mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

[QUOTE=F-16 viperman;11854495]Yes therefore I suggest the AMA service the members that pay and appreciate the service. I don't like flying alone, everything I need to enjoy the hobby requires the site owner insurance. I bet for the vast majority of members this is also the case. Why do we want a bunch of members that have to be drug kicking and screaming into the organization?

F-16 viperman

Sad. Obviously You don't like U.S. Whats up with that? We like You! My best Flying buddy's from toronto. We both laughed Ous ass off watching "team America World Police". Watch it and have a real sense of humor! LOL!

F-16 viperman

[QUOTE=mr_matt;11854568]I've been a AMA member for more than 40 years and a turbine waiver holder for 11 years and don't do drugs. No need to be snippy! OOOPPS I just realized You meant DRAGGED kicking and screaming

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

Sorry viperman I was speaking about FPV folks not you. As I said earlier, most all of the FPV guys I know fly out on their own and couldn't give two poops about the AMA, until now.

F-16 viperman

Its cool matt, As I said before though, I stlill think I might like to try fpv sometime in the future. As I also said before, it' still a personal liability thing. If some Yutz does stupidly endanger the public, They deserve to get arrested and face the consequences. on a individual basis. You or I should'nt have to lose Our right. See what I mean?

F-16 viperman

Ok Now My 2CTS on FPV and DRONES! FPV merely means adding a pilots view to a drone vehicle. DRONE is defined by websters as a honeybee that has no sting and gathers no honey. Also defined as a remote control aircraft, boat or other remote control vehicle. Also defined as a parasite that lives on the labor of others. Deep down They all know who They are.LOL! Seriously, by Websters definition All Our model aircraft could be called drones. I prefer model aircraft. So since the media now insists on calling them all DRONES, putting Them in a negative light, and They've all got Their toungues stuck so far up Government's keester, I see Them all as parasidic DRONES. and I won't stop calling Them that until They stop calling us DRONE operators. Those Who don't give Us respect, don't deserve respect. Right now, the lamestream media is not on the side of people, or freedom. They're on the wrong side of history, and They're not Our friend. If They were, They would go back to calling them toys! Until they do, They're DOG DUNG to Me! Update ALERT! Case in point. I just watched ABC evening news and They reported another close call with a drone and jetliner in the last 48 hours and that pilots have been using evasive manuevers to avoid collisions for a while. LIARS! Nobody has that good eyesight and no pilot or aircraft could react that quickly. How stupid do they think We are. I guess thats for another forum on this site asking if They're hyping up this CRAP on purpose . If You don't believe it, go to ABC news and look it up on tonight's news. NEWS FLASH THEY'RE HYPING UP THIS CRAP ON PURPOSE!

F-16 viperman

Now, it seems we're gonna have to hope that We can save our hobby While hoping that full scale pilots won't bear false witness against Us.

Bravo77

No: you get it wrong I have nothing against the US , I have lots of family and many good friends I have met over the years , but when someone is saying to me because I am Canadian I have no say or opinion in the US that pisses me off , cause it show how little some Americans know about Canada , and they make such stupid remarks , read what was said before I made my comment .By the way I have great sense of humour , but for reasons like this I do not like to post on RCU , cause some guys allow things to get personal and really downright stupid .

ravill

My Feedback: (11)

Yes, very nice sense of humor! (<- that's sarcasm!)

Jeez, insecure about your country much?

Frankly, I think we should have a world country with world citizens. But that's neither here nor there.

Now, back to our regular FAA programing!

Erik R

My Feedback: (32)

This may be one of the best posts I've ever read here.

Bravo,

You're confused. We care what you think, but you truly have no credible input towards what goes on in the USA. It's very similar to the fact that I have no credible input towards what goes on in Canada, especially the French province of Montreal. The thread is about BV's letters to the FAA, and AMA, which respectfully, don't concern you. They have no influence on what happens in Montreal.

Erik

Erik R

My Feedback: (32)

"So, The power mad Douschebags will always try to take some of it away from you. Are You just gonna let Them? They're the reason Most people believe GOD is dead! "

Wow!

I'm a pretty active "full scale" pilot. Love your spelling of "douchebag". I help run a club, and at least 2 jet events a year. I believe in God too! I staunchly fight for, and advocate for our rights. That said, when I'm at work, on final for the airport of your choice, I wouldn't want to be killed by some clueless "douchebag", who just bought an FPV quad and flew it through my windshield, killing me, and the 160 people riding behind me.

