|
RE: FPV SURVEY
kinda hard to imagine that anyone with sense would base any decision on a response of 2200 or so out of a possible 130,000 or so.
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: mongo kinda hard to imagine that anyone with sense would base any decision on a response of 2200 or so out of a possible 130,000 or so. |
RE: FPV SURVEY
I think FPV looks like a kick. I'd like to get into it if i could quit spending my fun money on classic pattern. BUT only outside of the AMA!
I believe the AMA should find every way possible to exclude, disown, shun, blackball and generally separate themselves from the entire FPV/ autonomous flight movement NOW, by adding live camera and autopilot restrictions to our rules. When something does happen, and it will, why risk the whole AMA. Let them organize themselves if they want. You don't have to invite the crazy drunk uncle to Thanksgiving just because you're related. Especially if the cops are already sitting in the driveway. Nothing personal, it's just a too high-risk activity to add to an already exposed AMA. IMHO |
RE: FPV SURVEY
Good thing that the C/L flyers didn't do the same when R/C started getting popular. How many R/C planes just flew off uncontrolled back when you had to build your own radios? There are safe ways to particpate in FPV just as there are unsafe ways to particpate in classic pattern. If the AMA has a set of rules and practices in place then as with other styles if you choose not to follow them then you are on your own. If our country used closed minded attitudes like that we wouldn't have many of the great things we have today. Its easy to sell others down the river when you have no vested interest, but it is far better to support them and help them design safe practices. We will have a whole new exciting aspect of this hobby to draw in new people
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
Good response and good points up to the last sentence.
We are not expanding our hobby by inviting the FPV crowd; we are subsidizing their hobby while underwriting their risk. Generally as it relates to the AMA our hobby is model acft period, theirs is AV – telemetry - programming etc. We are only a very convenient tool of little consequence. Sure we will sell more memberships and airplane parts helping contain our prices and might make some new nerdy friends. But if I was God of the AMA I wouldn't think the gain is worth the risk right now. Other Gods may disagree. I guess what I'm saying is after the turkey I wouldn't mind sneaking out and meet the crazy drunk uncle down at the strip club. [X(] |
RE: FPV SURVEY
A couple of good responses. Ipersonally see FPV as just another airplane flying technology that can be integrated into model aviation. And, what the AMA is doing by allowing FPV flying under strict management of a buddy box and line of sight coordination is to manage the risk rather than just underwrite it.
The AMA survey was intended, I think, to find out if the membership thought that the FPV policy could be re-engineered to allow for more FPVflying freedom while still effectively managing risk. |
RE: FPV SURVEY
I think you are lumping FPV with DIY Drones. FPV is just visually operating an A/C by way of a camera mounted on the aircraft, and can be done safely within a confined location in LOS of a safety pilot. DIY Drones is more what you are reffering to with programming and telemetry, often flown with a computer far away from, and well above, normal model airfields. I agree the latter is well beyond what the AMA is about, however it can (generally not though) also be done safely if the same rules are used. My point is if a person is willing to abide by the AMA rules they should be included, and not just banned because of the potential to operate outside of the AMA's safety programming.
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
One the other hand ...
RC model airplane flying without FPV is LOC limited by nature. To maintain LOC limits on FPV we have to wirte rules and enforce them. I agree that FPV can be safe and fun within the limits proposed by AMA, but I am concerned for AMA and all of us because of the small minority that will willfully go beyond those limits. Bedford |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: beepee One the other hand ... RC model airplane flying without FPV is LOC limited by nature. To maintain LOC limits on FPV we have to wirte rules and enforce them. I agree that FPV can be safe and fun within the limits proposed by AMA, but I am concerned for AMA and all of us because of the small minority that will willfully go beyond those limits. Bedford |
RE: FPV SURVEY
With that reasoning we should drop turbines as well. The potential to do harm is greater, and the availability and lower costs has made them more available to noobs with no experience or the slightest idea of the rules, regulations, and safety practices. There are people in every aspect of our hobby, and other hobbies for that matter, that will represent poorly. Short of an overzelous media personality trying to make a name for themselves, and that can happen in any aspect of the hobby, we will survive the few morons out there.
