RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?    Gallery
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
    Search This Thread  
 
Printable Version


Premier Pilot 1/4 scale full body pilot
Seller:  Ren DiLeo
Details:   $129.00   |  5/16/2013   |  Classified Ad
We will rotate YOUR AD in this spot if you select "Forum Featured" when placing or editing your ad!

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   next >   >>  

Tower Hobbies Get Coupon Codes Brands  
[Poll]

Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
Yes, our self-policing efforts (i.e. AMA Safety Codes) aren''t working.
  4% (25)
Yes, the world has changed considerably since 9/11.
  15% (83)
I''m not sure.
  5% (29)
No, the FAA has no business regulating "hobby" airplanes.
  34% (180)
No, we are fully capable of policing ourselves.
  12% (66)
No, the perceived threat to society doesn't exist!
  13% (72)
I hate polls like this!
  12% (65)


Total Votes : 520
(last vote on : 5/7/2012 6:43 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:43 AM   
chuckk2


 

Posts: 371
Score: 106
Joined: 7/24/2007
Last Login: 5/22/2013
From: Warner Robins, GA, USA
Status: offline 		Given the current state of things, the FAA has no choice but to issue regulations. I'd like to see model specifically aviation exempted. The problem is that currently, UAVs are basically outlawed for commercial use in the US, and the result is that other countries are far ahead of us, since they do permit commercial use.

Where to draw the line is the big question. Weight has long been one of the factors considered. Another is "line of sight". Altitude is another.
I believe that 1500 AGL or so is a reasonable limit, not 400 AGL. After all even birds fly higher than 400 AGL.
Another area that I don't care for (even though I do hold a private pilot's license) is any requirement that a modeler/pilot carry any sort of license or medical certificate.
Many of the RC modelers are older, and likely would not pass any FAA medical requirements for a certificate. (The devil is in the details, believe me!)

I can remember when those "flying dope" into the US, using light planes, were actually better off legally (when caught) if they were totally unlicensed.



Hide Signatures

(in reply to ggraham500)
       Post #: 101

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:54 AM   
804


 

Posts: 1043
Score: 172
Joined: 9/17/2005
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: sheridan, IN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: H5487

quote:

ORIGINAL: 804
Earilier, as I quoted before, you said this:

'Much like in an armed conflict, the ''enemy'' (in this case, the FAA) knows that it will enjoy an easy victory when it sees that its opposition is spending all of its energy fighting among themselves. ''

Then, you go and start a thread that promises just that.
I don't get it.


To be honest with you, I started the thread to see what the sentiment was amongst the modelers here. I had no idea that there were two strongly-opinionated sides who were ready to come out fighting. That being said, I am pleased that the responses/arguements have been mostly civil.

At least for me, this thread has been both informative and entertaining.

Harvey

You're right, it has been civil, and that's unusual and good.
One thing for sure, when the rules finally come out,
we'll all really have something to talk about.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to H5487)
       Post #: 102

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:56 AM   
warningshot



Posts: 340
Score: 100
Joined: 2/2/2006
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: S.E., OK, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: H5487

quote:

ORIGINAL: 804
...In one breath you are saying we should be open-minded and stick together as modelers (flyers), and in the next you (and others) are racking a guy over something you know nothing about as far as how he did it, where he did it.


My definition of open-minded doesn't include ignoring someone who has just bragged about doing something illegal, right in the middle of a discussion about how some modelers' flagrant disregard for the Safety Code are possibly responsible for bringing the FAA's eyes upon all of us. I don't have to know the details of how or why he did it, what color his aircraft was, or what type of clouds were in the sky that day. Dropping explosives (even if just a harmless little firecracker) from a model airplane is expressly forbidden by the AMA. There's no grey area here. He self-confessed that he did it so there's nothing that I, or the rest of us need to prove. He pronounced himself guilty. I see no reason to appologize for disapproving of an illegal act that he bragged about doing in a public forum.

It's no wonder that the FAA is proposing legislation for tighter controls on us!

Harvey


What he did is not illegal. May be against the AMA safety code which only applies to AMA members to keep their insurance in force.

_____________________________

Freedom Isn''t Free
USAF (Ret) 1961-1981

Hide Signatures

(in reply to H5487)
       Post #: 103

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:07 AM   
H5487


 

Posts: 834
Score: 117
Joined: 12/5/2005
Last Login: 5/6/2013
From: Waller, TX, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 804
One thing for sure, when the rules finally come out,
we'll all really have something to talk about.


