Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 102

  1. #76

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Parker, CO
    Posts
    19
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Does anyone know for sure whether this letter is currently binding and in effect immediately or subject to review after the comment period?

  2. #77
    Bob_B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bluegrass State of Mind
    Posts
    2,987
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by afterburner View Post
    Good points Wes. I can already hear Cuomo and Malloy calling for a ban on "high capacity" lipo's! "You don't need 5000 milliamps to fly a drone!!"

    Marty
    Didn't NY drop that recently and now a large Coke is like 64oz!!!
    EDF Jet Jam 2015 - http://www.orvrcf.com/ Event Information and registration: http://www.RCFlightDeck.com/event.cfm?id=3903

    Cincinnati Jet Club

  3. #78
    afterburner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Moseley, VA
    Posts
    2,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob_B View Post
    Didn't NY drop that recently and now a large Coke is like 64oz!!!
    Yes, the restaurant association won in court but de Blasio has vowed to continue to fight against large soft drinks where Bloomberg left off although he said Big Gulp Kool-aids are ok and recommended in some parts of NYC!
    Marty

    BOialsos

  4. #79
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    Quote Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
    Sounds like the FAA also has "a pen and a phone"...
    If the internet is using a pen and a phone I hope the AMA is using the internet and MS Word.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  5. #80

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    2,741
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by ace_drummond View Post
    Does anyone know for sure whether this letter is currently binding and in effect immediately or subject to review after the comment period?
    This notice reflects the FAAs current interpretation of the rules that are already in place. They are telling us that these points will guide their enforcement activity effective immediately. Whether or not their enforcement activities hold up in court is a different question, but unless you have the wherewithal to fight them in court, it would be best not to be the subject of their enforcement.

    Once again, from the press release. While today’s notice is immediately effective, the agency welcomes comments from the public which may help further inform its analysis. The comment period for the notice will close 30 days from publication in the Federal Register.

  6. #81
    Terry Holston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Posts
    3,549
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    They don't have enough people to enforce our border laws, how are they gonna enforce these "New Rules"
    Terry Holston,I Fly Jets
    I'm NOT speeding, I'm QUALIFYING!!!!!!

  7. #82
    rhklenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    5,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry Holston View Post
    They don't have enough people to enforce our border laws, how are they gonna enforce these "New Rules"
    The bottom line is, they won't - unless somebody does something that comes to their attention, then they'll use this to stop/punish the offenders...

    Bob
    Last edited by rhklenke; 06-29-2014 at 07:39 PM.

  8. #83
    jeffharris75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    RALEIGH, NC
    Posts
    32
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    What disappoints me is the lack of professionalism and imaturity demonstrated by Mr. Mathewson. AMA's history is a moot point in this case. With advances in technology the AMA membership (20% <= 19 years old) now had access to fly unmanned aircraft out of the pilots line of sight. This places an unlicensed pilot at the controls of the machine with no requirements as to the pilots knowledge of airspace regulations. As I mentioned earlier I have had conversations with FPV pilots who self admit taking photos from within 10 miles of a class B airspace at an altitude between ground level and 3000 ft.
    IMHO both FAA and AMA are having difficulty understanding the issues at hand. I am a person that would prefer to believe that human beings always assume personal responsibility but have seen behavior to prove myself wrong far too many times in my 57 years. This includes the idiotic activities of my young adulthood.
    There is allot at stake here: I hope folks on both ends can down-regulate their testosterone receptors; not listen to pride and ego and address the situation at hand through definition of the hobby, potential risks, known rewards and democratic process.
    Perhaps something like this:
    The AMA believes that any sudden action to limit the use of FPV aircraft by the general hobbyist interferes with the constitutional rights of both the manufacturers and hobbyists alike.;
    The AMA recognizes that the capabilities of remote controlled aircraft have changed: allowing the operator to fly beyond line of sight. The AMA acknowledges additional risks to civilian non-participants and suggests go-forward strategy wherein the AMA and FAA create a special committee to 1) determine if further legislative activity is required and 2) draft such legislation with sufficient public comment period as would be the case with any new or altered FAR. Until such time the AMA will notify its membership of the need to assure FPV aircraft are flown within line of sight of the operator or his/her designated lookout. All rules for maximum altitude and operating distance from airports listed on common sectional charts will remain the same.

