ALPA: Repeal Section 336
 

Well, the battle on repealing section 336 has intensified. I was in the room today in Washington when the President of the Air Line Pilots Association called for the total elimination of hobbyist rules.

ALPA President Cannoll said,
"But now we need to fix the loophole that prevents the FAA from regulating UAS used by hobbyists by repealing Section 336 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2012. Hobbyists who are compliant really have no reason for concern—we know they already respect the rules."

Attachment 2255545

AMA time to step up your efforts now!!!!!

I have always felt the rules should be the same for all modelers AMA member or not.

The problem with full unbridled control of the government is that freedoms will suffer. Imagine 400 ft being the ceiling, and if you want to fly higher you have to apply for a waiver 6 months in advance and pay a fee.

The rules are clearly written for quad copters, but do not work well for fixed wing aircraft. Yet as traditional fixed wing modelers we are getting painted with the same broad brush and lumped in with "drones", that is what is causing so much of the problem. If you fly small park foam airplanes then you probably couldn't care less what happens to my hobby, but I need to fly above 400 ft. I also fly turbine jets, there are no provisions for turbines in the current rules by the FAA.

Just thinking out loud here, but it seems strange that it is a right to own a gun (I have them) and you take 2015 for example, 13,286 people were killed and 26,819 were injured (those figures exclude suicide, that being 62% of gun deaths). Turbine jets have not killed a single person as an example, quad copters have not killed a single person. I guess the difference is the Constitution, anything outside of that is a privilege, and the founding fathers did not know about aviation! It just makes no sense to me, all I see is crush the small guy because it's easy.

I'm not saying I have all the answers, far from it, but I do like to error on the side of caution when it comes to bureaucrats in particular. Just saying turn it over to big brother and we will all be safe, is rather foolish in my opinion. Without the AMA I believe modeling would be banned already, certainly no single modeler outside of an organization like the AMA is going to do a damn thing for modeling.

Pure, unadulterated bullcrap..

So no one has to lobby Congress, they just take care of you? Sitting in your mom's basement picking your nose may work for you, but the freedoms you do enjoy were provided to you by far better men than yourself.

• "There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
  -- James Madison, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 16, 1788]

• "A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."
  --John Adams in a Letter to Abigail Adams (July 7, 1775)

Why would we need to protect the hobby? Please explain how your "DO NOTHING" approach to government will secure my hobby for me and future generations. I'll be waiting for your brilliance.

Government Affairs Update, February 21, 2018

Over the past two weeks, the AMA Government Affairs team has been hard at work representing and protecting the model aircraft hobby at the federal, state and local level. We wanted to share with you some of our work and progress made during the first half of February.

State and Local Government Relations

At the local level, AMA has engaged with members of the Pitt County, NC council to reduce the burden of a proposed county-wide UAS ordinance.

In addition, the team continues to engage with legislators on 15 problematic bills in various states:
• Hawaii: AMA submitted official testimony and opposition to proposed Senate Bill 2160 in Hawaii, which has been deferred in committee.
• Mississippi: A potentially problematic bill which would have given Mississippi the authority to regulate the operations of unmanned aircraft died in committee.
• Utah: AMA contacted Senate Committee members in Utah concerning House Bill 59, which accepted AMA’s recommended changes.

Federal Government Relations

In addition to our advocacy efforts at the state level, AMA continues to work closely with UAS industry leaders to improve safety, including the Drone Advisory Committee-Sub Committee (DACSC). Our team has attended several meetings this month and has helped finalize the DACSC Task Group 3 report, which will soon be presented to the full DACSC for approval.

That because the AMA wanted it that way but they should lobby for the hobby as a whole not just AMA members and not try to create a condition where all modelers have to join the AMA.

So you want the benefits of a lobby without having to pay for it? If you don't support the AMA you don't deserve anything from them.

You could start your own lobby without any financial help and fight for all your "friends" that wont give you a dime. Then I'll quit the AMA and enjoy the benefits you gained for free.

