Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

Here you go Doggie, here's one who got caught:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...arge-1.3413818

Rob2160

A friend in Florida sent me this video today, police landed their helicopter at his local club to investigate a report of a drone flying at 3,100 ft. (It wasn't them)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Xo0bdosVs

Luchnia

My Feedback: (21)

The ill informed as always....uggh. Don't this sort of thing really get you? I mean, so some official sees some device near an aircraft at over 3000' and immediately looks for the closest RC field, never mind the jokers that are in the neighborhoods doing this crap - the ones that could care less about registering or the AMA. Really not cool the way this whole things is directed at the hobbyist.

init4fun

Interesting to note that Canada is following the US in enacting "drone registration" laws , and It's also worth noting that the Canadian police used existing laws to charge the drone operator with . Interfering with manned flight operations has been illegal a lot longer than most people realize , it predates 9/11/01 in this country and I'm sure the same goes for Canada . A bit of well publicized application of existing law should wake people up to the fact that an airport really is about the single worst place ever to fly anything remote controlled , unless that airport happens to be hosting a model aircraft event .....

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

One out of how many Hundreds of sightings and he didn't even have his Federal or AMA number on/in it did he? U got all your toy airplanes Marked with the feds number and AMA info?

Luchnia

My Feedback: (21)

This makes me wonder just how many have put any numbers on their planes. I have planes that I don't even have my AMA number in. This does take some time.

init4fun

Hound buddy , the dude who got busted in Chris' link was in Canada , So of course he didn't have an FAA or AMA number ! Canada hasn't , yet , started registering RCers like we here in the USA do , but it's coming in 2016 for them if you read Chris' link . You more appropriate question , then , would be if he had a MAAC number since MAAC is to Canada what AMA is to the USA ....

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

The only thing really not cool is your attitude. I would love to have them land at our club field. I love to have the opportunity to show them what we fly, our appreciation for what they do, and how safe we fly always yielding to manned aircraft. I'd pull out my copy of the AMA safety code that I always keep in my field box and show them the safety rules that every member of my club follows and explain there's no way any member of my club would be flying at 3000ft. I would let them know how we self-police the surrounding area for rogue drone flyers and let them know we will report any suspicious activity. I'd also give them my contact information and the club's contact information in case they have any additional questions. I'd ask for their contact information as well.


Now, you tell me which is the best solution? Cop an attitude or build a great working relationship? Remember, those guys are going back to their officer and they're going to talk with the rest of their department as well.

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

You know what they say, a journey of a thousand miles beings with one step. There will be more.

Not sure what part of the article you read, but this happened in Canada.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Ya me too but the AMA can't Arrest U Fine U and Lock U up either. Maybe just Deny You insurance coverage after the fact. I (almost) Never build not even an arf. CA and I don't get along at all. I support RCU in that I buy only Used RTF ... Very Seldom, if Ever sell any of them. Anyway since I buy some times the AMA ino is in the Plane from the original owner. That's OK to leave it there, AIN'T IT?

Darn 8:18 already and I still gota SSS and get to the field. Got a couple of SUCKERS that think they might like to get into this hobby. Gota set the Hook today.

Sport_Pilot

The other part is that if it was an AMA member from that field, and unless it was flying in the way of the aircraft. Then that would be perfectly legal. Though I do not recommend doing that.

Sport_Pilot

Actually there was no law and still isn't. There is no regulation either, but that will change when the sUAV NPRM becomes regulation,

TimJ

The best thing to come out of this is local law enforcement learning about our hobby, how we have safety rules and guidelines, how we appreciate aviation. The rest of the world is ignorant to our hobby and our way of safety. Things like this will happen until your local law enforcement knows who you are as an organization.

This is absolutely a wonderful thing. Plus, you get a mini airshow.

Luchnia

My Feedback: (21)

No, you are missing the point I am trying to make in my post.That event was mishandled plain and simple.

I am all for getting the LEs involved, educated, and even hanging out together. I have LE friends, worked for LEs, and we have had LEs at our field hanging out with us. One of our members is a retired state trouper. We do educate them and have a great relationship with them.

