rt3232

My Feedback: (6)

Cant blame them.

It's just to bad there is not a way for the bad guy's to get caught before they cause a real problem

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I beg to differ.

When drones began to be a problem for the FAA, all the AMA had to do was kindly remind them that, "drones AREN'T us" and that "we" have been peacefully and safely sharing the NAS for 80 years. Kinda hard to refute the FACTS!!!!

Is that such a difficult concept to grasp?

Astro

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

It's not difficult for me to grasp....it's very logical. Has anyone ever accused the Government of being logical?

If the FAA had said "drones" you have to register, but "models" don't it would have created huge problems for them. Public opinion doesn't know the difference between a drone and a model. Law suits from drone pilots would allege discrimination and some court might agree. All in all it was just easier for the FAA to make a rule that applies to everyone...it's really how they work.

I'm just surprised how easy they went on model aircraft....sign up for free, put a number in your plane and have a good day.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I must have missed the part where the AMA actually tried that! LOL

That is where the CBO, their governing rules and CLEAR separation between what constitutes a model and a drone would've come into play. It's really not too difficult to draw the line on what vehicles or activities the FAA deems a danger to the NAS, they acknowledged at one point that it was not their intent to legislate or regulate "the hobby". They proved they knew the difference when they made that statement.
The public doesn't need to, the legislaters do; hopefully they are capable of distinguishing the two (but apparently not).

Regards,

Astro

jetmaven

Personally , I don't give a rats butt about a stinkin' 5.00 fee and a data base , you're already on more than you know if you own a credit card , a vehicle , if you vote , write checks , whatever .What I care about are 400' altitude limits .
i fly sailplanes . 400' is a bad winch launch .

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

The ex-president of my club is the regional AMA VP and heavily involved in the whole FAA issue. He used to attend our monthly meetings and keep us up to date on what what going on. When the FAA first started to make new regulations that would include UAS the AMA's position was "we are not drones, we are model airplanes". Their official stance on FPV was a buddy box was required with the master box flying line of sight and the FPV only on the slave. Over the course of a couple years that changed, and it changed drastically once the AMA got the exemption it asked congress for.

I'm not sure exactly what the AMA's position is anymore on FPV and line of sight, but I do know that the last time he updated us the AMA was at least considering much looser rules, no buddy box, a much larger flying area that included flying without line of sight. Also, he flat out said "drones are where the money is, the amount of money spent on drones already dwarfs traditional modelling" and that was over a year ago. He knew the number of drones sold in the past year and said simply, "that's the future of the hobby." So, if you don't think the AMA made a conscious decision to go after drone pilots at traditional flyers expense you simply haven't talked to the right people.

hairy46

My Feedback: (1)

I know I sure feel let down big time from the AMA!

misfitsailor

My Feedback: (6)

Now that this new program is in place at the FAA, it will never, ever go away. What government program ever does? Instead, it will become more expensive, more limiting and more intrusive.

As for the AMA, my new FAA number will make my AMA number worthless. The AMA raised our dues at a time when they are pushing everyone into digital subscriptions, which lowers their costs! We have been had. We no longer need the AMA. For less money, the members of each club can all chip-in and buy their own site insurance. Screw the AMA!

Tdaffy

It is frightening to see how many people actually think this is not a big deal. Of course, they'll also call me names, but I prefer to use history and precidence as a guide in many controversial opinions.

chip_MG

My Feedback: (14)

We who follow the rule of law will register ourselves. But here is the problem with this ideal. The people who want to fly their drones to spy on people in backyards will not register. As a result of that, the FAA will impose more and more sticker rules on US, the law abiding ones. Soon if we let this continue, we won't be able to fly at all anywhere.

hairy46

My Feedback: (1)

Agreed Chip!

init4fun

Not to worry , your among like minded folks here for the most part . Anyone calling names is either a troll or someone really happy about how the govt. has just intruded once again where such intrusion was not needed . The biggest issue is how our organization let us down by trying to become all things to all people , did the AMA really think the FAA was gonna allow them full control over all "UAS" as the AMA tried to do ?

