NorfolkSouthern

Well, folks. Even though I'm not flying, I extended my AMA membership anyway, figuring that perhaps I might be able to get up enough cash to get back into the hobby this Summer. Unfortunately, that's a bit doubtful at the moment. Too many bills, too many expenses, and not enough money to cover all of it. Who knows, maybe things will be different next year. None the less, there is something I may get out of my investment afterall, especially when it concerns the FAA, Chuck Schumer, and possibly my ability to fly unregulated one day, when (or IF) I can afford it.

I do believe I have read quite a bit about what the AMA has delt with during the last decade or so regarding the FAA and Congress, especially since that 9/11 incident. Needless to say, some folks in the media love a good story, because it's profitable. More money buys more Hummers for the big wigs, and all that stuff. And this, my friends, is a juicy one. Go ahead, take a BIG bite....

http://wcbstv.com/watercooler/local_...137002709.html

NorfolkSouthern

BUDMAN27

I have to admit that does scare me. I do keep a close eye on the guy next to me when I am at the flying field. One thing that scares me is that if these Alkida or any other group of terrist do use a modle to attact Americans then that would mean all of us would loos our right to fly rc for ever. One can only wonder what is going to happen next on this planit I guess.

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Schumer is a knee jerk reactionist who plays to the media. He is also a danger to our hobby. Attitudes like that will defintely hurt us. I think the story however really hits home for us. We have to be vigilant and keep our eyes open for idiots strapping explosives on models and asking questions about how to do this, and whn we see them, we report them. If they are trolls or jokesters, they do so at theor own peril.
Tommy

abel_pranger

AMA President Dave Brown has been conducting the same campaign of hysteria for years, and has lobbied for the same kind regulation that Schumer is yapping about. CBS must have done some background investigation for this story. What better source could there be?

Abel

bkdavy

My Feedback: (1)

Anybody that thinks terrorists aren't going to try to use model airplanes, wireless video, and cheaply available parts to build a smart bomb that can be flown several miles very rapidly to a high value target is kidding themselves. Call it hype if you want, but vigilance on our part is only part of the game. Many of the topics on RCU, particularly in the Beginners and Aerial Photography forums contain plenty of information that would be of use. I hope the Department of Homeland Security is watching very closely.

Brad

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

I wonder if he knows or even realizes that anyone can just buy a small jet, cash. Load it with tnt. Hop in it without a license or registering it. Be cleared to take off by ATC, if they even need to be cleared and crash it into a bigger building then what an RC plane could fly into. I thought these terrorists were supposed to be funded by the big oil rich countries, why would they need to resort to playing with toys to create havoc. There are a few jets for sale on Ebay right now. Take ya about 8 hours to learn how to take off and fly it half decent enough to score a direct hit on something big. You don't need to worry about learning how to land, patterns, weather and all that stuf, it's only one half of a one way trip, just pick a bright and sunny day.

It just comes down to today is RC day in terrorism. Tomorrow will be some other industry's turn. I think tommorrow will be the one where the terrorist will launch some biohazard materials into a water supply center using water soluable paintballs filled with the bio hazard materials. Paintball guns are coming next! Hey wait they are part of the RC industry now too ... hmmmm.

rogue-RCU

My Feedback: (2)

Shummer is a media hog who just likes to get his face on the news. I and the rest of my modeling friends keep our eyes and ears open to everything also. It's up to us to take care of it.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

Come off it A-P, when was the last time the drive by media did some background investigation for any story?

There are a heck of a lot better delivery vehicles for terrorists, particularly when they willingly furnish all the suicide auto pilots. Idiots like Schumer are a lot bigger threat to this country than ANY terrorist.

abel_pranger

RS-

Yes, any couple of brainwashed islamic zombies can make those autopilots. Many do, they crank them out by the millions. Model airplanes take some skill to make and fly.

I mentioned Schumer, and also Dave Brown. Which one of them is a bigger threat to our freedom to fly model airplanes?

Abel

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

[quote]ORIGINAL: abel_pranger


Schumer is a threat to EVERYTHING we hold dear in this country. DB, if considered a threat at all, is pretty well limited to model airplanes which don't form a pimple on the big picture. I think you give DB a lot more credit than really due him.

abel_pranger

Well, yes that is true. This is after all an AMA discussion forum. My question to you stands - is Schumer or DB the greater threat to our freedom to fly a model airplane sans oppressive regulation?

