garage launch slowstick 12am (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more] >> The Clubhouse



Message

brandon429 -> garage launch slowstick 12am (10/1/2012 6:42 AM)

Slow sticks are very lightweight night flyers
With no winds they can run controlled takeoffs and spot landings

7mph cross winds on landing and rudder only makes for a bent landing gear wire...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sul2tnSk2cg



flyinwalenda -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/1/2012 1:12 PM)

The slowstick was my first and still my favorite night flyer. Not a speed demon but inexpensive and easily modified.



MetallicaJunkie -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 4:13 AM)

that was cool!



scale only 4 me -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 4:21 AM)

How the heck did you find your way back home?



topspin -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 4:27 AM)

I can't believe you flew an RC plane over a populated area at night with no spotter and no real reference. I hope you don't make a habit of doing that.



jester_s1 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 2:08 PM)

No, that was not cool. That was stupid and irresponsible and likely illegal (depending on the local regulations). It's guys like this that have the AMA tying up personnel and money fighting the new regulations on the hobby instead of promoting the hobby like we need them to. It takes one uninformed person to see this to think that we all are a bunch of goofballs who fly cameras over people's houses in the middle of the night.



flyinwalenda -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 2:34 PM)

I commented earlier but didn't watch the video and thought it was just a typical night flight at the field. Not FPV over a town.
Just watched the video now and I have to agree that's not the smartest thing to do. Even though others do it too still doesn't make it right or safe.



JollyPopper -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 4:55 PM)

I'd like to hear how the OP defends that as a responsible act that is good for our hobby.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 7:58 PM)

Here is my justification.

I'm licensed to transmit and have the full legal right to fly exactly like this. There are zero problems with it, its 100% legal if anyone debates that id be happy to trade proofs with you.
You assumed I have no spotter, typical anti fpv response. in your automatic negative view I can't have family out front or anything.

My ethical justification, on top of my justification of being fully in compliance with city and FAA and ham radio statutes, is this is a park flyer and I flew over a park, I'm on the edge of town, I don't go down main or anything, split your own hairs what I do is perfectly fine. I fly over houses at night to get to a field, a park flyer is just as much exposure to this area of the city. My links up and down to this plane are better than the average park flyer link, and I'm ten years of flight on this block with foamies and emaxxes. Adding a camera only gives some a new argument angle, it doesn't actually change anything

When park flying becomes illegal or when specific laws are made against what I do there will be changes.

The AMA concerns you, not me, they don't regulate park flying and I definitely flew over a park.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:02 PM)

I've been watching spec'd out gliders hit three thousand feet plus for years online, and that too is legal as AC 9157 is advisory not law, people will always have opinions pro and con about varying aspects of Rc

If its ok to buzz an alley with a tmaxx, then its ok to fly it with a foamie

The ends to all arguments is whether or not I'm out of compliance with state or federal laws, and I'm not.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:07 PM)

In my opinion altitude is the definition of ethics even though there is no law regarding civilian flights w Rc, so fpv or not I think the high alt crew is not cool even when its a glider. But I don't bust someones chops for high alt flight, they are legal if not in specifically prohibited airspace.



The way I get home is by memorizing the dot patterns of the street lights, mine is part of a certain pattern.

In my opinion, night fpv is safest. Its the highest visibility mode for both real and Rc craft, miles of clearance, and midnight is least busy. good clean signal time, has been like this for years.



flyinwalenda -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:08 PM)

[8|]



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:11 PM)

Sure you'll post that walenda, what other response can there be but opining here, facts are covered.



flyinwalenda -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:19 PM)

Your responses speak volumes of your character. "Hooray for me and to h@ll with everyone else" apparently. Just because others do it and it's not "illegal" still doesn't make it safe or good for the hobby/sport.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/2/2012 8:28 PM)

No, I'm fully legal and am mitigating my risks in line with the law and my area. It does no good to sell you on anything, there are types that are against my flights but they'll go to a show and watch an 80 pound jet fly 500 feet in front of them at 200 mph where one glitch sends a missile into the crowd and that's ok for years for everybody.

We are both justifying taking risks any time with Rc. mine is a foamy with a simple cam I don't buy into fear hype, it takes years of design I posted the video as part of the rising tide of fully legal fpv in urban zones, there will always be pro and con feelings, the law takes everything into account and I'm within it.

