AMA says, "Wait to register"
01-26-2016, 05:29 PM
#626
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Well you've had 4 or 5 years to do something about that "performance". You've been signed up here (with this name) for over 12 years but only started commenting about the issue less than a month ago, after the fact. Do you see any other groups or "pros" representing the hobby? What have you been doing all along? The latest call to action is an untimely and ill-defined petition (to say what again?) that the AMA should put together and send out to 180,000 member and then get back somehow, and then give this to politicians? Sorry, it's too convoluted.
And how exactly is the FAA supposed to know how many AMA members are signed up, while the "wait us out" ??? They don't need to wait us out for anything...they are in the drivers seat. And they have no idea how many AMA members have signed up as that information is not given to them at the time of registration.
So yes, let the "pros" deal with this for better or worse...there isn't anyone else doing it.
And how exactly is the FAA supposed to know how many AMA members are signed up, while the "wait us out" ??? They don't need to wait us out for anything...they are in the drivers seat. And they have no idea how many AMA members have signed up as that information is not given to them at the time of registration.
So yes, let the "pros" deal with this for better or worse...there isn't anyone else doing it.
01-26-2016, 07:24 PM
#627
Who the He]] cares if you put 2 numbers in your Plane Heli Quad drone. Is all this commotion worth trying to protest to the FAA when they did the Minimal just to say they did something Registeration isn't the end of the world. What if all R/C Flying were restricted to 1/2 mile circles around registered R/C Fields outside the 5 mile radius of any towered airport. OH and controlled by only by a CBO.
01-26-2016, 07:28 PM
#628
Well you've had 4 or 5 years to do something about that "performance". You've been signed up here (with this name) for over 12 years but only started commenting about the issue less than a month ago, after the fact. Do you see any other groups or "pros" representing the hobby? What have you been doing all along? The latest call to action is an untimely and ill-defined petition (to say what again?) that the AMA should put together and send out to 180,000 member and then get back somehow, and then give this to politicians? Sorry, it's too convoluted.
And how exactly is the FAA supposed to know how many AMA members are signed up, while the "wait us out" ??? They don't need to wait us out for anything...they are in the drivers seat. And they have no idea how many AMA members have signed up as that information is not given to them at the time of registration.
So yes, let the "pros" deal with this for better or worse...there isn't anyone else doing it.
And how exactly is the FAA supposed to know how many AMA members are signed up, while the "wait us out" ??? They don't need to wait us out for anything...they are in the drivers seat. And they have no idea how many AMA members have signed up as that information is not given to them at the time of registration.
So yes, let the "pros" deal with this for better or worse...there isn't anyone else doing it.
01-26-2016, 09:44 PM
#629
01-26-2016, 09:49 PM
#630
I am not sure your use of the term reactivate our lawsuit is accurate regarding the 8/22/2014 action
AMA v FAA #14-1158.
I spoke to Chad Budreau several weeks before the email of 1/25/16 from the AMA that mentioned this lawsuit.
What the AMA did not say in last nights email is that the case is in abeyance as per the request of the FAA.
I sent emails on 1/24/16 to most everyone on the AMA department list asking "what does the AMA plan to do to get the case out of abeyance.
Really can the respondent indefinitely tie up the issue while they gather more information, which was the reason the FAA used with the court.
The AMA lawyers would probably have to write to the court and request that the court get off its' as and demand that the case should
commence and further delay is causing damages to the petitioner, namely us, the AMA.
During this long delay more actions by the FAA against us have come into being, and with each new member that registers, the reason for the
lawsuit becomes a less and less pressing issue. That is to say: If everyone is complying with the FAA regulations why should a lawsuit
against the FAA be re-instituted ? taken out of abeyance. I believe the FAA is aware of the growing numbers of AMA pilots who register
and are just waiting us out. That is why I had suggested to the AMA executive council that an electronic petition should be created quickly
and sent to them even if they have already arrived in DC. To be present to congressmen that they are meeting with as well as the FAA.
Not that I expect the FAA to be terribly impressed with any numbers we present to them, and I think the FAA could do the math to determine
how many AMA members have not registered. But I was told by one of the posters, "its too late baby" to do anything, let the "pros" handle it.