Throughout the years, there has been a process to go through, to become a pilot. The process itself weaned out the incompetent, or distracted, leaving only the safe and dedicated people with the capability/responsibility of being able to navigate our airspace. Now, any Nimrod with the cash can threaten my life, and those of my passengers and crew, at a whim. I think not. Bob's position is spot on. Most of the people posting here don't have a clue about the ramifications of Joe the plumber running an FPV beyond LOS in the NAS.

The pretty big sky belongs to the FAA. As incompetent as they can be, that's a good thing. Maybe you should go to the local FBO, and take a lesson or 2. Your perspective might change.

Erik

SushiHunter

Here's something interesting I saw on youtube today in regards to FPV drones. This actually is filmed in my area of residence (Menlo Park, CA). Look up on a navigational map of the area and factor in a custom build drone flying at roughly 3,500 feet of alt in this area. The amazing thing about this video is, it's roughly 3,500 alt and there are three airports fairly close to this area with lots of air traffic. San Carlos and Palo Alto airports are both a little north of this area and SFO (San Francisco Int'l) is a bit further north. However, where this drone is flying at that alt, he could be in the final approach/landing pattern of all three of these airports. This area is where the incoming international jetliners usually make their final turn to head north/northwest into the wind on final approach. I've come in plenty of times on JAL and we've made the turn right around this area plus at not much different in alt. Granted, a collision is a long shot and a small drone won't probably do a lot of damage to a jetliner, but all it's going to take is a single drone strike and antenna's will go up and heads will turn on this hobby.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivp4lj7g0sU

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Working on the aviation side of law enforcement I get to see things from a different perspective.

Today I just received an Email from the NFL and the FBI about the TFRs that surround football stadiums during games. This was all about FPV and using aircraft as a weapon. In the Email it talks about the rules for model aviation being very lenient (in their words not mine). It also talks about what to do if you see one and how to handle the situation. Another thing it said was they are working on a computerized electronic fence, takeover abilities and other types of jamming. I wish I could share the entire Email but I cant and this is the stuff that relates to us.

In a way after reading this I was kind of relieved because now I know they are coming up with a way to protect against it so maybe they wont get crazy with regulations. In another way kind of worried since now the FBI is involved with this and giving input to the FAA.

Also on a side note. we had a concert here in Tampa recently and some FPV guy with a big quad was flying over the crowd doing video!! This is exactly what is giving us these problems. This is why we want away from the FPV flyers. Us jet guys would never fly over a concert while its going on with thousands of people under us.

SushiHunter

A few weeks ago it made local news in my area showing what appeared to be one of those white Phantom drones streaking across the night sky over a fully loaded ball park during the game. The lighting of the ballpark reflected off the drone which is why it was visible. Footage shot from cell phones from individuals in the ballpark were submitted to local news stations, which aired the "story" if you want to even call it a story. I've not been able to find it on youtube "yet" but it may be on there somewhere.

dbsonic

My Feedback: (3)

Outside of either delta, but for sure he was inside class bravo. Floor of the shelf there is 2500.
Bob V. is completely right folks.

ravill

My Feedback: (11)

And this is just the thing the "media" and the regular public at large have a hard time differentiating from us.

I was starting my brand new F-100 in my drive way for the first time the other day and was asked if I was going to take off my drone down the street.

Shiza.

SushiHunter

Oh yeah, that's happened to me plenty of times. I'm running up the engine on my plane in the driveway and people actually ask me if I'm going to fly it right off the street. I tell them no but they always come back saying someone flies a parkzone foamie at the park just around the corner all the time. I guess they just don't get it.

Hydro Junkie

Actually, if a jet gets hit by a "drone", you could have a major issue on your hands. Lets look at a few possibilities:
1) Drone gets sucked into an engine. All it takes is one blade of that front fan to be damaged to unbalance the engine. I have no doubts that a quad will damage several blades and that would force a shutdown and put the pilot into an emergency landing situation. Not only that, it would pretty much eliminate the pilots ability to abort the landing if the plane affected is one of the modern twinjets(i.e 737, 757, 767, 777, 787, and pretty much all the Airbus aircraft). The only planes that might still be able to abort would be the 747 and A380 due to having four engines. After seeing a Bic pen take out an engine on an F-14 Tomcat, I have no doubts about the outcome of a quad through an engine.
2) Quad into windshield. It will either smash the windshield outright or result in a shattered panel that inhibits(or worse) forward visibility.
3) Quad into nose radome. The nose of a modern jet is nothing more than two layers of fiberglass with a treated paper honeycomb in the middle. While it may survive a birdstrike, the quad will probably go right through and do serious damage to the aluminum front bulkhead or weather radar
Needless to say, any of these will down the plane for an extended period of time. In the case of a windshield strike, it's possible that one, if not both of the flight crew could be incapacitated due to flying glass hitting the face and eyes

-JC-

My Feedback: (26)

The world is filled with morons and that is why we unfortunately need rules and regulations. If people used common sense and had an IQ higher than their shoe size, this would never had been an issue.


