UnLawful to Build Aircraft - FAA Reauthorization Senate Version
03-22-2016, 03:23 AM
#1
UnLawful to Build Aircraft - FAA Reauthorization Senate Version
This would destroy the ARF, Kit and Plans part of this hobby. You would not be able to buy anything but RTF. I wonder what you would do if you had to have it repaired. Think of what this will do to the cost of the hobby. Time to write your senators.
Read the message in this Forbes article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2016/03/16/senate-bill-could-ground-home-built-drones-no-exceptions-for-hobbyists-or-students/#48bd86bba6f2
Read the message in this Forbes article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2016/03/16/senate-bill-could-ground-home-built-drones-no-exceptions-for-hobbyists-or-students/#48bd86bba6f2
03-22-2016, 12:12 PM
#3
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: lake in the Hills,
IL
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
14 Posts
The Forbes writer got it wrong. Although in the past anyone could build test and fly sUAVS.
The Hobby provisions are the same with a few notables. No knuckle heads, safety test, registration and fines for violators.
The Hobby provisions are the same with a few notables. No knuckle heads, safety test, registration and fines for violators.
03-22-2016, 03:23 PM
#5
B. S. Worthless bits of useless information from someone that has zero experience in what they're writing about. It fills a page for something, and some editor somewhere thought it newsworthy. Don't sweat it, unless they step into your house and try to confiscate your hobby. Don't buy into it. As someone mentioned, these outfits get paid by the click onto the worthless bits.. So... I did my part for their ridiculous economy... and you did your part for bringing it to others(like me/we).. to do the same.
04-20-2016, 07:06 AM
#8
Member
04-20-2016, 07:23 AM
#9
My Feedback: (1)
The latest email (4/19/16) from the AMA supports much of what the article says, specifically that we will need to follow FAA rules to build our own airplanes.
"One of the provisions would still require hobbyists to who build their own models at home to meet FAA design and production standards."
Time to get your head out of the sand, guys!
"One of the provisions would still require hobbyists to who build their own models at home to meet FAA design and production standards."
Time to get your head out of the sand, guys!
04-20-2016, 10:42 AM
#10
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
The latest email (4/19/16) from the AMA supports much of what the article says, specifically that we will need to follow FAA rules to build our own airplanes.
"One of the provisions would still require hobbyists to who build their own models at home to meet FAA design and production standards."
Time to get your head out of the sand, guys!
"One of the provisions would still require hobbyists to who build their own models at home to meet FAA design and production standards."
Time to get your head out of the sand, guys!
04-21-2016, 06:01 AM
#11
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the actual final bill. Section 2124 deals with the airframe certification
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...14hr636eas.pdf
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...14hr636eas.pdf
04-21-2016, 07:43 AM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: lake in the Hills,
IL
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
14 Posts
Here is the actual final bill. Section 2124 deals with the airframe certification
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...14hr636eas.pdf
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...14hr636eas.pdf
04-21-2016, 10:32 AM
#14
Oh.... they're intact alright.... along with what looks to be several rules and regulations that are being put into place.... What does the following quote from the blog mean...?
‘‘(7) the operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test administered by the Federal Aviation Administration online for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems subject to the requirements of section 44809 and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.
‘‘(b) UPDATES.
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator, in collaboration with government and industry stake holders, including nationwide community-based organizations, shall initiate a process to update the operational parameters under subsection (a) as appropriate.
Found on page 104, starting at line 15. Just for sake of conversation and views of interpretation is all. We're all trying to figure this out it seems. Are they making us all outlaws if we don't comply... It might seem so...at least in some views. Hmmm....
‘‘(7) the operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test administered by the Federal Aviation Administration online for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems subject to the requirements of section 44809 and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.
‘‘(b) UPDATES.
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator, in collaboration with government and industry stake holders, including nationwide community-based organizations, shall initiate a process to update the operational parameters under subsection (a) as appropriate.
Found on page 104, starting at line 15. Just for sake of conversation and views of interpretation is all. We're all trying to figure this out it seems. Are they making us all outlaws if we don't comply... It might seem so...at least in some views. Hmmm....
04-21-2016, 03:53 PM
#15
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I have started a thread on here, Flying Giants, and Giant Scale News trying to promote the idea that a few hundred of us get together in Washington to show our concerns.
I not only would make a trip to Washington but bring my trailer and push my biggest aircraft ahead of me in the streets with a sign attached "This is not a drone but a model aircraft".
Imagine what the media would do and what our reps would think. This is what a lot of groups do and they get results. It is time we quit emailing, sending letters, depending on the AMA, and go do it ourselves.
I not only would make a trip to Washington but bring my trailer and push my biggest aircraft ahead of me in the streets with a sign attached "This is not a drone but a model aircraft".
Imagine what the media would do and what our reps would think. This is what a lot of groups do and they get results. It is time we quit emailing, sending letters, depending on the AMA, and go do it ourselves.
04-21-2016, 05:25 PM
#17
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I have started a thread on here, Flying Giants, and Giant Scale News trying to promote the idea that a few hundred of us get together in Washington to show our concerns.