I am not real happy with the "pros" performance to date.
AMA v FAA #14-1158.
I spoke to Chad Budreau several weeks before the email of 1/25/16 from the AMA that mentioned this lawsuit.
What the AMA did not say in last nights email is that the case is in abeyance as per the request of the FAA.
I sent emails on 1/24/16 to most everyone on the AMA department list asking "what does the AMA plan to do to get the case out of abeyance.
Really can the respondent indefinitely tie up the issue while they gather more information, which was the reason the FAA used with the court.
The AMA lawyers would probably have to write to the court and request that the court get off its' as and demand that the case should
commence and further delay is causing damages to the petitioner, namely us, the AMA.
During this long delay more actions by the FAA against us have come into being, and with each new member that registers, the reason for the
lawsuit becomes a less and less pressing issue. That is to say: If everyone is complying with the FAA regulations why should a lawsuit
against the FAA be re-instituted ? taken out of abeyance. I believe the FAA is aware of the growing numbers of AMA pilots who register
and are just waiting us out. That is why I had suggested to the AMA executive council that an electronic petition should be created quickly
and sent to them even if they have already arrived in DC. To be present to congressmen that they are meeting with as well as the FAA.
Not that I expect the FAA to be terribly impressed with any numbers we present to them, and I think the FAA could do the math to determine
how many AMA members have not registered. But I was told by one of the posters, "its too late baby" to do anything, let the "pros" handle it.
I am not real happy with the "pros" performance to date.
01-26-2016, 10:09 PM
#631
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Hudson Valley. New York. USA
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
What the FAA did was illegal, amateur, and below the quality standards that we the people should stand for. The classic give an inch, take a mile.
Every people has the government they deserve. You put up with this overreach from one agency, and you are setting up precedence for all agencies.
Every people has the government they deserve. You put up with this overreach from one agency, and you are setting up precedence for all agencies.
01-27-2016, 04:23 AM
#633
Get something straight. It matters not what a "drone" is to you or me. It is what a sUAV and "model aircraft" is to the FAA.
Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 01-27-2016 at 04:28 AM.
Yep , it's all fun and games till the meat runs out .... And then we start eating vegans ....
01-27-2016, 07:44 AM
#637
What the FAA did was illegal, amateur, and below the quality standards that we the people should stand for. The classic give an inch, take a mile.
Every people has the government they deserve. You put up with this overreach from one agency, and you are setting up precedence for all agencies.
Every people has the government they deserve. You put up with this overreach from one agency, and you are setting up precedence for all agencies.
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]Around 1790, Historian Alexander Tyler listed the 8 phases of a Democracy:
Stages of Democracy - Where's the U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. From Bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage"
Where do you think present day USA falls on this list?[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
01-27-2016, 08:34 AM
#639
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TITUSVILLE FLORIDA NY
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I was just letting the "pros" do it, isn't that what you advocate? Again you attack the person not the argument, "you've been signed up for
12 years and this is the first time, you have commented, so you're too new to saying, right Porcia83 ? You sound just like the old guy at some clubs
who disparage a new members opinion's because they are too new to have an opinion. It's just fear of losing status and control, How sad.
I should have been more aware of the problem and its' potential I admit it. So what? I'm doing what I can now. The night before the most recent
AMA email about the DC trip and lawsuit, I emailed about 20 department heads at the AMA including the janitor, and what do you know, the
next day there is a club email addressing the same issues I emailed the AMA . Yeah, I know, just coincidence.
Do I know of other groups representing the hobby ? No specifics , but perhaps this conflict may cause more people to consider alternatives to the
AMA.
As far as a electronic petition being too late, it could still be used with some of the congressmen now and in the future. I was not aware of the
executives councils DC trip until it was in motion, Who's plan was that? I do not believe that a petition is an absolute slam dunk requirement, it
would be something the AMA should have. Just because you can't see how it could be done, does not mean it can't be done. As you write
"Sorry, it's too convoluted. " Every email from the AMA goes to 180,000 members, the numbers are not a complexity issue.
How is the FAA suppose to know how many AMA member register ? Is that your question?
So the FAA does not track if a registrant is affiliated with a community based organization or not, during registration according to you.