And I'm sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for that as well. Hopefully, the new rules won't be terribly restrictive to any of us. However, I think this should be a wake-up call for all of us in that our carefree-do-anything-that-we-want days are over. We are being watched closely and anything that we do that threatens full scale aviation or folks on the ground may very easily result in further legislation. We need to understand that WE are directly responsible for our own future!

Harvey

_____________________________

Weather Geek

Hide Signatures

(in reply to 804)
       Post #: 104

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:12 AM   
H5487


 

Posts: 834
Score: 117
Joined: 12/5/2005
Last Login: 5/6/2013
From: Waller, TX, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warningshot
What he did is not illegal.


Okay, I'll tell you what. Get caught with your model loaded with fireworks (also known as Class C explosives) and let us know how they couldn't find anything to charge you with.

Harvey

_____________________________

Weather Geek

Hide Signatures

(in reply to warningshot)
       Post #: 105

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:20 AM   
jkpape


 

Posts: 198
Score: 100
Joined: 9/6/2007
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: LaGrange, KY, USA
Status: offline 		The reason that 400 ft agl is the limit is because full scale is limited to 500 ft agl over sparsely populated areas, 1000 ft agl over populated areas. Think about how far 1500 ft is. A model airplane at 1500 ft would look like a dot in the sky. Also, model airplane sights/fields are not shown on any aviation maps. Full scale aircraft have no way of knowing where model aircraft are being flown. It's hard enough to spot another full size aircraft at times, much less a model airplane.

By the way I fly both model & full scale.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to chuckk2)
       Post #: 106

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:23 AM   
jkpape


 

Posts: 198
Score: 100
Joined: 9/6/2007
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: LaGrange, KY, USA
Status: offline 		Think again, it's a federal offense to drop explosives from any aircraft, model or full scale.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to warningshot)
       Post #: 107

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:53 AM   
KidEpoxy



Posts: 6681
Score: 431
Joined: 10/14/2004
Last Login: 11/18/2012
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Wow, has this really gotten to a discussion of pyro on models?

Cause I think I recall hearing how we regular AMA memebers were not allowd to load a model with pyro,
because only the AMA showteam could load models with pyro.
Am I rememberin right about Muncie allowed the show team to have models with pyro?

Cause if thats the case,
it would stand to reason that it was either
not a violation of fed law to do what muncie did,
or that it was
.... cant be that pyro was a fed law violation AND muncie did it legally... gotta be one or the other right?

Hide Signatures

(in reply to jkpape)
       Post #: 108

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 4:00 AM   
H5487


 

Posts: 834
Score: 117
Joined: 12/5/2005
Last Login: 5/6/2013
From: Waller, TX, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

Wow, has this really gotten to a discussion of pyro on models?

Cause I think I recall hearing how we regular AMA memebers were not allowd to load a model with pyro,
because only the AMA showteam could load models with pyro.
Am I rememberin right about Muncie allowed the show team to have models with pyro?

Cause if thats the case,
it would stand to reason that it was either
not a violation of fed law to do what muncie did,
or that it was
.... cant be that pyro was a fed law violation AND muncie did it legally... gotta be one or the other right?


Kid,

Without knowing the exact details of the event, I can only guess that the AMA was able to get waivers for the show from both the FAA and AMA's insurance underwriter. I'm pretty certain that AMA wouldn't risk such an event without insurance coverage.

Harvey

_____________________________

Weather Geek

Hide Signatures

(in reply to KidEpoxy)
       Post #: 109

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 5:56 AM   
ira d


 

Posts: 1978
Score: 123
Joined: 5/29/2003
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Moreno Valley, CA, USA
Status: offline 		Models have been flying in the range of 300- 500 ft for years with no problems and virtually no conflict with full scale planes, The main reason for there
being almost contact between the two is full scale rarely flys below 2,000 ft unless taking off or landings and models rarely go above 500 ft due to
visibllity. I know some sail planes and rockets also balloons can on ocassion exceed 500ft and maybe the FAA needs to make some rules specific
for models that fly at high alititude.

_____________________________

Ira d

Hide Signatures

(in reply to jkpape)
       Post #: 110

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 5:57 AM   
NorfolkSouthern


 

Posts: 1369
Score: 105
Joined: 7/17/2006
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckk2

Where to draw the line is the big question. Weight has long been one of the factors considered. Another is ''line of sight''. Altitude is another.
I believe that 1500 AGL or so is a reasonable limit, not 400 AGL. After all even birds fly higher than 400 AGL.
Another area that I don't care for (even though I do hold a private pilot's license) is any requirement that a modeler/pilot carry any sort of license or medical certificate.
Many of the RC modelers are older, and likely would not pass any FAA medical requirements for a certificate. (The devil is in the details, believe me!)




