DOT registration impact on scale modeling.
10-30-2015, 06:51 PM
#26
Hi drac1,
I was replying to semenaro's questions regarding registration. The AMA already asks us to place a label with our info inside our models in case the model becomes lost. There may be other reasons too but, I am not aware of the specifics. The registration requirements have yet to be sorted out and hopefully it will only impact the rule followers minimally. Those who don't follow the rules don't care in any case. Perhaps it they catch the real perps, the feds will make examples of them. However, chances are the feds will catch some kid or newbie and rake them over the coals needlessly creating even more resentment and suspicion of our leaders in government.
There was a petition in RCG I believe about trying to put an end to this registration. I didn't sign it because it included "Professional" photographers as well, who i suspect are actually the cause of all this mess. Can you say Princess Diana ? I don't believe all Pro photographers are bad but, there are a number who haven't got allot of respect of one's privacy if it means they can get the picture of someone famous doing something that's human.
Dang, where did that soap box come from?
Carlos G
I was replying to semenaro's questions regarding registration. The AMA already asks us to place a label with our info inside our models in case the model becomes lost. There may be other reasons too but, I am not aware of the specifics. The registration requirements have yet to be sorted out and hopefully it will only impact the rule followers minimally. Those who don't follow the rules don't care in any case. Perhaps it they catch the real perps, the feds will make examples of them. However, chances are the feds will catch some kid or newbie and rake them over the coals needlessly creating even more resentment and suspicion of our leaders in government.
There was a petition in RCG I believe about trying to put an end to this registration. I didn't sign it because it included "Professional" photographers as well, who i suspect are actually the cause of all this mess. Can you say Princess Diana ? I don't believe all Pro photographers are bad but, there are a number who haven't got allot of respect of one's privacy if it means they can get the picture of someone famous doing something that's human.
Dang, where did that soap box come from?
Carlos G
10-30-2015, 06:56 PM
#27
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The real issue here is the same as it has always been. The responsible pay the price for the irresponsible. I have been saying for many years that some type of regulation is going to happen, it has to. And I will comply and follow the rules as most r/c enthusiast does. Will it be a pain sure, but on a positive note, I won't have to wait for all the little foamies and throw aways to exit the airspace so I can fly my scale bird. They won't be there!! Woo Hoo!!!!!
And by the way, as a responsible AMA member every one of my aircraft have my name, AMA number, and my phone number inside somewhere.
And by the way, as a responsible AMA member every one of my aircraft have my name, AMA number, and my phone number inside somewhere.
Last edited by acerc; 10-30-2015 at 06:59 PM.
10-30-2015, 07:50 PM
#28
Moderator
The FAA has no interest in your scale Mustang or Tri Motor. As long as you aren't endangering full scale planes with it they couldn't care less about it. They never have, and they never will. What they have an interest in and feel the need to regulate is multirotors that can be flown FPV, which tempt morons to fly them in dangerous ways. That's what the FAA wants to regulate, and that's all they are going to try to regulate. This worst case scenario thinking keeps us as a community from doing what we can to protect our hobby. We spend out energy going off about the FAA grounding our Piper Cubs when we could be forming well reasoned proposals and counterpoints that help to arrive at a genuine solution to a very real problem. The FAA has to do something; multirotor pilots have already caused too many problems to be ignored. So if we are smart we will take a serious minded look at the problem and try to propose regulations that punish/limit the right behaviors and leave the other ones alone.
10-31-2015, 06:11 AM
#29
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Carolina, PUERTO RICO (USA)
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-31-2015, 07:20 AM
#31
My Feedback: (1)
AMA for sure screwed up when they lumped us all together! All my stuff is flown by sight and at our field, I work at a airport and have never flown any of my stuff there because rc and full scale don't mix, these guys fly those stupid drones where they do not belong. Can't believe some of the video they have posted, the height they take them, that's and accident waiting to happen. Used to be if a person lived on the third floor apartment you could leave you curtains open, not anymore! These things have hurt the rc hobby in so many ways, and AMA should distance us from them before the hobby is forever ruined.