So how will the FAA measure their registration and guideline effectiveness on the non-CBO public of drone flyers if they don't know who is who ?
If the FAA does not track whether a flyer is CBO or not CBO how can the Special Rule for Model Aircraft be applied to a pilot? after an incident?
Oh, the FAA does not care if pilots are CBO ? They just make rules with no thought of their effectiveness or compliance with a law?
So the FAA does not care about a congressional law?
So if you are non-CBO you only have FAA guidelines, one set of rules, and if you are CBO (AMA) you have the Special Rule and
the FAA guidelines, two sets of rules? That makes sense?
The FAA is saying we don't have to abide by Congressional Laws or CBO, we make our own guidelines that supercede Congressional Law
and CBO's. That would be a good discussion to have with the congressmen and a petition from our members presented at that discussion would
not hurt either.
The lawsuit does not make this point nor does it delve into the registration process but a judge might piece together the whole thing if all pieces are
given to him.
His decision would, I trust, at least consider these issues and the effectiveness and ramifications of the FAA's actions.
12 years and this is the first time, you have commented, so you're too new to saying, right Porcia83 ? You sound just like the old guy at some clubs
who disparage a new members opinion's because they are too new to have an opinion. It's just fear of losing status and control, How sad.
I should have been more aware of the problem and its' potential I admit it. So what? I'm doing what I can now. The night before the most recent
AMA email about the DC trip and lawsuit, I emailed about 20 department heads at the AMA including the janitor, and what do you know, the
next day there is a club email addressing the same issues I emailed the AMA . Yeah, I know, just coincidence.
Do I know of other groups representing the hobby ? No specifics , but perhaps this conflict may cause more people to consider alternatives to the
AMA.
As far as a electronic petition being too late, it could still be used with some of the congressmen now and in the future. I was not aware of the
executives councils DC trip until it was in motion, Who's plan was that? I do not believe that a petition is an absolute slam dunk requirement, it
would be something the AMA should have. Just because you can't see how it could be done, does not mean it can't be done. As you write
"Sorry, it's too convoluted. " Every email from the AMA goes to 180,000 members, the numbers are not a complexity issue.
How is the FAA suppose to know how many AMA member register ? Is that your question?
So the FAA does not track if a registrant is affiliated with a community based organization or not, during registration according to you.
So how will the FAA measure their registration and guideline effectiveness on the non-CBO public of drone flyers if they don't know who is who ?
If the FAA does not track whether a flyer is CBO or not CBO how can the Special Rule for Model Aircraft be applied to a pilot? after an incident?
Oh, the FAA does not care if pilots are CBO ? They just make rules with no thought of their effectiveness or compliance with a law?
So the FAA does not care about a congressional law?
So if you are non-CBO you only have FAA guidelines, one set of rules, and if you are CBO (AMA) you have the Special Rule and
the FAA guidelines, two sets of rules? That makes sense?
The FAA is saying we don't have to abide by Congressional Laws or CBO, we make our own guidelines that supercede Congressional Law
and CBO's. That would be a good discussion to have with the congressmen and a petition from our members presented at that discussion would
not hurt either.
The lawsuit does not make this point nor does it delve into the registration process but a judge might piece together the whole thing if all pieces are
given to him.
His decision would, I trust, at least consider these issues and the effectiveness and ramifications of the FAA's actions.
01-27-2016, 09:03 AM
#640
Originally Posted by scale only 4 me 
stopped reading @ B^!! &#!+,, but I'm sure it was a great rant
Mikey My good Man When U use pronouns and DO NOT include all the back posts it is extremely difficult to know whom U are refering to or commenting ... Just saying some one coming along has no idea of what U might be talking about or speaking of. Just a comment.
Now just for clarification who the he[[ is"He"
01-27-2016, 09:21 AM
#641
Originally Posted by scale only 4 me stopped reading @ B^!! &#!+,, but I'm sure it was a great rant
Mikey My good Man When U use pronouns and DO NOT include all the back posts it is extremely difficult to know whom U are refering to or commenting ... Just saying some one coming along has no idea of what U might be talking about or speaking of. Just a comment.