A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea? How embarrassing it's gonna be for some folks when this thing finally unwinds. It's gonna be very hard to get most of us to stop laughing!

NS


Hide Signatures

(in reply to chuckk2)
       Post #: 111

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 6:03 AM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern

A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea?



It is very likely according to what the commercial sUAS guys say and think that 2nd class FAA medicals will be required for most sUAS operations. I have not seen anything hinting that they will be required for models.

_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to NorfolkSouthern)
       Post #: 112

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 6:07 AM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy-Gonzales

Ever try to collect on AMA's insurance?


Have you? While not primary for those who have other insurance the AMA insurance works as advertised. In the member's only area of the website they have the information about the number of claims filed, paid, etc.

I'll turn it around, I've never heard of a valid claim being denied.


_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Speedy-Gonzales)
       Post #: 113

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 6:12 AM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: H5487
right in the middle of a discussion about how some modelers' flagrant disregard for the Safety Code are possibly responsible for bringing the FAA's eyes upon all of us.


The FAA people have stated repeatedly that the modeling community has done absolutely nothing to cause the writing of the sUAS rules. It is motivated solely by the increasing demand for commercial and public agency sUAS operations. We are just getting swept up in the rule since we are sUAS by their definition, so they need to address us in the rule. But again, they are not "coming after us", we are only a tiny slice of what the rule is about. Like I said, the ARC document had 76 pages. Only 6 concerned models, the other 70 were for the guys they are really targeting.


_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to H5487)
       Post #: 114

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 6:13 AM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

You do know AMA rules aren’t law...don’t you?



Not right now they are not. But if the FAA accepts the AMA Standards for use they will have the force of law for those people using them to operate under.


_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to littlecrankshaf)
       Post #: 115

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 6:19 AM   
NorfolkSouthern


 

Posts: 1369
Score: 105
Joined: 7/17/2006
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R


quote:

ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern

A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea?



It is very likely according to what the commercial sUAS guys say and think that 2nd class FAA medicals will be required for most sUAS operations. I have not seen anything hinting that they will be required for models.


Yes, that's for the sUAS guys. You know, the ones who fly something made by Northrop-Grumman, that weighs 300 pounds, with a video camera, a zillion miles out of the line of sight to sniff out drugs and illegal aliens. Something like that. But the notion sounds a bit silly for someone who goes to the field to play with their toy airplanes on a Sunday afternoon.

NS

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Silent-AV8R)
       Post #: 116

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 1:20 PM   
GerKonig


 

Posts: 1489
Score: 191
Joined: 3/5/2005
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Levittown, PA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jkpape

The reason that 400 ft agl is the limit is because full scale is limited to 500 ft agl over sparsely populated areas, 1000 ft agl over populated areas. Think about how far 1500 ft is. A model airplane at 1500 ft would look like a dot in the sky. Also, model airplane sights/fields are not shown on any aviation maps. Full scale aircraft have no way of knowing where model aircraft are being flown. It's hard enough to spot another full size aircraft at times, much less a model airplane.

By the way I fly both model & full scale.



I fully agree with you.

Gerry

Hide Signatures

(in reply to jkpape)
       Post #: 117

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 1:27 PM   
GerKonig


 

Posts: 1489
Score: 191
Joined: 3/5/2005
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Levittown, PA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern


quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckk2

Where to draw the line is the big question. Weight has long been one of the factors considered. Another is ''line of sight''. Altitude is another.
I believe that 1500 AGL or so is a reasonable limit, not 400 AGL. After all even birds fly higher than 400 AGL.
Another area that I don't care for (even though I do hold a private pilot's license) is any requirement that a modeler/pilot carry any sort of license or medical certificate.
Many of the RC modelers are older, and likely would not pass any FAA medical requirements for a certificate. (The devil is in the details, believe me!)




A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea? How embarrassing it's gonna be for some folks when this thing finally unwinds. It's gonna be very hard to get most of us to stop laughing!

NS




That is a silly idea. Do you need a medical to fly a full size glider? Do you need a medical to fly a Skycatcher? (in case you do not know the answer: Of course not!)

Asking for a medical to fly a heavy sUAS over populated areas, and COMMERCIALLY, yes is a good idea. They would also need to prove proficiency somehow... and use certified platforms.