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
Writing and enforcing rules for this will be far from easy Pffft, easy as pie.. easy-peasy... its as easy as 10 easy things We got a nice (aka lame/agenda) precedent set by muncie on stuff like this when PPP came out. Remember how a bunch of folks said it was a burden to have the clubs enforce ppp 2/60 ? And remember how muncie stopped folks from harassing PPP by saying its only the pilots responsibility to stay within those rules? Good thing muncie stopped members/clubs from forcing those pilots to obey the rules, right? Great, if we have a rule thats hard for clubs to enforce onto pilots, its ok because its Pilots Responsibility not the clubs. Seems that was the route Muncie wanted to go to shove PPP onto us, so time to lay in the bed they made- Lets take TimmyPPP and put him at a club: To us it sure looks like his plane is pushing 3lb not 2 ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules.. not our job we cant harass him. To us it sure looks like his brushless Stryker is zooming 90 not 60 ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules, we cant harass him. To us it sure looks like he is wearing goggles while flying ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules, not our job we cant harass him. AMA was quick to say it is ONLY TimmyPPP's problem when TimmyPPP breaks the rules, the clubs dont have anything to complain about enforcing the hard to enforce rules because its not the clubs problem. A great ShovePPP agenda solution to the problem, just stop the rules from being enforced so we dont scare off the PPP by making them stay within their limits. See, easy peasy to deal with enforcing the FPV fules: You just enforce them the same way we enforce PPP rules. We have the edict/precedent that we DONT, just the individual pilot is responsible to be within the 2/60/NoGoggle rules. |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy Writing and enforcing rules for this will be far from easy Pffft, easy as pie.. easy-peasy... its as easy as 10 easy things We got a nice (aka lame/agenda) precedent set by muncie on stuff like this when PPP came out. Remember how a bunch of folks said it was a burden to have the clubs enforce ppp 2/60 ? And remember how muncie stopped folks from harassing PPP by saying its only the pilots responsibility to stay within those rules? Good thing muncie stopped members/clubs from forcing those pilots to obey the rules, right? Great, if we have a rule thats hard for clubs to enforce onto pilots, its ok because its Pilots Responsibility not the clubs. Seems that was the route Muncie wanted to go to shove PPP onto us, so time to lay in the bed they made- Lets take TimmyPPP and put him at a club: To us it sure looks like his plane is pushing 3lb not 2 ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules.. not our job we cant harass him. To us it sure looks like his brushless Stryker is zooming 90 not 60 ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules, we cant harass him. To us it sure looks like he is wearing goggles while flying ... but that Pilots Responsibility to obey the rules, not our job we cant harass him. AMA was quick to say it is ONLY TimmyPPP's problem when TimmyPPP breaks the rules, the clubs dont have anything to complain about enforcing the hard to enforce rules because its not the clubs problem. A great ShovePPP agenda solution to the problem, just stop the rules from being enforced so we dont scare off the PPP by making them stay within their limits. See, easy peasy to deal with enforcing the FPV fules: You just enforce them the same way we enforce PPP rules. We have the edict/precedent that we DONT, just the individual pilot is responsible to be within the 2/60/NoGoggle rules. |
RE: FPV SURVEY
It goes beyond insurance coverage. It puts our existence at risk. Have an accident that causes property damage, or injury, to a non-participant, and that particular field may get shut down. Worst yet, the club officers from the field from which the flight originated could get drawn into a lawsuit causing them great financial hardship even if they are able to prove they are not responsible for the actions of the individual(s) directly involved. This is particularly so if the AMA has determined that the safety rules have been violated and therefore their insurance coverage does not apply.
Does the premise extend beyond FPV to areas like jets, or giants, or maybe extremely fast racing aircraft? Sure it does, if the flyer does not recognize and stay within their skill level. That can be said for any type of aircraft in our hobby, for that matter most any hobby. For jets specifically, limited access due to cost in the earlier days is no limit at all. Money, skill, and recognition of one’s own limits are completely unrelated/independent values. Just look at how many very stupid things are done by full scale pilots. Do I need to put on my flame suit now? Bedford |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: beepee Do I need to put on my flame suit now? Bedford |
RE: FPV SURVEY
things may be in for some changing.
http://www.mercurynews.com/californi...one-helicopter had to start in the peoples republic of kalifornia, of course. hope this don't go any further than the local news media. |
RE: FPV SURVEY
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) has released a "Code of Conduct" for UAS operations. <div>
</div><div>http://www.auvsi.org/AUVSI/Home/ <div> </div><div>http://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AUVSI/958c920a-7f9b-4ad2-9807-f9a4e95d1ef1/UploadedFiles/AUVSI%20UAS%20Operations%20Code%20of%20Conduct%20-%20Final.pdf</div></div><div> </div><div>CBO for FPV?</div><div> </div><div>Brad</div> |
RE: FPV SURVEY
Wow! Those jerks broke every rule imaginable. What a couple of morons. Let's see, endangering public property, endangering people, flying over public property without permission, the list just goes on and on. And, that is not counting all the AMAsafety rules they broke. The deserved the citation, hope they do some serious jail time.