Now just for clarification who the he[[ is"He"
If you are so concerned that others would understand, then why do you keep using that clownish font and talk like a country bumpkin?
01-27-2016, 09:46 AM
#642
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo,
NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Guys, and any Ladies present!!!,
Yup, Now we got the FAA playing their B^!! &#!+ games with us stirring up a hornets nest!! "Drones" basically described as an airplane without somebody "in" it!! As we know the "Third Most Often Told LIE In The World" "IS," "I'm from the FAA and I am here to help you!!!" We all know the other two!!! Well,............The fed will be inundated!! There is currently an "18 Month Waiting Period" just for setting up an appointment to get a "Concealed Carry permit" in I believe Riverside County, CA since that shooting incident of recent!.. Five bucks on a credit card on the internet.......yeah right?? How many people got those things for Christmas??? Within a week at least 80% will be "Criminals" because of this new ".Gov edict!!" On a more "lethal" scale, after the "Sandy Hook" Fiasco, a couple of those "Northern States" went bonkers declaring a certain class of fire arm to be "Persona non grata!!" (just one way to put it!!) Anyone not "Registering" them after a specific date ...well you know the drift....... Only now instead of "Fire Arms" it's "Kids Toys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" You think I'm kidding??....How many times have you been looked at with disdain by the local citizenery as "That Grown Man Going out their and Playing with 'Toy Airplanes!'" "NOW YOU ARE A FELLON!!!!!!!" Just don't kiss the fed *****!!! They want five bucks per......As the late Frank Gallop would say in his throaty baritone voice,"R-I-G-H-T-!!!!!!!!" Don't be a Fool, five bucks, hell, they want to really get to know you, who you are where you live, who your wife is, where your kids go to school , how any traffic tickets do you have, do you ever Talk back to cops???" have you ever raised your voice at the PTA Meeting!!!!, It is all part of their Plan!!!! 4AM in the morning and you wonder why a SWAT team is breaking down your front door, shooting "Fifi", putting you in hand cuffs and meanwhile your wife and kids are scared out of their wits!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think I am kidding, they've done it for less and not to mention done it to the wrong address!!! Well, welcome to the Real world!! Besides Model Airplanes, I fly "Full Scale"9(Solo 7AC Aeronca Chmp, oct '62) You know the ones you have to get in and push the pedals with your feet and pull the stick back and forth!!! Dealt with the feds there too "AND" I am also a "SKYDIVER!!!" We Skydivers as I have stated before are the "******* Stepchildren of General Aviation!!!!!" (First jump 08MAY1964) 'Remember back in '65 there was a "NPRM" by .gov to curtail the areas where skydiving could take place!! That was back in the dayz of "TYPEWRITERS!!!!!" and we pounded key on paper and staved off the .gov for a while, happened again in '72. more pounding keys on paper!! Somehow we SURVIVED!!" thanks to being organized in the AMA brother organization the "United States Parachute Association" of which I have been a member since May of 1964!!!!!!!!!!!! Well boyz and Gurlz, I like Flying, Big Airplanes, Little Airplanes and "ME!!" Now we have our .gov trying to throw another monkey wrench in the werkz!! At Lexington Concord Bridge, Capt. Parker said to his men,"Don't fire unless fired upon, ..If they want to start a war, let it start here!!!" A little more "History for you!
Blue skies,
skybill-standing by
PS, I have more questions...........just not enough whiskey!!
