astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Well, Your experiences with droners are definitely different than mine.........

Astro

fliers1

It's just keeps getting better and better.

Academy of Model Aeronautics District V » FAA rules concerning club trainers

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

What could you possibly find wrong with that?

fliers1

Not a thing

franklin_m

Oh, I don't know....
- Maybe like not deciding on a SINGLE policy to define how they want it done? Geez...make a decision!
- Asking someone to expose themselves to liability by putting their number on an aircraft they're not flying?
- Not building a compliance mindset from the beginning by asking someone to register (not like it's the law or anything)?

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Yawn.

franklin_m

Maybe to a big wig like you, but it's a big deal asking someone to put their own personal info on something and then allow someone else to fly it. AMA can say that FAA isn't going to go after you. But if your information is not on it at all, the chance is ZERO.

Why bother taking the risk?

rcmiket

" Does any of your clubs have club trainers? If so read below to be legal with the FAA.

Two solutions below have been approved by the FAA:

1. The easiest solution is for a club leader to place his or her number on all of the trainers. The club leader does not need to be present when the model is flying. If there is an incident that involves an FAA investigation, the FAA typically focuses on the “Pilot In Command” and not on the person who lent their registration number.
2. The club can use a disposable or replaceable label that is changed depending on the instructor or student. Some clubs use masking tape that can be easily removed. Other clubs use plastic and a dry-erase marker.

I thought the AMA's stance on registration was it wasn't clubs responsibility to check registration.. This sure makes it look like it is a clubs problem to deal with.
Mike

jester_s1

That looks to me like giving advice to clubs on how not to violate the law. FREE legal advice, mind you. Or legal advice we've paid for with dues but given without us needing to ask. However you prefer to spin it, it's helpful and thoughtful. I see nothing there about clubs checking registration. But in that tiny chance of someone from the FAA showing up wanting to check it or the ever so slightly larger chance of an accident happening and that number being asked for, this lets the pilots be assured they are in compliance with the law. Would anyone rather have the AMA not explain this to us?

rcmiket

I'm not spinning anything. If the AMA is not asking anyone to check registration than why bother?
From the AMA site.

Q: Should clubs, contest directors, or event leaders require all pilots be registered?
A: No, we are not asking our clubs or contest directors to police UAS Registration. That decision is up to each individual club and event leader.

Mike

jester_s1

Right, and the statement quoted above is in line with that policy. Giving hobbyists advice about how to be in compliance is not the same thing as requiring clubs to police FAA registration. The truth is if one of us gets checked out by the FAA and is not in compliance, it won't matter at all what the AMA did or didn't do or require. It sounds to me like some are just looking for a way to be offended no matter what the AMA does.

rcmiket

You have no clue as far as my involvement in the AMA and local clubs so please don't assume I hate everything they do. That would be like me assuming your some kinda mindless do or die AMA defender. Yes I do have issues with AMA spending, focus and misleading statements ( such as we discussed here) along with the tactics used by the President in the last election. So that makes me a bad guy? No it makes me a concerned member.

Mike.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

There in is the rub, there are not enough concerned members to herald a change OR!!!!! the majority of the membership is OK with things as they are. No you can only speak for another member if you hold his proxy vote at the time a vote is called for.

Take this thread for instance. How many are participating? A dozen or two out of how many members. Is it any wonder they can choose to ignore you?

Dennis

fliers1

Does anyone think that all of this FAA stuff makes it more difficult to get more new members?

Hydro Junkie

Let me be the first to say I'm NOT a member and, with all the stuff I've been reading, it's hard to justify the cost of membership. Knowing that people like Rich Hanson want to waste money on white elephants and that the home office is a payroll glut, just to name a few reasons, I just can't justify spending the money. I think the part that really slams the door shut, in my case anyway, is to see how some of the members try to gloss over or rationalize the issues rather than admit the organization has some very serious problems. Until the powers that be can figure out how to cut costs and be considerably more fiscally responsible, just for starters, it's not worth it

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Based on my first-hand experience, it is my belief that the vast majority of AMA members are so disengaged that they don’t have a clue what goes on in Muncie. That is a far cry from them being “okay” with it and I tend to think that the Leadership knows and understands that and want to keep it that way so they can continue to do as they please.

Regards,

Astro

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

Disengaged, apathy, could care less attitude, what ever the reason its the same as accepting things as they are because all they want to do is fly and are OK with the way things are as long as it doesn't take any time or commitment on their part. Belonging to the AMA is part and parcel of flying at a AMA field same as paying dues to a club. The old saying that 10% do 90% of the work is as true today as it was years ago. Until that changes I don't see the head of the snake doing things differently. When there is only a few of you its easy to just ignore you. Wasn't it attributed to W C Fields "Go away kid, ya bother me."

