Tepid Pilot

The FAA, with the full capitulation - oops - I mean cooperation of AMA, chose to require model flight enthusiasts to acquire a "license" in order for us to "legally" operate.

Meantime, a few miles from our home, a hot air balloon hit some high tension power lines The propane exploded and slaughtered 15 innocents along with a very reckless operator. Worst hot air balloon accident in US history.

According to various news sources the NTSB had requested, some two years ago, that the FAA increase inspection and regulation of the hot air balloon tourist industry due to risk factors. The FAA declined, said "very low risk," you can look it up.

Talk about misplaced priorities.

TP
AMA 59376

TimJ

Sorry but you are sadly mistake. There is not a license requirement for you to fly a model aircraft for hobby pleasure.

However, if you choose to fly a sUAS (model aircraft) for financial gain, you must follow part 107 and pass a test.

Tepid Pilot

TimJ - You funny dude. Suggest you get hip to the cogitation.

TP
AMA 59376

TimJ

I suggest that you inform yourself before suggesting something that is false.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Talk about misplaced priorities. What a ghoulish attempt to juxtapose two completely issues (one involving horrific loss of life), to try to make some kind of point about the AMA.

Horrifically insensitive.

Tepid Pilot

My apologies. The point I was trying to make is only about FAA over-regulation regarding model aviation. Apparently I failed miserably.

What I'm asking, is why the FAA is so concerned about activities that have proven to be harmless and so unconcerned about activities that can be destructive of human life.

Sorry you missed the point, sorry I was unclear.

TP
AMA 59376

Tepid Pilot

Same here.

TP
59376

TimJ

Now I better understand what you are trying to do and say here.

And again, I will inform you that NO license is required to fly aircraft of model aviation for pleasure.

As for the hot air balloon, I could also include ultra-lite aircraft to your comparison. Two major reasons the FAA has us on the radar. One, the amount of news coverage of multi-rotor aircraft and tax revenue potential created by commercial enterprise such as Amazon, DHL and others. Amazon is spending big money to receive the ability to use 0 to 400 feet for delivery drones or sUAS devices.

init4fun

...

init4fun

...

TimJ

Good Point.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

I missed the point because it wasn't clear, and remains unclear. You're still comparing one thing as if it has to do in any way with the other, all the while taking a shot at the AMA. While the AMA may deserve some knocks here and there....this one is so far off base, and more contemptible because of the scenario. Shameful.

Did you know that there are already federal guidelines in place in order to pilot a balloon such as this? Clearly the FAA felt it was important to have these. See Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regs for further clarification. Average time to complete the requirements that this balloon pilot would have needed is about 14 months.

Feel free to post up the corresponding "license" that "model enthusiasts" are now "required" to hold in order to "legally" operate (whatever that means) thanks of course to the "full capitulation" of the AMA. If you are so inclined, post up the links to for those licenses needed for both classes of aircraft, .55 ounces and above.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Probably, but he specified license, and was noting NTSB in his discussions so it's safe to presume he knows the difference.

rgburrill

Remember that "assume" can be broken down into "ass" out of "u" and "me". He obviously has no idea of the difference because he continued to spout that ridiculous nonsense.

To repeat for the umpteenth time, the FAA by Congressional order has required that aircraft be registered for many, many years. Hobbyists have not been exempted from that requirement, we have merely been ignored mostly due to not knowing how to fairly treat the fact that many hobbyists have multiple airplanes and requiring each to be registered would be very expensive. Thanks to few a-holes who refused to follow some simple flying guidelines, Congress insisted that our toys be registered so that if someone actually damages a full scale aircraft then he can be dealt with. To reduce the cost to us hobbyists the FAA decided that a single registration number could be used on all RC models owned by one person.

Now can we stop the s--t about licensing?

Tepid Pilot

Gosh, talk about your good times. Thanks for missing my actual point and setting me straight. Never should have brought AMA into discussion. Sorry to have used the term "licensing" when I should have said "registering." My mistake. Whatever. Still seems to me as though FAA has misplaced priorities, however.

TP
AMA 59376

init4fun

...

Tepid Pilot

IMO the safety and regulation of airborne vehicles that carry persons should be top priority.

TP
AMA 59376

cj_rumley

I fully agree with you, TP. Who do you think should have the last say on what is safe in the NAS, FAA or AMA?

Silent-AV8R

The FAA agrees with you and this is the prime reason they have become so concerned about "drones". In addition, the FAA follows the NTSB recommendations most of the time:

https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets...m?newsId=11186

And let's not forget that it was the NTSB that affirmed that model airplanes are in fact "aircraft" for the sake of regulation. FAA took that to heart!!

init4fun

...

init4fun

...

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

That's an easy one, the same ones who will always have a say in that, congress. The FAA will then enforce that.

cj_rumley

Now that's scary

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Can't disagree totally...but then again, who else should be doing this? Please don't say that the feds, nor congress should have a say in the NAS, or that we should left to our own devices. Please?

cj_rumley

If you meant to say "Please don't say that neither the feds, nor congress should have a say in the NAS, or that we should left to our own devices. Please?" then okay, I wont.