BV's letters to AMA and FAA
07-31-2014, 04:46 AM
#226
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo,
NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by mike1974; 07-31-2014 at 05:32 AM.
07-31-2014, 06:56 AM
#228
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sailing in the Eastern Caribbean
Posts: 4,047
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C'MON GUYS LET'S KEEP IT POLITE.
The mods are monitoring this thread. As it has implications for all RC flyers we are letting it run. RCU is all about disseminating information and provides a place where things can be discussed.
But no flaming and please don't feed the trolls.
The mods are monitoring this thread. As it has implications for all RC flyers we are letting it run. RCU is all about disseminating information and provides a place where things can be discussed.
But no flaming and please don't feed the trolls.
07-31-2014, 06:57 AM
#229
Yesterday I was all set to do a jet demo for some groups of kids at a summer camp about aviation. Everything was all set up. But then last minute I was told by the tower that they cant allow any DRONES to fly in their airspace. All the kids where very upset. Me knowing they are wrong and I am not flying a drone I pulled up some info and educated the guys at the tower about what I was doing and how I would have an aircraft radio with me to maintain contact and respect the airspace. After half a day of talking to these guys I got the clearance to do the demo. All the kids loved it and I hope it will inspire some to try RC planes now.
This has never been a problem before until now. We are all getting labeled as flying drones. I dont like anything being regulated by the government. I deal with the FAA on the full scale aircraft I maintain and know how incompetent they are. The big problem here is the FPV flying has given us all a label now as drones.
Another example of how FPV flying is a whole different animal. We where all at the flying field several months ago. No one was flying at the time we where all taking a break from the sun in the shade. We all stood around and watched a high wing trainer airplane enter the pattern fly around and do a touch and go then fly away. We still have no clue where this aircraft came from or who was flying it. Flying beyond visual range is a problem and its what getting us all the label as flying DRONES.
I dont have any problem with FPV if its done right. You need a spotter that can maintain visual contact the entire flight. Flying beyond visual range should never be allowed IMO. I know the FPV guys feel like we are all gaining up on them but the bottom line is they are something totally different. Model aviation is about airplanes and helicopters and the love of flight. These quadcopters and other aircraft are a different animal and are geared for taking a gopro up and doing videos to me that's not what model aviation is about.
This has never been a problem before until now. We are all getting labeled as flying drones. I dont like anything being regulated by the government. I deal with the FAA on the full scale aircraft I maintain and know how incompetent they are. The big problem here is the FPV flying has given us all a label now as drones.
Another example of how FPV flying is a whole different animal. We where all at the flying field several months ago. No one was flying at the time we where all taking a break from the sun in the shade. We all stood around and watched a high wing trainer airplane enter the pattern fly around and do a touch and go then fly away. We still have no clue where this aircraft came from or who was flying it. Flying beyond visual range is a problem and its what getting us all the label as flying DRONES.
I dont have any problem with FPV if its done right. You need a spotter that can maintain visual contact the entire flight. Flying beyond visual range should never be allowed IMO. I know the FPV guys feel like we are all gaining up on them but the bottom line is they are something totally different. Model aviation is about airplanes and helicopters and the love of flight. These quadcopters and other aircraft are a different animal and are geared for taking a gopro up and doing videos to me that's not what model aviation is about.
07-31-2014, 07:26 AM
#230
I actually think Congress has it right on this one. They have directed the FAA to leave alone "hobbyist" as long as "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization"
I think we should direct our energies to solidify this position that Congress has directed to the FAA. Then, if the FPV, Parkflyer, Jet, IC, 3D, Pattern or any other group chooses to operate outside the guidelines (which would appear to be directed at the AMA) then they can suffer the consequences. Fines or whatever.
We have to follow some reasonable set of rules and I think the AMA Rules and Guidelines are a good set to follow. If this is done, then the FPV can be done as long as there is a spotter and other Spec Interests can operate as long as they follow as well.
Congress has directed the FAA to do this, we just need to find a way to put their feet to the fire.
