BV's letters to AMA and FAA
07-27-2014, 12:17 PM
#126
This goes back to what I was saying in my posts yesterday about the dangers presented by the guy flying BLOS in Seattle. Had the cropduster pilot, in this case, had less experience, the outcome may have been totally different and possibly tragic
07-27-2014, 01:08 PM
#127
My Feedback: (211)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sun City,
AZ
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure what your point was yesterday with the NRA and the private property advocates, but i would agree with you on BLOS unless it occurs at a AMA field with a spotter or in a remote or sparsely populated area with a spotter. Maybe there should be a waiver similar to the turbine waiver. Obviously without any regulation we can see where its headed. I don't see the upside if the AMA excludes itself from the discussion on FPV.
07-27-2014, 02:41 PM
#128
My NRA and private property comments go back to a post from someone claiming that they would shoot down an FPV if he saw it hovering over his yard with a shotgun loaded with "gooseshot". The NRA comment covers the shotgun, the private property advocate goes to his "my yard" statement
07-27-2014, 04:08 PM
#129
LOL, you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer are you?
07-27-2014, 04:23 PM
#130
For many years model aviation remained under the radar of the federal government. As models have become more capable and sophisticated we have become more visible and more likely to be subjected to onerous regulation.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
07-27-2014, 05:24 PM
#131
For many years model aviation remained under the radar of the federal government. As models have become more capable and sophisticated we have become more visible and more likely to be subjected to onerous regulation.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
07-27-2014, 09:18 PM
#132
Another reason these quads belong only in the hands of professionals licensed to use them;
http://www.capradio.org/articles/201...ill-evacuated/
This jack@$$ goes out and flies over an active fire fighting effort with air support dropping water and they had to STOP because of him! ***!
So again, I say stop selling them to the general public.
http://www.capradio.org/articles/201...ill-evacuated/
This jack@$$ goes out and flies over an active fire fighting effort with air support dropping water and they had to STOP because of him! ***!
So again, I say stop selling them to the general public.
07-27-2014, 10:05 PM
#133
My Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tucson,
AZ
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez, Remember when everyone wanted to ban Lipo's? Some clubs still do, Ignorance. Sorry Bob, I have to disagree with you on FPV. I feel safer at the field with someone flying an FPV quad than a 200mph jet screaming around the pattern.
07-27-2014, 10:46 PM
#134
Even better!
FPV newbie flying his Parrot with a LiPo he knows little to nothing about. Then imagine him flying around a wild fire while full scale fire fighting operations are being conducted. Then imagine his drone crashes and starts another fire... Or he gets hit by an aircraft which goes on to have an accident Or the AC is out of commission and the fires take out more homes and land. This is not far fetched.
Yes this could happen with an RC plane or an RC heli BUT these examples do not have sophistcated AUTOPILOT and stabilization systems or a return to home function. Typically these examples are flown by responsible hobby oriented pilots. Therefore the real threat to our hobby is from people new to RC who buy FPV quads and similar aircraft. Thats why Im in favor of banning the sale of these platforms to the general public.
Ignorance about LiPo technology is no different than when the hobby transitioned from NiCd to NiMh, people have to learn how to use them safely regardless. ALL batteries are dangerous and all of them can cause harm, injury and death. Lets not go down this topic path...
I've test flown a couple different quads and you can only fly them within an area of about your yard or flying field. Once they get out a ways about 400ft you can easily lose orientation. Hit the return home button on your TX and it can come back to you at full speed then hover right over its original GPS location. Pretty cool tech but it does not require very much flying skill and these are just getting easier to operate. That puts them very easily in the hands of people who have little to zero RC flying experience which in turn means they have very little respect for the hobby, coincidently, they are ignorant. They are not aware of their part of the bigger picture.
Next phase is to buy the Quad with FPV built in or add the camera and now the Quad can go a very long range well beyond 400ft.
My point is these are cool RC vehicles and Im very impressed with how far its all come but the industry has to take responsibility and restrict this particular product. It should be available to professionals and only limited very small models to the general public.
FPV newbie flying his Parrot with a LiPo he knows little to nothing about. Then imagine him flying around a wild fire while full scale fire fighting operations are being conducted. Then imagine his drone crashes and starts another fire... Or he gets hit by an aircraft which goes on to have an accident Or the AC is out of commission and the fires take out more homes and land. This is not far fetched.