  9. #84

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Miramar, FL
    Posts
    337
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Agree with above statement. What I read dictates and upholds the current rules about flying near an airport. At Florida Jets, this policy exists and works excellent. We have had no problems with the local airport or the FAA ATC. As far as I am concerned it has to do with the UAV which I care nothing about.

  10. #85
    HoundDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Apache Junction AZ
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by ledd4u View Post
    Agree with above statement. What I read dictates and upholds the current rules about flying near an airport. At Florida Jets, this policy exists and works excellent. We have had no problems with the local airport or the FAA ATC.
    As far as I am concerned it has to do with the UAV which I care nothing about.
    That's one of the greatest problems with a lot of people in this hobby/sport and other walks of life. "If they don't do it they don't care enough to fight for others rights to do it. i.e. be it IMAC, Pattern, Big Bird, Pylon Racing, Gliders Jets. ECT. If we don't defend every ones rights soon none of us will have any rights to fly at all. Besides there is more than FPV at stake here ... The right of someone, Be it a private person demonstrating a model or developing a model for sale or a Manufacture doing the same. If the FAA interperts their existing regulations it won't be long before they go after all forms of Model Flying in one way or another.

    The bottom line here we must stick together to safe guard our right to continue to enjoy our hobby/sport and all it's facets. If U can't defend all forms of our hobby U might as well just sell all your planes Quads or what ever, Go buy a Sail Boat, A lawn Chair and a
    6 pack. Then when U sober up U can wonder where your Boat went. They'll figure how to take that away from U too.
    Remember ... Every one of these Things we fly Comes with a Number, When the R/C Gods call that Number, it's going in a Garbage Bag, No Sniveling Allowed.
    P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #24 & #43

  11. #86
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    What disappoints me is the lack of professionalism and imaturity demonstrated by Mr. Mathewson. AMA's history is a moot point in this case
    IMO when you start with such a strong negative there is no point in reading further.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  12. #87
    Terry Holston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Posts
    3,549
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by HoundDog View Post
    That's one of the greatest problems with a lot of people in this hobby/sport and other walks of life. "If they don't do it they don't care enough to fight for others rights to do it. i.e. be it IMAC, Pattern, Big Bird, Pylon Racing, Gliders Jets. ECT. If we don't defend every ones rights soon none of us will have any rights to fly at all. Besides there is more than FPV at stake here ... The right of someone, Be it a private person demonstrating a model or developing a model for sale or a Manufacture doing the same. If the FAA interperts their existing regulations it won't be long before they go after all forms of Model Flying in one way or another.

    The bottom line here we must stick together to safe guard our right to continue to enjoy our hobby/sport and all it's facets. If U can't defend all forms of our hobby U might as well just sell all your planes Quads or what ever, Go buy a Sail Boat, A lawn Chair and a
    6 pack. Then when U sober up U can wonder where your Boat went. They'll figure how to take that away from U too.
    Well said...................+ one
    Terry Holston,I Fly Jets
    I'm NOT speeding, I'm QUALIFYING!!!!!!

  13. #88
    flyinfool1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cudahy, WI
    Posts
    687
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by ledd4u View Post
    As far as I am concerned it has to do with the UAV which I care nothing about.
    You do realize that ALL RC aircraft are considered UAVs??
    UAV means Unmanned Ariel Vehicle, it makes no distinction on power source or method of generating lift.

    Government has used the divide an conquer theory since government existed. You start by regulating out the easy targets because to many people will say "As far as I am concerned it has to do with the UAV which I care nothing about." to reduce the number of people that care about something. Once that small segment is gone those people will not care about the rest of the hobby because they are already out of it. The government will nibble away at the easiest targets all the while shrinking the size and strength of the main target.

