Are we as hobbyist UAS users in the clear for now? can we jump for joy? or to soon?
#401
The FAA would rather that they send their drones above 500 feet once they get their issues worked out for drones flying with the full scale airplanes. But probably not till after 2020. IMO drones are not workable for door to door delivery, But may be from warehouse to warehouse.
#402
Nothing new here. The same thing happened with Amateur Radio decades ago. The commercial interests lobbied the FCC for the frequencies set aside for Amateur Radio. The ARRL (equivalent of our AMA) worked very diligently fighting the FCC to preserve those frequencies set aside for Amateur Radio. The ARRL now has a dedicated legal defense fund setup specifically for legal actions that could impact amateur radio.
#403
The FAA did very recently perform some test flying UAS and full size aircraft. It would seem to me that as long as the AMA is around, we modelers shouldn't loose our ability to fly models. Much like the EAA did for general aviation. So I think you might be correct. Airspace would have to be reclassified in some manor to do what amazon wants.
Before someone posts that I'm predicting doom and gloom for our hobby, please note that I'm only speculating what some in the government would probably LIKE to do with us. The next terrorist attack on the US (and we'd be fools to say it can never happen again!) will determine just how much those DHS planners will get their way.
Harvey
Last edited by H5487; 07-18-2016 at 09:41 AM.
#404
Except for the landing and takeoff phases (and perhaps cropdusting and law enforcement ops) full-scale aircraft don't usually operate below 500ft above the highest obstacle in sparsely-occupied areas, 1000ft in congested areas. However, bear in mind that these altitudes were largely established back when accidental contact with an obstacle was the main concern. However, since 9/11, the Dept of Homeland Security has been diligently occupied with preventing a reoccurrence. This includes finding ways to identify potential threats in enough time to react to them. While a drone probably isn't a substantial threat to the airlines or crowds of people on the ground (not yet, anyway), I'm sure Homeland Security would prefer to keep larger (non-hobby) UAVs above 500ft where it is easier to spot and track them, as opposed to closer to the ground where they could be hidden by buildings, trees, etc. And since our models typically fly under 400ft, I can see where they would like to keep us confined to officially-recognized locations such as AMA Club fields.
Before someone posts that I'm predicting doom and gloom for our hobby, please note that I'm only speculating what some in the government would probably LIKE to do with us. The next terrorist attack on the US (and we'd be fools to say it can never happen again!) will determine just how much those DHS planners will get their way.
Harvey
Before someone posts that I'm predicting doom and gloom for our hobby, please note that I'm only speculating what some in the government would probably LIKE to do with us. The next terrorist attack on the US (and we'd be fools to say it can never happen again!) will determine just how much those DHS planners will get their way.
Harvey
#405
Harvey
#406
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
And that's how AOPA has been able to successfully argue against increased scrutiny and regulations against small GA aircraft. However, remember the story two or three years ago about the engineering student who tried to buy two turbine models for a planned terrorist attack against a government building (either the White House or Congress, I believe)? While I don't remember whether he was a wanna-be terrorist or connected to any of the mainstream terrorist groups, it DOES show that the idea of using model airplanes for an attack is out there.
Harvey
Harvey
#407
And that's how AOPA has been able to successfully argue against increased scrutiny and regulations against small GA aircraft. However, remember the story two or three years ago about the engineering student who tried to buy two turbine models for a planned terrorist attack against a government building (either the White House or Congress, I believe)? While I don't remember whether he was a wanna-be terrorist or connected to any of the mainstream terrorist groups, it DOES show that the idea of using model airplanes for an attack is out there.
Harvey
Harvey
#408
My Feedback: (15)
about 2 years later, my AMA card started showing Leader Member Admin along with the CD. i never applied for it. was later was told a similar story by hoss. the same thing happened to him around the same time frame, although a coupla years ahead of me. we think it was for not ever having a complaint filed about any event we ran, getting all the paperwork turned in correctly and in a reasonable time frame, and for running events correctly.
the scientific was added around 88-90, and it also is something i never applied for. i was told that i was presented for consideration as scientific leader by a group of fliers that promoted me for my work in making Ducted Fan and Turbine model aircraft available to everyday modelers. whatever that means, and i was never told who these folks were.
