eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

It looks like the AMA is snugly in bed with the FAA on drones. Where does that leave the modeling community? What defines 'light commercial?

So many questions on what is going on at Muncie, and few answers...,

Courtesy of AvWeb.com:

Drones At Rocky Mountain Air Show [TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[TABLE="width: 170, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The Rocky Mountain Air Show will host what it's calling "the first FAA-sanctioned drone demonstrations" at this type of event Aug. 22-23 at Greeley-Weld County Airport in Greeley, Colorado. The display will be coordinated by the Academy of Model Aeronautics and the FAA and will feature flight demonstrations and plenty of information on the integration of unmanned aerial systems into the national airspace system. Rich Hanson from the AMA will be on hand as will FAA reps for a question-and-answer session on the rapidly evolving technology. "It's important for both pilots and non-pilots to have access to what is happening in the National Air Space," said airshow chairman Jim Cimiluca. "Connecting the public to what's current in aviation is part of our mission statement.'"
Although the blur between hobby and industry remains an issue in the integration of drones, there's no doubt that technology has increased the fun factor for RC enthusiasts, and that side of the business will be well represented. Hobby stores and manufacturers will be on hand with product displays and demonstrations. Also, some of the best RC pilots in the country will put on a "giant scale radio control aerobatic demonstration" that will include electric-powered aircraft that can go 150 mph. There will be piloted aircraft there, too, with warbird and aerobatic demos and a twilight show on Aug. 22.

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

abelard

Let me tell you something about the FAA, Eddie: They can be difficult to work WITH, but if you ever try to work AGAINST them, you're gonna regret it. If they extend an offer to demonstrate capabilities and work out agreements, and you think it's a good idea to tell them to buzz off, I'd recommend not buying a lot of expensive modeling gear in the coming years.

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

Thanx, I've worked with them since the mid-70s.

acerc

I have been saying from day one the FAA has no interest in shutting down our hobby. But they do have a job to do and they do have to find where the line is between recreational hobby and business venture. I personally think the AMA should help the situation along by dropping the FPV type altogether, it clearly goes against the AMA's own rules. And in the grand scheme of our hobby very few want any part of it. JMHO!
And at some point in time there will also be some consideration as to a weight and size limit, period, no waivers. Why? Well, just look at the pic posted in the first post. Clearly well above and well beyond most flying sites capabilities, but that does not stop them from wanting to fly.
Unfortunately common sense is not the norm, and that, is what the FAA has to contend with.

TomCrump

I couldn't agree more.

The trouble is, the AMA wants money. They see big bucks in this FPV thing. Advertising in Model Aviation, and the possibility of new members is putting dollar signs in their eyes.

It's a short term solution, to a long term problem. If we dump the drones, the FAA will have fewer reasons to get involved in what we do. If we side with them, the goverment will be in our faces more than we can now imagine.

tacx

My Feedback: (1)

I personally would like to know the EXACT definition of a "DRONE". I did say "EXACT".

Let the discussion begin !!!!

abelard

It's a male bee. You wanted EXACT, right?

Rob2160

Definitions for Drone in the RC context from various dictionaries.

Cambridge Dictionary - a type of aircraft that does not have a pilot but is controlled by someone on the ground

Oxford Dictionary - A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile.

Webster Online - an unmanned aircraft or ship guided by remote control or onboard computers

Wordnet dictionary - an aircraft without a pilot that is operated by remote control

Dictionary.com -

• an unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously,without human control or beyond line of sight:
• (loosely) any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely:

My latest: With a Naza flight control board it can fly autonomously. Turning off the Transmitter during any part of a flight will cause this quad to fly back to it's take off position, land and shut down automatically.

init4fun

Wow , this is SO simple that I thought EVERYONE knew the definition ......

" A drone is any remotely piloted craft being used for any specific purpose or task , as opposed to being operated solely for the sheer fun of operating the craft remotely "

Flyin it to take pictures , gather weather data , or shoot terrorists ? ..... That's a drone .

Flyin it for nothing but the sheer fun of flying it , with no other "mission" attached ? .... That's a model aircraft .

Sounds pretty simple to me ...

jcstalls

My Feedback: (7)

And there you go again,.......Thinking.

I agree that an average for personal pleasure model aircraft is not anywhere near the restricted use to a drone

308jockey

For those of you, and there seem to be plenty, who think multirotors or FPV or drones should be distanced from more traditional R/C activities, it's time to get your heads out of the sand. They are here to stay, they are developing at a huge rate, and many hobby shops have said multis are by far the biggest part of their R/C sales. The auto pilot or autonamous control systems are here to stay too along with on board cameras and all the rest. There are thousands out there world wide and will only grow regardless of what the FAA says. There is big money in it. Frankly most multicopter owners see no need for the AMA or traditional modeling and generally could care less what the Feds say. These things are ready to fly and easy to learn. Sure a bit of technical knowledge is needed but that's easy too. We need to find a way to bring this segment in with us, not exclude them. They'll just tell us where to go and continue to grow in numbers and capabilities. It is the traditional modeler who is in danger of becoming irrelevant.

Rick H.

init4fun

I have distilled all the B.S. out of your post , and posted the one shining nugget that proves what most of us believe ; that FPV/drones are NOT and should NOT be the business nor concern of the AMA ! Please remember , the "M" in AMA stands for "MODEL" , as in the traditional model aircraft you so disdain , and folks building/flying models of real aircraft for fun , VS mission based FPV/drones , are really in two entirely separate fields of operation .

