porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Absolutely, the 2016 meeting notes no doubt show that 80 years of self regulation has come to a miserable failure of and end. Specifically regarding one tiny segment of the hobby. Wonder who we could ask about that? Anyone running for ama president that would know anything about this? Maybe that question should be put to them since they are involved in that segment, and have a well established history of crashes and severe injuries...or perhaps we'll lob up some more softball questions about real issues, like the magazine or grants to clubs versus Muncie money?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Nope, just a near miss with a plastic shopping bag. Close call! Actually I think Franklin was referencing the meeting notes surrounding the turbine crashes and lack of responsibility that involved folks were taking. Might have been the incident where the pilot and spotter were severely burned, and the CD claimed no responsibility or fault. Don't know for sure, it's not spelled out. The SIG president though confirmed some well known issues though. As folks are clamoring for CHANGE, I can't help but wonder why they aren't looking for change in that arena. I mean, they're already getting changes at the presidential level with the AMA come election time

Sport_Pilot

OK but that one had nothing to do with the NAS and I don't think the FAA cares, or at least not much.

franklin_m

Only in the sense that someone at the meeting said they believe they're one serious incident away from losing it (turbines). -- or words to that effect.

franklin_m

If they're well known, why haven't they been addressed before now? Sounds like the oversight has been weak at best. Don't look now, but comments like that are typical of what we find in failed aviation safety programs.

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

Yes I have heard that since 1998......

Curious, I wonder what the AMA will do or say, given that the AMA is hosting the "Drone Racing Championship" the week the FPV "law" goes into effect.

franklin_m

AMA is already suing them, I'm sure holding a very open violation of the FARs will go over very well.

I also wonder if the timing of the Forbes piece is no accident. If so, one could interpret it as a warning shot to the AMA - a test of their willingness to abide by FAA interpretations.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Oh I agree....could be a serious issue. Serious enough that it's discussed in session, serious enough that the Sig reps confirmed the issue and will work on it. Serious enough to bring up here...but not ask the guy who makes a living from it and might have been involved in it. Weird what becomes a focal point and priority.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Agree....seems like something to ask those that are very very involved in this area, almost exclusively even. Have they heard about the issue discussed in the meeting, are they aware that this has been a problem , do they say this is a problem themselves or do they think nobody is really responsible, , do they have any plans to deal with this issue if they become the president of the AMA..etc...etc...etc...

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

The FAA used a blogger to post up a story as a subtle warning to the AMA?

franklin_m

Not unheard of in government.

franklin_m

Programmatic questions are properly directed at those responsible for oversight of the program. Especially when those same folks are in poweer now that have allowed this problem to develop and go unaddressed.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

So true, alot had been said since 1998, usually forecasts of bad things happening just around the corner.

Chances are the AMA will report back that they had a great event, they might even report on how many pilots showed up, and immediately the result will be labeled as...pathetic.
Just another tempest in a teapot, this time from a blogger. If the story had been even remotely positive...we'd never had heard about it.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

And yet at least one of those parties will be out of that role shortly. Not that he had exclusive control over that situation to begin with but still. So that leaves the SIG president, and I would presume an immediate situation that the new president would need to deal with. Any chance any of the current candidates for the role could answer questions on this pressing issue? In addition to questions about magazine subscriptions and discounts? It's hard to ask the hard questions I guess.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Since your involved in building and flying high end giant svale and turbines, do you have any insight to what the EC meeting notes were referring to. Are you aware that there is or has been an ongoing opportunity with regards to safety and to rules and regulations and the turbine community? Are you part of that SIG?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Virtually unheard of, if ever heard. They place a call to legal and they fire off a quick memo. That's if there's even an issue to be concerned about. They aren't leaving policy and procedure and compliance to some commercial blogger.

franklin_m

Untrue. Earlier this year there was a flurry of stories about how WH staff planted stories to create "an echo chamber."


Forbes magazine is hardly a blogger.

franklin_m

Are you advocate that people who were responsible for oversight of the program should not be accountable for the situation they allowed to develop?


Ok, let me see if I follow this. We have a CBO, and those rules aren't being followed. But we expect a "sub-CBO" (SIG) to fix a problem problem they were aware of but did not address already?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

FAA...not the white House, let's stick with the same realm of similarity.

He's not a writer/reporter for Forbes. He is a blogger/contributor who generally deals with poorly written hack pieces that are not subject to the scrutiny or editorial process a real reporter is. Forbes notes this under his byline. He doesn't appear for/against drones, his work is just clickbaity in general, usually incorrect, or just incomplete.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Great questions for the candidate (s). I fly giant scale, but not turbines...yet.

franklin_m

Realm of similarity? Both are Executive Branch.


Well, Forbes must think highly enough of the work to run it under their title.

franklin_m

I prefer to ask those question of the folks who were, and still are, responsible for oversight.

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

More likely, the AMAs problem will be a concern troll that stirs things up with the FAA before the AMA FPV quad racing event in Muncie.

Like most of these FAA issues, concerned "safety types" in the club's/AMA's own membership should be most members number 1 concern.

Has the AMA said they will legally ($) defend someone against this (long standing) FAA FPV interpretation if it comes to that?

cj_rumley

He wants to diss it because it isn't what he wants to read. I found something I like in it and want it to be so. If it has any basis in fact, FAA is drawing a clear line between model airplanes and drones. I appreciate that. The "modelers must pay dues to the CBO" thing will go away for the simple reason that it is un-American. Not sure how that will come about, but confident that it will happen.

franklin_m

That would be an interesting way to generate a case of first impression. That is if they (AMA) is willing to put our money behind it.