Yes this could happen with an RC plane or an RC heli BUT these examples do not have sophistcated AUTOPILOT and stabilization systems or a return to home function. Typically these examples are flown by responsible hobby oriented pilots. Therefore the real threat to our hobby is from people new to RC who buy FPV quads and similar aircraft. Thats why Im in favor of banning the sale of these platforms to the general public.
Ignorance about LiPo technology is no different than when the hobby transitioned from NiCd to NiMh, people have to learn how to use them safely regardless. ALL batteries are dangerous and all of them can cause harm, injury and death. Lets not go down this topic path...
I've test flown a couple different quads and you can only fly them within an area of about your yard or flying field. Once they get out a ways about 400ft you can easily lose orientation. Hit the return home button on your TX and it can come back to you at full speed then hover right over its original GPS location. Pretty cool tech but it does not require very much flying skill and these are just getting easier to operate. That puts them very easily in the hands of people who have little to zero RC flying experience which in turn means they have very little respect for the hobby, coincidently, they are ignorant. They are not aware of their part of the bigger picture.
Next phase is to buy the Quad with FPV built in or add the camera and now the Quad can go a very long range well beyond 400ft.
My point is these are cool RC vehicles and Im very impressed with how far its all come but the industry has to take responsibility and restrict this particular product. It should be available to professionals and only limited very small models to the general public.
Last edited by Chris Nicastro; 07-27-2014 at 11:05 PM.
07-28-2014, 04:43 AM
#135
Shame on those concerned painting every one with the same black brush from a tainted can of paint. The model airplane business was doing great until certain companies and countries got involved
07-28-2014, 05:33 AM
#136
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that nobody has posted the other letter.
http://www.bvmjets.com/Safety/FAA0714.pdf
Seems like it's OK to rule against until it affects him personally....
http://www.bvmjets.com/Safety/FAA0714.pdf
Seems like it's OK to rule against until it affects him personally....
07-28-2014, 05:51 AM
#137
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MIRAMAR, FL
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think many are missing the point, I doubt Bob V is upset about the guy flying FPV responsibly at the field, rather he's worried about the thousands of units being sold monthly to the average Joe, who is not an AMA member and has no real knowledge (or love) of aviation. To the public, the guy flying his new quad over the highway from his living room is the real danger and if we are lumped in with that picture the public has, right or wrong, we're all at risk of being on the harsh end of a full or partial government ban, which history has shown will eventually come. The AMA historically was always the majority of those using model technology but with the rapid advances and lower costs, not to mention R/C toys marketed to the masses, we are no longer the majority but rather the public is. So do we get lumped in with people that don't care about aviation and the hobby or try and distinguish ourselves from public opinion of the Wild West for drones? I respect anyone who is serious about the hobby, no matter that they fly but I'm also practical enough to see the writing on the wall...
Jack
Jack
07-28-2014, 06:15 AM
#138
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think many are missing the point, I doubt Bob V is upset about the guy flying FPV responsibly at the field, rather he's worried about the thousands of units being sold monthly to the average Joe, who is not an AMA member and has no real knowledge (or love) of aviation. To the public, the guy flying his new quad over the highway from his living room is the real danger and if we are lumped in with that picture the public has, right or wrong, we're all at risk of being on the harsh end of a full or partial government ban, which history has shown will eventually come. The AMA historically was always the majority of those using model technology but with the rapid advances and lower costs, not to mention R/C toys marketed to the masses, we are no longer the majority but rather the public is. So do we get lumped in with people that don't care about aviation and the hobby or try and distinguish ourselves from public opinion of the Wild West for drones? I respect anyone who is serious about the hobby, no matter that they fly but I'm also practical enough to see the writing on the wall...
Jack
Jack
07-28-2014, 07:25 AM
#139
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to figure out a way to jam the signal of a drone if it were within say a few hundred feet of my home, or even hijack it with my own radio. My trash compactor would be getting in a good workout. That would probably be the most effective way to deal with drones flying around your house.
Last edited by SushiHunter; 07-28-2014 at 07:32 AM.
07-28-2014, 09:08 AM
#141
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo,
NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with that argument is that we have a 2nd Amendment right to own guns in the Constitution of the United States. There is no constitutional RIGHT to fly drones in controlled USA airspace. You're going to have to try harder to find a useful analogy to your argument.