And I do wish you well with that "Feds be damned" 'tude ya got goin on there , , , It worked real well for guys like Al Capone ....... Oh , Well , then , maybe not .......

jcstalls

My Feedback: (7)

It's fine to express one's personal opinions, but why included demeaning/derogatory/belittling wording is not Ok

308jockey

Ok init, go back and read that post again and this time read all the big words. I have no disdain for traditional r/c, I'm all about it. Been at it since the age of four and so far have only owned a single small quad that I gave away. Planes, boats, cars, helis, tanks, trains, scale, racing, pattern, got 'em all. I'm a MODELER. I view the hobbyist class of multis as MODELS. I believe that if the AMA runs away from a type of model that is by some estimates accounting for 70-80% of r/c sales it is going to find itself in the same boat as IMAA and that would not be good for anyone. Most multi owners are able to get in the air on their own and don't see a need to seek out clubs, instruction or membership in an organization. Hobby shops are not pushing newbies in that direction either. They then go out and do stupid stuff you and I would not dream of. They don't seem to know better. As for the FAA, I've dealt with them before and as with all federal agencies I have a healthy mistrust of them knowing damn good and well that they are not primarily interested in the well being of the aviation community as a whole. I think their position that they are in charge of all airspace everywhere period is incredibly arrogant. Adding an attitude of exclusivity from the large and growing population of multi owners is going to cause traditional modelers to go by the wayside. As for the commercial use of multis and other flying machines, I know a few people involved in aerial photography that are in love with this technology and are finding many markets for it. The FAA only cares about it because there is money to be made and they feel the need to regulate that just as they always have. There are quite a few morons causing problems but of course most of the commercial users are sensible and responsible. The FAA attitude of 'there are no rules yet so everything is forbidden' is foolish and simply won't be tolerated by commercial users. It's possibly the first time I've seen something grow so rapidly and become so capable and valuable that the participants are not allowing the government to get in the way. The numbers are going to grow so rapidly they won't be able to keep up. Finally I just gotta say, the way you are coming across here isn't helping.

Rick H.

Rob2160

As I was leaving the airport yesterday I noticed this.

Checked their website when I got home and it looks like a good operation.

init4fun

Hi Rick H ,

Ok , maybe I misread you , but when I see things like "head in the sand" and "irrelevant" being said about my hobby well Hell yea , of course I'm sendin it back both barrels . If you were not thinking you were being malicious with those terms then you DO have my apology . Really .


But !

I hold to my assertion that any kinds of drone/fpv are such different modes of flight than "traditional" model aircraft , to the point that they should have their OWN "FPVAMA" or whatever ! And that "our" AMA shouldn't be chasing the almighty buck to the point of going so far outside of our hobby's scope . Yes , there are big bucks in the drone/fpv field , just as there are big bucks in selling motorcycles , and in my opinion our AMA has about as much business tryin to make a buck off of either

( you'll note that the motorcycling world has it's own AMA , the American Motorcyclist Association)


init4fun

AMA 80274

308jockey

Yeah innit I think you and I are actually pretty much on the same page. I wouldn't be bothered if the multi pilots had their own organization but I wish they would do a little self policing and deal with some of the idiots in their ranks. I worry, maybe for no good reason, that traditional r/c is going to lose out in a big way over some of the antics of a few of these pilots. I hear a lot of long time modelers try to wish away this new technology and it just ain't going away. I think I'll go burn some nitro....

Rick H.

init4fun

I completely agree that some of the folks flying FPV ought to be setting better examples of themselves but I chalk that up to the percentage of folks in any hobby that misbehave . In my opinion the folks chasing jetliners with their FPVs are no different than the people who misbehave in other hobbies , a small minority with the potential to give their hobby a giant black eye with their antics . I think FPV/drone flying sounds like a lot of fun if practiced safely , but I don't consider it an extension of our traditional model aircraft , and thus a separate flight catagory alltogether . Even if it does happen to use some of the same equipment , like I said already , once a "mission" other than "for the fun of flying it" has been assigned it's a drone . In reality , how can the use of a drone to take pictures for profit or make deliveries even be considered a hobby at all ? Now as to the AMA , yes of course I understand the dynamic of "that which does not grow is doomed" but when the growth involves branching into non hobby territory is it really growth or more like diversification ? I don't want our organization to loose the focus of the model aircraft hobbyist to chase the big money that is sure to circulate in the drone business once Amazon and Google actually begin making their deliveries with them . I fear that when the monetary "push comes to shove" we as hobbyists WILL loose out to the chase for the attention of folks who have no need of the AMA in the first place . Clubs of all sorts are on the decline as has been already mentioned , and a great example of this is IMAC 's demise even as the giant scale RC plane has become more and more common at most RC fields . If the AMA is to "sink or swim" I don't think it'll be drones that save it , at least not in the form that we now recognize the AMA as our hobbyist organization .

Darkbird

My Feedback: (7)

Respectfully, I think some of you are missing the point about all this. Those people causing the most problems for us already have nothing to do with us, other than using some of the same equipment. Those fools haven't heard of, and wouldn't care if they did, the AMA or anything else. There are thousands of these things flying around and not causing a single issue, some even in the hands of capable modelers like myself. Griping about the AMA's involvement with FPV, and them abandoning FPV, will have no effect on what will happen to us in the future. This technology came out of our hobby, and regardless of whether the idiots are affiliated with us or not, we will be included in the FAA's solution to the problem sooner or later. From my point of view, it's better for us to embrace this new tech and try to work with the FAA, than to reject it and get included in new rules anyway. I think the AMA's guidelines for FPV are fine. If your going beyond line of sight, then to me your operating as a full scale in everything but size. Just my opinions here, of course.