I think we should direct our energies to solidify this position that Congress has directed to the FAA. Then, if the FPV, Parkflyer, Jet, IC, 3D, Pattern or any other group chooses to operate outside the guidelines (which would appear to be directed at the AMA) then they can suffer the consequences. Fines or whatever.
We have to follow some reasonable set of rules and I think the AMA Rules and Guidelines are a good set to follow. If this is done, then the FPV can be done as long as there is a spotter and other Spec Interests can operate as long as they follow as well.
Congress has directed the FAA to do this, we just need to find a way to put their feet to the fire.
07-31-2014, 07:55 AM
#231
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SushiHunter 
Question is, how many FPV guys actually belong to the AMA and abide by the rules? .
I went out to a local AMA sanctioned club (mostly heli guys) a few weeks back and there were aprox 25 people there.. At least half of them had multi-rotors.. 80% of those were flying them FPV.. (mix of goggles and monitors) At least 4 people I was introduced to only flew FPV/Multi-rotors and had never flown anything previously.. ALL of them are current AMA members..
My previous club back in Austin, TX (ARCA) has a huge following of FPV'ers, including the club president. They've had at least two multi-rotor FPV events, including one where a type of pylon race was flow as a competition with Curtis Youngblood's Stingray 500's and anyone else who wants to race.
I seriously doubt this is only taking place at Texas R/C clubs..
07-31-2014, 10:04 AM
#232
My Feedback: (145)
Plane Insane-The operative word for the place you did your FPV survey is "AMA club" Of course the 80% were AMA members, they had to be to be in the club. Trust me I know about 8 people at my work who are flying FPV and NONE of them are members of AMA. Even at my urging they wont join, they dont want to and dont see the need. They fly at parks,
beaches, schools, around their homes. Those guys are the ones who are going to cause us problems
beaches, schools, around their homes. Those guys are the ones who are going to cause us problems
07-31-2014, 10:59 AM
#233
Plane Insane-The operative word for the place you did your FPV survey is "AMA club" Of course the 80% were AMA members, they had to be to be in the club. Trust me I know about 8 people at my work who are flying FPV and NONE of them are members of AMA. Even at my urging they wont join, they dont want to and dont see the need. They fly at parks,
beaches, schools, around their homes. Those guys are the ones who are going to cause us problems
beaches, schools, around their homes. Those guys are the ones who are going to cause us problems
07-31-2014, 11:13 AM
#234
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-E0iSJ_UwE
07-31-2014, 04:30 PM
#237
FED EX INSPECTORS INVESTIGATED MY SHIPMENT OF SERVOS:
A few weeks ago a shipped 8 new servos and a receiver to my builder Via FED EX. I bought the box and bubble wrap in the store where I also boxed it up and paid with my credit card ( showing my ID). An hour later I received a call from an "INSPECTOR" from fed ex who wouldn't clearly ID himself, who began questioning me about shipping DRONE Equipment. Once I stopped laughing, I actually became furious at this ******* who hadn't a clue what a drone really is, nor what a model aircraft is, nor the difference between the two. Later I found out that my friend who's doing the building received a call as well.
Obviously, one of the idiot clerks and therefore the store manager called it in. The young guy that was helping me asked me some questions about the hobby, which I'm always enthusiastic to talk about. Apparently one of the other employees ( all fat women) decided I was breaking some law by shipping DRONE PARTS. This is the type of ignorant hysteria that we're coming up against gentlemen. Perhaps our AMA dues would be better spent launching a major online/ social media PR campaign to educate the public about our hobby, and to distinguish it from the UAS industry. Perhaps we need to take this upon ourselves. Educating the public one at a time isn't going to cut it; as in the case mentioned by AndyAndrews
A few weeks ago a shipped 8 new servos and a receiver to my builder Via FED EX. I bought the box and bubble wrap in the store where I also boxed it up and paid with my credit card ( showing my ID). An hour later I received a call from an "INSPECTOR" from fed ex who wouldn't clearly ID himself, who began questioning me about shipping DRONE Equipment. Once I stopped laughing, I actually became furious at this ******* who hadn't a clue what a drone really is, nor what a model aircraft is, nor the difference between the two. Later I found out that my friend who's doing the building received a call as well.
