Yikes!! and I am not even a member of the club, but I have friends who are.... GOOD GRIEF!
Ken Dunlap
11-08-2015, 01:36 PM
#2
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for your loss, Ken. I hope you can find another site, and having been 'there' I know it won't be easy.
Tragic irony is that we have a basic need for improved flying sites (for runways and safe flyover areas, etc.) to enjoy our hobby/sport while the irresponsible drone operators that are putting them in jeopardy are getting all the investment, attention and support from AMA have no need for them.
Tragic irony is that we have a basic need for improved flying sites (for runways and safe flyover areas, etc.) to enjoy our hobby/sport while the irresponsible drone operators that are putting them in jeopardy are getting all the investment, attention and support from AMA have no need for them.
11-08-2015, 02:42 PM
#4
Sorry to hear that NVRC's closed - I was just there this past winter with the "freezer" fun fly, had a lotta fun.
Idiot politicians...
Idiot politicians...
11-08-2015, 05:00 PM
#7
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Why bother with facts or specifics, it's easier to tell a tiny part of the story, and then try to lay the blame for this at the feet of the AMA. If it wasn't so sad it would be funny, but the ignorance when it comes to this topic (and ALWAYS blaming the AMA) is just pathetic.
11-08-2015, 05:34 PM
#8
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: baton rouge 70811,
LA
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we have pay ama they should take up for every cub and member of ama . it looks like they are on the wrong the side the money they spend discussion with faa they should not rise our dues most cubs fly planes hels. sorry about that cub ,with all that said .ama dont care about you are me all they care about is our money
11-08-2015, 09:08 PM
#9
My Feedback: (2)
we have pay ama they should take up for every cub and member of ama . it looks like they are on the wrong the side the money they spend discussion with faa they should not rise our dues most cubs fly planes hels. sorry about that cub ,with all that said .ama dont care about you are me all they care about is our money
11-08-2015, 11:21 PM
#10
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is the North Virginia RC field in Fairfax, VA
Fairfax County, Virginia has ordered Northern Virginia Radio Control (NVRC) to close their club field in response to this language in the FAA's AC97-51A
While NVRC's field at Poplar Ford Park is outside of the 15 mile FRZ around Washington, it is located within the 30 mile SFRA, also centered on Washington.
The county decided that the club's operations at the park were illegal and shut them down.
There are 8 other AMA clubs operating inside the SFRA, as of this weekend they are still operating. They are located in Maryland or in other counties in northern Virginia.
While NVRC's field at Poplar Ford Park is outside of the 15 mile FRZ around Washington, it is located within the 30 mile SFRA, also centered on Washington.
The county decided that the club's operations at the park were illegal and shut them down.
There are 8 other AMA clubs operating inside the SFRA, as of this weekend they are still operating. They are located in Maryland or in other counties in northern Virginia.
11-09-2015, 04:11 AM
#11
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
NVRC Field Update
NVRC Field Remains Closed
I sent our County Park official an email letting him know about our status. As of today, I did not receive a reply. I sent an email to Rich Hanson asking about his emails that were sent to the FAA asking for clarification/support to show the County that the intent is not to close down any AMA fields. I am waiting for a reply. I will reach out to them again tomorrow and as soon as I hear something I will let everyone know. The field is closed because of the interpretation by the County that we should not be flying within the SFRA zone which was extended from 15nm to 30nm. Other AMA clubs in the area are open that are within that zone but are not in Fairfax County. Our relationship with the County has been excellent and we have been good occupants of the NVRC field at Poplar Ford Park. I am confident that we will be able to show the County that AMA fields were not intended to be part of this new advisory and we will get back in the air. If you have any information that can be beneficial, please let me know. Your cooperation and patience are appreciated as we work through this situation.
Thanks!
Gary Quinn
President, NVRC
Also of interest, the club shared this park with horse owners/riders, who complained that the aircraft spooked the horses. OP also conveniently left off the official reason why the club was closed, that being the language in AC 91-57A. The only thing absent from this misdirected rant is a THANK OBAMA meme. But ya, this is clearly the fault of the AMA.