Gerry

Hide Signatures

(in reply to NorfolkSouthern)
       Post #: 118

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 1:28 PM   
Bird of Paradise


 

Posts: 120
Score: 100
Joined: 12/28/2001
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Ft. Collins , CO, USA
Status: offline 		KE, all:

The AMA show teams have no dispensation for loading models with pyro. The teams actually follow rules that are more restrictive that the typical modeler. However, the teams may use ground based pyro provided that a strict set of guidelines are followed. See AMA doc #718

Mike
Safety Director
TEAM AMA

_____________________________

H. Michael Harrington
AMA 20640, Leader Member, CD

Hide Signatures

(in reply to KidEpoxy)
       Post #: 119

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:05 PM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern
Yes, that's for the sUAS guys. You know, the ones who fly something made by Northrop-Grumman, that weighs 300 pounds, with a video camera, a zillion miles out of the line of sight to sniff out drugs and illegal aliens. Something like that. But the notion sounds a bit silly for someone who goes to the field to play with their toy airplanes on a Sunday afternoon.

NS



Not just for the large UAS, even the small ones. I have several friends who work for AeroVirnoment, the leader in smaller UAS, and they all hold 2nd Class medicals and they have all taken and passed the FAA Private Pilot written test.

And again, the only place that medical for modelers is being discussed is in the fantasy and that is the Internet.

_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to NorfolkSouthern)
       Post #: 120

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:08 PM   
littlecrankshaf



Posts: 4101
Score: 259
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: here
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R




I'll turn it around, I've never heard of a valid claim being denied.



That line works on most people...of course, all insurers say they never deny "valid claims”...

_____________________________

Wow! Another epiphany…that is why the suckups suckup. Super sucking protection power. Yea baby.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Silent-AV8R)
       Post #: 121

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:33 PM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R




I'll turn it around, I've never heard of a valid claim being denied.



That line works on most people...of course, all insurers say they never deny ''valid claims”...



Can you list the claims you know have been denied along with the circumstances so we can determine the validity of AMA insurance? Also, are you implying that the AMA policy, or any other insurance policy, should pay invalid claims??

_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to littlecrankshaf)
       Post #: 122

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 2:33 PM   
brendon33


 

Posts: 1
Score: 100
Joined: 4/20/2011
Last Login: 12/14/2012
From: Orlando, FL, USA
Status: offline 		I absolutely think the government should regulate our hobby.  Just like they've done such a great job with homeland security, social security, medicare and unemployment benefits.  This way, any one who can not afford that new model everyone wants, the government will supply this for you.  You will probably have to be unemployed for at least one year to qualify for the "model plane stamp" and probably have to show no initiation towards getting a job.  I can't wait for them to regulate us!

Hide Signatures

(in reply to littlecrankshaf)
       Post #: 123

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:14 PM   
littlecrankshaf



Posts: 4101
Score: 259
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: here
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R





Can you list the claims you know have been denied along with the circumstances so we can determine the validity of AMA insurance? Also, are you implying that the AMA policy, or any other insurance policy, should pay invalid claims??


I think you could do a better job of that since your are the one paid as an expert witness, while being an AMA AVP, against those seriously injured, that try to prove "valid claims" in a court of law...

_____________________________

Wow! Another epiphany…that is why the suckups suckup. Super sucking protection power. Yea baby.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Silent-AV8R)
       Post #: 124

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose in... - 1/23/2012 3:26 PM   
Silent-AV8R



Posts: 4783
Score: 180
Joined: 3/16/2004
Last Login: 5/26/2013
From: Orange County, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R





Can you list the claims you know have been denied along with the circumstances so we can determine the validity of AMA insurance? Also, are you implying that the AMA policy, or any other insurance policy, should pay invalid claims??


I think you could do a better job of that since your are the one paid as an expert witness, while being an AMA AVP, against those seriously injured, that try to prove ''valid claims'' in a court of law...


Actually, I was the one who helped defend a fellow AMA member against a baseless claim by a person who was injured as a direct result of his own documented and continued negligence. As far as being an AVP at the time the Superior Court judge nor the opposing counsel had an issue with it, but you do. Is this based on your wide and extensive legal training and experience, or something else?

But back on the (off) topic. Can you provide evidence to support your point that the AMA has denied valid claims?

_____________________________

Be aware and prepared, or pay the price of ignorance.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to littlecrankshaf)
       Post #: 125

Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   next >   >>  
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   next >   >>  




Jump to:


 
Google 



Search | Marketplace | Event Calendar | Local Clubs | Magazine | Product Ratings | New Products | Discussion Forums

Photo Gallery | Instructor Search | Field|Track|Marina Search

Advertisers | Hobby Vendor Resources | Rate Manufacturers | Sign In/Sign Up

SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

RC Universe is a service of Internet Brands, Inc. Copyright © 2001-2013.

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America


0.985RCU1