Abel

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

I think a US Senator trumps any bureaucrat in a relatively small special interest group. Yes, this is an AMA forum, but it could disappear in a heartbeat if internet forums become the target of our politicians for reasons of national security. Sure, it was "invented" by arch-Democrat Al Gore, and as such, another arch-Democrat could justify the need for pulling the plug if it was perceived as being "in the best interest of the country" - read: best interest of the party.

abel_pranger

To put things in perspective, I wouldn't support either of them for dog catcher, except maybe if the job venue were Sadr City. As a practical matter, US Senator Schumer has to get at least 50 other Senators to agree with him before his paranoia starts on its way to becoming the law. It has been demonstrated that DB will go over, under, behind, and through the elected officers of AMA to turn his paranoia into AMA policy, and he has succeeded in doing just that.
In the Senate, Schumer has balancing forces to content with. AMA has a rudderless, foundering ship with loose cannon on deck.

Abel

Sport_Pilot

Before they do that they will try a semi full of explosives. Which do you think would do more damage, a model plane with 20 pounds of explosives or a simi trailer with 20 tons of explosives? A smaller version with a Ryder delivery truck has already been used on these shores. And if the radio controled part scares you, then I notice that about once a month Mythbusters puts radio control in a full scale car or truck. IMO its not the planes that may get regulated but the radio equipment.

NorfolkSouthern

I don't know much about this whole politics thing. However, I used to belong to the NRA and have lived through all the media hysteria involving the Second Amendment, and gun ownership. Fortunately, the NRA has stood in the way of draconian regulations and European-style gun control schemes. Recently, the NRA has given in to some pressure from the media and other groups have started to form as a result.

I don't remember the AMA as ever being an organization after the increased regulation of R/C hobby. No license is required to join, and there are essentially no laws regarding the purchase, fabrication, and operation of a model airplane. You just go to the hobby shop, show the cash, and buy what you need. The AMA, in my opinion, has ALWAYS been fully, and completely AGAINST the regulation of R/C in any form.

The point I was trying to make, is that the hobby still exists because of the organizations lobbying efforts. Otherwise, we would have all been nearly legislated out of existence back in 2003. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I have yet to see how a background check will be required to buy a transmitter. I do believe that much of what Dave Brown writes about relating to the hobby, has a lot to do with the pressure from governing bodies he is often under.

NorfolkSouthern

anonymouse

I'm going to send "Chucky" a personal invitation to come out and show me how easy it is for someone to just walk up and fly ANY RC airplane with out any training or help.....If he can solo without any help from anybody, I'll help him write some regulation that will be ignored by the law breakers any way.

Hossfly

Just go check out what it takes to be able to fly an RC model in Italy. I read it all a year or so ago. It takes "an act of Congress almost". []

OTOH unlike Great Britian and Australia, Italy has just passed some good stuff for citizen rights ref. firearms due to their high rate of crime. GB and Aus. continue to have great increases in crime but just punish the victims.

Back to RC, giving the devil its due, DB did at one time promote the idea of the establishment of a Foundation and separate non-Non-Profit org. such as both NRA and EAA are set up. I do not know what happened to his idea, except that his method allowed for family line ownership like EAA of the main unit.

While I am against that portion, I think it is way past time where AMA needs an organization that CAN lobby for model aviation as well as a Non-Profit Foundation to serve the membership.

The main enemy is a non-informed public that elects such people to the Congress that are determined that government will regulate every move every citizen makes. If we don't inform someone, then who do we blame when we do get regulated out of business? Look in the mirrior.

abel_pranger

US Govt regulation (via FAA) of model airplane operations:
Essentially the same as AMA Safety Code General Rule 5. "I will not fly my model aircraft higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level, when within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying
the airport operator. I will yield the right-of-way and avoid flying in the proximity of full-scale aircraft, utilizing a spotter when appropriate."

This is nearly verbatim from FAA's AC 91-57 (included in AMA PDF Docs as 540-C), which has been in effect for twice as long as DB's excruciatingly long tenure as AMA prexy, and was recently (2005) restated with the issuance of FAA's statement of UA policy.