FPV is cool stuff. But, it has potential to do harm that means that it has to be regulated so morons can't do stupid things.


The AMA should distance itself very clearly from anything that can be flown outside visual range.


Flying outside those parameters should require a "drone license" -where considerable training is required. Flying without a license should have fines, penalties and confiscation of equipment.


I call it drones on purpose so there is a clear distinction between RC models. That is the only way we can take our hobby back and make a clear separation between the two terms.

Erik R

My Feedback: (32)

Hydro,

All modern twin jetliners have the performance capabilities to do a single engine go-around, up to the structural max landing weight, and beyond. Your first point is completely inaccurate.

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Erik,
Your assumption is somewhat flawed. Yes, modern airliners are designed to fly with one engine, in optimal circumstances and whenever things are all going your way. Pilots are trained religiously on one engine operations, but I doubt any pilot flying a heavily loaded airliner, low and slow on approach or departure would ask to be put in that situation. On top of that, have you ever bought a part for a full size airplane? I have and they aren't cheap. I cannot imagine the costs to repair a skin panel on a commercial aircraft. my guess is that it would exhaust your insurance policy pretty quickly and cost a helluva lot more than your foam/quad/plane which created it.
I am not against FPV flying, but like said on here previsouly, there needs to be some rules to keep these things out of the airspace where general and commercial aviation is located. The risk and costs are too great just so we can have a little fun with our "hobby".

Erik R

My Feedback: (32)

Doc,

We are on the same side of the fence regarding FPV. My assumption is not flawed. All twin engine airliners have the performance to successfully go around at max landing weight,with no other issues. I have trained that maneuver on every airliner I've ever flown. Obviously, it is a worst case scenario, but it is possible to accomplish safely. The other poster was saying it's not. That was my point.


. [oQUOTE=DocYates;11855620]Erik,
Your assumption is somewhat flawed. Yes, modern airliners are designed to fly with one engine, in optimal circumstances and whenever things are all going your way. Pilots are trained religiously on one engine operations, but I doubt any pilot flying a heavily loaded airliner, low and slow on approach or departure would ask to be put in that situation. On top of that, have you ever bought a part for a full size airplane? I have and they aren't cheap. I cannot imagine the costs to repair a skin panel on a commercial aircraft. my guess is that it would exhaust your insurance policy pretty quickly and cost a helluva lot more than your foam/quad/plane which created it.
I am not against FPV flying, but like said on here previsouly, there needs to be some rules to keep these things out of the airspace where general and commercial aviation is located. The risk and costs are too great just so we can have a little fun with our "hobby".[/QUOTE]

Hydro Junkie

You show me a pilot that will willingly attempt to abort a landing with one engine. Being a pilot, you know how much yaw force the rudder would have to overcome to be successful and not result in spinning the plane into the ground. When you consider the 777 has between 76,000 and 115,000 lbs of thrust, the 787 has 64,000, the 737 starts out at 26,500 lbs per engine, that's a lot of yaw force to overcome. Still, I do have to agree, modern planes have the "capability" to do so and I also know all three had to prove they could maintain altitude on one engine to receive their FAA certification. Looking at the specs on the 737-600, it will maintain 17,000ft at max weight on one engine. Still, my point is that a quad can and will do serious damage if it hits an airliner in flight

SushiHunter

I think it's a slim chance that a drone strike would actually take a jetliner out. But all it's going to take is a drone strike on a jetliner and things are going to change big time. Some of those custom made drones with 4, 6 and even 8 engines with all the electronics along with say a 6S lipo battery would probably do some serious damage to an aircraft. Watch the video below and look what flesh, bones and blood can do to aircraft, and these are just bird strikes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=851y6F79Qtk

Wclays

My Feedback: (85)

Stupid people of the world.

http://news.msn.com/us/drone-crashes...-national-park

This just brings attention to us all.