AndyAndrews

From what I can see after watching over an hour, nothing has changed since the last meeting. Did anyone gain new any insights? I guess its good that they (the FAA people) are both involved in the hobby. That can't hurt.

KC36330

seamed a repeat to me.

RCISFUN

My Feedback: (44)

Thanks Andy, you saved me from waiting my time watching it

hooker53

My Feedback: (106)

After watching and listening to this for over the last few years, I have to wonder where the original problems and questions erupted from.

rhklenke

My Feedback: (24)

Its very, very simple. There are a *lot* of companies out there that want to fly small UAV's in the National Airspace. The FAA stepped in and told them no, and has kept them from doing it for around 10 years now. That's money out of their pockets. At the same time, those people saw modelers flying aircraft that they contend are similar every day and cried foul to the FAA. Now the FAA has to come up with some way to allow them to acces the NAS for their business and somehow, differentiate between them and us and possibly regulate us, in some way, in order to satisfy those people. That is *ALL THERE IS TO IT* nothing more...

Bob

essyou35

My Feedback: (11)

The resultmay be that anyone flying RC aircraft will HAVE to join the AMA to follow the regulations that AMA set up, and the FAA adopts. That is what will come out of this, the FAA will require the AMA to setup rules and regs that the FAA approves of. One of which will be required membership in the AMA for anyone, including people who fly vapors in their front yard. Iam just guessing but Icould see that happening.

I'm fine with all of this as long as I see some good flying sites pop up and teh AMA actively pursues setting up flying sites in the same way the NRA actively pursues setting up shooting ranges.

AndyAndrews

After thinking about it there is one thing that came out that I hadn't heard before: Here is a post that I made on the MIG 29 breakup thread:
-
Maybe the new FAA regulations comming out will prevent cheap imports from dumping dangerous and non flight worthy jets in the USA. After watching the AMA video yesterday, it looks like there is going to be some teeth put into safety. As a matter of fact, the FAA woman in the video when asked about how the FAA would inforce safety mentioned point blank that people who operate model aircraft unsafely will have their rights taken away.

If a company is dumping jets that are not airworthy in the USA, and i.e. they simply break in the air for no apparent reason or are using sub standard or defective parts, they can be reported to the FAA and by law the FAA would have to investigate. The new key word for all of us once the rulings come out will be SAFETY. If you are a company that is selling crap in the USA market your time is comming to an end.

Its going to be interesting to see the outcome and how it affects the companies that fall into this catagory.

Andy

speed is life

Andy,
You have to be careful what you wish for. FAA investigation/enforcement is a very blunt instrument that smashes all things in its path.
Enforcement action would not just be aimed at "the manufacturers" in the event of an incident; the poor unsuspecting "operator" (pilot) could/would wind up on the wrong end of the FAA as well. Remember what two "we're here to help" Feds did to Bob Hoover.....Much less dozens of well meaning full scale pilots that get caught up in enforcement action (equals huge civil fines, and grounding) every year. Bottom line; in any crash the Feds come after the pilot first........that means us.

AndyAndrews

I'm not wishing it at all. My wish would be the FAA stays out of our hobby. This is just reality that we are going to have to face one way or another. It IS coming whether we like it or not. But if we have to be thrusted into their regulatory perview we may as well use the opportunity to clean up these cheapo manufacturers who are constantly sending out ARFs that are not flight worthy.

I foresee the government requiring jet manufacturers overseas to provide copies of blueprints and test flight results for inspection before they are allowed to sell them here. If a model crashes because off a missing pin etc, they could be fined.

Wap4life

My Feedback: (3)

+1 Speed is life

Also the cost to investigate each and every crash would not be feasible.  I hope and there should be a distinction made between UAV and RC Modelers.

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

I am first hand stuck in a battle with the FAA as we speak over night vision goggles.

Make no mistake about it they (Do not make sense!) They also dont care about safety and only who is responsible during an incident.


If anyone should get involved with the crap Chinese product it should be the AMA not the clueless over regulating FAA.

The AMA could just flat out say no flying unapproved Chinese crap unless its been certified. One of these days some one is going to get hurt if not worse with the crap Chinese ARFs and we are all going to pay the price and loose our turbines. It would not be hard at all for manufactures to send the first production plane to the AMA for approval.

Ron101

My Feedback: (22)

I understand what you guys are thinking. But if a ban was made on chinese planes who is going to certifie what is good or not?

This would mean all BVM, Comp ARF, Habu's... and so on arfs that are made over sea's with some work done in the manufactors country of origin would have to be banned or inspected.

