RE: GETTING PAID  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       


1/6 Scale Fei Bao F-5 Tiger II - ARF
Seller:  rcjetmodels
Details:   $1,835.00   |  7/15/2008   |  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: GETTING PAID
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: GETTING PAID - 12/18/2007 10:12:19 PM   
teamflatout02


 

Posts: 2
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: columbus, GA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

We probably can slap drop tanks on a .91 floater & with a pair of good binoculars fly around at FL181 all day... cause we are not regulated by Tital 14 of the CFRs.

or does that seem just plain illegal incursion to controlled airspace?
Being a recreational model doesnt let you just pop above FL180 at your liesure, the feds (FAA) will come knocking and not in the "We brought you a fruit basket" way.

If you want to call the FAA to get blessings,
tell them you are gonna break ClassA in 20mins and they cant do anything to stop you, and then give them the field you are at address. Remind them they dont regulate models, so the ClassA regulations in CFR T14 cant apply to you, I'm sure they will love the irony.

Go ahead, We'll wait.
Call the tthe FAA & threaten to break FL180, and see if they say they dont care what you do with your toys.



What about GA23911 airspace? What happens if I brake it and fly above 20k at 95 knots and do an immelman up there? Will I have to have a ClassZ or P. Oh and I'll be staying in GA239112 for 20mins. LMFAO

(in reply to KidEpoxy)
       Post #: 126

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/19/2007 7:34:51 AM   
KidEpoxy



Posts: 3222
Joined: 10/14/2004
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Well, to answer your question "What about" that

either
A) You subscribe to the theory that the FAA does indeed regulate model flight activity and does indeed impose airspace restrictions on models, AC on model flight decscription, does indeed issue waivers to restritctions to modelers that apply, has already had model flight waiver revokations (911 & corona area)

or

B) The FAA doesnt regulate models so there is no applicable regulation, AC, NOTAM, waiver, or any other imposition or infringement on wild azz random anywhere anytime model flying by the FAA.

I am leaning toward A.
If you pizzoff the FAA with a model, you will feel the current sting of the FAA on your model flying.

p103 doesnt make us register & inspect Ultralights, yet does clearly have regulations as to when, where, & how much weight they can fly. That is the FAA regulating the ultralights, yet saying it is a self regulated industry. Self regulated, as long as you are within the FAA regulations, like the weight & fuel FAA regulated caps

_____________________________

Optional MA is part of AMA history, we can go optional AGAIN if we just say so

(in reply to teamflatout02)
       Post #: 127

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/19/2007 11:00:59 AM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9091
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: offline 		I'm with you Kid, A all the way. What the heck is UAS 400???? It's rules and regs regulating models. In part it separates professional modelers and professional RC pilots, from hobbyists. Every sentence in that 12 page document is a rule, policy or provision on RC aircraft a.k.a. models, for both professional and non-professional RC pilots.

What the FAA doesn't regulate is non commercial (no job too small) RC activity a.k.a. hobbyists. And of course they only regulate hobbyists up until the point you want to find out whether or not AC 91-57 is just a "memo" or perhaps something a little more kick to it, especially when it's limits are surpassed.

quote:

I have no idea what a air-ops based field is not that I can see that it matters.
A field designated for RC operations. And yes, that matters. I don't think the AMA wants to worry or not whether you'll be performing your commercial airshows in areas designated for RC flight, or a carnival parking lot. Thus the policy for paid instructors.


< Message edited by STLPilot -- 12/19/2007 6:06:42 PM >

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to KidEpoxy)
       Post #: 128

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/19/2007 9:45:23 PM   
ira d


 

Posts: 790
Joined: 5/29/2003
From: Rancho Belago, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

Well it's going to be hard to do Ira and for a lot of obvious reasons. Same reason they made worker's comp a law, since so many companies tried to work their way around it.

What's the difference if you do 1 show or 100 shows? Are you going to report to the AMA each time you host a compensated show, or are you going to only report your show when there is an accident? Many of companies tried this method when trying to insure their employees on the day their employees were injured.

Also the "for compensation" the AMA has now is only for designated air-ops based fields. So I assume both the AMA and their insurance provider had safety on their mind as well.



From what I have read it does not matter where you are to be compensated. But then again STL you continually post info here
that is supposed to be from the AMA and the FAA that no else
has heard of including people from both of the organizations.

I might add im talking reimbursment for expenses not being
outright paid for pilot instruction.


< Message edited by ira d -- 12/19/2007 10:28:03 PM >

_____________________________

Ira d

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 129

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 1:41:59 AM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9091
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: offline 		http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/500-H.pdf

#4

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to ira d)
       Post #: 130

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:04:20 AM   
abel_pranger


 

Posts: 2289
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline 		Off topic and getting trite, STL. Topic is getting paid for demo flights at air shows, not for instructing at AMA club sites. I know you enjoy nettling Ira et al with subject matter that is tangential to the topic when you have nothing on-topic to offer, but enough is enough. Whether AMA sanctioned ASTs get compensated seems more in line with topic of this thread. Since AMA has budgeted for their support, it is inferred that there is some sort of compensation involved. I asked about this previously (there is little on the AMA web site except for a list of the ASTs), and you replied linking compensation to contest winnings - which made no sense to me because air shows aren't contests. I waited for input from others, but non materialized. Can you cite a link to anything resembling an authoritative source that confirms/elaborates on your reply?