Last edited by mongo; 07-18-2016 at 12:04 PM. Reason: formatting, date correction
#409
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
back around 79-80 i applied for CD. was successful, passed the test and was awarded my CD and offered a chance to change my AMA number, which i declined. too many aircraft to redo numbers on.
about 2 years later, my AMA card started showing Leader Member Admin along with the CD. i never applied for it. was later was told a similar story by hoss. the same thing happened to him around the same time frame, although a coupla years ahead of me. we think it was for not ever having a complaint filed about any event we ran, getting all the paperwork turned in correctly and in a reasonable time frame, and for running events correctly.
the scientific was added around 88-90, and it also is something i never applied for. i was told that i was presented for consideration as scientific leader by a group of fliers that promoted me for my work in making Ducted Fan and Turbine model aircraft available to everyday modelers. whatever that means, and i was never told who these folks were.
about 2 years later, my AMA card started showing Leader Member Admin along with the CD. i never applied for it. was later was told a similar story by hoss. the same thing happened to him around the same time frame, although a coupla years ahead of me. we think it was for not ever having a complaint filed about any event we ran, getting all the paperwork turned in correctly and in a reasonable time frame, and for running events correctly.
the scientific was added around 88-90, and it also is something i never applied for. i was told that i was presented for consideration as scientific leader by a group of fliers that promoted me for my work in making Ducted Fan and Turbine model aircraft available to everyday modelers. whatever that means, and i was never told who these folks were.
More interesting that this apparently was the single thing Hoss didn't complain about....getting a designation without filling out the paperwork! Turning in the event ppwk doesn't get someone a designation, but does get one a discount on dues (another reason for those complaining about the dues increase to get more involved).
Not signing the application form is odd as well as it required a pledge.
#411
My Feedback: (15)
that doc was created on 8 oct 15, modified on XX mar 16.
the apps i signed for other folks seeking leader member stratus back in the 80s was quite different.
only 3 classes, admin, scientific, industrial.
the pledge was several lines shorter, and that entire second paragraph of coordinating with VP stuff was not there.
the pledge was the same as the one for the CD app i filled out, short and to the point.
oh yeah, back then, the CD that actually did the paperwork, correctly, and got it turned in at all, was the exception rather than the rule.
the apps i signed for other folks seeking leader member stratus back in the 80s was quite different.
only 3 classes, admin, scientific, industrial.
the pledge was several lines shorter, and that entire second paragraph of coordinating with VP stuff was not there.
the pledge was the same as the one for the CD app i filled out, short and to the point.
oh yeah, back then, the CD that actually did the paperwork, correctly, and got it turned in at all, was the exception rather than the rule.
Last edited by mongo; 07-18-2016 at 07:45 PM. Reason: forgot a comment
#412
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trying really hard to not say "told ya so"
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
#413
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Trying really hard to not say "told ya so"
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
#414
back around 79-80 i applied for CD. was successful, passed the test and was awarded my CD and offered a chance to change my AMA number, which i declined. too many aircraft to redo numbers on.
about 2 years later, my AMA card started showing Leader Member Admin along with the CD. i never applied for it. was later was told a similar story by hoss. the same thing happened to him around the same time frame, although a coupla years ahead of me. we think it was for not ever having a complaint filed about any event we ran, getting all the paperwork turned in correctly and in a reasonable time frame, and for running events correctly.
the scientific was added around 88-90, and it also is something i never applied for. i was told that i was presented for consideration as scientific leader by a group of fliers that promoted me for my work in making Ducted Fan and Turbine model aircraft available to everyday modelers. whatever that means, and i was never told who these folks were.
about 2 years later, my AMA card started showing Leader Member Admin along with the CD. i never applied for it. was later was told a similar story by hoss. the same thing happened to him around the same time frame, although a coupla years ahead of me. we think it was for not ever having a complaint filed about any event we ran, getting all the paperwork turned in correctly and in a reasonable time frame, and for running events correctly.
the scientific was added around 88-90, and it also is something i never applied for. i was told that i was presented for consideration as scientific leader by a group of fliers that promoted me for my work in making Ducted Fan and Turbine model aircraft available to everyday modelers. whatever that means, and i was never told who these folks were.