AMA Regulation of model airplane operations:

Begin with the rest of the AMA SC items under the General, Radio Control, Free Flight, Control Line headings and the several Supplemental Specialized Safety Codes and Waiver requirements. Continue with Insurance Policy Docs 500-l and la, et al, and note the Exclusions ordered A. - W., and the definition of 'model aircraft' contained therein. Go on with PDF Docs 510-A thru -R, 515-a thru -C, 520-A thru -C, 525, 530, 540-A an B. Then sift through PDF Docs 902 - 917 for further regulations that apply to flying model airplanes within the AMA sphere of influence.

Tell me again how "The AMA, in my opinion, has ALWAYS been fully, and completely AGAINST the regulation of R/C in any form. " The Feds position re regulation of model aircraft has historically been and was recently reaffirmed as laissez faire. AMA's position, especially where DB's position has overridden everyone else, regarding regulation of the same activity is anything but.

Abel

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

Most of the AMA's regulation is to satisfy the insurance providers, not the members. The AMA knows that with each new regulation of the safety code or whatever else added they'll lose more members, not good for them.

Afterall there is nothing in the safety code that says you can't shoot your airplane with a paintball or a shotgun for that matter. As soon as they have to put such a restriction on that you'll lose at least a few members on this forum alone.

abel_pranger

AMA's primary insurance provider is AMA itself, i.e., in accord with the SIR terms of the insurance contract with Westchester, that leaves AMA at risk for all claims up to $250K. With that clarification, I agree that AMA's regulation is to satisfy the insurance providers, rather than to serve the interests of its members, much less the general population of modeling enthusiasts and wannabe modelers in the US.
My insurance providers, both HO and PUP, have one exclusion: I'm not covered if my model airplanes are carrying human passengers. No more than that; most notably absent are exclusions referencing non-existent external documents controlled by other agencies - example: have you ever seen a list of R/C equipment that FCC deems obsolete?

Abel

NorfolkSouthern

If you can give a link to the requirements they have for RC, I would like to learn about the details. Although I highly doubt the United States will ever go to that length, it seems like it would be some interesting reading.

NorfolkSouthern

Hossfly

Sorry but I cannot. It was in a magazine somewhere and I only remember that is was a lot of work for each transmitter. For those of us that have a bunch of transmitters we would most probably definitely downsize. Anymore, I only really remember the basic points of a few things that make a definition impression. That did.

rcuman

I believe the main problem here is the uninformed general public. Media always distorts the truth for their own political agenda and most people eat it up like candy.

OMG they can actually put bombs in a little airplane and fly it into my house??!!! I am calling the Senator They must be banned and regualated!!!

While I do admit thet there is a very real threat here I do not think Joe Blow is going to come up to the field and ask about strapping bombs to an airplane or heli. This will totally eliminate the possibility of any us modelers catching a terrorist. I hope that after seeing that article it does not provoke a paranoid citizen to call the feds after seeing a person flying a eletric plane in their backyard.
I see one day where we will have to get a license to fly these planes much like a drivers or a pilot's license and get background checks, have to wait a week to get approved, and then get a blessing from the Pope. Funny thing is I am sure we are going to have to pay $100-$200 each year to keep it.

ptulmer

My Feedback: (5)

STL, never thought it would come to this, but I am in total and complete agreement with your first post. This is just another example of ignorance in the media. Like gas, this will pass. If Dave Brown lets it....

NorfolkSouthern

The jet would take a huge capital outlay, that most ordinary citizens don't have. Then, there is the intense government scrutiny they would have to go through in order to get clearance to even learn how to fly it. It's hard enough gaining access to a public airliner as a regular passenger. Also, guns require a background check that would more likely screen out a potential terrorist.

I watched a video, once. In the video, a Slow Stick was rigged to carry a Pepsi bottle. The operator filled the bottle with water, attached it to a release device, then flew the Slow Stick to 500 feet AGL. He then tripped the servo that activated the release, and filmed the bottle as it plummeted down to the parking lot where he was flying. The bottle exploded by weight of the pressure of water when it hit, and looked like it was ran over by a car and torn to a couple pieces after it was recovered. Just for reference, a HALF pound of any type of explosive, is 225 grams, which was significantly less than the weight of the bottle. That's equivilant to 4 sticks of dynamite.

As the article pointed out, one person in Ohio was arrested for conspiracy because he was planning to use an R/C helicopter to commit an act of terrorism. I don't know much about explosives, but I do know a little about the law regarding their possession and manufacture. Theoretically, the governenment could scrutinize the purchase of model aircraft because they may be considered a delivery device. Extra vigilance by the local hobby dealers may not be a bad idea afterall.

NorfolkSouthern