View Poll Results: Was it a mistake or not for the AMA to embrace drones ?
Voters: 356. You may not vote on this poll
Yes or No , Do you think the AMA was right or wrong to embrace DRONES ?
04-12-2016, 02:37 AM
#876
At different periods of time in our US history , it has been illegal to be ;
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their
100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their
100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?
Last edited by init4fun; 04-12-2016 at 03:41 AM. Reason: the dreaded typo monster .....
04-12-2016, 05:00 AM
#877
At different periods of time in our US history , it has been illegal to be ;
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their
100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?
04-12-2016, 05:32 AM
#878
I hate to admit but rgburrill is right. Even at the height of slavery there were free blacks living in the south. (and north of course.). It wasn't illegal to be a free black. The problem was that it was legal to be an enslaved black.
04-12-2016, 05:53 AM
#879
But of the three , yes , it's never been illegal to be a free African , but It's sure been Illegal to drink & gamble , so like the ol Meatloaf song said , "Two outta three ain't bad" .....
04-12-2016, 05:57 AM
#880
At different periods of time in our US history , it has been illegal to be ;
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?
Drinking a Beer , (Prohabition)
Gambling , (Puritanical "Blue Laws")
A free African , (Slavery)
And many other things due to the definitions thereof by various branches of the US government !
And eventually , your all knowing , all intelligent , and infallible boys on the hill came to see that they were WRONG ! And reversed policy !
Gee , Hound , , , ya think they might be wrong here too ? Or is their
100% spot on record on policy really good enough for you ?https://www.yahoo.com/news/real-hove...163000320.html
04-12-2016, 05:57 AM
#881
And back on point ,
Sorry , but anyone who can't see the difference in LOS only VS BLOS able craft are usually the ones with a vested interest in getting all model aviation lumped in together , whereas those of us with no BLOS plans are the ones who want no part of being lumped in with them .
Flame away , kiddos ......
Sorry , but anyone who can't see the difference in LOS only VS BLOS able craft are usually the ones with a vested interest in getting all model aviation lumped in together , whereas those of us with no BLOS plans are the ones who want no part of being lumped in with them .
Flame away , kiddos ......
Last edited by init4fun; 04-12-2016 at 06:12 AM.
04-12-2016, 08:37 AM
#883
I'm not talking about the millisecond that visual contact is lost as an FPV aircraft passes a pylon in a race , that's not BLOS anymore than when a non FPV craft passes a pylon , I'm talking full on flying far away over neighborhoods when the pilot hasn't actually seen the aircraft for the majority of the flight .
Also , as per #550 , each FPV pylon racer is supposed to have his or her own dedicated spotter , so as long as they have that spotter I'd say flying past a pylon wouldn't be considered as being BLOS by anyone whose not looking to try to twist things to force an agenda . Can you really say BLOS includes a craft passing a pylon Sport ? Really ? If so , your assertion IS just about as silly as my African one was
Last edited by init4fun; 04-12-2016 at 08:40 AM.
04-12-2016, 01:04 PM
#884
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
AMA Member Call to Action
Dear AMA members, The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
04-12-2016, 01:10 PM
#885
And back on point ,
Sorry , but anyone who can't see the difference in LOS only VS BLOS able craft are usually the ones with a vested interest in getting all model aviation lumped in together , whereas those of us with no BLOS plans are the ones who want no part of being lumped in with them .
Flame away , kiddos ......
Sorry , but anyone who can't see the difference in LOS only VS BLOS able craft are usually the ones with a vested interest in getting all model aviation lumped in together , whereas those of us with no BLOS plans are the ones who want no part of being lumped in with them .
Flame away , kiddos ......
04-12-2016, 01:11 PM
#886
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
AMA Member Call to Action
Dear AMA members, The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
04-12-2016, 01:30 PM
#887
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
AMA Member Call to Action
Dear AMA members, The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.
Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.
As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.
These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.
By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.
As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.
Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: yiv1654553007drop, colspan: 3"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Mike
p.s. see ya about 7:30 Mountain standard time PM me with your cell.
Last edited by HoundDog; 04-12-2016 at 01:45 PM.
