Did The Club members bring this FAA stuff on themselves?
07-20-2014, 03:44 PM
#101
absolutely unequivocally unconditionally no.
To try to blame a group of people following rules, for those that don't, is preposterous. And to ask if it is intentional is equally specious.
If one has to asses blame, it belongs with those conducting themselves irresponsibly, nowhere else.
To try to blame a group of people following rules, for those that don't, is preposterous. And to ask if it is intentional is equally specious.
If one has to asses blame, it belongs with those conducting themselves irresponsibly, nowhere else.
07-20-2014, 04:16 PM
#102
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hemet , CA
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mabe befor you can buy a model plane or park flyer or any rc flying item you must have a >> ama card>.have to fill out a form and be checked out and wait 10 days to get it??
07-20-2014, 04:47 PM
#103
Originally Posted by [email protected]
mabe befor you can buy a model plane or park flyer or any rc flying item you must have a >> ama card>.have to fill out a form and be checked out and wait 10 days to get it??
07-20-2014, 05:04 PM
#104
absolutely unequivocally unconditionally no.
To try to blame a group of people following rules, for those that don't, is preposterous. And to ask if it is intentional is equally specious.
If one has to asses blame, it belongs with those conducting themselves irresponsibly, nowhere else.
To try to blame a group of people following rules, for those that don't, is preposterous. And to ask if it is intentional is equally specious.
If one has to asses blame, it belongs with those conducting themselves irresponsibly, nowhere else.
Actually it isn't club members at all .... It's all my fault ... I did it. I sorry. It all started as a friendly wager between me and an FAA Inspector. Then, the drinking started and I accidently slept with his girlfriend.
Last edited by Airplanes400; 07-20-2014 at 05:14 PM.
07-20-2014, 05:25 PM
#105
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Originally Posted by [email protected]
mabe befor you can buy a model plane or park flyer or any rc flying item you must have a >> ama card>.have to fill out a form and be checked out and wait 10 days to get it??
07-20-2014, 06:39 PM
#107
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Realistically this footage is spectacular and less dangerous than one might think.
1.) No full scale planes in the area.
2.) Out over a lake or body of water where there are no crowds or spectators.
3.) Much easier to keep track of the Quad at night by keeping in or near the fire works as a reference.
4.) I would guess (Hope) he also had GPS return to home capability.
FPV can be done safely and it's up to us to prove to the FAA that it can be done safely. If we allow one form
of R/C to be outlawed soon other types of R/C i.e. Sail planes IMAC Jets will become a target for the FAA.
Try keeping a Sail Plane or a big IMAC model or a Jet for that matter under 400' AGL. JMHO.
1.) No full scale planes in the area.
2.) Out over a lake or body of water where there are no crowds or spectators.
3.) Much easier to keep track of the Quad at night by keeping in or near the fire works as a reference.
4.) I would guess (Hope) he also had GPS return to home capability.
FPV can be done safely and it's up to us to prove to the FAA that it can be done safely. If we allow one form
of R/C to be outlawed soon other types of R/C i.e. Sail planes IMAC Jets will become a target for the FAA.
Try keeping a Sail Plane or a big IMAC model or a Jet for that matter under 400' AGL. JMHO.
GPS return would be a blind path to a point no matter who or what may be in the way.
This only intended as points to ponder, not an attack. Also, I saw 2 stories today about misuse of RC aircraft and one involving a close call with a manned aircraft that was close enough they inspected for damage when they landed (none was found). One of the stories involved felony charges against someone for flying a camera equipped aircraft around a hospital peeking in windows and the other involved a crash damaging a building and I wasn't even looking for RC, drone or UAV related information when I stumbled across it.
Jeff
07-20-2014, 07:04 PM
#108
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , ON, CANADA
Posts: 974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the first Google search page for "Fox News Drone Privacy" I found these two articles. I mentioned Fox by name because of their massive viewership numbers, and their tendency towards fear mongering, but they are certainly not alone in that field: CNN and MSNBC have some horrendously ill-informed pieces as well. Properly researched, non-biased articles on "drones" are few and far between, mostly in the tech side of the web.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/24/seattle-woman-sees-drone-peeping-into-her-apartment-window/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/14/privacy-concerns-as-us-government-rolls-out-domestic-drone-rules/
By far-and-away the worst article I've come across was in the local paper yesterday (as seen below); A Sun News "article" that starts the headline off with an Ad-Hominum attack against modellers. It then decides that drones "fell into the hands of civilians" from the military, and that their use as a video platform "has been called into question" after a single crash. Finally, it assumes that we don't have laws against flying over airports. It's really a pathetic piece of journalism that does nothing but hurt our image.