NVRC Field Remains Closed
I sent our County Park official an email letting him know about our status. As of today, I did not receive a reply. I sent an email to Rich Hanson asking about his emails that were sent to the FAA asking for clarification/support to show the County that the intent is not to close down any AMA fields. I am waiting for a reply. I will reach out to them again tomorrow and as soon as I hear something I will let everyone know. The field is closed because of the interpretation by the County that we should not be flying within the SFRA zone which was extended from 15nm to 30nm. Other AMA clubs in the area are open that are within that zone but are not in Fairfax County. Our relationship with the County has been excellent and we have been good occupants of the NVRC field at Poplar Ford Park. I am confident that we will be able to show the County that AMA fields were not intended to be part of this new advisory and we will get back in the air. If you have any information that can be beneficial, please let me know. Your cooperation and patience are appreciated as we work through this situation.
Thanks!
Gary Quinn
President, NVRC
Also of interest, the club shared this park with horse owners/riders, who complained that the aircraft spooked the horses. OP also conveniently left off the official reason why the club was closed, that being the language in AC 91-57A. The only thing absent from this misdirected rant is a THANK OBAMA meme. But ya, this is clearly the fault of the AMA.
11-09-2015, 06:19 AM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: West Haverstraw,
NY
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rockland County New York passed some drone legislation this year. Because of our clubs good standing, we fly on a closed landfill and do an air show each year, we were able to deal with the politicians directly. Their intent was to curb the types of reckless activity we see on the news. We reminded them of how and where we fly. Now keep in mind we are across from the Hudson River and there is a big marina, a county park and last but not least an active heliport. This was our 7th year and we still exist without problems. I believe one biggest reasons is because we welcome the public not only to our air show, but we always have a trainer ready to offer visitors a chance to fly and to spectate. Our Town sees us as a positive and they really promote the air show. Last August they gave out 1100 hot dogs to the public for free. I honestly think we try our best to show people how great this hobby is.
Now while the legislation didn't hurt the two clubs in Rockland County, as club president I went to each public hearing to hear the public comments and offer an opinion if I could. Before one of meetings, I spoke to a County Legislator, I went on about the AMA Safety Code and how we fly at the club fields. The lawmaker reponded with "what's the AMA?". That's when I realized that we modelers really needed to reach out to the public, be it an air show, school projects or just go to our Town Hall meetings and talk about the club during the public comment portion. This pleases our Town Supervisor because of the big crowd we get each summer at the air show, and the good use of closed landfill.
While we have no problems with people flying quads, we do not allow FPV at the field. In past threads I was beaten up about that rule by some people. None the less, because of our location and what surrounds us we have no regrets. A few months ago we were paid a visit by the FBI. It seems that someone crashed a "drone" at a nuclear power plant that we can see from our flying field. We made it clear that we don't support that facet of "model aviation." We also stressed the fact that while we need a runway for our planes but a "drone" can take off from anywhere.
All I can say is that I think more clubs will lose flying fields due to negative fall out. I think that it's too late for the AMA to reverse it's position, and even if they did it wouldn't matter much. All we can do is just try and show people that we are reponsible and not a danger or risk to public safety. Each field that is lost is a major blow.
Now while the legislation didn't hurt the two clubs in Rockland County, as club president I went to each public hearing to hear the public comments and offer an opinion if I could. Before one of meetings, I spoke to a County Legislator, I went on about the AMA Safety Code and how we fly at the club fields. The lawmaker reponded with "what's the AMA?". That's when I realized that we modelers really needed to reach out to the public, be it an air show, school projects or just go to our Town Hall meetings and talk about the club during the public comment portion. This pleases our Town Supervisor because of the big crowd we get each summer at the air show, and the good use of closed landfill.
While we have no problems with people flying quads, we do not allow FPV at the field. In past threads I was beaten up about that rule by some people. None the less, because of our location and what surrounds us we have no regrets. A few months ago we were paid a visit by the FBI. It seems that someone crashed a "drone" at a nuclear power plant that we can see from our flying field. We made it clear that we don't support that facet of "model aviation." We also stressed the fact that while we need a runway for our planes but a "drone" can take off from anywhere.
All I can say is that I think more clubs will lose flying fields due to negative fall out. I think that it's too late for the AMA to reverse it's position, and even if they did it wouldn't matter much. All we can do is just try and show people that we are reponsible and not a danger or risk to public safety. Each field that is lost is a major blow.
Last edited by bruceal; 11-09-2015 at 03:18 PM.
