quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart


Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart


Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

Your hypothetical is illegal right now.

I would share your enthusiasm about this Bill if we had an agreement with the FAA and knew what restrictions will be required in the AMA Safety Code in order to qualify as an exempted CBO.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart

quote:

ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart


Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

Your hypothetical is illegal right now.

I would share your enthusiasm about this Bill if we had an agreement with the FAA and knew what restrictions will be required in the AMA Safety Code in order to qualify as an exempted CBO.

You're right, they are illegal right now, but people are flying them anyway, and I'm talking about right her in the U.S. It's ellegal to drive and text, but people do it every minute of the day. Just because something is outlawed doesn't mean it's not going to continue. I don't see any R/C police being hired any time soon, and if they do, I don't think they can hire enough of them to make a difference.

And as far as you finding out about the qualifying exempted CBO, you'll eventually find out, but it's most likely you're not going to like the outcome . Sorry. I'm not enthused about any bill, but I'm definately not worried about either.

Just because my aspect of the hobby "probably" won't be affected by the bill, that doesn't make me a supporter of it. And, just because I can see where the FAA may have some concerns, that too does not make me a supporter of the bill.

Just because I'm not 100% on "your" side does not make me a supporter of the bill. I think I've gone out of my way to state the following........I'm neither for, nor against the AMA. I'm neither for, nor against the idea of the FAA getting involved in our hobby. And lastly, I'm neither for, nor against what "you" are in support of.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart

Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

quote:

Let's look at this whole subject again. Surely some of you can understand why the FAA is getting involved. It's not a bad thing guys. Sure, the last thing we need in our lives in another form of government, but we've got to look and each incident with some sensability. I think what we are dealing with is "sensable"

quote:

ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart


Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

Your hypothetical is illegal right now.

I would share your enthusiasm about this Bill if we had an agreement with the FAA and knew what restrictions will be required in the AMA Safety Code in order to qualify as an exempted CBO.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jp_boud

Toolman, thanks for the picture, would you like the story behind that crash.......hint, it was in 1994 and involved a full scale f-117, not a LOS model.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart

Here's a hypothetical to think about. Someone builds an 85 pound jet that can cruise somewhere around the neighborhood of 250 MPH for approximately 20 minutes. It has unlimited radio range, or can simply by flown on autopilot by using GPS coordinates. This aircraft is also able to easily handle a payload of 10 pounds. Now........add to the scenario that the guy who owns the plane is a really, really bad guy! Surely you get the picture.

Your hypothetical is illegal right now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warningshot



For my own education, what makes them illegal now?

quote:

ORIGINAL: yard-dart


Don't think for one minute, though, that it can't be done exactly as I stated (using GPS).

quote:

they are illegal right now, but people are flying them anyway

quote:

<...>
The FAA’s Role: Safety First
The FAA’s main concern about UAS operations in the National Airspace System (NAS)
is safety. It is critical that these aircraft do not endanger other users of the NAS or
compromise the safety of persons or property on the ground.

Recreational use of the NAS is covered by AC 91-57 which generally limits operations
to below 400 feet above ground level and away from airports and air traffic.

For the remainder of UAS operations, there are <...>

quote:

ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

they are illegal right now, but people are flying them anyway

quote:

I think the bottom line here is, our airplanes are not "unmanned aerial systems" as that they are not semi or fully autonomous computer guided or assisted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

PF
Yup


..


Eagle

quote:

I think the bottom line here is, our airplanes are not ''unmanned aerial systems'' as that they are not semi or fully autonomous computer guided or assisted.

who is this 'our' you talk about?
The hobby including the cbos AMA & DIYDrones,
or just the AMA looking to sell out our comrades in DIYDrones?

