abel_pranger
Posts: 2319
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by J_R
Hi Abel
I have this habit of trying to see two sides of most issues. To give you a reference, I can never see the flowing lines of a car. I always see the panels, dents, dings, and protrusions. I dissect the darn thing. Maybe I read 1984 too many times as a kid. My question about who is going to determine what recreational means has nothing to do with debating a definition. When it comes right down do it, is the local sheriff going to have the ability to make that determination? The FBI, the FAA, the CIA? Where does this all stop?
Now this may seem really off the wall. I don't like the NRA. I am a member of the NRA. It is the only effective organization trying to protect my right to bear arms. I am willing to give up some weapons, such as RPGs and Stingers, in order to keep what I feel are reasonable weapons that I enjoy.
By the same token, I see the AMA in the same light. I am willing to give up a "model" that I can set on the runway, press a button, watch as it does maneuvers, and then land, with no intervention by me. Not because I would use it for a purpose not intended, not because it would not challenge my technical abilities and be fun, but, for the perceived common good. Let me keep reasonable toy airplanes for my amusement without government intervention.
The same is true of fields. My community already has an ordinance prohibiting all R/C devices in a park. Who is going to help change their thinking? Without some political clout, no one. Will flying at my house be next? Who knows? I will throw my support to the AMA. At least I perceive that they are on my side.
If it comes to the government controlling us, or the AMA controlling us, and IF those are the only choices, I chose the AMA. As with the NRA there are things I don't like, but the other alternative is unacceptable.
Anyway, that is how I view the other side of the issue, right or wrong. Paranoid? I suppose I am.
JR [/QUOTE]
JR-
First point re who decides what's a recreational model aircraft. I think FAA has the jurisdiction, not the local sheriff, etc. They've been working with a very loose definition, and managed just fine as far I am concerned. They've been laissez faire toward our activity and from what has come out them, prefer to keep it that way. Do you see anything out of AMA that better defines it?
As for fields, I have seen nothing by way a performance measure to rate AMA's record regarding keeping our local flying sites. According to Joyce Hager, the reason they went ahead with the development of the Muncie site was because of the alarming rate of loss of local flying sites. I read that to say they threw in the towel on the sites where in my mind model aviation really happens. The one AMA activity directed at retaining our most important asset (far and away more essential than anything else to our sport, recreation, etc.) is the flying site assistance program headed by Joe Beshar. In pragmatic rather than Rah Rah terms, what has it accomplished? Do you really think that defining a model flying field as one that is operated according to the AMA Safety Code makes more of them available to us? I submit that half of AMA's own members don't belong to a club, and so presumably don't fly at AMA SC compliant sites. I don't have stats re numbers of the sites they use, but because they likely fly in smaller groups than sanctioned clubs, I expect the number of sites they use far outnumbers sanctioned club sites. Virtually no model sailplane flyers do there thing at a AMA SC compliant site (one exception - Torrey Pines, where Maroney provided a novel interpretation of what compliant with AMA SC means). Then there's the park flyer sites, those that have been exploited as well as potential sites. I expect these outnumber AMA sanctioned sites by several orders of magnitude. You're free to perceive that AMA is on your side by pushing for FAA to allow model flying only at sites that are AMA SC compliant, but I respectfully and strongly disagree.
Last point I want to comment on is the issue of a choice between the government controlling us, or the AMA controlling us. I'll go for FAA. They don't want to regulate us and I anticipate the level of control they would exert would be comparable that other government agency, FCC. FCC control over us has been practically nil. What about the other guy(s)? The ones we elected on the promise to represent us and promote model aviation (the charter doesn't read promote AMA). Have you seen enough evidence yet to perceive where he is/they are coming from regarding motivation to control us?
Abel
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> What's a Model Airplane? 
What's a Model Airplane? - 