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
I think I'm with most the people here who would rather not be associated with FPV. This "Drones" issue is already boiling and honestly what is the problem with using the buddy box. What is one good argument against the buddy-box safety backup and LOS? When people fail to be reasonably responsible unfortunately as you can see all around you somebody else feels like they need to regulate it with a law. I'm always irritated at those people who say "These aren't toys, they are super complex real airplanes that normal people can't even fly! Yadda,Yadda" I for one don't want to give any do-gooders the impression I do anything other than fly little model planes with a little plastic controller that only operate as far as I can see them for the most part. The only 2 people I have seen fly FPV refused to use a buddy-box and that unfortunately isn't going to help us keep our rights. One of those people almost hit me behind the pilots fence twice.
Its like riding a motorcycle. The concept that too many inexperienced riders fail to grasp is that even though when that guy in the van pulls out in front of you it will be his fault...It won't matter if you're dead. Sometimes in life you have to put your fingers over the levers and get ready for the worst to happen rather than worrying about "Rights". Just because someone says their pit bull is trained and would NEVER bite a person doesn't mean you strip down and tie a sausage in your crotch and go start whacking him with it!! |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: mongo things may be in for some changing. http://www.mercurynews.com/californi...one-helicopter had to start in the peoples republic of kalifornia, of course. hope this don't go any further than the local news media. I'm on the Left Coast and Iresemble that!http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f...wink_smile.gif It was a balanced job of reporting, and it involved a commercial UAS being operated illegally. The sooner we understand within our own ranks, so we can make it clear to folks in the 'hood that this is something quite different from a model aircraft, the better off all of us with a passion for our hobby/sport will be. Idon't support the operation that got the operator in Dutch, you don' t, AMAdoesn't, and FAA doesn't either. We all are concerned about our more 'accepted' model airplanes being lumped in with military and police drones, etc. So are folks within our ranks that pursue their interest in FPVwhile flying their legitimate model aircraft. CJ |
RE: FPV SURVEY
The DI have been cast. No need to think about it anymore. Read it all including the end.
>>>>>>>>> AMA July "INSIDER": President to President Nats: Past and Future by Bob Brown, AMA President The AMA National Aeromodeling Championships (Nats) continue the 2012 edition on July 9. If you are interested in participating or spectating, information and a complete schedule are located at www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats.aspx. One of the neat things about the Nats is that it contains many different facets or interests of aeromodeling. Included are various forms of Free Flight, Radio Control, and Control Line. Have you seen the excitement of Control Line Team Race? How about the serene beauty of Free Flight or RC Soaring? Want more thrills? Try RC Pylon. All of these different events are at the Nats. This year marks the 70th anniversary of the Academy’s recognition of Control Line model flying. A step back in history can be found in the October 1942 issue of Model Aviation: "In a precedent-setting session officials of the AMA have agreed, in response to many requests, to recognize control model flying. The only reason that this step has not been made previously is that this type of activity, which is also known as G-line flying, tether flying, and U-control flying has been expanding so rapidly that it would have been practically impossible to set up the machinery of servicing the activity and licensing control model flights." Following this announcement, Control Line aeromodelers were able to receive a special experimental license separate from the Free Flight license and upon receiving it would affix the official number to the wing of their airplane. Control Line numbers would be followed by the letter "C," for example 671C. Cost for the license was $1 and the first licenses were available December 1, 1942. It was also noted that Control Line aeromodelers would be allowed to participate in the compilation of a set of national rules covering this new competitive sport and that every effort should be made to encourage this important development along the lines of scientific research, speed, and stunting. This illustrates the fact that times and our interests do change. Could the involvement of First-Person View (FPV) be the next facet of aeromodeling to become recognized by the Academy? |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: Hossfly The DI have been cast. No need to think about it anymore. Read it all including the end. (snipped quoted material) Any doubts where the AMA is going? [:-] Not really. It's where AMAmust go if they are to back up the PRthat sez they support all modelers, and they(we) have lot riding on that PR. Only doubt I have about it is the way they're going about, e.g., what's this poll thingy about? I think I've expressed my thoughts on that - got any to add? CJ |