Yup, Now we got the FAA playing their B^!! &#!+ games with us stirring up a hornets nest!! "Drones" basically described as an airplane without somebody "in" it!! As we know the "Third Most Often Told LIE In The World" "IS," "I'm from the FAA and I am here to help you!!!" We all know the other two!!! Well,............The fed will be inundated!! There is currently an "18 Month Waiting Period" just for setting up an appointment to get a "Concealed Carry permit" in I believe Riverside County, CA since that shooting incident of recent!.. Five bucks on a credit card on the internet.......yeah right?? How many people got those things for Christmas??? Within a week at least 80% will be "Criminals" because of this new ".Gov edict!!" On a more "lethal" scale, after the "Sandy Hook" Fiasco, a couple of those "Northern States" went bonkers declaring a certain class of fire arm to be "Persona non grata!!" (just one way to put it!!) Anyone not "Registering" them after a specific date ...well you know the drift....... Only now instead of "Fire Arms" it's "Kids Toys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" You think I'm kidding??....How many times have you been looked at with disdain by the local citizenery as "That Grown Man Going out their and Playing with 'Toy Airplanes!'" "NOW YOU ARE A FELLON!!!!!!!" Just don't kiss the fed *****!!! They want five bucks per......As the late Frank Gallop would say in his throaty baritone voice,"R-I-G-H-T-!!!!!!!!" Don't be a Fool, five bucks, hell, they want to really get to know you, who you are where you live, who your wife is, where your kids go to school , how any traffic tickets do you have, do you ever Talk back to cops???" have you ever raised your voice at the PTA Meeting!!!!, It is all part of their Plan!!!! 4AM in the morning and you wonder why a SWAT team is breaking down your front door, shooting "Fifi", putting you in hand cuffs and meanwhile your wife and kids are scared out of their wits!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think I am kidding, they've done it for less and not to mention done it to the wrong address!!! Well, welcome to the Real world!! Besides Model Airplanes, I fly "Full Scale"9(Solo 7AC Aeronca Chmp, oct '62) You know the ones you have to get in and push the pedals with your feet and pull the stick back and forth!!! Dealt with the feds there too "AND" I am also a "SKYDIVER!!!" We Skydivers as I have stated before are the "******* Stepchildren of General Aviation!!!!!" (First jump 08MAY1964) 'Remember back in '65 there was a "NPRM" by .gov to curtail the areas where skydiving could take place!! That was back in the dayz of "TYPEWRITERS!!!!!" and we pounded key on paper and staved off the .gov for a while, happened again in '72. more pounding keys on paper!! Somehow we SURVIVED!!" thanks to being organized in the AMA brother organization the "United States Parachute Association" of which I have been a member since May of 1964!!!!!!!!!!!! Well boyz and Gurlz, I like Flying, Big Airplanes, Little Airplanes and "ME!!" Now we have our .gov trying to throw another monkey wrench in the werkz!! At Lexington Concord Bridge, Capt. Parker said to his men,"Don't fire unless fired upon, ..If they want to start a war, let it start here!!!" A little more "History for you!
Blue skies,
skybill-standing by
PS, I have more questions...........just not enough whiskey!!
Originally Posted by scale only 4 me stopped reading @ B^!! &#!+,, but I'm sure it was a great rant
Mikey My good Man When U use pronouns and DO NOT include all the back posts it is extremely difficult to know whom U are refering to or commenting ... Just saying some one coming along has no idea of what U might be talking about or speaking of. Just a comment.
Now just for clarification who the he[[ is"He"
01-27-2016, 02:32 PM
#644
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TITUSVILLE FLORIDA NY
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Scale only for me,
I am not engaging in these post for the fun of argument, but rather to find out information regarding the FAA situation that I do not posses.
For example Porcia83 mentioned that the FAA registration does not ask if you are a member of a CBO like the FAA.
Since I have not registered I found that to be of great interest from a legal stand point.
I have read the lawsuit from 8/22/14 AMA v FAA #14-1158 .
Here is the issue I see not mentioned in the lawsuit:
The 2012 Special rule is suppose to protect all modelers Who follow guidelines of a CBO from new restrictions.
So as long as we follow our CBO guidelines we are not required to follow a new regulation from the FAA. The
special rule does not say
"except in matters of safety and security or past rules we the FAA opted not to enforce."
Now the FAA says their rules supercede any CBO you got to follow FAA guidelines.
During registration I am told that nowhere does the registration ask if you belong to a CBO or not.
So the registrant may be non-CBO (regular citizen) or CBO (an AMA member).
So what guidelines would the non-CBO registrant follow, answer the only ones they have namely the FAA, one
set of rules.
What guideline would the CBO registrant follow, they would have to follow their CBO as well as the FAA , two
sets of rules.
So what does that say about the FAA's attitude toward the credibility of the CBO ?
It is saying' " CBO's are not needed because our FAA's guidelines supercede the CBO's guidelines.
That puts the AMA in jeopardy because they are our CBO,
Have I lost you yet?