I do see a future where the relevance of the AMA is diminished even further than it was yesterday by ever increasing regulation . Who needs the safety code when it's the FAA calling all the shots now ?

ira d

+1

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

[QUOTE=smithcreek;12142422 So, if you don't think the AMA made a conscious decision to go after drone pilots at traditional flyers expense you simply haven't talked to the right people.[/QUOTE]

I believe what you are saying. I also believe it didn't matter what the AMA did or didn't do. The FAA has it's own agenda and doesn't need to accommodate you and I. The driving force behind the new rule is the drone problem, of course. We model airplane users are just collateral damage. If the AMA had divorced itself from drones at the outset, nothing would be different....in my opinion.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Just curious, did the AMA make a conscious decision to embrace helis back in the day, at the expense of the "traditional flyers" whatever that means? Heli's were around in the 40's and 50's right?

Your premise seems to be that in accepting new forms of flying, the AMA would turn their back on the other more traditional ones? If so, how has the AMA managed to stay such a part of this hobby for 80 years?

rt3232

My Feedback: (6)

So I guess it's time for me to abandon my 65 years of building and flying model airplanes.

just as fast as I cn

Cheers

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

That would be an absolute shame, over what, a registration? I would say reconsider that decision.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

What I don't understand is this: The AMA is a non-profit. For what purpose do they think they need to chase the $$ at any cost, especially their members?

Astro

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

twice in one day...I agree with you 100%, I want to know why as well. I keep seeing people repeat the same comment about this money grab and lining their pockets etc etc....for what? They are a non-profit. Nobody is getting rich working at the AMA. What would be the logic in purposefully going after droners at the expense of an already well established client base, many of which are lifetime members, or members with double digit membership histories. Whats in it for either the EC or the AMA?

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

It's a stretch to equate helis and drones. Helis have historically and fundamentally operated in much the same way as our more traditional aircraft, with the exception of flight patterns, which is really the only reason the AMA membership was somewhat divided on their opinions of helis. Helis (like you stated) have been around for many decades and did not stir the ire of the public, media or FAA as drones have in their relatively brief existence. One can't simply look at the similarities that helis and the "typical" drone (MR) and draw the comparison you just did. One must look at the differences, which are vastly different.

Simple. Because for 80 years the AMA was relevant to THIS hobby (and still is). It simply has no chance of having any influence on the drones and droners. It's really all about HOW the craft are operated. For 80 years the AMA membership was completely satisfied joining the AMA, joining the local club and enjoying their hobby at the local flying field, out of the way of the general public, at designated, remote flying sites. They were willing to go out of their way and take responsibility to enjoy their hobby where it would not interfere with the general public. Enter drones and park flyers; they think it is their RIGHT to fly whenever, wherever they please, regardless of what those they may be affecting think.

THERE, I said it! THAT IS THE REAL REASON FOR THESE REGULATIONS.

Regards,

Astro

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

Simple, the airplane part of the hobby is dying and the participants are aging. Drones are where it's at. Those are not my words but the regional VP. My opinion is people that buy drones will never join the AMA or local clubs, so lumping us in with them gets us nothing but grief in the end.

ccostant

My Feedback: (38)

Well if not money then maybe, just maybe growing the membership to promote the AMA itself? Maybe a bit of a power trip for the EC. I just don't think the EC of the AMA has completely thought through the risk/reward of attracting the droners. It really is a numbers game. The new droners could easily exceed the current membership in short order altering the look and makeup of the future AMA. The risk of incidences will no doubt increase over time. Is this really something the AMA wants to deal with going forward?

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

You say, "simple"
I say, WAIT......the AMA was founded BY those who are dying....to advocate for THEM.........how did the AMA get to the point where they are self-directed and misguided enough to completely lose focus of WHY they exist, just to exist at any cost (up to and including fundamentally changing WHO they are?)

Just doesn't make sense.

Astro

ccostant

My Feedback: (38)

Ditto on smithcreek's comment. I heard the very same quotes from the regional VP. Pretty much promoting drones from the beginning.

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

See, you're trying to make this an emotional issue and that's not what I'm talking about. A year ago when me and others first said drones were going to cause us a lot of grief a lot of people quickly pulled out the emotional arguments about "abandoning drone flyers" and "all for one and one for all" and basically said we were no good grumpy haters. That's not the point. I can speak for myself when I say I have nothing against drones. I think they are pretty friggin cool, but that doesn't mean I want to have to deal with all the grief that's going to come with being lumped in with them. And this is just the start.

Anyway, what's done is done. I think they made a mistake, but with the popularity of rc modeling taking a big hit lately I'm sure the AMA figures they need a way to pay for that spread out in Muncie.

Here's a cool video taken by a friend of mine from a recent mountain biking trip to Utah.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9kSZ5GloFg