400 foot? NOPE
07-31-2016, 12:40 PM
#526
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Got 2 flights in 1 more than usual ... One a day is good enough. I seldom go over 100 feet with my little E Flight F4U. More fun to do tight turns over the runway and straiff the field. Do an occasional victory roll or a hammer head to a landing. I go to the field every day (Except if I have an appointment at the VA).
Colonoscopy and a Sleep study last time. had 57 berating stoppages of 10 seconds or more per hour. (One a Minute). With the CPAP machine they are down to 1 or 2 a night. Wake rested and I haven't had to get up to P since I started using it 2 weeks ago. I don't know what the CPAP has to do with that but that's OK too. But then that has nothing to do with R/C Flying. This does Yesterday we had our annual fun fly, very well attended. Moved te flight out 20' to accommodate more spectators. Heard today that the Boy Scouts did a $1048 gorse on the food and another $400+ on the parking. Hope they goto bat for us when the two new Subdivisions just 2200' away complain about the big Gassers. OH well Life moves on.
Sure happy ya all have aggred to disagree ad all that. Bet that don't last long. LOL
Look at the Subdivision 2200' SE it know has about 30 0f 168 proposed houses and there is another sub going in to the East of that one. There coming to get us.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1342...!3m1!1e3?hl=en
Colonoscopy and a Sleep study last time. had 57 berating stoppages of 10 seconds or more per hour. (One a Minute). With the CPAP machine they are down to 1 or 2 a night. Wake rested and I haven't had to get up to P since I started using it 2 weeks ago. I don't know what the CPAP has to do with that but that's OK too. But then that has nothing to do with R/C Flying. This does Yesterday we had our annual fun fly, very well attended. Moved te flight out 20' to accommodate more spectators. Heard today that the Boy Scouts did a $1048 gorse on the food and another $400+ on the parking. Hope they goto bat for us when the two new Subdivisions just 2200' away complain about the big Gassers. OH well Life moves on.
Sure happy ya all have aggred to disagree ad all that. Bet that don't last long. LOL
Look at the Subdivision 2200' SE it know has about 30 0f 168 proposed houses and there is another sub going in to the East of that one. There coming to get us.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1342...!3m1!1e3?hl=en
07-31-2016, 01:23 PM
#527
Yikes that a ton of money! Wow! It's not everyday I can do that many flights, and I got to visit 3 clubs today and have some fun, even if the weather wasn't perfect. Oh, and at each of them I was able to go over 400 feet, just as I was a year or two or three ago. As we have both said, keep flying like U always did, and all will be o/k. Oh, listen to the dr's on the CPAP machine..it can literally be a lifesaver.
07-31-2016, 05:27 PM
#529
Sorry, you're just wrong. You are looking at this neglecting to consider that there are thousands of people flying RC that are not part of the AMA. Never have been, never will be. In fact many of them are here talking about that very fact. Your stat of 98% is pure conjecture. It's not 98% either, nor is it as high as 50% either, somewhere in between. The RC industry, as vast as it is, isn't kept afloat from AMA members is it?
And of course the AMA doesn't want non members flying at chartered fields, why in the world would they ever want that? The pros and cons of the AMA are irrelevant, and the chances of anyone being "hassled" by the FAA for not flying at an AMA field is slim and virtually none. They don't have a police force that's going to be checking every guy flying in a field to make sure he's registered, or part of a CBO. Let's not forget not all aircraft are required to be registered.
The final statement is opinion, just more of the same AMA cynicism, AMA=Bad. Although they aren't doing what about 5 people now are claiming they are doing, it's just another instance of where anything they do is bad.
There isn't a single person in the AMA that was "forced" to join, it's completely voluntary. Always has been, always will be.
And of course the AMA doesn't want non members flying at chartered fields, why in the world would they ever want that? The pros and cons of the AMA are irrelevant, and the chances of anyone being "hassled" by the FAA for not flying at an AMA field is slim and virtually none. They don't have a police force that's going to be checking every guy flying in a field to make sure he's registered, or part of a CBO. Let's not forget not all aircraft are required to be registered.
The final statement is opinion, just more of the same AMA cynicism, AMA=Bad. Although they aren't doing what about 5 people now are claiming they are doing, it's just another instance of where anything they do is bad.
There isn't a single person in the AMA that was "forced" to join, it's completely voluntary. Always has been, always will be.
07-31-2016, 05:38 PM
#530
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Never said those people are "here" in this thread, you might have misread that. They are however here in the AMA threads. Not everyone on RCU are AMA members. Are you saying you have never seen people here comment how they aren't AMA members, they have no need for it...they fly on their own property, they fly out in the desert and don't need the insurance, etc etc etc? They are usually the same folks who note they aren't going to register with the AMA as well.