We know darn well that we have had park trainers sold with crash avoidance electronics (horizon detection)
that allow the craft to decide if it should listen to the rookiepilot steering it into the ground or save itself ~autonomously

we should be focusing on
having the line between Hobby&Recreational activities vs Commercial&Public activities
BE a line between Hobby&Recreational ops vs Commercial&Public ops
without this harassment of modeling disciplines and some kind of Divide&Conquor of modeling folks by FAA

quote:

ORIGINAL: iron eagel

I think the bottom line here is, our airplanes are not ''unmanned aerial systems''

quote:

Model Aircraft: A sUAS used by hobbyists and flown within visual line-of-sight under
direct control from the pilot, which can navigate the airspace, and which is manufactured or
assembled, and operated for the purposes of sport, recreation and/or competition. (ARC Recommendations, April 1, 2009)

quote:

Unmanned Aircraft: A device used or intended to be used for flight in the air that has no onboard pilot. This includes all classes of airplanes, helicopters, airships, and translational lift aircraft that have no onboard pilot. Unmanned aircraft are understood to include only those aircraft controllable in three axes and therefore, exclude traditional balloons

AVIATION SAFETY - UNMANNED AIRCRAFT PROGRAM OFFICE AIR-160
Interim Operational Approval Guidance 08-01 - Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations in the U. S. National Airspace System

quote:

I have no problem with them being flown according to the limitation of LOS and our current rules to be considered "hobby"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R


They are as defined by the FAA.

quote:

Model Aircraft: A sUAS used by hobbyists and flown within visual line-of-sight under
direct control from the pilot, which can navigate the airspace, and which is manufactured or
assembled, and operated for the purposes of sport, recreation and/or competition. (ARC Recommendations, April 1, 2009)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cj_rumley

Since when have the ARC recommendations represented FAA policy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R

quote:

ORIGINAL: cj_rumley

Since when have the ARC recommendations represented FAA policy?

Are you trying to say that the FAA does not see models as sUAS? If so, can you cite any reference that supports that opinion?

Dear Mr.

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization, specifically concerning model aviation regulation.  It is good to hear from you.

On February 17, 2011, S. 223, the "FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act," passed the Senate with my support by a vote of 87-8.  This bill authorizes approximately $35 billion for FAA programs through fiscal year 2011 and contains many provisions that are critical to modernizing our air traffic control system and improving air travel for consumers. 

One of the main components of the bill is funding for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). NextGen would replace the current ground-based system of air traffic control with a satellite-based system, which is crucial to meeting future demand and, once in place, will increase the efficiency of flight operations.

S. 223 also contains provisions that will strengthen airline safety, such as requiring the FAA to develop a plan to improve runway safety by providing pilots necessary traffic information in the cockpit.  Furthermore, this bill contains an amendment to exempt model aviation from several regulations, which was agreed to in the Senate on February 17, 2011.

Overall, this legislation is crucial to maintaining and improving our aviation system.  I am hopeful that the Senate and the House of Representatives will work together to pass a bill for the President's signature in the near future.  Should further legislation regarding the FAA come before the Senate for consideration, I will keep your thoughts in mind.

If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov. Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.

quote:

From: NY23WOIMA@mail.house.gov
To: luftwaffeoberst@msn.com
Subject: Responding to your message
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:38:24 -0500




Dear Mr. Dowling,



Thank you for contacting me about model aviation regulations in S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act. I appreciate that you took the time to share your thoughts with me.



As you know, the Senate recently passed S. 223, which included an amendment that denies the FAA the ability to regulate model airplanes in an effort to reduce rules and regulations regarding model aircraft flown for recreation, sport, competition, or academic purposes. Like you, I support removing over burdensome regulations and eliminating unnecessary federal programs. That is why I recently added a new area to my website where you can report what you believe to be onerous federal regulations that are standing in the way of job creation and economic development.



While the House continues to consider its own version of legislation to reauthorize the FAA in H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, please be assured I will continue to work against undue federal regulations and that I will keep your thoughts in mind.



Again, thank you for contacting me about this important issue. To receive updates on my work in New York and Washington, please visit my website at www.owens.house.gov. Should you have additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. My door is always open as I believe that we function better as a society when we engage in nonpartisan, civil discourse.






Sincerely,

Bill Owens
Member of Congress