400 foot? NOPE
#76
Please remember the Safety Guidance:
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
- I will fly below 400 feet
- I will fly within visual line of sight
- I will be aware of FAA airspace requirements: faa.gov/go/uastfr
- I will not fly directly over people
- I will not fly over stadiums and sports events
- I will not fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
- I will not fly near aircraft, especially near airports
- I will not fly under the influence
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
#77
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Please remember the Safety Guidance:
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
- I will fly below 400 feet
- I will fly within visual line of sight
- I will be aware of FAA airspace requirements: faa.gov/go/uastfr
- I will not fly directly over people
- I will not fly over stadiums and sports events
- I will not fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
- I will not fly near aircraft, especially near airports
- I will not fly under the influence
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
LoL...seriously?
#78
Please remember the Safety Guidance:
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
- I will fly below 400 feet
- I will fly within visual line of sight
- I will be aware of FAA airspace requirements: faa.gov/go/uastfr
- I will not fly directly over people
- I will not fly over stadiums and sports events
- I will not fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
- I will not fly near aircraft, especially near airports
- I will not fly under the influence
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
#79
Once again, keep in mind that a guidance is not the same thing as a rule or regulation. As I have said many, many times, if it is NOT in the FAR's it is NOT a regulation. AC 91-57A said it best, the FAA views 400 feet as a "best practice", meaning they think most people should fly below 400 feet. But this letter makes clear that people operating under a CBO safety program in accordance with Section 336 are granted a bit more latitude when it comes to that guidance.
Please remember the Safety Guidance:
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
- I will fly below 400 feet
- I will fly within visual line of sight
- I will be aware of FAA airspace requirements: faa.gov/go/uastfr
- I will not fly directly over people
- I will not fly over stadiums and sports events
- I will not fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
- I will not fly near aircraft, especially near airports
- I will not fly under the influence
.
When you register with the FAA your agree to these rules. I doesn't say anything about joining that CBO just abiding to the rules.
Mike
#80
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that it says you must operate in accordance with a community based set of safety guidance. Some will read into the phrasing that one must belong to a CBO operate as a hobbyist. Lots of lawless folks out there, in numbers far exceeding dues-paying members of any one of the CBOs extant or imagined.
#83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...washington-dc/
I don't know how this link can be dismissed, but nothing surprises me anymore in terms of what lengths people will go to in ignoring what the AMA has done for us, and/or the energy that goes into finding fault with them. Some have mastered the head in the sand, or fingers in the ears technique.
#85
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Preaching to the choir here.......
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...washington-dc/
I don't know how this link can be dismissed, but nothing surprises me anymore in terms of what lengths people will go to in ignoring what the AMA has done for us, and/or the energy that goes into finding fault with them. Some have mastered the head in the sand, or fingers in the ears technique.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...washington-dc/
I don't know how this link can be dismissed, but nothing surprises me anymore in terms of what lengths people will go to in ignoring what the AMA has done for us, and/or the energy that goes into finding fault with them. Some have mastered the head in the sand, or fingers in the ears technique.
#86
#87
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#88
#89
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to discuss it further, start another thread. This one has already taken enough off-topic trajectories.
#91
Yes, yes and no. AMA gets the advantaged tax-exempt status in trade for providing a service for the public good per 501(c)(3) intent. Running a private members-only club that seeks special privilege under federal law for it's dues-paying members doesn't much resemble a service for the public good to me. YMMV, and I'm certain it does.
If you want to discuss it further, start another thread. This one has already taken enough off-topic trajectories.
If you want to discuss it further, start another thread. This one has already taken enough off-topic trajectories.
#92
#93
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#95
Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, yes and no. AMA gets the advantaged tax-exempt status in trade for providing a service for the public good per 501(c)(3) intent. Running a private members-only club that seeks special privilege under federal law for it's dues-paying members doesn't much resemble a service for the public good to me. YMMV, and I'm certain it does.
If you want to discuss it further, start another thread. This one has already taken enough off-topic trajectories.
If you want to discuss it further, start another thread. This one has already taken enough off-topic trajectories.
#98
No matter how good the news for the AMA and its members there will always be a few that have to rain on someone's parade because they feel as though someone got something they didn't and they're entitled to it too.
Despite all the negativity towards the AMA they're the only voice we have and the only group lobbying on our behalf. I'm glad we got the letter from the FAA as this has been a bone of contention for many AMA members and clubs and I'm glad Andy was able to share it with us.
A huge thanks to everyone at the AMA who made this possible.
Despite all the negativity towards the AMA they're the only voice we have and the only group lobbying on our behalf. I'm glad we got the letter from the FAA as this has been a bone of contention for many AMA members and clubs and I'm glad Andy was able to share it with us.
A huge thanks to everyone at the AMA who made this possible.
#99
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#100