04-12-2016, 01:39 PM
#888
BOLOS should be no problem below 400' when kept away from airports and populated areas. Just as Full Scale must maintain an altitude that does not endanger those on the ground. Rattle Snakes, Jack Rabbits and coyotes be damed.
I'd like to Hunt Cyoties with an FPV equiped Gun Toten Fully armed A-10 or P-47. Just think a miny GAU-8 firing 30 caliber instead of 30 MM. Teare them Cyots a new one Jacks too. Man bet this rilies feathers andthe do gooders amung us. Burrrrrrrrp goes the GAU-8
I'd like to Hunt Cyoties with an FPV equiped Gun Toten Fully armed A-10 or P-47. Just think a miny GAU-8 firing 30 caliber instead of 30 MM. Teare them Cyots a new one Jacks too. Man bet this rilies feathers andthe do gooders amung us. Burrrrrrrrp goes the GAU-8
Last edited by HoundDog; 04-12-2016 at 01:42 PM.
04-14-2016, 08:03 PM
#890
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have been seeing previews in the last 24 hours on TV about a news story being released tonight at 6pm.
Australia Post are just about to introduce postal delivery drones. This should be interesting. I will post a video of the story here later.
(Channel 7 for any Aussies interested)
Edit - ok here is the video of the "successful trial" - not very confidence inspiring in my opinion -
1. Flimsy looking quad copter - fail. (at least Amazon wants to use serious looking octocopters)
2. Flown Line of Sight with a Spektrum DX6 - Hmmm
3. Package dropped via fishing line?
I am not against this concept at all but c'mon guys, Quad copters with zero redundancy... really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-vW_-T30VQ
Australia Post are just about to introduce postal delivery drones. This should be interesting. I will post a video of the story here later.
(Channel 7 for any Aussies interested)
Edit - ok here is the video of the "successful trial" - not very confidence inspiring in my opinion -
1. Flimsy looking quad copter - fail. (at least Amazon wants to use serious looking octocopters)
2. Flown Line of Sight with a Spektrum DX6 - Hmmm
3. Package dropped via fishing line?
I am not against this concept at all but c'mon guys, Quad copters with zero redundancy... really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-vW_-T30VQ
Last edited by Rob2160; 04-15-2016 at 01:35 AM.
04-15-2016, 03:53 AM
#891
Have been seeing previews in the last 24 hours on TV about a news story being released tonight at 6pm.
Australia Post are just about to introduce postal delivery drones. This should be interesting. I will post a video of the story here later.
(Channel 7 for any Aussies interested)
Edit - ok here is the video of the "successful trial" - not very confidence inspiring in my opinion -
1. Flimsy looking quad copter - fail. (at least Amazon wants to use serious looking octocopters)
2. Flown Line of Sight with a Spektrum DX6 - Hmmm
3. Package dropped via fishing line?
I am not against this concept at all but c'mon guys, Quad copters with zero redundancy... really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-vW_-T30VQ
Australia Post are just about to introduce postal delivery drones. This should be interesting. I will post a video of the story here later.
(Channel 7 for any Aussies interested)
Edit - ok here is the video of the "successful trial" - not very confidence inspiring in my opinion -
1. Flimsy looking quad copter - fail. (at least Amazon wants to use serious looking octocopters)
2. Flown Line of Sight with a Spektrum DX6 - Hmmm
3. Package dropped via fishing line?
I am not against this concept at all but c'mon guys, Quad copters with zero redundancy... really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-vW_-T30VQ
Well , I can give them an A for effort , even if the testing involved toy like craft and the silly idea of lowering the cargo with a fishing string . I like to see countries embrace innovation without stomping all over the existing users of the technology , something the US really should look into as well . Here , all the politicians and even the FAA and AMA are all to willing to push the traditional RC user aside in their strive for maximum profit , I guess a well lined pocket being more important that what's right and fair use of something we've used safely for years . Let me know when your first "air mail" delivery happens
04-15-2016, 04:06 AM
#892
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well , I can give them an A for effort , even if the testing involved toy like craft and the silly idea of lowering the cargo with a fishing string . I like to see countries embrace innovation without stomping all over the existing users of the technology , something the US really should look into as well . Here , all the politicians and even the FAA and AMA are all to willing to push the traditional RC user aside in their strive for maximum profit , I guess a well lined pocket being more important that what's right and fair use of something we've used safely for years . Let me know when your first "air mail" delivery happens
Last edited by Rob2160; 04-15-2016 at 04:08 AM.