    This is exactly the attitude that the government wants and needs to get rid of everything.
    Turbines are also a comparatively small group and could be an early target.
    Last edited by flyinfool1; 06-30-2014 at 10:54 AM.
    Jeff Borowski
    RAMS Club President
    www.ramsrcclub.com

  14. #89

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Cartersville, GA
    Posts
    209
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by HoundDog View Post
    That's one of the greatest problems with a lot of people in this hobby/sport and other walks of life. "If they don't do it they don't care enough to fight for others rights to do it. i.e. be it IMAC, Pattern, Big Bird, Pylon Racing, Gliders Jets. ECT. If we don't defend every ones rights soon none of us will have any rights to fly at all. Besides there is more than FPV at stake here ... The right of someone, Be it a private person demonstrating a model or developing a model for sale or a Manufacture doing the same. If the FAA interperts their existing regulations it won't be long before they go after all forms of Model Flying in one way or another.

    The bottom line here we must stick together to safe guard our right to continue to enjoy our hobby/sport and all it's facets. If U can't defend all forms of our hobby U might as well just sell all your planes Quads or what ever, Go buy a Sail Boat, A lawn Chair and a
    6 pack. Then when U sober up U can wonder where your Boat went. They'll figure how to take that away from U too.
    I also concur. If we let the FAA walk all over FPV pilots, then we are next.

    I do not own any FPV equipment or quadcoptors, However, I see the benefit of the modeling community sticking together, even if only one segment of the community is threatened at the moment. I therefore plan to give the FAA and my congressmen a piece of my mind.

    Furthermore, I have no way of knowing what my interests will be in the future. When 2014 rolled in, I had no interest in returning to this hobby. Since then, I have invested a lot of money and time as a modeler.
    Last edited by N410DC; 06-30-2014 at 08:56 AM.

  15. #90
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    If you are going to concur there is no need to divide, just say yes!
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  16. #91
    HoundDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Apache Junction AZ
    Posts
    2,069
    There is more than just FPV at stake here ... The FAA is saying that any flying of anything for as deamed by them for profit pay or any commercial purpose is now Illegal. Company's nor anyone else may operate anything in the NAS if it is in anyway can be considered as part of or leading to monetary gain or companion, Unless U as the operator, the vehicle, and equipment are first approved by the the powers that be. Right now the powers that be i.e. the FAA have only approved, I be believe one company, and they are authorized to operate only in remote parts of Alaska. Make no mistake the FAA is/will do everything it can to control any thing and every thing that flies in the NAS.
    This may be a bit of an exaggeration but make no mistake about it Like I've said before "If the FAA could mandate Altitude Encoding Transponders on Geese it would be done by now.
    Last edited by HoundDog; 06-30-2014 at 10:06 AM.
    Remember ... Every one of these Things we fly Comes with a Number, When the R/C Gods call that Number, it's going in a Garbage Bag, No Sniveling Allowed.
    P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #24 & #43

  17. #92
    flyinfool1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cudahy, WI
    Posts
    687
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
    If you are going to concur there is no need to divide, just say yes!
    Darn auto correct......
    Jeff Borowski
    RAMS Club President
    www.ramsrcclub.com

  18. #93

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
    Posts
    602
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
    The FAA never had a rule, they had an advisory of 400 feet. The same applied to flying near airports, it was not against the law or regulations to fly RC near an airport, but a voluntary advisory not to do so. Now it is against the law to fly near airports. Nevermind it was never a big problem.
    sorry.....you better read up on the controlled airspace rules around airports etc. Full size have the space above 500 ft within 5 miles of an airfield. A cone extends out from an airport. Then, there are flight corridors radiating out from the runways. NAS is far more regulated and segmented than modellers appreciate. Ask a commercial pilot to explain it all.

  19. #94
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    Quote Originally Posted by dw_crash View Post
    sorry.....you better read up on the controlled airspace rules around airports etc. Full size have the space above 500 ft within 5 miles of an airfield. A cone extends out from an airport. Then, there are flight corridors radiating out from the runways. NAS is far more regulated and segmented than modellers appreciate. Ask a commercial pilot to explain it all.
    I am well aware of the regulations but part 91 does not apply to model aircraft in any way so there is actually no restriction only an advisory. A judge recently through out a case and said that the FAA has no regulation for use of model aircraft.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  20. #95
    FalconWings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,747
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
    I am well aware of the regulations but part 91 does not apply to model aircraft in any way so there is actually no restriction only an advisory. A judge recently through out a case and said that the FAA has no regulation for use of model aircraft.
    you mean regulation or jurisdiction?
    Buying Jet Legend? Read here: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_11372496/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm

  21. #96
    HoundDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Apache Junction AZ
    Posts
    2,069
    Here we go again arguing among our selves over semantics .... It's time to stop saying the FAA has no jurisdiction over model aircraft and realize the FAA believes they do and that is good enough for them.It will cost U a lot of time and money to prove them wrong, if U can.
    There is less than 30 days to let the FAA know how U/we feel about their new interpretation of the new
    FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that pertains to Model aircraft.
    and how the FAA is viewing and interpreting congress mandate. Interpretive Rule
    Last edited by HoundDog; 06-30-2014 at 12:17 PM.
    Remember ... Every one of these Things we fly Comes with a Number, When the R/C Gods call that Number, it's going in a Garbage Bag, No Sniveling Allowed.
    P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #24 & #43

  22. #97
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    Regulation, part 91 is applicable to aircraft carrying people. This is from the applicablity section which says it is applicable to each person in the aircraft, only the FAA's regulations on obstuctions can be applied to model aircraft. Part 77 for example. But I also believe that the FAA only has jurisdiction of navigable airspace, but then we often fly into navigable airspace and there is no rule which prevents that.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  23. #98

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
    Posts
    602
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
    Regulation, part 91 is applicable to aircraft carrying people. This is from the applicablity section which says it is applicable to each person in the aircraft, only the FAA's regulations on obstuctions can be applied to model aircraft. Part 77 for example. But I also believe that the FAA only has jurisdiction of navigable airspace, but then we often fly into navigable airspace and there is no rule which prevents that.
    That is the exact point....FAA regulates and controls the airspace. They have the laws and regulations. Just because the words "model" are not written explicitly. It is explicitly stated what can and can't be in REGULATED airspace. Air ports and corridors are regulated and controlled airspace......it doesn't matter, manned, FPV, model airplane or UFO. If your in the controlled airspace your under the FAA laws and regulation by default. If they could catch them, ET would be fined for flying near a airport in the regulated airspace.

    Further, Model flying is a privledge guys.....There is no defined right to fly models, FPV, helicopters etc......so, sorry....this means the gov't makes the rules regards of what anyone wishes. National security is the current fade excuse!!!

    DW_CRASH

  24. #99
    mr_matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oak Park, CA,
    Posts
    9,282
    Quote Originally Posted by ledd4u View Post
    Agree with above statement. What I read dictates and upholds the current rules about flying near an airport. At Florida Jets, this policy exists and works excellent. We have had no problems with the local airport or the FAA ATC. As far as I am concerned it has to do with the UAV which I care nothing about.
    Better be careful there with that ATC at Florida Jets. An AMA member in Kansas just reported this on the AMA forum:

    Up until Monday, 6/23, we were able to fly under our written agreement with the FBO manager in an area that is listed on both the sectional and NOTAMs, now, way this new rule is interpreted by one FBO manager, we need to get prior authorization for EACH FLIGHT and have means to announce our intent, depart, and approach. This same manager says we need to get Sportsman ratings if we want to continue to fly.
    Matt

  25. #100
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,889
    That is the exact point....FAA regulates and controls the airspace. They have the laws and regulations. Just because the words "model" are not written explicitly. It is explicitly stated what can and can't be in REGULATED airspace. Air ports and corridors are regulated and controlled airspace......it doesn't matter, manned, FPV, model airplane or UFO. If your in the controlled airspace your under the FAA laws and regulation by default. If they could catch them, ET would be fined for flying near a airport in the regulated airspace.
    The FAA never wrote a regulation for model airplanes or sUAV's. There were no laws written either. This was specifically pointed out by an NSTB judge in the Pirker case last March. They do have laws and regulations for obstructions to airspace however. Although there is nothing specific about model aircraft there the FAA can say you unlawfully obstucted a full scale aircraft. In the Pirker case however he did not obstuct any aircraft and they were trying to fine him for unsafely flying an FPV model aircraft.
    Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 06-30-2014 at 12:58 PM.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15


Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:06 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.