10-31-2015, 07:34 AM
#32
10-31-2015, 07:39 AM
#33
Moderator
I'd like to know when you think AMA decided to lump the two kinds of RC aircraft together. When was the board meeting where that was decided? The truth is that if anyone is lumping all RC pilots together, it's the public and the media. Even then, I have never had a conversation with someone who worries about model planes that are flown without FPV gear or the ability to record video. The truth is there has never been a single move by the FAA to regulate, register, or ban non-camera equipped model aircraft. Nobody cares about those because they have never been a problem. It's the fear mongers who propose doomsday scenarios where proposed FAA regulations could take away our traditional planes and helicopters. What will likely happen when all the dust settles is that regulations will be made for all vehicles that carry cameras and are able to fly beyond line of sight of the operator.
That said, I think we must absolutely stand with the drone community. Commercial operation is its own separate activity that needs its own set of regulations, but hobby drone use is the biggest thing that's happened in RC since proportional control was invented. If we distance ourselves, the drone community will continue to develop on its own path, mostly disorganized, and there really is no telling how that will work out. But if we embrace it, we will be able to influence hobby drone pilots with our 80 some odd years of experience sharing the airspace peacefully with the public and the full scale aviation community. Drones' best chance is to be on friendly terms with traditional RC pilots, and our best chance to avoid any kind of regulations is to help the reputation of the drone community. After all, most quad pilots aren't morons who fly over restricted airspace or peek into places they don't belong. And, of course, if you use your imagination a bit, there are lots of ways these new technologies can blend with the old stuff and make some really cool new toys to try out. Traditional aeromodelers are more the same as drone pilots than we are different, so within this big family I think we need to work out ways to get along.
That said, I think we must absolutely stand with the drone community. Commercial operation is its own separate activity that needs its own set of regulations, but hobby drone use is the biggest thing that's happened in RC since proportional control was invented. If we distance ourselves, the drone community will continue to develop on its own path, mostly disorganized, and there really is no telling how that will work out. But if we embrace it, we will be able to influence hobby drone pilots with our 80 some odd years of experience sharing the airspace peacefully with the public and the full scale aviation community. Drones' best chance is to be on friendly terms with traditional RC pilots, and our best chance to avoid any kind of regulations is to help the reputation of the drone community. After all, most quad pilots aren't morons who fly over restricted airspace or peek into places they don't belong. And, of course, if you use your imagination a bit, there are lots of ways these new technologies can blend with the old stuff and make some really cool new toys to try out. Traditional aeromodelers are more the same as drone pilots than we are different, so within this big family I think we need to work out ways to get along.
10-31-2015, 07:42 AM
#34
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Georgetown, KY
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree 105%.
Last edited by oliveDrab; 10-31-2015 at 12:17 PM.
10-31-2015, 08:18 AM
#36
It DOES state the requirements for safe flying, which I observe every time I fly.
"Know Before You Fly"
(does that sound familiar?)
BTW, I'm 100% with jester_s1 - if we all don't stand together, then we all shall most certainly hang separately. (yeah, that's also a quote from long ago [Ben Franklin] - but it applies here anyway)
Academy of Model Aeronautics National Model Aircraft Safety Code
Effective January 1, 2014
A. GENERAL
: A model aircraft is a non-human-carrying aircraft capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere. It may not exceed limitations of this code and is intended exclusively for sport, recreation,education and/or competition. All model flights must be conducted in accordance with this safety code and any additional rules specific to the flying site.
1. Model aircraft will not be flown:
(a) In a careless or reckless manner.
(b) At a location where model aircraft activities are prohibited.
2. Model aircraft pilots will:
(a) Yield the right of way to all human-carrying aircraft.
(b) See and avoid all aircraft and a spotter must be used when appropriate. (AMA Document #540-D.)
(c) Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator.
(d) Not interfere with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport or seaplane base except where there is a mixed use agreement.
(e) Not exceed a takeoff weight, including fuel, of 55 pounds unless in compliance with the AMA Large Model Airplane program. (AMA Document 520-A.)
(f) Ensure the aircraft is identified with the name and address or AMA number of the owner on the inside or affixed to the outside of the model aircraft. (This does not apply to model aircraft flown indoors.)
(g) Not operate aircraft with metal-blade propellers or with gaseous boosts except for helicopters operated under the provisions of AMA Document #555.
(h) Not operate model aircraft while under the influence of alcohol or while using any drug that could adversely affect the pilot’s ability to safely control the model.
(i) Not operate model aircraft carrying pyrotechnic devices that explode or burn, or any device which propels a projectile or drops any object that creates a hazard to persons or property.