So if the FAA's actions ostensibly nullify the need for CBOs guidelines
How does that nullification affect the protection afforded us by the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft wherein
Congress writes we are protected
from burdensome regulations so long as we follow a CBO?
Answer: By removing the CBO's it removes our protection . And then the only agency we are left with is the FAA.
and they nullifies the
2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft which I understand is a law.
It figuratively spits in Congress's face and says " We at the FAA don't care what Congress legislates, we are doing our on thing."
This is far more that just saying the FAA is misinterpreting and not following the intention of Congress, as the lawsuit alludes to, but mentions
submission of a briefing to the court outlining more specifics ways the FAA's actions impose hardship on the hobby.
I am not engaging in these post for the fun of argument, but rather to find out information regarding the FAA situation that I do not posses.
For example Porcia83 mentioned that the FAA registration does not ask if you are a member of a CBO like the FAA.
Since I have not registered I found that to be of great interest from a legal stand point.
I have read the lawsuit from 8/22/14 AMA v FAA #14-1158 .
Here is the issue I see not mentioned in the lawsuit:
The 2012 Special rule is suppose to protect all modelers Who follow guidelines of a CBO from new restrictions.
So as long as we follow our CBO guidelines we are not required to follow a new regulation from the FAA. The
special rule does not say
"except in matters of safety and security or past rules we the FAA opted not to enforce."
Now the FAA says their rules supercede any CBO you got to follow FAA guidelines.
During registration I am told that nowhere does the registration ask if you belong to a CBO or not.
So the registrant may be non-CBO (regular citizen) or CBO (an AMA member).
So what guidelines would the non-CBO registrant follow, answer the only ones they have namely the FAA, one
set of rules.
What guideline would the CBO registrant follow, they would have to follow their CBO as well as the FAA , two
sets of rules.
So what does that say about the FAA's attitude toward the credibility of the CBO ?
It is saying' " CBO's are not needed because our FAA's guidelines supercede the CBO's guidelines.
That puts the AMA in jeopardy because they are our CBO,
Have I lost you yet?
So if the FAA's actions ostensibly nullify the need for CBOs guidelines
How does that nullification affect the protection afforded us by the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft wherein
Congress writes we are protected
from burdensome regulations so long as we follow a CBO?
Answer: By removing the CBO's it removes our protection . And then the only agency we are left with is the FAA.
and they nullifies the
2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft which I understand is a law.
It figuratively spits in Congress's face and says " We at the FAA don't care what Congress legislates, we are doing our on thing."
This is far more that just saying the FAA is misinterpreting and not following the intention of Congress, as the lawsuit alludes to, but mentions
submission of a briefing to the court outlining more specifics ways the FAA's actions impose hardship on the hobby.
Last edited by jeffrey solomon; 01-27-2016 at 04:05 PM.
01-27-2016, 07:36 PM
#648
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TITUSVILLE FLORIDA NY
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are concerned that any actions by members could potentially upset the negotiations, right ?
Yes I have heard that before, but we have all heard people say that our voice of a mere 180,000 members does not count with the FAA.
So which is it ? Our actions don't matter or they do matter, it can't be both.
I realize that you may not have commented regarding our collective affect in this matter, but anything I have suggested would be presented to
the AMA and meet or not meet with their approval. Don't believe that these so called "pros" think of everything. If you ever retained an
attorney you know that you have to hold these guys accountable to you. That is my perspective.
As far as two lawsuits there are I believe 1 from the AMA and 2 private lawsuits. I re-read the AMA lawsuit and noticed at the end the AMA
lawyer mentions a briefing outlining the ways that the FAA's action will impact the hobby. I have never seen the briefing , has anyone?
Here is the language:
As will be set out more specifically in briefing that will follow, the Order is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, and without observance of procedure required by law. This Petition should be granted, and the Order should be set aside, vacated, and/or reversed.
Was this briefing ever sent to the judge?
Here is a thought process that might be considered by the judge during his review, this thought would be an extrapolation of the FAA's actions against the AMA and RC flyers in general:
1) The 2012 Special rule is suppose to protect all modelers from new FAA regs, who agree to follow guidelines of a CBO.
