ace_drummond

My Feedback: (21)

Does anyone know for sure whether this letter is currently binding and in effect immediately or subject to review after the comment period?

Bob_B

My Feedback: (11)

Didn't NY drop that recently and now a large Coke is like 64oz!!!

afterburner

My Feedback: (18)

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!

Sport_Pilot

If the internet is using a pen and a phone I hope the AMA is using the internet and MS Word.

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

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.

Terry Holston

My Feedback: (1)

They don't have enough people to enforce our border laws, how are they gonna enforce these "New Rules"

rhklenke

My Feedback: (24)

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

jeffharris75

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%

ledd4u

My Feedback: (23)

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.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

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.

Sport_Pilot

IMO when you start with such a strong negative there is no point in reading further.

Terry Holston

My Feedback: (1)

Well said...................+ one

flyinfool1

My Feedback: (2)

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.

N410DC

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.

Sport_Pilot

If you are going to concur there is no need to divide, just say yes!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

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.

flyinfool1

My Feedback: (2)

Darn auto correct......

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

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.

Sport_Pilot

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.

FalconWings

My Feedback: (57)

you mean regulation or jurisdiction?

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

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

Sport_Pilot

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.

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

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

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

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.

Sport_Pilot

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.