I not only would make a trip to Washington but bring my trailer and push my biggest aircraft ahead of me in the streets with a sign attached "This is not a drone but a model aircraft".
Imagine what the media would do and what our reps would think. This is what a lot of groups do and they get results. It is time we quit emailing, sending letters, depending on the AMA, and go do it ourselves.
I not only would make a trip to Washington but bring my trailer and push my biggest aircraft ahead of me in the streets with a sign attached "This is not a drone but a model aircraft".
Imagine what the media would do and what our reps would think. This is what a lot of groups do and they get results. It is time we quit emailing, sending letters, depending on the AMA, and go do it ourselves.
04-22-2016, 10:13 AM
#20
I think an actual talk to the members of our local/state government is a great idea. And a few/dozen/lots and lots of flyers going together is even better. But a large group of people all with different ideas about what is the best way to solve this issue will not do much good, and perhaps some harm. Perhaps there is a list of terms or conditions we as non MR flyers could come up with. So anybody that wants to talk to the government offices has the same ideas as the rest of us? I am not saying that such a list is something that would be set in stone as the only ides, but maybe just some things to break the ice. My nephew is works in the Minn. government. I think I will give him a call and see if I could arrange a little chat.
Last edited by jeffEE; 04-22-2016 at 10:41 AM.
04-22-2016, 11:10 AM
#21
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
From what I have seen of small interest hitting Washington or even their local reps it would not take many.
From my perspective LOS with no transmission of video is the only way we can remain a hobby without regulation. Multi's, FPV, or anything with a transmitting video is the technology creating the problem.
I believe it is going to take a nation wide campaign to accomplish anything. As I stated above, I think LOS with no video transmission is the only possible way we will save the hobby as we have known it. Anything with the advanced technologies such as video, self stabilization, GPS, etc. is what has brought us to this point.
I think an actual talk to the members of our local/state government is a great idea. And a few/dozen/lots and lots of flyers going together is even better. But a large group of people all with different ideas about what is the best way to solve this issue will not do much good, and perhaps some harm. Perhaps there is a list of terms or conditions we as non MR flyers could come up with. So anybody that wants to talk to the government offices has the same ideas as the rest of us? I am not saying that such a list is something that would be set in stone as the only ides, but maybe just some things to break the ice. My nephew is works in the Minn. government. I think I will give him a call and see if I could arrange a little chat.
04-22-2016, 11:20 AM
#22
If you need "talking points" go to the AMA site here: http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...stration-rule/
“AMA is disappointed with the new rule for UAS registration. As a member of the task force that helped develop recommendations for this rule, AMA argued that registration makes sense at some level and for UAS flyers operating outside the guidance of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes. Unfortunately, the new rule is counter to Congress’s intent in the Special Rule for Model Aircraft and makes the registration process an unnecessary burden for our more than 185,000 members who have been operating safely for decades.
“The Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 clearly states that the FAA is prohibited from promulgating any new rules for recreational users operating within the safety guidelines of a community-based organization (CBO). Meanwhile, the FAA’s contention that model aircraft should be considered aircraft is currently the subject of pending litigation. Congress by no means intended to grant a free pass to flyers within this system. Instead, it left risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines to organizations like AMA.
“AMA’s eighty years of experience demonstrates that this voluntary, community-based approach to managing recreational flyers is highly effective. Our members follow a comprehensive set of safety and privacy guidelines, which are constantly evolving to accommodate new technologies and new modeling disciplines.
“At the same time, AMA understands that new legions of flyers need to be educated on how to fly safely and responsibly. That’s why AMA has been working closely with the FAA and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) on the Know Before You Fly campaign. Education programs like these are one of the best ways to ensure the safety of our airspace.”
“AMA is disappointed with the new rule for UAS registration. As a member of the task force that helped develop recommendations for this rule, AMA argued that registration makes sense at some level and for UAS flyers operating outside the guidance of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes. Unfortunately, the new rule is counter to Congress’s intent in the Special Rule for Model Aircraft and makes the registration process an unnecessary burden for our more than 185,000 members who have been operating safely for decades.
“The Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 clearly states that the FAA is prohibited from promulgating any new rules for recreational users operating within the safety guidelines of a community-based organization (CBO). Meanwhile, the FAA’s contention that model aircraft should be considered aircraft is currently the subject of pending litigation. Congress by no means intended to grant a free pass to flyers within this system. Instead, it left risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines to organizations like AMA.
“AMA’s eighty years of experience demonstrates that this voluntary, community-based approach to managing recreational flyers is highly effective. Our members follow a comprehensive set of safety and privacy guidelines, which are constantly evolving to accommodate new technologies and new modeling disciplines.
“At the same time, AMA understands that new legions of flyers need to be educated on how to fly safely and responsibly. That’s why AMA has been working closely with the FAA and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) on the Know Before You Fly campaign. Education programs like these are one of the best ways to ensure the safety of our airspace.”
04-22-2016, 11:24 AM
#24
I believe it is going to take a nation wide campaign to accomplish anything. As I stated above, I think LOS with no video transmission is the only possible way we will save the hobby as we have known it. Anything with the advanced technologies such as video, self stabilization, GPS, etc. is what has brought us to this point.