Mike
#415
Trying really hard to not say "told ya so"
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
here has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.
Some of you , whom I will not name, remind me of people on the highway that cannot see in front of the car in front of them to see what is really going on in front of you.
Now that we have that there's no question about the 400 ft rule. the problem was nobody knew for sure. It puts all doubt behind.
Mike
#417
Reminds me of the saying "can't see the forest through the trees". Even more bizzare though is that even when presented with something good, something positive, the naysayers still find a way to turn it into something bad, something horrible even. Because just wait, it might get worse later. We finally get something in writing from the FAA and the usual folks with the usual complaints start right in, oh gee, what's new with that. They couldn't do better? Wow, that's it? Sure, AMA is doing this but only as a way to make more money because....because drones! LoL.
#418
Not nobody, anybody reading the laws and regulations, and understood them knew this for sure. No doubt at all.
#420
If you've ever seen the Blues or T-Birds perform, you also know that even a subsonic aircraft can be on top you before you hear it for more than a second or so (not enough time to "avoid" per AMA & FAA rules).
Having nearly lost a jet when I hit a sparrow in the windscreen at 420 indicated on a VR route, I can only imagine how much damage would have been caused by a 2lb or more sUAS at that speed.
#421
Franklin,
Yes, I'm familiar with MTRs and MTAs. I used to cut through the Atchafalaya Swamp northwest of New Orleans where the USN and USAF go to play. Heading home after flying all night for the Fed, ATC would ask if I would be agreeable to being used for drug interdiction and intercept practice. I'm pretty sure that more than just a few Cajun fishermen spilled their beers after a Cessna 337 with one or two mil birds close behind rocketed past at treetop level!
That was 20 years ago. We probably couldn't do that now!
Harvey
Yes, I'm familiar with MTRs and MTAs. I used to cut through the Atchafalaya Swamp northwest of New Orleans where the USN and USAF go to play. Heading home after flying all night for the Fed, ATC would ask if I would be agreeable to being used for drug interdiction and intercept practice. I'm pretty sure that more than just a few Cajun fishermen spilled their beers after a Cessna 337 with one or two mil birds close behind rocketed past at treetop level!
That was 20 years ago. We probably couldn't do that now!
Harvey
Last edited by H5487; 07-23-2016 at 07:40 AM.
#422
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Franklin,
Yes, I'm familiar with MTRs and MTAs. I used to cut through the Atchafalaya Swamp northwest of New Orleans where the USN and USAF go to play. Heading home after flying all night for the Fed, ATC would ask if I would be agreeable to being used for drug interdiction and intercept practice. I'm pretty sure that more than just a few Cajun fishermen spilled their beers after a Cessna 337 with one or two mil birds close behind rocketed past at treetop level!
That was 20 years ago. We probably couldn't do that now!
Harvey
Yes, I'm familiar with MTRs and MTAs. I used to cut through the Atchafalaya Swamp northwest of New Orleans where the USN and USAF go to play. Heading home after flying all night for the Fed, ATC would ask if I would be agreeable to being used for drug interdiction and intercept practice. I'm pretty sure that more than just a few Cajun fishermen spilled their beers after a Cessna 337 with one or two mil birds close behind rocketed past at treetop level!
That was 20 years ago. We probably couldn't do that now!
Harvey
#423
Franklin got lucky. More than one plane based at Whidbey Island has crashed over that training route. I know of a couple that crashed in the bombing range outside of Boardman OR as well, all due to low level flights. Were they pilot error, equipment failure or bird strikes? That's one we probably will never hear the answer to.
#424
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Why does this seem familiar?
Franklin got lucky. More than one plane based at Whidbey Island has crashed over that training route. I know of a couple that crashed in the bombing range outside of Boardman OR as well, all due to low level flights. Were they pilot error, equipment failure or bird strikes? That's one we probably will never hear the answer to.
#425
hmm......multiple crashes of the same or similar types or aircraft, all flown by the military pilots, all specially certified by the same type of organizations. It's a design failure, a manufacturing failure, a pilot failure, or an training/inspection failure. What it's not is a coincidence.
Is your opinion based on knowledge?
Harvey
Last edited by H5487; 07-23-2016 at 06:05 PM.