Any glitch at my local park could send someones park zone trojan laterally into the houses, I'm sure it's happened before. The reason we don't read about it is it's a non issue. My cam doesn't make it an issue to all, just those with double Rc standards


nice excuse for only bashing when the crowd set in walenda.




I do not feel adding a camera changes the park flyer qualification. If I did urban fpv with a 30 gram micro and 5.8 ghz vtx nobody would care, so its really not the flight its hair splitting about weight. Mines 30 ounces that's nbd to me just like 30 grams is no big deal to anyone in any neighborhood except for privacy hacks, no the cam can't zoom all I see below is street lights on the edge of town. The crowded area is opposite to my direction of flight

The AMA is an insurance company who handles payments and qualifications for payments, that's it. I didn't elect for their services. they make subjective rulings about safety margins and in no way does their logic affect my flying. Being at an airshow is far more dangerous than being asleep in your house as I buzz over a few hundred feet up silently, who cares if they disagree, FAA and FCC rules are the guidelines. At any AMA sanctioned flying field your foamy can have a receiver short and fly straight up or sideways until the battery runs out. That is the exact risk I face, we are even except that when I fly nobody is outside. The only difference is that adhering to their subjective evaluation of safety would qualify for payment, both actives had equal risk however and mines safer. My plane its marked all over with phone number and call sign, if it damages a shingle or scratches your ride out front I'll pay up, there are no Ferrari's in my parts. You could be parked around the perimeter of an AMA field and have the exact same risk.

All a bunch of opinion trading...



KaP2011 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/3/2012 1:13 AM)

I saw a news story back in the spring about a real estate agent in Colorado or somewhere that used a quad copter with a camera attached to shoot video of his listings. I thought it was a great idea but that was not the case with the reporter or the people he interviewed. They were all concerned that you could spy on people in their own homes. I believe if some of the people who's home you flew over knew about it they would report you to the police.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/3/2012 1:26 AM)

That could be the case, however its legal to film up there, public vantage point and not that it matters but there isn't much discernible detail other than the lights. If you film not for profit its ok
Currently in my city its the same legality as filming off a tall mountain peak next to the town.

Putting a camera on a plane is upsetting to everyone but the people who actually make the rules.

Model Rc review by the FAA was not changed since 1981ish they opted to wait until '15 in a recent ruling, the integration mandate. That very well may include pilots licenses...

i'm sympathetic to privacy issues though with zoom cams, ir and the such, people aren't very welcoming that's for sure
Let the municipalities decide, mine says ok.

Not every drone is for spying, sometimes its just a simple hobby. currently we're allowed to film from the air
Expecting changes in regulation soon. Now is freedom though, being a ham and staying a certain distance from an airport are the actual requirements. When someone gets the required license and doesn't cut corners it comes down to a difference of opinion, stating its illegal before discovery is a further rush to judgment.

It really seems wrong, but other than the standpoint of an insurance company the government says I can fly around at night if I follow two rules so that's done.

Its funny google earth can show your license plate but my grainy plasma display of a pin dot grid is all offensive

I don't think it would be hard to equate what I do with the same freedoms afforded google earth

I too read about FAA crackdowns when income is generated, that Crosses the line between civilian and commercial uas

When, when, fpv is so regulated you have to have a special license I'll try for it and if not go to ground based work.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 5:36 PM)

found an article discussing the privacy aspects of aerial hd video flights, again its very different when we compare flights made by civilians vs any gov't/police entity, we are much much freer to fly, currently:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/12/10/if-i-fly-a-uav-over-my-neighbors-house-is-it-trespassing/263431/



topspin -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 8:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: brandon429

Here is my justification.

I'm licensed to transmit and have the full legal right to fly exactly like this. There are zero problems with it, its 100% legal if anyone debates that id be happy to trade proofs with you.
You assumed I have no spotter, typical anti fpv response. in your automatic negative view I can't have family out front or anything.

My ethical justification, on top of my justification of being fully in compliance with city and FAA and ham radio statutes, is this is a park flyer and I flew over a park, I'm on the edge of town, I don't go down main or anything, split your own hairs what I do is perfectly fine. I fly over houses at night to get to a field, a park flyer is just as much exposure to this area of the city. My links up and down to this plane are better than the average park flyer link, and I'm ten years of flight on this block with foamies and emaxxes. Adding a camera only gives some a new argument angle, it doesn't actually change anything

When park flying becomes illegal or when specific laws are made against what I do there will be changes.