07-21-2014, 02:32 AM
#109
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Originally Posted by [email protected]
mabe befor you can buy a model plane or park flyer or any rc flying item you must have a >> ama card>.have to fill out a form and be checked out and wait 10 days to get it??
Originally Posted by [email protected]
i dont make jokes
07-21-2014, 02:57 AM
#110
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Hi Bob;
On the first Google search page for "Fox News Drone Privacy" I found these two articles. I mentioned Fox by name because of their massive viewership numbers, and their tendency towards fear mongering, but they are certainly not alone in that field: CNN and MSNBC have some horrendously ill-informed pieces as well. Properly researched, non-biased articles on "drones" are few and far between, mostly in the tech side of the web.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/24/seattle-woman-sees-drone-peeping-into-her-apartment-window/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/14/privacy-concerns-as-us-government-rolls-out-domestic-drone-rules/
By far-and-away the worst article I've come across was in the local paper yesterday (as seen below); A Sun News "article" that starts the headline off with an Ad-Hominum attack against modellers. It then decides that drones "fell into the hands of civilians" from the military, and that their use as a video platform "has been called into question" after a single crash. Finally, it assumes that we don't have laws against flying over airports. It's really a pathetic piece of journalism that does nothing but hurt our image.
On the first Google search page for "Fox News Drone Privacy" I found these two articles. I mentioned Fox by name because of their massive viewership numbers, and their tendency towards fear mongering, but they are certainly not alone in that field: CNN and MSNBC have some horrendously ill-informed pieces as well. Properly researched, non-biased articles on "drones" are few and far between, mostly in the tech side of the web.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/24/seattle-woman-sees-drone-peeping-into-her-apartment-window/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/14/privacy-concerns-as-us-government-rolls-out-domestic-drone-rules/
By far-and-away the worst article I've come across was in the local paper yesterday (as seen below); A Sun News "article" that starts the headline off with an Ad-Hominum attack against modellers. It then decides that drones "fell into the hands of civilians" from the military, and that their use as a video platform "has been called into question" after a single crash. Finally, it assumes that we don't have laws against flying over airports. It's really a pathetic piece of journalism that does nothing but hurt our image.
I agree it starts with name calling, but is the content of the article really that slanted, biased, or harmful to the hobby? I don't think so. The author brings up completely valid points about safety, which was the main point of the article as indicated in the title. He also goes on to differentiate "responsible modelers" from the other ones. I also don't see where he's assuming anything about laws, or lack thereof in airspace by airports. What he suggests is that those that cause potential danger to aircraft be held accountable with fines and other potential legal/civil punishments. Wouldn't you agree with that?
While every news story or article might not be technically perfect in describing the platform (calling them drones), I can't help but feel the blame sometimes gets placed at those reporting the story, rather than the root cause of the story, and that's the person flying irresponsibly. How many similar stories have you seen in the past few years about fixed wing or helis? While there might be one, I don't recall any.
07-21-2014, 03:19 AM
#111
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
mabe befor you can buy a model plane or park flyer or any rc flying item you must have a >> ama card>.have to fill out a form and be checked out and wait 10 days to get it??
07-21-2014, 04:46 AM
#112
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Clearwater,
FL
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just got back into the hobby after 4 years off. Got tired of the propeganda at our local field. Started flying quad-copters, they are not drones, about 6 months ago. Never FVP, not at night and never over 400 feet or around crowds. Just informed today that my local club is banning them due to recent FAA rulings. I hope they realize this just forces us to fly at parks, empty parking lots with permission and stuff like that. No notice today till i hauled the stuff out of my truck and got the news. Just for information, it was SPARKS field in St. PETS FLORIDA. Been a member and on the board for a few years till my hiatus. Looks like we as quad flyers will have to open our own place.
What you were told is that we (SPARKS Officers/Board) temporarily suspended FPV flying (not line-of-sight quadcopters). There may have been miscommunication between you and the Officer who spoke to you.By the way, since this decision is very recent, the SPARKS general membership is still in the process of being informed, either via direct communication and/or e-mailing. The Board decision was based on trying to be prudent, given our close proximity to the PIE airport, even though the FAA rule has not even been finalized, and will last at least until the FAA and the AMA sort this issue out.
A pilot flying a quadcopter (non-FPV) within the bounds of an AMA sanctioned field has never been seen as an issue by the SPARKS officers, but actually as a positive thing.
07-21-2014, 05:53 AM
#113
My Feedback: (204)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Va Beach, VA
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent evidence that there is no limit to stupidity, arrogance, and self-gratification at others' costs.