04-15-2016, 02:53 PM
#893
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04...ittle_lea.html
On the flip side.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/13/espn-...ne-racing.html
But it will probably be shown at 2AM on ESPN THE OCHO.
https://vimeo.com/12861660
Mike
On the flip side.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/13/espn-...ne-racing.html
But it will probably be shown at 2AM on ESPN THE OCHO.
https://vimeo.com/12861660
Mike
04-19-2016, 10:48 AM
#895
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Stats are always interesting.
Some context is in order perhaps?
Over 21,000 views, less than 350 voted, some confirming the question was confusing and they answered it wrong.
185,000 AMA members, lets say for argument sake only the paying/adult members count, so 150,000.
The poll conducted in the AMA forum where the overwhelming percentage of posters are certainly not what could be considered ardent supporters of the the AMA.
It's a single tiny snapshot of a subset of those involved in the hobby. Would anyone be shocked to see completely different numbers if this was run on RCG, or Drone Users Network etc, etc?
Some context is in order perhaps?
Over 21,000 views, less than 350 voted, some confirming the question was confusing and they answered it wrong.
185,000 AMA members, lets say for argument sake only the paying/adult members count, so 150,000.
The poll conducted in the AMA forum where the overwhelming percentage of posters are certainly not what could be considered ardent supporters of the the AMA.
It's a single tiny snapshot of a subset of those involved in the hobby. Would anyone be shocked to see completely different numbers if this was run on RCG, or Drone Users Network etc, etc?
04-19-2016, 12:22 PM
#896
04-19-2016, 12:25 PM
#897
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04...ittle_lea.html
On the flip side.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/13/espn-...ne-racing.html
But it will probably be shown at 2AM on ESPN THE OCHO.
https://vimeo.com/12861660
Mike
On the flip side.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/13/espn-...ne-racing.html
But it will probably be shown at 2AM on ESPN THE OCHO.
https://vimeo.com/12861660
Mike
04-19-2016, 03:43 PM
#899
By it's very description , #550 does not allow BLOS !
I'm not talking about the millisecond that visual contact is lost as an FPV aircraft passes a pylon in a race , that's not BLOS anymore than when a non FPV craft passes a pylon , I'm talking full on flying far away over neighborhoods when the pilot hasn't actually seen the aircraft for the majority of the flight .
Also , as per #550 , each FPV pylon racer is supposed to have his or her own dedicated spotter , so as long as they have that spotter I'd say flying past a pylon wouldn't be considered as being BLOS by anyone whose not looking to try to twist things to force an agenda . Can you really say BLOS includes a craft passing a pylon Sport ? Really ? If so , your assertion IS just about as silly as my African one was
I'm not talking about the millisecond that visual contact is lost as an FPV aircraft passes a pylon in a race , that's not BLOS anymore than when a non FPV craft passes a pylon , I'm talking full on flying far away over neighborhoods when the pilot hasn't actually seen the aircraft for the majority of the flight .
Also , as per #550 , each FPV pylon racer is supposed to have his or her own dedicated spotter , so as long as they have that spotter I'd say flying past a pylon wouldn't be considered as being BLOS by anyone whose not looking to try to twist things to force an agenda . Can you really say BLOS includes a craft passing a pylon Sport ? Really ? If so , your assertion IS just about as silly as my African one was
At this late date in 2016 none of this should need to be explained for the umpteenth time.
04-20-2016, 05:25 AM
#900
Thank You CP , Coming from someone here at RCU that I respect such as you , I really do appreciate that . I gotta admit , at times I DO like to probe Sport's "devil's advocate" position , I guess I'm just trying to get to an understanding of how such "out there" positions can be formed and advocated . Believe me , there are plenty of times I walk away from the computer , shaking my head , thanking God that he saw fit to make me a Mechanic rather than a Psychologist !