Obviously, one of the idiot clerks and therefore the store manager called it in. The young guy that was helping me asked me some questions about the hobby, which I'm always enthusiastic to talk about. Apparently one of the other employees ( all fat women) decided I was breaking some law by shipping DRONE PARTS. This is the type of ignorant hysteria that we're coming up against gentlemen. Perhaps our AMA dues would be better spent launching a major online/ social media PR campaign to educate the public about our hobby, and to distinguish it from the UAS industry. Perhaps we need to take this upon ourselves. Educating the public one at a time isn't going to cut it; as in the case mentioned by AndyAndrews
07-31-2014, 04:48 PM
#238
Man, an airport calling our stuff drones and now FED-EX worried about "drone parts". Really? This thing must be going viral. It's hard to believe the ignorance of some people.
07-31-2014, 08:07 PM
#239
My Feedback: (1)
This is exactly the concerns most of us have and this is why there will be no way for the AMA to regulate it, even if they try. I can see some good things that FPV can do like helping find a lost child or for law enforcement to find a wanted criminal, this makes it a "TOOL" not for the enjoyment of model flight its self and therefor should be treated in a different category all together. Not saying it shouldn't be allowed but it should have nothing to do with what we do at our local flying fields.
IMO AMA should divorce itself from endorsing these things until a clear cut way is planned to regulate them. We all sign on and pay our dues to abide by the AMA safety code to the best of our ability. FPV by nature breaks some of the most important safety rules set fourth by the AMA like not flying directly over people and structures as listed in section B .1 of the safety code. As someone else already mentioned I doubt these pilots are just flying over open water and farm fields. Sorry if this upsets some guys but they don't seem to be worried if we loose or are regulated beyond reason, what we have all been doing for decades.
IMO AMA should divorce itself from endorsing these things until a clear cut way is planned to regulate them. We all sign on and pay our dues to abide by the AMA safety code to the best of our ability. FPV by nature breaks some of the most important safety rules set fourth by the AMA like not flying directly over people and structures as listed in section B .1 of the safety code. As someone else already mentioned I doubt these pilots are just flying over open water and farm fields. Sorry if this upsets some guys but they don't seem to be worried if we loose or are regulated beyond reason, what we have all been doing for decades.
08-01-2014, 05:37 AM
#241
His post: Amazed....well maybe not....at the number of people posting that have (until now) not been seen on the RC Jets/turbine forum.......
FPV/BLOS defenders and Hot Stove League guys that must use the search function to find the "argument du jour"? .
My post: Does it really matter if someone's been in the jet forum or not? The way I see it, this is an issue that will, sooner than later, be spread across all of the R/C hobby. I myself am concerned that, with the abundant numbers and access to ARF/ARR models, we will be seeing boats and cars running around the lakes and streets with the operator blocks away. Just think of the repercussions of a small child being hit by FPV buggy while playing in the front yard with the driver on the next street. I know, surface vehicles don't have the same radio range as a plane but, with the new radio tech, the range is being extended. It won't be long until someone that doesn't understand how an R/C really works tries to see how far away they can drive FPV, not realizing that they need to enable a fail safe first. I see serious full sized auto accidents, homes and people being hit and another facet of our hobby made to suffer because of idiots
His post: Actually yes, it matters to me.
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 08-01-2014 at 05:39 AM.
08-01-2014, 07:00 AM
#242
This is exactly the concerns most of us have and this is why there will be no way for the AMA to regulate it, even if they try. I can see some good things that FPV can do like helping find a lost child or for law enforcement to find a wanted criminal, this makes it a "TOOL" not for the enjoyment of model flight its self and therefor should be treated in a different category all together. Not saying it shouldn't be allowed but it should have nothing to do with what we do at our local flying fields.
IMO AMA should divorce itself from endorsing these things until a clear cut way is planned to regulate them. We all sign on and pay our dues to abide by the AMA safety code to the best of our ability. FPV by nature breaks some of the most important safety rules set fourth by the AMA like not flying directly over people and structures as listed in section B .1 of the safety code. As someone else already mentioned I doubt these pilots are just flying over open water and farm fields. Sorry if this upsets some guys but they don't seem to be worried if we loose or are regulated beyond reason, what we have all been doing for decades.