Exceptions:
·
Free Flight fuses or devices that burn producing smoke and are securely attached to the model aircraft during flight.
·
Rocket motors (using solid propellant) up to a G-series size may be used provided they remain attached to the model during flight. Model rockets may be flown in accordance with the National Model Rocketry Safety Code but may not be launched from model aircraft.
·
Officially designated AMA Air Show Teams (AST) are authorized to use devices and practices as defined within the Team AMA Program Document. (AMA Document #718.)
(j) Not operate a turbine-powered aircraft, unless in compliance with the AMA turbine regulations. (AMA Document #510-A.)
3. Model aircraft will not be flown in AMA sanctioned events, air shows or model demonstrations unless:
(a) The aircraft, control system and pilot skills have successfully demonstrated all maneuvers intended or anticipated prior to the specific event.
(b) An inexperienced pilot is assisted by an experienced pilot.
4. When and where required by rule, helmets must be properly worn and fastened. They must be OSHA, DOT, ANSI, SNELL or NOCSAE approved or comply with comparable standards.
B. RADIO CONTROL (RC)
1. All pilots shall avoid flying directly over unprotected people, vessels, vehicles or structures and shall avoid endangerment of life and property of others.
2. A successful radio equipment ground-range check in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations will be completed before the first flight of a new or repaired model aircraft.
3. At all flying sites a safety line(s) must be established in front of which all flying takes place. (AMA Document #706.)
(a) Only personnel associated with flying the model aircraft are allowed at or in front of the safety line.
(b) At air shows or demonstrations, a straight safety line must be established.
(c) An area away from the safety line must be maintained for spectators.
(d) Intentional flying behind the safety line is prohibited.
4. RC model aircraft must use the radio-control frequencies currently allowed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Only individuals properly licensed by the FCC are authorized to operate equipment on Amateur Band frequencies.
5. RC model aircraft will not knowingly operate within three (3) miles of any pre-existing flying site without a frequency-management agreement. (AMA Documents #922 and #923.)
6. With the exception of events flown under official AMA Competition Regulations, excluding takeoff and landing, no powered model may be flown outdoors closer than 25 feet to any individual, except for the pilot and the pilot's helper(s) located at the flightline.
7. Under no circumstances may a pilot or other person touch an outdoor model aircraft in flight while it is still under power, except to divert it from striking an individual.
8. RC night flying requires a lighting system providing the pilot with a clear view of the model’s attitude and orientation at all times. Hand-held illumination systems are inadequate for night flying operations.
9. The pilot of an RC model aircraft shall:
(a) Maintain control during the entire flight, maintaining visual contact without enhancement other than by corrective lenses prescribed for the pilot.
(b) Fly using the assistance of a camera or First-Person View (FPV) only in accordance with the procedures outlined in AMA Document #550.
(c) Fly using the assistance of autopilot or stabilization system only in accordance with the procedures outlined in AMA Document # 560.
C. FREE FLIGHT
1. Must be at least 100 feet downwind of spectators and automobile parking when the model aircraft is launched.
2. Launch area must be clear of all individuals except mechanics, officials, and other fliers.
3. An effective device will be used to extinguish any fuse on the model aircraft after the fuse has completed its function.
D. CONTROL LINE
1. The complete control system (including the safety thong where applicable) must have an inspection and pull test prior to flying.
2. The pull test will be in accordance with the current Competition Regulations for the applicable model aircraft category.
3. Model aircraft not fitting a specific category shall use those pull-test requirements as indicated for Control Line Precision Aerobatics.
4. The flying area must be clear of all utility wires or poles and a model aircraft will not be flown closer than 50 feet to any above-ground electric utility lines.
5. The flying area must be clear of all nonessential participants and spectators before the engine is started.
Last edited by skylark-flier; 10-31-2015 at 08:36 AM. Reason: correcting appearance
10-31-2015, 08:25 AM
#37
Doing nothing is the same as doing something. The AMA has done nothing to illustrate that there is a difference between the types. They did not have to have a meeting or a vote.
I do not have a problem with the AMA embracing the FPV/Quad community, but it needs to be strongly illustrated that there is a difference between the types.
I would go as far as to say that the FPV type aircraft are as different to conventional RC a boats, cars and rockets. I understand a conventional airplane can be flown FPV, but only a quad can be hovered in your neighbors backyard.