You are putting words in my mouth I don't have a problem with people joining the AMA of their own free will but I have a problem with being mandated by law to join.

They aren't, they can fly via 107

There is no law that says you need to join the AMA, in my opinion if you love modeling you need to join.

Read part 107 from the FAA site, in the attached screen capture. 107 is for recreational purposes also. I think everyone should take the test anyway and get thier 107 licence, the more you know the better.

One other thing I think is weird, is the amount of AMA trolls that spend a huge amount of time trolling the AMA, some spend hundreds of hours making graphs and charts! All you have to do is not join, I don't want to hear endlessly in every thread how you don't like the AMA. I'm packing some planes to go flying now, so I'm going to go off and enjoy my hobby. Thank you AMA!

Nobody`s trolling the AMA. Reading the readily available info shared here by a concerned paying member has awakened some of us to the notion that maybe the good folks at Muncie have gotten their priorities a little bit mixed up.

You know in reality you are correct nobody really has to join the AMA but the AMA wanted to mandate membership. IMO you can do anything with RC as long as you don't draw attention to yourself,
you can exceed 400 feet, operate a turbine, fly something over 55 lb's the FAA does not care unless you are causing a problem for them. If you are on your own land flying something over 55 lb's they won't hunt you down and arrest you just for doing that.

Thankfully, the FAA has not supported the assertion by AMA that if you're not a member of AMA or any other CBO, you have to fly under 107. As the Director of the FAA;s UAS Integration Office said at CES 2018 year in response to a question about the "...and within the programming...":

"Actually that's pretty straightforward. We've gone to our legal counsel multiple times and there's multiple discussions on this out there. But they've been pretty clear, that the way the law is written, it's not a regulation, it's the way Congress wrote the law, it does not necessarily require membership. It means you're operating under the purview of that particular organization. That doesn't necessarily mean you have to be a member of an organization because it depends on the specific circumstances. That's what gets difficult about these. You have a general statement out there, but when it comes to taking enforcement action you have to look at the very specific action that was taken and who was doing it and how were they operating. So they're individual cases. But in general, no, you do not have to be a member of a specific organization in order to be operating under their safety guidelines. (emphasis added)"

His interpretation is supported by any number of emails from his office saying, in effect, that they do not interpret "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines AND within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization" as requiring membership in a CBO.

100% correct , the FAA won't be hiding behind every tree , just waiting to pounce , but make any kinds of nuisance of yourself by getting in the way of full scale aviation and you will be visited . In that regard they tend to be more reactive than proactive , my best example being that at the club I belong to , in operation since the early 1970s , there has NEVER once been a complaint to the FAA from anyone about the flying at our field and so no visits from "the Man" ....

I agree with you 100% and if the FAA does pay you a visit the fact that you are a AMA member or not won't mean anything at that point anyway.

I believe if things got so bad at a club field that the FAA had to send someone , the fact of being an AMA member not only wouldn't help out the offender , it would likely land him/her in even more trouble since being an AMA member means to have promised to follow the AMA safety code . Which of course the FAA official would use as proof of the offender knowing exactly which rules of safe operation he/she was breaking , as they rolled the safety code neatly and stuffed it up the nose of the offender(s) . A non AMA member could try to plead ignorance of the safe rules of operation in the hope of some (unlikely) forgiveness on the FAA official's part , but It'd be obvious to all present that anyone with an AMA card knew exactly which rules were being broken to bring the FAA official calling in the first place .

So under that premise, it might even increase one's chance of penalty if they're an AMA member...because they're presumed to know the rules?

Exactly my thought , someone who bought a Wallmart Drone VS a "card carrying" AMA member , I'd say the AMA member has no way to try to plead ignorance of the rules like the Wallmart Drone person could , thus the AMA member would be "held to a higher standard" of safe behavior and likely face increased punishment .