11-09-2015, 06:49 AM
#14
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wonderful City of Los Angeles just passed a new law that codifies their misinterpretation of AC 91-57A and the AMA Safety Code. Among the highlights:
1) No FPV at all, even with a spotter as allowed by the AMA
2) 400 foot hard altitude cap everywhere in the City
3) No flying within 5 miles of any airport with a tower without express permission
4) No night flying. Period.
This effectively ends some long time activities within the City limits and jeopardizes more than one long time flying site. It also ends soaring in the City and stops night flying at a few well attended helicopter events.
But at least they stopped short of a total ban. So I guess that is "good" news.
1) No FPV at all, even with a spotter as allowed by the AMA
2) 400 foot hard altitude cap everywhere in the City
3) No flying within 5 miles of any airport with a tower without express permission
4) No night flying. Period.
This effectively ends some long time activities within the City limits and jeopardizes more than one long time flying site. It also ends soaring in the City and stops night flying at a few well attended helicopter events.
But at least they stopped short of a total ban. So I guess that is "good" news.
11-09-2015, 09:13 AM
#15
I agree that the drone operation is affecting the public opinion of RC flying. I think AMA should only be concerned about AMA members flying, club accepted aircraft, at all AMA authorized flying fields. Let the FFA handle all RC flying activities (drones) in unauthorized areas, they are not likely to be AMA members anyway. If they are AMA members, let them pay for their careless disregard for the law.
Rich
Rich
Last edited by jwrich; 11-09-2015 at 09:16 AM.
11-09-2015, 10:48 AM
#16
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a minor point, the AMA does not sanction, authorize, charter, approve, inspect, or in any other manner recognize a flying site beyond issuing a certificate of insurance to the site owner at the request of an AMA Chartered club. And the club has to pay for it.
Semantics matter in this discussion and it needs to be clearly understood that AMA really has nothing to do with flying sites. Yes, they do have suggested field layouts, etc. but no club, or anyone else, is required to use those suggestions.
Semantics matter in this discussion and it needs to be clearly understood that AMA really has nothing to do with flying sites. Yes, they do have suggested field layouts, etc. but no club, or anyone else, is required to use those suggestions.
11-09-2015, 12:50 PM
#17
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Georgetown, KY
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we have pay ama they should take up for every cub and member of ama . it looks like they are on the wrong the side the money they spend discussion with faa they should not rise our dues most cubs fly planes hels. sorry about that cub ,with all that said .ama dont care about you are me all they care about is our money
11-09-2015, 12:57 PM
#18
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Georgetown, KY
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wonderful City of Los Angeles just passed a new law that codifies their misinterpretation of AC 91-57A and the AMA Safety Code. Among the highlights:
1) No FPV at all, even with a spotter as allowed by the AMA
2) 400 foot hard altitude cap everywhere in the City
3) No flying within 5 miles of any airport with a tower without express permission
4) No night flying. Period.
This effectively ends some long time activities within the City limits and jeopardizes more than one long time flying site. It also ends soaring in the City and stops night flying at a few well attended helicopter events.
But at least they stopped short of a total ban. So I guess that is "good" news.
1) No FPV at all, even with a spotter as allowed by the AMA
2) 400 foot hard altitude cap everywhere in the City
3) No flying within 5 miles of any airport with a tower without express permission
4) No night flying. Period.
This effectively ends some long time activities within the City limits and jeopardizes more than one long time flying site. It also ends soaring in the City and stops night flying at a few well attended helicopter events.
But at least they stopped short of a total ban. So I guess that is "good" news.
- we rarely have an FPV at our field
- we almost never fly above 400 ft
- we're not within 5 miles of an airport w/tower
- I don't know of anybody who flies at night at our field
The law passed by the City of L.A. doesn't sound so bad, considering it addresses airfields in a crowded city environment. (I'm about to get flamed for saying this!)
Last edited by oliveDrab; 11-09-2015 at 01:07 PM.
11-09-2015, 01:28 PM
#19
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Rockland County New York passed some drone legislation this year. Because of our clubs good standing, we fly on a closed landfill and do an air show each year, we were able to deal with the politicians directly. Their intent was to curb the types of reckless activity we see on the news. We reminded them of how and where we fly. Now keep in mind we are across from the Hudson River and there is a big marina, a county park and last but not least an active heliport. This was our 7th year and we still exist without problems. I believe one biggest reasons is because we welcome the public not only to our air show, but we always have a trainer ready to offer visitors a chance to fly and to spectate. Our Town sees us as a positive and they really promote the air show, last August they gave out 1100 hot dogs to the public for free. I honestly think we try our best to show people how great this hobby is.