Ain't no doubt about it - the FAA's Interpretive Rule has muzzled the AMA, who was nearly toothless to begin with on this FPV issue.
Cannot agree more with every post in this thread about the "rogue" operators/buyers/users of technology with no regard to greater good or obligation to safety in the aviation community.
Ain't no doubt about it - the FAA's Interpretive Rule has muzzled the AMA, who was nearly toothless to begin with on this FPV issue.
Cannot agree more with every post in this thread about the "rogue" operators/buyers/users of technology with no regard to greater good or obligation to safety in the aviation community.
07-21-2014, 10:56 AM
#114
The hobby can survive regulation, just look at the way its regulated in Europe and what it cost to flying over there. Start locking up/fining the idiots and they will move to something else. They said the 1968 Gun Control Act would end private gun ownership and it didn't. All that happen was it made sportsmen all the more vigilant and now look at it today.
Last edited by FlyerInOKC; 07-21-2014 at 10:58 AM.
07-21-2014, 11:06 AM
#115
The hobby can survive regulation, just look at the way its regulated in Europe and what it cost to flying over there. Start locking up/fining the idiots and they will move to something else. They said the 1968 Gun Control Act would end private gun ownership and it didn't. All that happen was it made sportsmen all the more vigilant and now look at it today.
07-21-2014, 12:56 PM
#116
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah! Look at it today!! 31,000 + homicides, murders per year in 2010 as an acceptable level of deaths!! Yet, we go ballistic for 6500 deaths in the Middle East conflict over a couple years, or an Airliner shot down killing 298 instantly, but let the everyday, every year gun deaths go unnoticed, other then maybe making the local news that night, and National, if it is more then a few killed.
BTW...it's "than" not "then"...you might as well be confusing "not" with "nut". (sorry, but I am getting tired of seeing that grade school error in everything I read)
Jeff
07-21-2014, 12:59 PM
#117
Thanks Jeff with 6 WHOLE POST!!! LOL >>>>>>>What screen name where you prior to this one?
This whole subject is politics!! We are talking about he Government, Congress, and the FAA....How much more political can you get in a forum?
This whole subject is politics!! We are talking about he Government, Congress, and the FAA....How much more political can you get in a forum?
Last edited by RCFlyerDan; 07-21-2014 at 01:01 PM.
07-21-2014, 07:07 PM
#119
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor,
FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quad copter with cameras and for are exponentially moving away from hobby status.they by their very nature are less and less of a hobby and becoming more commercial oriented.i was with a good flyer just a few days ago and to my suprise brought out a quad copter set up with video .investment was probably around 2000 buck.he plans to go commerical .he has already attracted realtors and some surveyors.thats not a hobby.so I still contend am a needs to distance itself and those copter folks really need a organization that supports their vision and goals.ama needs to advocate for sport scale etc flyers including helis.flying a remote vehicle miles away from its operator and heights unknown is foreign and counter to line of sight flyers.argue chicken little and the sky falling in got control etc .but the world is evolving and the fun stuff is a reality.it has lots of potential for good.but like anything else there are Rebels that will operate out of control and push everyone's buttons.more than ever we need to educate the public and neighbors boarding our flying fields.they need to be invited to see firsthand what rc flying is truly about.i will continue in this hobby until I can't participate .
07-21-2014, 07:47 PM
#120
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah! Look at it today!! 31,000 + homicides, murders per year in 2010 as an acceptable level of deaths!! Yet, we go ballistic for 6500 deaths in the Middle East conflict over a couple years, or an Airliner shot down killing 298 instantly, but let the everyday, every year gun deaths go unnoticed, other then maybe making the local news that night, and National, if it is more then a few killed.
Jeff
07-22-2014, 02:24 AM
#121
Where did you get 31,000? The FBI claims 14,722 for 2010 TOTAL (meaning all forms of murder, not just those involving firearms) and a decreasing violent crime rate to the point where it is now about half of what it was 20 years ago. Compare that to any country or city where firearms have been banned.
Jeff
Jeff
07-27-2014, 04:23 AM
#122
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeff
Last edited by jelge; 07-27-2014 at 04:34 AM.
07-27-2014, 04:30 AM
#123
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I would trust the FBI's national crime statistics a lot more than a propaganda sheet like the Washington Post. They aren't any better than FOX or MSNBC. It is nearly impossible to get the truth from any news organization. Just look at what they are printing about RC and drones.
Jeff
Jeff
Mike
07-28-2014, 08:17 AM
#124
Whatever the cause and effect of why the FAA is doing what they are doing, the important thing is to comment individually to make our opinions known to the FAA and to follow up with our Congressional representatives with those opinions to apply additional pressure to the FAA to modify their rules.