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: m1morrow Guys, This PFV debate is so crazy. I fly REAL AIRPLANES for a living and I have never once worried about running into a foam easy star with a little security camera on it. Give me a break. There are way more Canadian Geese out there to worry about. If a terrorist uses a little RC airplane to cause damage they are stupid because they could cause way more damage with just about every other vehicle on the planet. Scary, but maybe 400+ Knots had enough air pressure to keep them back a few inches. OTOH, Have had holes in the machine up to 18,000 ft MSL. I have dodged birds, light airplanes, and bunches of balloons from ground level to 18,000 ft MSL. There are no absolutes. Snipped stuff. Lots of personal items that I could find fault with. :eek: If that Carden Extra looses RC it could fly miles and miles away on its own and crash into people and property also. The bottom line. The AMA is insurance guys. If your flying FPV your not insured, not less safe. Just keep the plane below 2000 ft agl 400ft to be legal and even safer. and more than 5 miles away from an airport and you wont hit a real plane. If you do hit a real plane below 2,000ft agl the pilot was scud running and flying unsafely anyways. If you think because you are at a AMA field and you can see your plane you have no chance of causing damage you are wrong. Thats my 2 cents. For what its worth. Just use common sense. Make sure your line of sight plane or FPV plane is reliable. Don't fly it in stupid places. Andy don't fly it recklessly... End of story. I know that people abuse FPV but people also abuse Line of sight. Just like people abuse everything else. Fly safe guys <br type=''_moz''/> AMA insurance is not something to rely on if one kills or maims a child. Some one doing stupid or with intent hurts one of my grandchildren better well hope the cops catch him first. [:@] My sympathy bucket has a big hole in it. You, Sir, might well listen at that old fellow that tried to assist you with the CG. Being a tad off balance can create harm and not just to an airplane. :eek: |
RE: FPV SURVEY
1 Attachment(s)
ORIGINAL: bradpaul The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) has released a ''Code of Conduct'' for UAS operations. <div> </div><div>http://www.auvsi.org/AUVSI/Home/ <div> </div><div>http://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AUVSI/958c920a-7f9b-4ad2-9807-f9a4e95d1ef1/UploadedFiles/AUVSI%20UAS%20Operations%20Code%20of%20Conduct%20-%20Final.pdf</div></div><div> </div><div>CBO for FPV?</div><div> </div><div>Brad</div> CBO? well, maybe... what a CBO is: In this section the term "nationwide community-based organization'' is intended to mean a membership based association that represents the aeromodeling community within the United States; provides its members a comprehensive set of safety guidelines that underscores safe aeromodeling operations within the National Airspace System and the protection and safety of the general public on the ground; develops and maintains mutually supportive programming with educational institutions, government entities and other aviation associations; and acts as a liaison with government agencies as an advocate for its members. AUVSI continues as the hub of the global unmanned systems and robotics community. Through communication, education, advocacy, awareness and leadership, the organization continues to promote and support the unmanned systems and robotics industry. AUVSI speaks for the unmanned systems and robotics community as a trusted source of information to government officials, regulators, media and the public. We represent the industry in Congressional hearings, participate in coalitions and collaborate with various trade associations and stakeholders to serve and achieve the interests of the unmanned systems and robotics community. I doubt they are a CBO right now, but if they just introduce something like ~provide policy and document material for liaisoning with education entities~ well, that should do the trick: Presto Cbo, just by putting a couple lines in their policy and a ForSchools.PDF on their web looks like a member organization with local chapters all across the nation |
RE: FPV SURVEY
Are FPV drones/models required to maintain 500' seperation from people/structures ?
|
RE: FPV SURVEY
ORIGINAL: TexasAirBoss Are FPV drones/models required to maintain 500' seperation from people/structures ? If you fly at an AMA club field you will be held accountable to the posted field rules and any applicable AMApolicy. If you choose to fly somewhere else, you are on your own. The jails should be full of people who cause property damage or injury by flying where they aren't supposed to. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:27 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.