Would this would also mean every ARF on the market would have to be looked at and certified.... is a 30 pound warbird any less dangerous? not so much


None of this is going to happen... we are going to have to police ourselfs like we always have and make sure are plane are up to snuff the best we can. If anyone has a crash at your site you would be a fool to call the FAA to come and inspect. Even if you hate Jet Legend planes you would have to crazy to report a crash to the FAA in hope of getting them banned.

You may get a lot more banned than you bargained for

John Redman

My Feedback: (8)

As explained the standard that the AMA is writing now has to be adopted by the FAA. Anyone or group can write the standard, it is all about which one is adopted. Once adopted, that is what you will fly by, nothing more. I am confident that the AMA will not state you must belong to the AMA; that is a bit ridiculous to think I believe. It was spelled out pretty clear how things will be. I just hope the AMA can complete the standard in enough time to get it to us for comment before deadlines occur with the NPRM rules program.

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

I was at that meeting. I tend to agree this meeting went over old ground. But there were some interesting moments nonetheless.

Compared to last year, this year seemed a throw back to what the original 2009 ARC recommendations were, namely, the FAA would come out with some restrictive regulations (some would say very restrictive, like no flying over 100 mph, no flying over 400 feet anywhere, no flying within xx miles of an airport, etc etc). The FAA would then allow non government groups (like the AMA) to propose operational standards that the FAA would then review and either approve, disapprove or approve with changes. These rules could allow flying over 100 mph, allow flying over 400 feet, etc, IF that was part of a comprehensive set of (approved) operating standards. My understanding is that the AMA is preparing a draft set of these standards now. If the FAA approves them and they are largely similar to our current safety code, then we are fine.

A question was specifically posed to the FAA as to whether these standards would require membership in the AMA. FAA said they would not require this. The AMA agreed, and further said the AMA would "license" these rules as AMA “Intellectual Property� to any individual/group who wanted to use them...for the life of me I don't see how Rich Hansen thinks he can pull that off, but more power to him.

A VERY interesting question was asked, along the lines of "Given these new regulations coming, would you (FAA) recommend someone go ahead with a major (multi thousand dollar) hobby investment, such as getting a turbine?�. The answer from the FAA was swift and clear..."don't hesitate to invest in anything turbine or otherwise". I found this very encouraging.

Finally, a couple of hours later I spoke with one of the FAA representatives privately. We had a nice chat, but at the end, he gave me a piece of advice that surprised me....he said "keep pushing them". I asked "keep pushing who?" He said "the AMA". I took this to mean the standards “committee� (the group of AMA/SIG/Industry types coming up with our proposed operating standards). BTW, this FAA guy has been a modeler for a long time, and he flies FPV. So he is not just a bureaucrat. I think he needs the AMA to come through with a good set of standards as much as we do, for him to continue to enjoy his PERSONAL hobby.

AndyAndrews

Did you guys watch the video? The FAA offical in the meeting stated, and I quote:


from VID 5 around 7:00 into vid:

"we have within our office (UAPO) an intire group dedicated to data and currently we are trying to assimilate how are we going to measure accidents and incidence for unmaned aircraft; For the big ones at 18,000 feet that are as big as 737s or for the little ones, or for models. Because we will want there and need there to be a way to track things like that just as we do in manned aviation. And I think there is an on going effort to figure out how they are going to do it"

From VID 4 around 1:36

"From my perspective, you know, leading up to the oversight of this particular effort, if were successfull at the end of this effort, then you all shouldn't see a change in what you are doing with this hobby. Um, then on the flip side of that, those people who are out there that you all would say, he's giving us a bad name, thats crazy what he did. Thats unsafe, thats the kind of thing that give us a bad name...HE WON"T BE ABLE TO DO THAT ANYMORE... Then I think we have really been successful.."

From VID 4 around 12:32

"I think the nice thing will be that ah, when those modeling operations; because we get letters from modelers, um we get calls from the AMA - this is not safe we thought this was a very unsafe operations is there anything you can do to condem that operation?.. because certain operations that are out there do give modeling a bad name, and we're aware of them we hear about them just like you yourselves hear about them, and I think that ONE OF THE GOOD THINGS IS that WHEN UNMANED AIRCRAFT FLYING IS ON THE BOOKS and when ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES OCCOURS, then there is SOMETHING WHEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT CAN BE DONE".