07-28-2014, 09:16 AM
#142
I think many are missing the point, I doubt Bob V is upset about the guy flying FPV responsibly at the field, rather he's worried about the thousands of units being sold monthly to the average Joe, who is not an AMA member and has no real knowledge (or love) of aviation. To the public, the guy flying his new quad over the highway from his living room is the real danger and if we are lumped in with that picture the public has, right or wrong, we're all at risk of being on the harsh end of a full or partial government ban, which history has shown will eventually come. The AMA historically was always the majority of those using model technology but with the rapid advances and lower costs, not to mention R/C toys marketed to the masses, we are no longer the majority but rather the public is. So do we get lumped in with people that don't care about aviation and the hobby or try and distinguish ourselves from public opinion of the Wild West for drones? I respect anyone who is serious about the hobby, no matter that they fly but I'm also practical enough to see the writing on the wall...
Jack
Jack
In my opinion, the best way to prevent FPV guys from doing stupid stuff to educate them. I also think the best way to educate them is to get them involved with some sort of community based organization, which is exactly what the AMA is trying to do.
By the way, I don't for one second believe that in order to have any fun with FPV gear that it's necessary to fly beyond line of site. Some of the float plane guys at Joe Nall had a very sophisticated setup. It was quite impressive and it was really nice to see the video from the plane as is flew over the pond. Everything was done well within line of sight and in a very safe fashion. I'd personally hate to see guys like that have their fun ruined by a bunch of short sighted individuals that have little knowledge of such activities, simply because FPV doesn't interest them.
While there are pretty clear distinctions between commercial and hobby related activities the FAA seems to prefer to ban technologies rather than clarify what constitutes commercial vs hobby use. In many cases, I really don't see that it even matters whether it's hobby related or commercial. If someone's hobby is photography and they wish wish to use a quad rotor with FPV to enhance their enjoyment of their hobby that's fine with me. If someone is a professional photographer and wishes to use FPV to photograph properties for real estate agents, and enhance their business, I'm fine with that too. As long as they operate in a reasonable and safe fashion without endangering others, I see no reason to have the FAA involved with either activity.
It just seems like everyone is all too willing to make the FPV guys the sacrificial lamb and while I'm not personally involved in FPV in any shape or form, I think that's really rather sad.
Last edited by wfield0455; 07-28-2014 at 01:21 PM. Reason: fixed typo
07-28-2014, 10:58 AM
#144
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For many years model aviation remained under the radar of the federal government. As models have become more capable and sophisticated we have become more visible and more likely to be subjected to onerous regulation.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
Perhaps the time has come to discuss whether we as a group want to be more visible or less visible, and what it is that makes us visible in the first place.
FPV activity certainly is one activity that makes model aviation more visible. We will have a REAL problem when someone combines activities together, say FPV Jets or FPV giant scale, beyond line of sight. I fear this day will soon be upon us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erPhlXI7m0E
Last edited by SushiHunter; 07-28-2014 at 11:02 AM.
07-28-2014, 03:10 PM
#145
I completely disagree with saying it's Ok to ban certain activities because they MAY be used in a dangerous fashion. It's the idiot that is behaving in an irresponsible fashion that is the problem, not the activity itself. There are often laws already in place to deal with these idiots so why not simply enforce those, instead of limiting the activities of those that are already following the rules and acting responsibly. There will always be stupid people doing stupid things, I'm not willing to punish everyone for the acts of a few that have no common sense. Unfortunately, with the prevalence of youtube, etc, the attention of the public is focus on these idiot on a daily basis. That still doesn't mean there aren't literally hundreds or even thousands, participating in that same activity in a safe and responsible fashion for every dope that posts something that defies common sense on youtube.
In my opinion, the best way to prevent FPV guys from doing stupid stuff to educate them. I also think the best way to educate them is to get them involved with some sort of community based organization, which is exactly what the AMA is trying to do.
By the way, I don't for one second believe that in order to have any fun with FPV gear that it's necessary to fly beyond line of site. Some of the float plane guys at Joe Nall had a very sophisticated setup. It was quite impressive and it was really nice to see the video from the plane as is flew over the pond. Everything was done well within line of sight and in a very safe fashion. I'd personally hate to see guys like that have their fun ruined by a bunch of short sighted individuals that have little knowledge of such activities, simply because FPV doesn't interest them.