Abel

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 131

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:08:58 AM   
The Toolman


 

Posts: 679
Joined: 11/29/2005
From: Warsaw, MO, USA
Status: offline 		I'd just do what ya want an forget about stl. He's just passin' gas as usual......



Ronnie



_____________________________

Ron B.
AMA-862729 PB-2718

(in reply to ira d)
       Post #: 132

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:11:35 AM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9091
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: offline 		Quote what I said so I can understand what you want me to provide as a source. I believe you've confused 2 seperate points.

Also realize this is a discussion and sometimes comparisons are utilized.

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to abel_pranger)
       Post #: 133

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:36:27 AM   
abel_pranger


 

Posts: 2289
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

Quote what I said so I can understand what you want me to provide as a source. I believe you've confused 2 seperate points.

Also realize this is a discussion and sometimes comparisons are utilized.



Referring to Post #86 0f this thread:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Abel_Pranger

Anybody know if the AMA sanctioned Air Show Teams are allowed to be compensated in any way?


quote:


Original: STLPilot

They are allowed if the fee is based on contest winnings. I have a couple aerobatic pilot friends that are not commercial but have taken home winnings for competition flight.

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 134

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:42:59 AM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9091
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: offline 		I gave the person an example of a method of receiving a soft money compensation. Just turn the airshow into a competition flight and pay them in winnings and you have your solution. I think I made several attempts to explain certain methods of payment solutions. These are what you call "legal loopholes". These methods are used in more then just our little world. They are especially popular in the political arena and the financial markets.



< Message edited by STLPilot -- 12/20/2007 2:49:06 AM >

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to abel_pranger)
       Post #: 135

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 2:52:54 AM   
abel_pranger


 

Posts: 2289
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

I gave the person an example of a method of receiving a soft money compensation. Just turn the airshow into a competition flight, seeing that you are using a "team" of pilots, and then you have your solution. I think I made several attempts to explain certain methods of creating soft money payment solutions. These are what you call "legal loopholes". These methods are used in more then just our little world. They are especially popular in the political arena and the financial markets.






Ohhhhhhh..... Now respond to OP's inquiry with a direct answer. Does AMA allow "legal loopholes" that are popular in the political arena and financial markets to apply to demonstration pilots getting paid? OP is concerned about AMA insurance covering him, and not using "legal ratholes" to squirm out of paying a claim. Enough with the examples from other sectors. What would AMA do? is the question.

Abel

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 136

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 3:01:45 AM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9091
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: offline 		I wasn't answering the OP's question. I was answering another question in line with the discussion from another member.

There is no legal solution for the OP unless he wants to file for a waiver from the FAA and follow the rest of their compliance. Then he's gotta break open his wallet and start removing for his private insurance company.

Do you actually think for a second that the FAA thinks that any provision against their policies and regulations could be considered "too small" for their standards???

If I'm wrong about all this Abel, why doesn't he just take it upon himself to go about it the way he thinks it should be. We wouldn't be having this discussion if he knew what he was doing could get him in trouble, not only financially if something went wrong, but also legally.

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to abel_pranger)
       Post #: 137

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 3:33:38 AM   
abel_pranger


 

Posts: 2289
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

I wasn't answering the OP's question. I was answering another question in line with the discussion from another member.

There is no legal solution for the OP unless he wants to file for a waiver from the FAA and follow the rest of their compliance. Then he's gotta break open his wallet and start removing for his private insurance company.

Do you actually think for a second that the FAA thinks that any provision against their policies and regulations could be considered "too small" for their standards???


Yes. Model airplanes in general are "too small" for them to bother with, as long as we don't create problems for them. They said as much (see full text of AC 91-57). Where they expect problems they enforce the law, to wit the situation with commercial use of model aircraft for AP. I suppose they expect that such use entails flying over houses and people (photos that are sold to realtors are obviously taken over houses, newsworthy events for marketable photo-journalism opportunities gather people), so they do chose to direct enforcement activity at that. Another example of 'too small" to bother with is the weight limit on model airplanes of 25 Kg as defined by ICAO. FAA is responsible for ensuring compliance with ICAO standards, which the US is signatory to, but though the standard have been around for years, it has not risen high enough on FAA's priority list to get codified in US law.
AMA also deems some deviations from the letter of their rules "too small" to make an issue of. The instruction for hire on a 'casual' basis is such a case, and variance from general non-commercial model use policy is specifically allowed.

quote:

If I'm wrong about all this Abel, why doesn't he just take it upon himself to go about it the way he thinks it should be. We wouldn't be having this discussion if he knew what he was doing could get him in trouble, not only financially if something went wrong, but also legally.


Well frankly Dion, we aren't having a meaningful discussion about it largely because your Pied Piper act has drawn it off on many tangential paths. There are people here that could offer him some advice that is germane to his situation (as the fellow that just posted about show teams might). A lower noise level from your one man lounge act might give them an opportunity to get a word in edgewise.

Sorry for being so blunt, but this thread has been annoying tedious due to the constant diversion to subjects with no bearing on the topic, and your contribution to that tedium has stood out above the rest.

Abel


(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 138

RE: GETTING PAID - 12/20/2007 3:52:24 AM   
Hossfly