Don't you think there are people out there flying RC that have nothing to do with AMA? I've met plenty of them throughout New England...in fact found 4 such folks flying at a public golf course in Hartford a few years back. They had never heard of the AMA. Was about to tee off and a Corsair came out from my left and I thought it was a real plane at first as there is an airport near by. Once I met up with them we started talking about flying, etc, and clubs/AMA and they had no idea clubs were nearby, nor that the AMA existed. Needless to say, as any good AMA member would do (I'm sure), i gave them some Koolaide and within two weeks....well, lets just say the AMA ranks increased by 4. God I love a story with a happy ending!
Don't you think there are people out there flying RC that have nothing to do with AMA? I've met plenty of them throughout New England...in fact found 4 such folks flying at a public golf course in Hartford a few years back. They had never heard of the AMA. Was about to tee off and a Corsair came out from my left and I thought it was a real plane at first as there is an airport near by. Once I met up with them we started talking about flying, etc, and clubs/AMA and they had no idea clubs were nearby, nor that the AMA existed. Needless to say, as any good AMA member would do (I'm sure), i gave them some Koolaide and within two weeks....well, lets just say the AMA ranks increased by 4. God I love a story with a happy ending!
07-31-2016, 07:41 PM
#531
Doggy...things are looking up, nobody is a loser...the hobby is doing great, I hope everyone is having fun flying. I got 8 flights in today dialing in my new Carbon Z T-28. Was never really a big warbird fan, but I'm sold on this one. And the best part? I went well over 400 feet with it! Yeehaaa!
08-03-2016, 01:45 PM
#533
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
There has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that operations above 400 feet are permitted, 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 within visual line of sight of the pilot/observer. In a recent letter to the AMA, the FAA recognized AMA’s role as a community-based organization and acknowledged our safety guidelines, including allowing flight above 400 feet.
Read it, looks pretty clear. Also, this went to AMA members, not non members/general public. The AMA is talking about their members flying above 400 feet.
Read it, looks pretty clear. Also, this went to AMA members, not non members/general public. The AMA is talking about their members flying above 400 feet.
08-03-2016, 02:14 PM
#534
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True if 'us' is taken to be participants/readers of this forum, Tim. It's the modelers outside of this little group that need to know, those that are not AMA members and AMA members that might innocently misinform them.
08-03-2016, 03:27 PM
#535
The AMA wants everyone to think you have to be a AMA member in order fly over 400ft or a over 55lb model or a turbine model. Truth is it all depends on how the FAA will approach this and I suspect they will
treat all modelers the same AMA member or not. For the FAA to make a distinction between AMA and non AMA members will at this time be playing into the AMA scheme and I think they are smarter than that.
I do think if the FAA comes across a operation that is clearly a commercial venture they will deal with it as needed but as for the hobbyist I think they will pretty much leave them alone as long as they don’t
interfere with full scale operations.
treat all modelers the same AMA member or not. For the FAA to make a distinction between AMA and non AMA members will at this time be playing into the AMA scheme and I think they are smarter than that.
I do think if the FAA comes across a operation that is clearly a commercial venture they will deal with it as needed but as for the hobbyist I think they will pretty much leave them alone as long as they don’t
interfere with full scale operations.
08-03-2016, 03:38 PM
#536
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
08-03-2016, 04:02 PM
#537
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think for the most part nothing has changed with respect to the run of the mill AMA member. Not do I think that most of the MR pilots who are AMA members are the ones causing issues. The issues for the most part are being generated by the instant drone pilot who truly does not what they do not know!! So they charge forth filled with the confidence of the ignorant and do stupid crap that gives us all a black eye.
08-03-2016, 04:21 PM
#538
Correct me if I am wrong but some comments here would read that some people are opposed to having to join the AMA ( No such requirement at this time ). I would have no issue if it were a requirement however. Then again I have been an AMA member since 1977. My thought is that as of right now the AMA is the only organization that lobbies for our hobby and I see some guys complaining about how the AMA has handled the FAA however openly admit they are not members. Perhaps with more membership the AMA would have had more resources. I guess my question is why would anyone not want to join the AMA? My perspective is that there are many benifits to joining with no downside.
08-03-2016, 04:27 PM
#539
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think for the most part nothing has changed with respect to the run of the mill AMA member. Not do I think that most of the MR pilots who are AMA members are the ones causing issues. The issues for the most part are being generated by the instant drone pilot who truly does not what they do not know!! So they charge forth filled with the confidence of the ignorant and do stupid crap that gives us all a black eye.
08-03-2016, 06:05 PM
#540
anyone else ever notice that the first 40 years of AMA, there were NO incidences of conflict with full scale, or anything else, that could cause us any trouble? seems that is was only after the advent of widespread R/C that things started to go south. of course, it is only with R/C that one is able to actually control one of our models into near proximity with a full scale.