When I mention to most (laymen) that our typical RC aircraft do not have these kinds of capabilities they are surprised. They think all RC aircraft have cameras and can be flown where ever, and as far away as we want to. The AMA needs to try to launch a media campaign IMO.
I do not have a problem with the AMA embracing the FPV/Quad community, but it needs to be strongly illustrated that there is a difference between the types.
I would go as far as to say that the FPV type aircraft are as different to conventional RC a boats, cars and rockets. I understand a conventional airplane can be flown FPV, but only a quad can be hovered in your neighbors backyard.
When I mention to most (laymen) that our typical RC aircraft do not have these kinds of capabilities they are surprised. They think all RC aircraft have cameras and can be flown where ever, and as far away as we want to. The AMA needs to try to launch a media campaign IMO.
10-31-2015, 08:32 AM
#38
You have never had to fly at an official flying field, AMA recognized or not. Nor are you required to have AMA to fly your planes. Unless some local law says you need insurance. I hope this is never going to be the case. I have always lied to just throw my smaller planes in the air and fly where convenient. Of course, I am a member of a local club with a great facility and big runways for my big scale stuff.
As far as the effects all of this will have on scale modeling? I am going to say it will have none. In the end cooler heads will prevail I believe, and scale type (and conventional line of sight RC) will be omitted from this registration process.
As far as the effects all of this will have on scale modeling? I am going to say it will have none. In the end cooler heads will prevail I believe, and scale type (and conventional line of sight RC) will be omitted from this registration process.
10-31-2015, 08:35 AM
#39
And one more! lol This was a surprise to me, but it is actually the result that should have occurred. Local laws will differ, but you have the right to protect yourself and your property. Now there is a little precedent to site. Of course you would want to be very careful shooting in your hood, but light shotgun loads carry very little energy and would not be much of a hazard. As anyone with honest shotgun experience will attest.
http://www.wdrb.com/story/30354128/j...hot-down-drone
http://www.wdrb.com/story/30354128/j...hot-down-drone
10-31-2015, 09:27 AM
#41
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I predict video transmission from an aircraft to view from anywhere will be terminated for recreational use, eliminating the headset viewing of flight would eliminate 99.9% of the issue.
10-31-2015, 09:44 AM
#42
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Well, we all have to remember that a registration number, registers the aircraft and not the pilot.
Our government can not handle any of its paper work now, IRS as an example. Just imagine the mass confusion if people were to register each and every model aircraft that they own and fly. Also just for the fun of it with some of my very old worthless models, I might be tempted to go out and crash them, just so that I could add to their paper work the ones that are now not flying. Hell, they could not handle that either.
Come on guys, our worthless government can not handle this situation. Also " personally " speaking, I think that the AMA should get out of bed with them !
Our government can not handle any of its paper work now, IRS as an example. Just imagine the mass confusion if people were to register each and every model aircraft that they own and fly. Also just for the fun of it with some of my very old worthless models, I might be tempted to go out and crash them, just so that I could add to their paper work the ones that are now not flying. Hell, they could not handle that either.
Come on guys, our worthless government can not handle this situation. Also " personally " speaking, I think that the AMA should get out of bed with them !
10-31-2015, 10:09 AM
#44
All RC modelers used place their names somewhere on the inside of each of their airplanes/aircraft. I don't see why this would not be sufficient to identify the owner of an aircraft. I hope that registration will be restricted to those that operate large commercially viable drone aircraft.
And regarding quads, this problem started many years ago when there were not quads. It started again with hobby fliers run amok who put video cameras an their fixed wind planes and flew them way, way beyond line of sight.
10-31-2015, 10:12 AM
#45
Why do we have to have another thread on this subject? Aren't 4 enough? Or does each person with his own wild hair get to start another on a closely related subject that has already been touched upon in one or more of the original threads.
10-31-2015, 10:23 AM
#46
Well, if you do not like it, you can change the channel right?
Quads offer a stable platform for the cameras though. That is the difference. So the advent of good, small cameras, added to the Quad copter designs, have created this situation.
It is always so easy to spot the defenders of the quad, but they are the crux of the problem right now. Whether you want to admit it or not. Typical forward flying aircraft being flown FPV are not the issue, at all.