Now while the legislation didn't hurt the two clubs in Rockland County, as club president I went to each public hearing to hear the public comments and offer an opinion if I could. Before one of meetings, I spoke to a County Legislator, I went on about the AMA Safety Code and how we fly at the club fields. The lawmaker reponded with "what's the AMA?". That's when I realized that we modelers really needed to reach out to the public, be it an air show, school projects or just go to our Town Hall meetings and talk about the club during the public comment portion. This pleases our Town Supervisor because of the big crowd we get each summer at the air show, and the good use of closed landfill.
While we have no problems with people flying quads, we do not allow FPV at the field. In past threads I was beaten up about that rule by some people. None the less, because of our location and what surrounds us we have no regrets. A few months ago we were paid a visit by the FBI. It seems that someone crashed a "drone" at a nuclear power plant that we can see from our flying field. We made it clear that we don't support that facet of "model aviation." We also stressed the fact that while we need a runway for our planes but a "drone" can take off from anywhere.
All I can say is that I think more clubs will lose flying fields due to negative fall out. I think that it's too late for the AMA to reverse it's position, and even if they did it wouldn't matter much. All we can do is just try and show people that we are reponsible and not a danger or risk to public safety. Each field that is lost is a major blow.
Now while the legislation didn't hurt the two clubs in Rockland County, as club president I went to each public hearing to hear the public comments and offer an opinion if I could. Before one of meetings, I spoke to a County Legislator, I went on about the AMA Safety Code and how we fly at the club fields. The lawmaker reponded with "what's the AMA?". That's when I realized that we modelers really needed to reach out to the public, be it an air show, school projects or just go to our Town Hall meetings and talk about the club during the public comment portion. This pleases our Town Supervisor because of the big crowd we get each summer at the air show, and the good use of closed landfill.
While we have no problems with people flying quads, we do not allow FPV at the field. In past threads I was beaten up about that rule by some people. None the less, because of our location and what surrounds us we have no regrets. A few months ago we were paid a visit by the FBI. It seems that someone crashed a "drone" at a nuclear power plant that we can see from our flying field. We made it clear that we don't support that facet of "model aviation." We also stressed the fact that while we need a runway for our planes but a "drone" can take off from anywhere.
All I can say is that I think more clubs will lose flying fields due to negative fall out. I think that it's too late for the AMA to reverse it's position, and even if they did it wouldn't matter much. All we can do is just try and show people that we are reponsible and not a danger or risk to public safety. Each field that is lost is a major blow.
11-09-2015, 01:33 PM
#20
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I have to be honest ... items 1 - 4 listed above are exactly the way we fly at our club. Except for FPV - we've had a couple of those at our field. But for the most part items 1 - 4 describe flying at our field:
- we rarely have an FPV at our field
- we almost never fly above 400 ft
- we're not within 5 miles of an airport w/tower
- I don't know of anybody who flies at night at our field
The law passed by the City of L.A. doesn't sound so bad, considering it addresses airfields in a crowded city environment. (I'm about to get flamed for saying this!)
- we rarely have an FPV at our field
- we almost never fly above 400 ft
- we're not within 5 miles of an airport w/tower
- I don't know of anybody who flies at night at our field
The law passed by the City of L.A. doesn't sound so bad, considering it addresses airfields in a crowded city environment. (I'm about to get flamed for saying this!)
11-09-2015, 01:37 PM
#21
My Feedback: (1)
I too am upset about the AMA linking us to the drones, they should not have put us into the same bed, I for one fly to sight, the drone folks are flying to far out and way to high to be safe, mine are model planes the drones are ?????, I fly at a local field or and old dirt road these guys fly anywhere even in population, no I really don't see how we are the same, and I do remember a very short time ago where we RC guys did not have this kind of crap to deal with, I am upset with the AMA for putting us into the same category, when they could be saying right now if they had not is its not the RC pane and helicopter folks doing this!
11-09-2015, 02:45 PM
#22
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
LoL...the AMA didn't "put us in bed with drones". Where do people come up with this stuff? Your generalization about "drone folks" is inaccurate. Plenty of MR, quad, and "drone" pilots fly line of sight, and don't go to far out and to high to be safe. Do you have any at your club, or where you fly? If not I'm not sure where you get your information from.