"Thank you AMA! "

For? Attending "numerous meetings", going here and there and doing this and that? Where are the measurable results? What's the status of the lawsuit? As PAYING members we deserve answers. When pushed for answers the AMA responds with talking points. Heck they can't even get something as simple as getting the EC minutes posted in a timely manner. I have to hand it to the opposition they are a hell of a lot more effective than we are.

Mike

Excellent point. I see a lot of activity, but very few results. Lots of "we continue to..." or "We're working on...." or "We participated in..."

The EC minutes? Agree. Almost 2 months and still not up
AMA today uploads not done since Oct 2017: http://www.modelaircraft.org/publica...AMA_Today.aspx
AMA flightline uploads not done since Feb 2017: http://www.modelaircraft.org/publica...ewsletter.aspx
AMA ground control uploads not done since Oct 2017: http://www.modelaircraft.org/publica...d_Control.aspx
AMA media minutes uploads not done since Mar 2017: http://www.modelaircraft.org/publica...ia-minute.aspx
AMA rotor reports seems to be better, but appears to be missing the Feb 2018 issue: http://www.modelaircraft.org/publica...or-report.aspx
AMA Dates to Remember still showing 2017 information: http://www.modelaircraft.org/membership/AMAdates.aspx
TFR 8/9712 still up on the site even though it expired days ago: http://www.modelaircraft.org/members...bs/notams.aspx
...and those are just a few

My point is that people at AMA HQ are being paid with our dues to perform these jobs, and they're clearly not doing them.

PAYING member? Wow, don't break the bank, they should send you updates by the minute for all the cash you lay out and send you a private jet to pick up a hard copy of the EC minutes. I get everything I need from the AMA, for only $75 a year, I spend that on lunch for my friends after a morning of flying. It seems that being so concerned about what everyone is doing on a day by day basis you need to run for office in the AMA. Certainly crying on here will not be that effective.

Are you talking about a small model airplane organization being less effective than the federal government? You have been listening to Franklin Mellot to much, he wants the repeal of 336 and he wants the AMA to fail. He trolls all over the web against the AMA and wants more big government in everyone's life, but then he will post a "Don't tread on me" flag, go figure. He even acts like an AMA member, in one post on the other forum he says he sent an Email to "his VP" in the AMA and was complaining that the VP did not get back to him. They know Franklin at the AMA, they will not be getting back to that troll. Franklin is not an AMA member, he has no VP in the AMA! LOL! Very strange man, that is all I got to say.

Crying ? Who's crying? Asking for results is some kinda crime? Some members expectations are lower than others. As far as running for AMA office If your not one of the "good old boys" you won't get far, as proven by the last election for VP.

Mike

How does someone post a post like this , and not earn the "Troll" moniker himself ? Attack the man's beliefs ? Sure , opposing viewpoints are always welcome and enlightening . Attack the man personally , as you have done here ? Sorry pal , if your gonna roll in the mud that's fine , just don't you DARE have the balls to then demand we all see YOU as being squeaky clean !

Knock off the Troll garbage and stay on point if you want ANY cred here ....................

If you want to pay AMA to perform functions they're clearly not performing, that is your business. That staff accounts for 1/4 of every AMA member's dollar, and many of us want to see them do the jobs they're being paid to do.

I am indeed a member, so yes I have a VP. Didn't send an email to my VP? How about the email I sent him proposing a discounted rate for active duty E5 and below, that was voted on and approved by the EC and approved? Or how about the email I sent Dave M recommending in light of the Fairview Flyers experience, he talk about how to lose a field? Which he did in a column not long afterwards. And what about the email I sent to Rich with the response I received from the FAA to my "...within the programming" question? He quoted that in his February column. So yes, I am a member, and they are listening, as evidenced above. And thanks to my analysis of their financial performance, other members are now asking them questions now too. That is a good thing ... being accountable to members for how they spend the members money.

Thankfully we're allowed to have our own opinions and we are not required to be automatons, repeating the AMA's talking points whether we agree or not. Others have seen my email to the FAA, and have written their own - receiving similar responses. That's certainly having an impact.