Four Hundred Feet?
01-17-2016, 10:12 AM
#476
If indeed the FAA is going to change language to more clearly allow flight above 400', my concern is that the AMA will use it to compel membership. If that's the case, then I'll start writing some letters, as nowhere else in government am I aware of private dues collecting organizations are granted special privileges in public airspace, on waterways, or on roads that are not enjoyed by non-members. I suspect Congress would not be happy either to find out that AMA is using a public law to make people become members.
01-17-2016, 12:48 PM
#477
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Franklin_M said:
"If indeed the FAA is going to change language to more clearly allow flight above 400', my concern is that the AMA will use it to compel membership. If that's the case, then I'll start writing some letters, as nowhere else in government am I aware of private dues collecting organizations are granted special privileges in public airspace, on waterways, or on roads that are not enjoyed by non-members. I suspect Congress would not be happy either to find out that AMA is using a public law to make people become members."
Again with the FAA forcing people to join the AMA......another self prescribed AMA doom and gloom prophecy. It is never enough?
"If indeed the FAA is going to change language to more clearly allow flight above 400', my concern is that the AMA will use it to compel membership. If that's the case, then I'll start writing some letters, as nowhere else in government am I aware of private dues collecting organizations are granted special privileges in public airspace, on waterways, or on roads that are not enjoyed by non-members. I suspect Congress would not be happy either to find out that AMA is using a public law to make people become members."
Again with the FAA forcing people to join the AMA......another self prescribed AMA doom and gloom prophecy. It is never enough?
Last edited by porcia83; 01-17-2016 at 03:11 PM.
01-17-2016, 03:02 PM
#478
My Feedback: (21)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Apple River IL
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
h
01-17-2016, 03:25 PM
#479
Franklin_M said:
"If indeed the FAA is going to change language to more clearly allow flight above 400', my concern is that the AMA will use it to compel membership. If that's the case, then I'll start writing some letters, as nowhere else in government am I aware of private dues collecting organizations are granted special privileges in public airspace, on waterways, or on roads that are not enjoyed by non-members. I suspect Congress would not be happy either to find out that AMA is using a public law to make people become members."
Again with the FAA forcing people to join the AMA......another self prescribed AMA doom and gloom prophecy. It is never enough?
"If indeed the FAA is going to change language to more clearly allow flight above 400', my concern is that the AMA will use it to compel membership. If that's the case, then I'll start writing some letters, as nowhere else in government am I aware of private dues collecting organizations are granted special privileges in public airspace, on waterways, or on roads that are not enjoyed by non-members. I suspect Congress would not be happy either to find out that AMA is using a public law to make people become members."
Again with the FAA forcing people to join the AMA......another self prescribed AMA doom and gloom prophecy. It is never enough?
01-17-2016, 04:57 PM
#481
http://amaflightschool.org/clubs/rec...ecifications-0
01-17-2016, 05:43 PM
#482
Here Ya go I guess u don't check the AMA web Much.
http://amaflightschool.org/clubs/rec...ecifications-0
http://amaflightschool.org/clubs/rec...ecifications-0
01-17-2016, 06:44 PM
#483
01-17-2016, 09:21 PM
#485
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do in fact. And after a few decades of doing just that I comprehend the difference between the actual AMA rules and the various suggestions and guidelines they offer to members and clubs. I might suggest you spend some time learning the difference before you continue to present your misinformed opinion as some sort of fact.
To be clear, there are ABSOLUTELY no lateral limits on operation in any existing or proposed AMA rule.
To be clear, there are ABSOLUTELY no lateral limits on operation in any existing or proposed AMA rule.