The AMA concerns you, not me, they don't regulate park flying and I definitely flew over a park.

I'm also a HAM Brandon and have been one for 45 years. Being a ham does not justify an unsafe practice so that's a crummy excuse. You say that it is perfectly safe but RC components and control surfaces connections fail. Spotter? who and where? It's nightime dude what the hell could a spotter see at night besides maybe some lights on the plane. That also doesn't hold water. What you did/are doing is very irresponsible and has the potential for trouble, not just for you but for all of us in this hobby. Oh, and leave ham radio aout of it, the public already thinks amateur radio operators are nuts.




brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 8:47 PM)

so by quoting with no reply you are in agreement that urban fpv with a slowstick is 100% equal to flying in a park surounded by houses with one? cool, me too. Hair splitting never does anything but cause frizz.
Im assuming those who are against urban fpv will post the weight limits that would earn their acceptance, after all a parkzone flyer with a 5.8 ghz setup can't harm anything at any time, agreed?



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 8:52 PM)

I didnt see your reply within the quote.


We need to figure out whats acceptable and whats not since Im 100% in the law.

The FAA has seen all these vids, they didn't regulate them, Im within state and federal compliance yet you are telling me its ok for foamies to whiz around a park with people but me flying at night when there is none is bad, and I flew over a park?



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 9:08 PM)

Truthfully I didnt post this to make people mad, its truly how I fly and many others. We've made subjective assessments of the rules for so long, and now technology is allowing for change, thats why I posted.


Park flying is the exact same risk, and more, since their gear is less quality than what I use and there are people present around the perimeter. I like to uncover the real problems people have with putting a camera on the same plane they'd gladly fly any other day, to me its a double standard.

There is no spotter rule. Part of the trumped up statements made by anti FPV crowds are not being licensed, which is why I included the ham info, and various legalities about filming which we've started to uncover here as well.

I don't use spotters for low alt flights, park flyers dont use em, and what I do is the same.

But I use them for high alt flights (there is also no alt restriction, a common myth)

My plane has lights, we can see it when I choose to turn them on.

Spotters dont watch my plane, I do, from the cam. Spotters simply scan the sky where Im flying for planes.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 9:15 PM)

So to summarize:

anti FPV crowds think park flying is great and risk free or risk mitigated if you follow the ama rule of setting a flight zone/barrier around the crowds, which are always present cuz its a park. They feel fine that the plane can lose signal and crash into someones head, because planes that lose signal don't ever, ever, follow your designated flight path.


Parks are bordered by houses, always, at least for the purposes of this safety issue you guys keep harping on.

So if I take a plane, and put a 3 oz camera, and fly it over the houses as opposed to right in front of them, when zero people are about, and a 1 mi area is now my flight path, thats when the world explodes apparently. Its all hair splitting, subjectivity, but guess who isn't subjective? The actual laws that allow it totally.

Your problem is with legislation Sir, not me. I take it your a gasser and not a park flyer?



scale only 4 me -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 9:23 PM)

You do make good points, and I will agree the hazard is minimal.

The only thing that is different is that people sitting around a RC field are there knowing the hazard they have put themselves near, flying over their homes they have not make the choice voluntarily, you've made the choice.



brandon429 -> RE: garage launch slowstick 12am (10/13/2012 9:34 PM)

Agreed, if laws change around that i totally understand and will comply

But my comparison is to ama sanctioned park flying, the park visitors didn't give y'all permission to crash a foamy into their baby carriage its just the ama compliant group doesn't care since they set an intended flight path :)

All i mean is that park flying is the same risk i take, ama had no bearing on risk to others.

If we aren't flying in an rc specific park, you have to lump all park flyers in the same group as me imo.

So Im not talking about rc dedicated fields...the pro ama group always compare what I do to their rules, and I looked them up, they say you can make any park your own flight area without problem and without the permission of those around you enjoying a walk in the park. That, to me, is a double standard galore. Theres no way ama adherence is safer in that regard when people are actually present. My way is undeniably safer to people, without question, and equally risky to property.




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   next >   >>  

Valid CSS!




SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

RC Universe is a service of Internet Brands, Inc. Copyright © 2001-2013.
0.1101074