FAA: CBO Membership NOT required to comply with 336
#76
So then why is it OK for the AMA to refuse LMA certification to non-members. Charge a small fee (short of membership), heck even let the inspector keep it for his trouble. We know that other than sizing of the control surface servos, it's largely ambiguous anyway ("minimal voltage drop"), so what's the harm?
#77
Thread Starter
On 4 January 2016, Chad Budreau responded: "At this time, the AMA will only certify AMA member aircraft [emphasis added]."
#78
Thread Starter
#79
Why do you fell it's the responsibility of a private dues collecting organization to inspect public aircraft?
#81
#82
What authority does he have? Web forum administrator? Does he have authority to make the claim that only AMA members aircraft are inspected? The AMA documents do not make that distinction.
#85
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design,construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by acommunity-based organization;
#86
Why should I bother doing that when it's far more fun to point out the hypocrisy with which you post . It's ok for you to go off topic , but no one else can . It's ok for you to talk trash about the posters personally but you wail like a diva when it's done to you . It's ok for you to twist posts to mean things they never did but but you get all indignant when it's done to you . Seen your act before , in fact I'd bet your a poster whose been known here by other names in the past which is why you are so afraid to post even your location much less any credentials , you know , like how you were demanding of someone else here just last night but refused to give the same info back . Just another nameless faceless troll out for a trollabout is how you look to me and quite honestly the game of "whackAtroll" never gets old when the targets are as arrogant as you are ...
#87
Thread Starter
You won't mind me trying? Maybe get some language that covers when the CBO requires you to join to have your aircraft certified.
#88
Thread Starter
I'd prefer the option of either the recognized CBO , or the FAA , do the inspection depending on the choice of the owner . Someone wants to go the CBO route , fine , let the CBO sign off on it . They don't want to belong to the CBO , fine , let the FAA do it . Either way the inspection criteria should be the same and the end result would be that the few who fly planes that large would still have a choice between CBO or FAA . It's been said earlier in this thread and I'm inclined to believe that there are likely very few indeed flying +55# model aircraft who aren't in the at present only recognized CBO , but even if there are only one of them your right he does deserve the option of having either a CBO or FAA inspection depending on whether he wants to belong to the CBO or not . Of course the flipside being if there is an FAA inspection available , there should be no reason to ask the CBO to inspect non member aircraft , if they don't want to be members fine take the FAA's inspection path to the skies instead ...
#89
Thread Starter
Chad Budreau, Public Relations & Government Affairs.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...n/hqstaff.aspx
http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...n/hqstaff.aspx
#90
Thread Starter
#91
Thread Starter
#92
#94
Oh look , there's a parrot in the thread , how quaint ....
I agree , we are not that far apart on this at all . The only thing I'd mention would be that if the CBO did charge for inspections of non member planes I can see a "discount rate" applying to members VS non members , just as many other organizations have discount rates for members only , as long as the option existed to have either the FAA or the CBO inspect the plane for a fairly set (not discounted) fee . Your point of being forced to join the CBO for the 55# inspection , when your letter specifically says CBO membership isn't required , needs to be addressed fairly and I do believe that can be accomplished for the few flying such large planes who aren't CBO members ...
I agree , we are not that far apart on this at all . The only thing I'd mention would be that if the CBO did charge for inspections of non member planes I can see a "discount rate" applying to members VS non members , just as many other organizations have discount rates for members only , as long as the option existed to have either the FAA or the CBO inspect the plane for a fairly set (not discounted) fee . Your point of being forced to join the CBO for the 55# inspection , when your letter specifically says CBO membership isn't required , needs to be addressed fairly and I do believe that can be accomplished for the few flying such large planes who aren't CBO members ...
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/report.php?p=12239378
#95
Chad Budreau, Public Relations & Government Affairs.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...n/hqstaff.aspx
http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...n/hqstaff.aspx
#96
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Well, yes and no. He speaks as a representative of the AMA and behalf of them as well, so at a minimum he is often times seen as the "Face" of the AMA, at least in regards to these issues. It's safe to say the average AMA member would take what he says as coming from and approved by the AMA. But yes, at the end of the day he has no real authority, or perhaps even decision making abilities.
#97
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
"at this time" means just that. Leaves open the possibility for something else, like say another CBO (which is free to form on it's own). Or, perhaps the AMA decides to be a go to resource and charges a "fee" for services. Again, how many of these non member requested inspections do you realistically think there will be?
#98
Does this not make sense though? I know you're going to pivot to the "AMA forcing membership narrative", but I don't know if I want the AMA doing specific things for non members, even more so if it opens a person or the AMA up to any liability.
"at this time" means just that. Leaves open the possibility for something else, like say another CBO (which is free to form on it's own). Or, perhaps the AMA decides to be a go to resource and charges a "fee" for services. Again, how many of these non member requested inspections do you realistically think there will be?
"at this time" means just that. Leaves open the possibility for something else, like say another CBO (which is free to form on it's own). Or, perhaps the AMA decides to be a go to resource and charges a "fee" for services. Again, how many of these non member requested inspections do you realistically think there will be?
#99
Does this not make sense though? I know you're going to pivot to the "AMA forcing membership narrative", but I don't know if I want the AMA doing specific things for non members, even more so if it opens a person or the AMA up to any liability.
"at this time" means just that. Leaves open the possibility for something else, like say another CBO (which is free to form on it's own). Or, perhaps the AMA decides to be a go to resource and charges a "fee" for services. Again, how many of these non member requested inspections do you realistically think there will be?
"at this time" means just that. Leaves open the possibility for something else, like say another CBO (which is free to form on it's own). Or, perhaps the AMA decides to be a go to resource and charges a "fee" for services. Again, how many of these non member requested inspections do you realistically think there will be?
should just inspect any models that the law requires inspection on where it be a AMA members models or not and leave it at that, and also the FAA should require that the AMA follow the law.
#100
The AMA is who pushed this law through congress concerning models that have to be inspected by the AMA, if they don’t want the liability they should have thought of that before they lobbied for the law. Now the AMA
should just inspect any models that the law requires inspection on where it be a AMA members models or not and leave it at that, and also the FAA should require that the AMA follow the law.
should just inspect any models that the law requires inspection on where it be a AMA members models or not and leave it at that, and also the FAA should require that the AMA follow the law.