2) The special rule does not say, "except in matters of safety and security or past rules the FAA opted not to enforce."
That idea is contained in the FAA's interpretation not the law.
3) The FAA says their rules supercede any CBO, you have to follow FAA guidelines.
During registration I am told that nowhere does the registration ask if you belong to a CBO or not.
So the registrant may be a non-CBO (regular citizen) or CBO (an AMA member).
4) What guidelines would the non-CBO registrant follow, answer; the only ones they have namely the FAA, one set of rules.
5) What guideline would a CBO registrant follow, they would have to follow their CBO as well as the FAA , two sets of rules.
6) What does that say about the FAA's regulations regarding the authority of the CBO to regulate its' pilots?
7) It is saying' " CBO's are not needed because our FAA's guidelines supercede the CBO's guidelines.
8) The FAA's actions nullify the need for CBOs guidelines .
9) How does that nullification affect the protection afforded CBO pilots by the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft
wherein Congress writes we are protected from burdensome regulations so long as we follow a CBO?
10) By removing the CBO's it removes our protection . And then the only agency we are left with is the FAA.
11) The FAA's actions nullifies the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft which the judge know is a law.
It spits in Congress's face and says " We at the FAA don't care what Congress legislates, we are doing our on thing."
This is far more then just saying the FAA is misinterpreting and not following the intention of Congress, as the lawsuit states.
I believe the judge would be compelled to vacate the FAA's actions.
Yes I have heard that before, but we have all heard people say that our voice of a mere 180,000 members does not count with the FAA.
So which is it ? Our actions don't matter or they do matter, it can't be both.
I realize that you may not have commented regarding our collective affect in this matter, but anything I have suggested would be presented to
the AMA and meet or not meet with their approval. Don't believe that these so called "pros" think of everything. If you ever retained an
attorney you know that you have to hold these guys accountable to you. That is my perspective.
As far as two lawsuits there are I believe 1 from the AMA and 2 private lawsuits. I re-read the AMA lawsuit and noticed at the end the AMA
lawyer mentions a briefing outlining the ways that the FAA's action will impact the hobby. I have never seen the briefing , has anyone?
Here is the language:
As will be set out more specifically in briefing that will follow, the Order is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, and without observance of procedure required by law. This Petition should be granted, and the Order should be set aside, vacated, and/or reversed.
Was this briefing ever sent to the judge?
Here is a thought process that might be considered by the judge during his review, this thought would be an extrapolation of the FAA's actions against the AMA and RC flyers in general:
1) The 2012 Special rule is suppose to protect all modelers from new FAA regs, who agree to follow guidelines of a CBO.
2) The special rule does not say, "except in matters of safety and security or past rules the FAA opted not to enforce."
That idea is contained in the FAA's interpretation not the law.
3) The FAA says their rules supercede any CBO, you have to follow FAA guidelines.
During registration I am told that nowhere does the registration ask if you belong to a CBO or not.
So the registrant may be a non-CBO (regular citizen) or CBO (an AMA member).
4) What guidelines would the non-CBO registrant follow, answer; the only ones they have namely the FAA, one set of rules.
5) What guideline would a CBO registrant follow, they would have to follow their CBO as well as the FAA , two sets of rules.
6) What does that say about the FAA's regulations regarding the authority of the CBO to regulate its' pilots?
7) It is saying' " CBO's are not needed because our FAA's guidelines supercede the CBO's guidelines.
8) The FAA's actions nullify the need for CBOs guidelines .
9) How does that nullification affect the protection afforded CBO pilots by the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft
wherein Congress writes we are protected from burdensome regulations so long as we follow a CBO?
10) By removing the CBO's it removes our protection . And then the only agency we are left with is the FAA.
11) The FAA's actions nullifies the 2012 Special Rule for Model Aircraft which the judge know is a law.
It spits in Congress's face and says " We at the FAA don't care what Congress legislates, we are doing our on thing."
This is far more then just saying the FAA is misinterpreting and not following the intention of Congress, as the lawsuit states.
I believe the judge would be compelled to vacate the FAA's actions.
Last edited by jeffrey solomon; 01-27-2016 at 07:39 PM.
01-28-2016, 04:53 AM
#650