From VID 6 around 3:48

"But I do hope once this is done that that guy that was at the University of Virginia recently that shoooooosh almost hit that guy recently and made him jump into the bush. I just saw it on YOUTUBE THATS WHY I KNOW ABOUT IT. THAT PEOPLE LIKE THAT CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE"


So you guys tell me, am I being alarmest about this or are you of the opinion like me that the days of cheapo UNSAFE jets is soon going to come to a close? Because I can assure you that if it can be proven that these companies are sending out unsafe ARFs and it causes an accident or near miss threatening life or limb, this will be reported.

Wake up we are about to enter into a new world here.

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

With all respect, I think all of those comments relate to creating a bright line between models and sUAS. The activities she was talking about would end up being classified as sUAS, not modeling.

At one point she made it clear they are not going to put someone at every field to hand out tickets for violating model aircraft rules.

I agree with Ron101, IMHO there is no way the FAA is getting into approving or investigating modeling. This will be left the the operational standards that the AMA is creating.

AndyAndrews

Her quotes (the ones I listed) specifically stated and referred to Modeling.. ie the Youtube comment etc. Moreover, modeling was included in those statements. I don't know how you can separate it. People can review the vids and make the determination themselves. This is how I hear it though.

Ron101

My Feedback: (22)

By definition yes:

Alarmist - a person who tends to raise alarms, especially without sufficient reason, as by exaggerating dangers or prophesying calamities.

AndyAndrews

lol, so you agree that cheapo unsafe jets are here to stay in this upcoming environment of FAA regulation. I see...

F4dar

My Feedback: (55)

Here is my interpretation of the discussion from the videos:

- There seems to be an adequate understanding and distinction between recreational use and commercial use of UAVs in public airspace, recreational being applicable to us modelers.
- Recreational use will be coverd by the adoption of the standards and if AMA and others do their job right, hopefully these standards will be nothing more than what we currenlty have and therefore no change for us.
- Obviously there will be new laws regarding the commercial use.
And therefore the concerns we all have are those gray areas where there will be an overlap between the standards and the mandated laws for commercial use which must be followed and will be enforced. Based on this discussion it seems that the areas under discussion at this point are gross safety violations/incident reporting and tracking rules which may spill over into the recreational use. There could be many others that was not discussed in this meeting.

- I believe that AMA officers and US (members) should keep our eyes open on these gray area redflags once these standards and regs are proposed and ensure there is minimal cross over of the mandates from commercial to recreational use.

just my 2cnts
jason

Ron101

My Feedback: (22)

Yes, I think you will see all the same planes that are on the market today after the regulation.

Jet Legend, Fei Bao, Xtreme Jets, Jet Teng, Fly Eagle, Sky Master, Comp ARF, BVM, Yellow Aircraft

Nitro planes, ESM, Hobbico, BH, Hanger 9, Top Flight

bet you will still be able to buy a jet joe turbine too


Get all your radio gear and packs from Hobby King too or a dangerous cheap 120mm EDF fan


Every manufactor will have there share of crashes caused by something, people will still buy cheap stuff and have issues, many will have success....
Some will buy the best but build it wrong and crash, some will buy the best with cheap gear and radios and crash, some will buy the cheapest and put it together good and have success..

The fact will stand that even with all the different types of aircraft we have flying (cheap or high dollar) with the saftey precautions we use at our flying sites and meets aeromodeling remains one of the safest hobbies you can do. I think thats the main point and why I really don't feel we are going to be affected much in these regulations if you are flying at an AMA field.

CornNuts

+1

trioval00

My Feedback: (17)

My thinking is, that the only time the FAA will be involved with our hobby is that after the rules have changed and are set in stone, Is when there is an accident involving full sclae or maybe even civilians on the field.

but then again was it a set up? meaning the two people from FAA that were at the AMA expo, were in someway in the hobby the gentleman was a very long time AMA member and enjoy's flying and the women bought her son a Vapor last year and this year was buying him a super cub. BUT if I heard right didn't they say they were with the UAV division and had nothing to do with the rule making?

are they just blowing smoke, or what they did say, " we can take to the bank" as they say. I did hear a lot of double talk during the conference.......

Mark

Upnet

My Feedback: (8)

I am curious as to whether any industry types have had any input to the AMA regarding this? You know...Tower...Horizon....etc? I wonder what their take is on this?

jpjamie

I agree with you Bob and will take it a bit further.

I watched up to video "chapter 4." Everything was rather vague.

The FAA will have rules, but the AMA hopes to have the FAA "sign off" on "standards" which they will protect legally as "intellectual property." These standards I predict will be "interpretations" of the FAA rules which (if the FAA signs off) will "stretch" the rules a bit. IF this happens the AMA will have the ability to market, their membership (um er...liability insurance?) a lot better. It's all about the money spent on being safe and playing the FAA game, because in the end the FAA rules.