The point here is them hitting the local RC field as they did was not needed and it would be interesting to see if they hit the first RC field they could instead of policing the area neighborhoods for those that actually pulled the stunt, if there was actually a real incident at all.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Remind me again why it was such a great idea for the AMA to "Romance the drones"?

Astro

da Rock

Make a stencil and used Permanent Magic Marker. It produces quite accurate numbers that won't disrupt your paint scheme or will stand out depending on your choice of color.

franklin_m

And which AMA "Proconsuls" voted for it? And which AMA board member cast the vote to break the tie?

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

No, you totally missed the point. Posting negativity about LE doing their job, yes, doing their job. R/C modelers are not special. and not seizing the opportunity and being a role model for others on how to welcome and represent yourself to LE is disappointing.

br549-2

AMA charter Rcacf field ,6 miles to the East is a old horse track that I have seen people fly from. It is really hard to tell who is a renegade these days, but i find it hard to belive it is anyone from this group.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

C'mon now, you know it was a tie with Brown's final vote sealing the deal. But....as we can clearly see by the FAA's decision, it wouldn't have mattered a bit...not a single solitary bit if the AMA accepted or rejected them. Rejecting them only would have lead to less members, simple. The continued "wish this were different in the past" is nothing more than a personal disdain for MR in general, we'd still be right here where we are with them in or out of the fold.

Did we see a big swing with the last elections as a result of the votes? Not that I saw. One district swapped out a No Droner and replaced them with another No Droner. Go figure! We'll have to keep a close eye on future elections to see if those that occur in the districts that voted "yes" have a huge turnover.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Here is another interesting drone versus heli situation, just saw this video.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c5a_1453504784

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Rob, what point were you trying to make with that 4:18 video..?
That an engine could make 4 props rotate fast enough to stir up the air..?
Do you understand why / how many ways an engine powered, toy scale quad is at a disadvantage / inferior to direct drive electric..?
Especially for the mass toy level market..?
If not, there isn't enough time to go into it here.
Do you understand the point that Vertical Grimace was trying to make or were you just looking for a reason to show us how ANYTHING is possible, no matter how impractical, mechanically flawed, archaic, unnecessarily complex, convoluted, Rube Goldbergish, Homer Simpsonish, economically unfeasible the contraption may be...?

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

First page of 195 pages of the sUAV NPRM
2120-AJ60_NPRM_2-15-2015_joint_signature.pdf

/ 195

Billing Code 4910-13-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration14 CFR Parts 21, 43, 45, 47, 61, 91, 101, 107, and 183

[Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150; Notice No. 15-01]

RIN 2120–AJ60

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing to amend its regulations to adopt specific rules to allow the operation of small unmanned aircraft systems in the National Airspace System.

These changes would address the operation of unmanned aircraft systems, certification of their operators, registration, and display of registration markings. The proposed rule would also find that airworthiness certification is not required for small unmanned aircraft system operations that would be subject to this proposed rule. Lastly, the proposed rule would prohibit model aircraft from endangering the safety of the National Airspace System


I've Highlighted the Important words of the first Page of 195 pages of the sUAV NPRM . Note in the second last line the FAA uses the term "Model Aircraft" not sUAS/UAV/UAS/DRONE but Model aircraft.

Now Just who is the FAA really going after Drones or Us?

Rob2160

I totally agree that electric is a better propulsion system than nitro in a multicopter application for many reasons. I don't disagree with the general point VG was making with his revised wording.

The video was posted purely in response to the part of his original post that said we "Never would have seen an engine powered quad". That they do exist already was the point. Without developments in electric propulsion systems we may have seen a lot more of them.

e.g. I have a dozen Electric Helis, but if suitable electric power systems had not been developed I would have Nitro Helis instead.

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

Makes me wonder if we had the electric power systems we have today at the time glow fuel was developed if glow would have ever made it. I think not. IMHO the remaining glow fuel days are numbered.