01-17-2016, 09:42 PM
#486
Originally Posted by HoundDog 
Here Ya go I guess u don't check the AMA web Much.
http://amaflightschool.org/clubs/rec...ecifications-0
Of course Like Much of what the AMA says and even FAAs Advisory Circulars like AC 91-57A are Recommendations and suggestions. But Then their Suggestions are taken more like rules. Prey tell what are the dimensions of the Fields & flight area U fly at, that U need to have a mile diameter protection from Real Airplanes and other Maned aircraft. At the main AMA registered field I fly at in the summer at 400' more than a quarter mile to our WEST we would be over a 4 lane restricted access HI WAY. At 2000' SE would be over a new subdivision housing area. Besides most small electric planes a Lot of us are flying can't/shouldn't be flown that far out because of their size and difficulty of judging their Orientation.
Do me a favor go to Google Maps (Satellite View) center on your favorite AMA Field. Right Click and set a Measure distance point. Now go Out 1/4 to 1/2 mile and see what is there U might be flying over between 1/4 and 1/2 mile away from U. Especially straight out in front of U.
. There is NO need to fly ANY R/C Plane farther than 1000' left or right of Your position. No Mater if it's a Giant Scale War Bird (20 Foot Wing span B-29) or an FPV Equipped Quad or Fixed wing for that mater. That's why the AMA MAKES Recommendations as to field size and flight area.
Last edited by HoundDog; 01-17-2016 at 09:56 PM.
01-17-2016, 10:00 PM
#487
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, let's see. The document you selected to cite as if it were an AMA rules starts with these words:
Shortly after that we see these words:
But let's not let pass one final point. Notice that little "*" next to the lateral distances?? Well, let's see what the AMA says about those:
So I am not clear why this remains a point of debate. What you are trying to say are rules, are in fact, NOT RULES. Why you insist on spreading misinformation is beyond me, but I really wish you would stop. There are plenty of people already doing that, no need for you to join the chorus.
The suggested specifications detailed below..
The official AMA Safety Code remains the governing factor. All members and clubs should conduct their field operations in accordance with the Code.
But let's not let pass one final point. Notice that little "*" next to the lateral distances?? Well, let's see what the AMA says about those:
*Distances referenced may be increased or decreased according to site usage.
01-17-2016, 10:15 PM
#488
Well, let's see. The document you selected to cite as if it were an AMA rules starts with these words:
Shortly after that we see these words:
But let's not let pass one final point. Notice that little "*" next to the lateral distances?? Well, let's see what the AMA says about those:
So I am not clear why this remains a point of debate. What you are trying to say are rules, are in fact, NOT RULES. Why you insist on spreading misinformation is beyond me, but I really wish you would stop. There are plenty of people already doing that, no need for you to join the chorus.
Shortly after that we see these words:
But let's not let pass one final point. Notice that little "*" next to the lateral distances?? Well, let's see what the AMA says about those:
So I am not clear why this remains a point of debate. What you are trying to say are rules, are in fact, NOT RULES. Why you insist on spreading misinformation is beyond me, but I really wish you would stop. There are plenty of people already doing that, no need for you to join the chorus.
01-18-2016, 06:16 AM
#491
Oh wait, that's a fact based on opinion.
01-18-2016, 06:40 AM
#492
01-18-2016, 06:48 AM
#493
My Feedback: (21)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Apple River IL
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ROFL! Again, you demonstrate that you are clueless in your comments. So you combine your exaggeration with negative rhetoric in your attempt to sound knowledgable! ROFL
Last edited by hook57; 01-18-2016 at 07:49 AM.
01-18-2016, 11:32 AM
#494
01-18-2016, 02:39 PM
#495
My Feedback: (7)
Originally Posted by HoundDog . There is NO need to fly ANY R/C Plane farther than 1000' left or right of Your position. No Mater if it's a Giant Scale War Bird (20 Foot Wing span B-29) or an FPV Equipped Quad or Fixed wing for that mater. That's why the AMA MAKES Recommendations as to field size and flight area.
01-18-2016, 04:18 PM
#497
01-18-2016, 07:44 PM
#498
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest from the AMA. Recap of their meetings with the FAA late last week.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...ary-15-and-16/
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...ary-15-and-16/
01-18-2016, 07:47 PM
#499
Latest from the AMA. Recap of their meetings with the FAA late last week.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...ary-15-and-16/
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...ary-15-and-16/