While there are pretty clear distinctions between commercial and hobby related activities the FAA seems to prefer to ban technologies rather than clarify what constitutes commercial vs hobby use. In many cases, I really don't see that it even matters whether it's hobby related or commercial. If someone's hobby is photography and they wish wish to use a quad rotor with FPV to enhance their enjoyment of their hobby that's fine with me. If someone is a professional photographer and wishes to use FPV to photograph properties for real estate agents, and enhance their business, I'm fine with that too. As long as they operate in a reasonable and safe fashion without endangering others, I see no reason to have the FAA involved with either activity.
It just seems like everyone is all too willing to make the FPV guys the sacrificial lamb and while I'm not personally involved in FPV in any shape or form, I think that's really rather sad.
In my opinion, the best way to prevent FPV guys from doing stupid stuff to educate them. I also think the best way to educate them is to get them involved with some sort of community based organization, which is exactly what the AMA is trying to do.
By the way, I don't for one second believe that in order to have any fun with FPV gear that it's necessary to fly beyond line of site. Some of the float plane guys at Joe Nall had a very sophisticated setup. It was quite impressive and it was really nice to see the video from the plane as is flew over the pond. Everything was done well within line of sight and in a very safe fashion. I'd personally hate to see guys like that have their fun ruined by a bunch of short sighted individuals that have little knowledge of such activities, simply because FPV doesn't interest them.
While there are pretty clear distinctions between commercial and hobby related activities the FAA seems to prefer to ban technologies rather than clarify what constitutes commercial vs hobby use. In many cases, I really don't see that it even matters whether it's hobby related or commercial. If someone's hobby is photography and they wish wish to use a quad rotor with FPV to enhance their enjoyment of their hobby that's fine with me. If someone is a professional photographer and wishes to use FPV to photograph properties for real estate agents, and enhance their business, I'm fine with that too. As long as they operate in a reasonable and safe fashion without endangering others, I see no reason to have the FAA involved with either activity.
It just seems like everyone is all too willing to make the FPV guys the sacrificial lamb and while I'm not personally involved in FPV in any shape or form, I think that's really rather sad.
+ 1
07-28-2014, 09:23 PM
#146
Chris already posted something about the guy filming a Fire, but it got bigger attention now. http://news.msn.com/us/toy-drone-dis...ornia-wildfire Those are the types of activities that will end up getting all of us in trouble. I can see the headlines now. Couple of extra homes burned or someone hurt because a 'Drone" caused a firefighters to stop their work.
Ralph
Ralph
07-29-2014, 05:35 AM
#148
My Feedback: (43)
Once this starts to happen, good bye flying sites. Cities will not let us fly on park property, or any sort of govt property due to the perceived liability brought on by the reckless few. Potential private leases will dry up due to the again "perceived" liabilities. To get a proper flying site we will have to be 100 miles out in the middle of nowhere just to fly a .40 sized trainer. To fly turbines, NOTAMS will have to be filed, airspace adjustments just like the super powerful rocket guys do. AMA insurance, will double or triple I bet after the first major incident happens with an FPVer crashing and burning into a bus load of nuns. The underwriters for the AMA insurance will lump all into one risk bucket.
07-29-2014, 06:18 AM
#149
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo,
NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once this starts to happen, good bye flying sites. Cities will not let us fly on park property, or any sort of govt property due to the perceived liability brought on by the reckless few. Potential private leases will dry up due to the again "perceived" liabilities. To get a proper flying site we will have to be 100 miles out in the middle of nowhere just to fly a .40 sized trainer. To fly turbines, NOTAMS will have to be filed, airspace adjustments just like the super powerful rocket guys do. AMA insurance, will double or triple I bet after the first major incident happens with an FPVer crashing and burning into a bus load of nuns. The underwriters for the AMA insurance will lump all into one risk bucket.
07-29-2014, 06:39 AM
#150
What does a dumb FPV pilot who is not part of the AMA and doing something already illegal and therefore possibly getting sued have to do with our flying fields? You guys fly at fields that are near populace areas????? If that is the case I feel sorry for you city dwellers. I guess the beautiful location in which I live excludes me from a lot of these problems.
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 07-29-2014 at 06:47 AM.