10-31-2015, 10:47 AM
#47
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
AMA for sure screwed up when they lumped us all together! All my stuff is flown by sight and at our field, I work at a airport and have never flown any of my stuff there because rc and full scale don't mix, these guys fly those stupid drones where they do not belong. Can't believe some of the video they have posted, the height they take them, that's and accident waiting to happen. Used to be if a person lived on the third floor apartment you could leave you curtains open, not anymore! These things have hurt the rc hobby in so many ways, and AMA should distance us from them before the hobby is forever ruined.
10-31-2015, 10:49 AM
#48
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Doing nothing is the same as doing something. The AMA has done nothing to illustrate that there is a difference between the types. They did not have to have a meeting or a vote.
I do not have a problem with the AMA embracing the FPV/Quad community, but it needs to be strongly illustrated that there is a difference between the types.
I would go as far as to say that the FPV type aircraft are as different to conventional RC a boats, cars and rockets. I understand a conventional airplane can be flown FPV, but only a quad can be hovered in your neighbors backyard.
When I mention to most (laymen) that our typical RC aircraft do not have these kinds of capabilities they are surprised. They think all RC aircraft have cameras and can be flown where ever, and as far away as we want to. The AMA needs to try to launch a media campaign IMO.
I do not have a problem with the AMA embracing the FPV/Quad community, but it needs to be strongly illustrated that there is a difference between the types.
I would go as far as to say that the FPV type aircraft are as different to conventional RC a boats, cars and rockets. I understand a conventional airplane can be flown FPV, but only a quad can be hovered in your neighbors backyard.
When I mention to most (laymen) that our typical RC aircraft do not have these kinds of capabilities they are surprised. They think all RC aircraft have cameras and can be flown where ever, and as far away as we want to. The AMA needs to try to launch a media campaign IMO.
They all turn into this regardless of what the topic starts as. Mostly anti Govt, anti drone, anti ama.
10-31-2015, 01:10 PM
#50
Moderator
All we really need is clear laws that enforce basic rights that citizens already have. If it's illegal to stand on a ladder by someone's fence so you can peek into their bedroom window while they undress, it needs to be clear that it's also illegal to use a quad copter for that purpose. If it's illegal to go driving a motorcycle recklessly down a crowded sidewalk, it should also be clear that it's illegal to fly a drone in the same space. If it's currently illegal to go flying over a forest fire in your privately owned Cessna while firefighting planes are in the air, the law should specifically state that quads doing the same thing will be prosecuted. It's the 1% thrill seekers and imbeciles who are causing the problem. The vehicles only make it possible for their stupid ideas to become a reality. I think the AMA has done a pretty good job of defining safe FPV flying. About the only area where they are lagging behind is creating contest rule books for FPV specific events that would give the quad pilots a way to challenge themselves in more productive and safe ways.
As for playing Rambo and shooting down quads, you're a fool if you do it. Even here in the great state of Texas where guns are fashion accessories, it's been well publicized that law enforcement does not consider a quad copter to be a safety threat and therefore a person who shoots at one in their neighborhood can expect prosecution and lawsuits. Let's get real; someone flying over your backyard is little more than a nuisance, and getting angry about it is little more than a territorial pissing contest. Does anybody really think it's justifiable to release a few hundred shotgun pellets into the air to come down who knows where? And yes, they can carry significant energy for quite a distance. I used to dove hunt a lot and have gotten tagged before by hunters I would have thought were too far away to hit me. It was about like getting shot with a BB gun so no big deal really, but I don't think your neighbor a couple of streets over would be understanding about it if you tag him while he's mowing the grass.
As for playing Rambo and shooting down quads, you're a fool if you do it. Even here in the great state of Texas where guns are fashion accessories, it's been well publicized that law enforcement does not consider a quad copter to be a safety threat and therefore a person who shoots at one in their neighborhood can expect prosecution and lawsuits. Let's get real; someone flying over your backyard is little more than a nuisance, and getting angry about it is little more than a territorial pissing contest. Does anybody really think it's justifiable to release a few hundred shotgun pellets into the air to come down who knows where? And yes, they can carry significant energy for quite a distance. I used to dove hunt a lot and have gotten tagged before by hunters I would have thought were too far away to hit me. It was about like getting shot with a BB gun so no big deal really, but I don't think your neighbor a couple of streets over would be understanding about it if you tag him while he's mowing the grass.