Dennis

init4fun

Hi fliers1 ,

I think there are a couple of things making it more difficult for the AMA to get new members , specifically ;

#1 , People just do not seem to be as eager to be members of clubs like the AMA as they were in years past . This is the real reason , I believe , that the AMA is grasping at any and all options to remain afloat , that although the numbers of folks interested in flying machines has grown exponentially with the whole hobby based "drone revolution" , the AMA has not seen a corresponding rise in membership numbers .

#2 , With the exception of us who fly at traditional clubs who are required to have an AMA membership , this new hobby offshoot that's selling all these millions of units annually has no need of the traditional club field and thus no pressure to join the AMA . I can not just walk out into the street , put my PT-17 down and take off vertically like a drone can and thus they need no real field to operate from (make no mistake I do NOT condone this type of reckless operation , but truth be told I see a lot more Utube videos of folks operating drones in urban areas than I see of them being used at dedicated flying club fields) .

For better or worse , the FAA is (I believe) trying to make an honest go of integrating non manned commercial flight into the present air travel system . I do believe their ultimate goal is the safety of the airspace for all users , manned & unmanned . The AMA is struggling to find it's niche in this brave new world in a do or die battle for it's very future survival . Sadly , I believe , there is no place for the AMA in the future of these FAA controlled commercial operations as it's presently run (non profit educational hobby organization only) and that to survive the AMA would need to become something far beyond it's original mission of hobby advocacy , a full blown commercial organization that would ultimately leave those of us (hobbyists) who built it behind . As my poll thread indicates , I'd rather the AMA cease to exist if the hobby can no longer support it rather than see it become just another for profit commercial insurance brokerage or for profit commercial "drone pilot's school" .....

jester_s1

I don't think the FAA registration has anything to do with the AMA's membership worries. As I stated above, the hobby in general is in decline. As the hobby goes, so the AMA goes unless it shifts its focus. Part of it is cultural- a lot of the younger hobbyists don't want to be part of a group. Yet oddly enough groups are forming organically as people figure out it's really boring to fly drones by yourself. I agree the paradigm of club fields and AMA sanctioning won't work with the drone crowd. It's still a bit early to know what will work, but history shows that building community is the key. That's what got the AMA to where it is now, and that's what will carry it into the future if it is to survive.

fliers1

Academy of Model Aeronautics - Strategic Task Force

franklin_m

Mind you, this will never be an issue unless there's a serious mishap of sorts, or perhaps if an injury attorney starts digging, but here's something to consider. While AMA is not accountable for the actions of individual members, they are accountable for what they know or should know is happening at events they sanction. If at a sanctioned event, it's AMA policy NOT to check for compliance with a law DIRECTLY related to the operations at the event, that's a data point about the AMA's safety culture. How much will it matter? By itself, not much. But remember this discussion could be happening in front of a jury, one looking at some badly injured person. Then say the lawyer does some digging on you tube and finds any number of violations of AMA's safety code. That combined with the earlier point could start making the case for a weak safety culture. From there, all you do is bring a professional aviation safety expert in to talk about what happens when an organizations' safety culture is weak ... which is a mishap. Could be very compelling in front of a jury.

franklin_m

There may be a niche AMA could fill, particularly if the FAA reauthorization looks more like the Senate bill than the one that came from the House. The Senate bill requires recreational folks to demonstrate knowledge (via a test). In the case of amateur radio operators, ARRL has become a authorized test group. They also have a lot of influence over the questions. Though FCC is the ultimate approval authority. AMA might be able to perform a similar role for the FAA. They could charge individuals to take the test, and work with the FAA on test questions etc.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

LOL. They approved the STF in JANUARY 2010???????

It only took them 8 years to take action????????

Here's my Cliff's Notes version of that article:

"We have no clue what we are doing, and we are failing. Anybody out there that can do our jobs for us?"

Wouldn't it just be easier to "clean house" and let someone that is capable earn the salary and right the ship?

Regards,

Astro

franklin_m

You have a gift for brevity ... and accuracy.

jester_s1

The house cleaning style of problem solving rarely results in a better overall situation. It's essentially a decision made in anger. They rarely go well.

franklin m- You make a good point. I agree with you. 99.9% of the time no one will care if we've registered or have our numbers on our planes. But it is a compliance piece, and if we don't do it and do get into trouble, it's a mark against us if we haven't done it. I like that the AMA is making us aware of where we stand. I appreciated their communication during the whole legislation process. They boiled it all down to simple procedures to follow for us to be in compliance, and they kept us informed of where the process was and what their goals were. In the final analysis, they did a good job.