IMO AMA should divorce itself from endorsing these things until a clear cut way is planned to regulate them. We all sign on and pay our dues to abide by the AMA safety code to the best of our ability. FPV by nature breaks some of the most important safety rules set fourth by the AMA like not flying directly over people and structures as listed in section B .1 of the safety code. As someone else already mentioned I doubt these pilots are just flying over open water and farm fields. Sorry if this upsets some guys but they don't seem to be worried if we loose or are regulated beyond reason, what we have all been doing for decades.
08-01-2014, 08:47 AM
#243
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , ON, CANADA
Posts: 974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Violet is wrong here by further creating a rift in our hobby.
Like it or not, when the FAA steps down, it's not going to be just against FPV. It's going to be against all models, and everyone will suffer. We should be publicly defending the hobby, including FPV, so that the legislators know that the majority of hobbyists effected are not the ones buzzing local airport circuits or crashing into skyscrapers with DJI Phantoms. Distancing ourselves is only having the opposite effect and is doing nothing but making it easier for the media and lawmakers to blanket all R/C as a danger to our skies and privacy.
Like it or not, when the FAA steps down, it's not going to be just against FPV. It's going to be against all models, and everyone will suffer. We should be publicly defending the hobby, including FPV, so that the legislators know that the majority of hobbyists effected are not the ones buzzing local airport circuits or crashing into skyscrapers with DJI Phantoms. Distancing ourselves is only having the opposite effect and is doing nothing but making it easier for the media and lawmakers to blanket all R/C as a danger to our skies and privacy.
08-01-2014, 09:47 AM
#245
My Feedback: (19)
The AMA should support AMA members that are following AMA guidelines. There are a lot of FPV pilots that are AMA members and are following the AMA guidelines. What the AMA should do is publicly separate themselves and support the prosecution of dangerous actions against the AMA safety code and local laws. I think dividing the AMA members is a bad thing for all of us.
08-01-2014, 09:53 AM
#246
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Violet is wrong here by further creating a rift in our hobby.
Like it or not, when the FAA steps down, it's not going to be just against FPV. It's going to be against all models, and everyone will suffer. We should be publicly defending the hobby, including FPV, so that the legislators know that the majority of hobbyists effected are not the ones buzzing local airport circuits or crashing into skyscrapers with DJI Phantoms. Distancing ourselves is only having the opposite effect and is doing nothing but making it easier for the media and lawmakers to blanket all R/C as a danger to our skies and privacy.
Like it or not, when the FAA steps down, it's not going to be just against FPV. It's going to be against all models, and everyone will suffer. We should be publicly defending the hobby, including FPV, so that the legislators know that the majority of hobbyists effected are not the ones buzzing local airport circuits or crashing into skyscrapers with DJI Phantoms. Distancing ourselves is only having the opposite effect and is doing nothing but making it easier for the media and lawmakers to blanket all R/C as a danger to our skies and privacy.
08-01-2014, 10:24 AM
#247
Only problem is the FPV stuff has unique capabilities that all the other model aircraft do not. We all fly within visual range and love watching our aircraft. FPV is something totally different and IMO its not model aviation. That is the reason to separate the two.
The AMA should support AMA members that are following AMA guidelines. There are a lot of FPV pilots that are AMA members and are following the AMA guidelines. What the AMA should do is publicly separate themselves and support the prosecution of dangerous actions against the AMA safety code and local laws. I think dividing the AMA members is a bad thing for all of us.
08-01-2014, 10:41 AM
#248
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's right! Nothing spells love like a high speed low alt flyby.
08-01-2014, 11:30 AM
#250
My Feedback: (19)
All my friends the fly FPV do so within visual range. The stuff needed to be successful in FPV is available and will be available whether the FAA outlaws it or not. The bad guys will be able to do what they want anyway. I just get the feeling that because FPV is the minority and "could" be used for something bad, we are willing to sacrifice those members because the majority hopes it will appease the FAA.