08-03-2016, 06:21 PM
#541
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anyone else ever notice that the first 40 years of AMA, there were NO incidences of conflict with full scale, or anything else, that could cause us any trouble? seems that is was only after the advent of widespread R/C that things started to go south. of course, it is only with R/C that one is able to actually control one of our models into near proximity with a full scale.
Mike
08-03-2016, 07:10 PM
#542
anyone else ever notice that the first 40 years of AMA, there were NO incidences of conflict with full scale, or anything else, that could cause us any trouble? seems that is was only after the advent of widespread R/C that things started to go south. of course, it is only with R/C that one is able to actually control one of our models into near proximity with a full scale.
when you factor in real time video and the auto return land function it’s easy to see why RC craft are flying in places they never did before.
08-03-2016, 07:11 PM
#543
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I am wrong but some comments here would read that some people are opposed to having to join the AMA ( No such requirement at this time ). I would have no issue if it were a requirement however. Then again I have been an AMA member since 1977. My thought is that as of right now the AMA is the only organization that lobbies for our hobby and I see some guys complaining about how the AMA has handled the FAA however openly admit they are not members. Perhaps with more membership the AMA would have had more resources. I guess my question is why would anyone not want to join the AMA? My perspective is that there are many benifits to joining with no downside.
08-03-2016, 07:38 PM
#544
What rules have the AMA come up with that affect non members? As I understand the FAA states that anyone flying is to do so in a manner that follows a CBO safety guidelines. Key word, guidelines. Yes the AMA is the only CBO at this time but the safety guidelines for the most part were established well before this mess happened. There is nothing there that forces anyone to join the AMA. The guidelines are available to everyone, member or not. Of course AMA would like everyone flying a model aircraft to join, to criticize them for that IMO is absurd, it would be like criticizing Walmart for not sending people to Target.
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
08-03-2016, 08:04 PM
#545
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie;12242636[B
]What rules have the AMA come up with that affect non members?[/B] As I understand the FAA states that anyone flying is to do so in a manner that follows a CBO safety guidelines. Key word, guidelines. Yes the AMA is the only CBO at this time but the safety guidelines for the most part were established well before this mess happened. There is nothing there that forces anyone to join the AMA. The guidelines are available to everyone, member or not. Of course AMA would like everyone flying a model aircraft to join, to criticize them for that IMO is absurd, it would be like criticizing Walmart for not sending people to Target.
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
08-03-2016, 08:11 PM
#546
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What rules have the AMA come up with that affect non members? As I understand the FAA states that anyone flying is to do so in a manner that follows a CBO safety guidelines. Key word, guidelines. Yes the AMA is the only CBO at this time but the safety guidelines for the most part were established well before this mess happened. There is nothing there that forces anyone to join the AMA. The guidelines are available to everyone, member or not. Of course AMA would like everyone flying a model aircraft to join, to criticize them for that IMO is absurd, it would be like criticizing Walmart for not sending people to Target.
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
Still, I have to wonder why some people refuse to join the AMA, it's certainly not because of the money. Joining would increase numbers and thus strength to deal with the FAA. I can't help but think it has more to do with ego and pride. I hear echos of " nobody is going to tell me what I can't do ".
08-03-2016, 10:04 PM
#547
While the AMA letter does state that one must be a member to be protected as operating within the guidelines of a CBO, the FAA letter does not support that statement and would actually imply that they would support multiple CBO's. Again it is only understandable IMO that AMA would campaign to increase membership. Not that I agree with their methods but we see ads on TV everyday that stretch the truth to a higher degree and we seem to be able to weed through it. So the reality is that AMA have no real authority to establish " rules " in which non members must follow when flying at a non AMA flying site. What exactly are the requirements to be a qualified CBO? What is keeping me from writing down a few safety guidelines and calling myself a CBO?
My actual question actually has not been answered and that is why would anyone NOT want to join the AMA?
My actual question actually has not been answered and that is why would anyone NOT want to join the AMA?
08-04-2016, 02:18 AM
#548
both turbine operations and over 55 pound operations require a waiver issued by the CBO, according to sec 336 as interpreted by the FAA. the only CBO has said it will not issue waivers to non members.
as to your question, some of us just are not social folk who like to be around others or want to join any type of organization.
as to your question, some of us just are not social folk who like to be around others or want to join any type of organization.
08-04-2016, 04:56 AM
#549
I'm sorry, but what you wrote that I highlighted is NOT what AMA has told its members. Did you receive the Email that went out from AMA today 8/3/2016? If not you can read it at http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutama/gov.aspx
That said I think it would be hard to prove you are, even if you have the rules on hand.
08-04-2016, 06:08 AM
#550
The Enforcement arm of the FAA is not PRO active. Nothing will happen till U screw up. They ain't gona do RAMP CHECKS especially at the more than 2400 Sanctioned AMA fields. Now U guys that fly in your back yards and Parks just might come under the scrutiny of some new over zellius JR grade FAA inspector. Just Keep it cool and don't cause waves and we'll all be OK.