AOPA - Positioning to be a CBO?
08-10-2016, 05:18 AM
#1
Thread Starter
AOPA - Positioning to be a CBO?
Digging around the net last night I stumbled on this.
https://www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft...ear-an-airport
Is AOPA positioning to be considered a CBO too? They would appear to do many if not all of the things necessary... the advocacy, education, and on this page some rules. I also note the organization path of the page is "Go Fly" then "Aircraft and Ownership" and then "Drones." So is AOPA saying that a drone is just one type of aircraft that people own?
As FAA said "model aircraft" are a subset of "all aircraft," then why couldn't someone argue they're a CBO too?
https://www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft...ear-an-airport
Is AOPA positioning to be considered a CBO too? They would appear to do many if not all of the things necessary... the advocacy, education, and on this page some rules. I also note the organization path of the page is "Go Fly" then "Aircraft and Ownership" and then "Drones." So is AOPA saying that a drone is just one type of aircraft that people own?
As FAA said "model aircraft" are a subset of "all aircraft," then why couldn't someone argue they're a CBO too?
08-10-2016, 06:49 AM
#2
You are reading too much into it. I'm a member of AOPA as well as AMA. They are partners in making sure the drone issue does not become a bigger problem. For AMA is to keep modeling a sport and keep the FAA out of the hobby. For AOPA is to keep their members safe and to help guide hobbyists in the right direction (they are not all member of AMA, or even know that it exists). I am one of thousands of people that got started flying in RC and now fly full scale. Education is education doesn't matter where is comes from.
Rafael
Rafael
08-10-2016, 07:01 AM
#3
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
You are reading too much into it. I'm a member of AOPA as well as AMA. They are partners in making sure the drone issue does not become a bigger problem. For AMA is to keep modeling a sport and keep the FAA out of the hobby. For AOPA is to keep their members safe and to help guide hobbyists in the right direction (they are not all member of AMA, or even know that it exists). I am one of thousands of people that got started flying in RC and now fly full scale. Education is education doesn't matter where is comes from.
Rafael
Rafael
08-10-2016, 07:12 AM
#4
Thread Starter
08-10-2016, 07:16 AM
#5
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are reading too much into it. I'm a member of AOPA as well as AMA. They are partners in making sure the drone issue does not become a bigger problem. For AMA is to keep modeling a sport and keep the FAA out of the hobby. For AOPA is to keep their members safe and to help guide hobbyists in the right direction (they are not all member of AMA, or even know that it exists). I am one of thousands of people that got started flying in RC and now fly full scale. Education is education doesn't matter where is comes from.
Rafael
Rafael
08-10-2016, 07:23 AM
#6
Thread Starter
You are reading too much into it. I'm a member of AOPA as well as AMA. They are partners in making sure the drone issue does not become a bigger problem. For AMA is to keep modeling a sport and keep the FAA out of the hobby. For AOPA is to keep their members safe and to help guide hobbyists in the right direction (they are not all member of AMA, or even know that it exists). I am one of thousands of people that got started flying in RC and now fly full scale. Education is education doesn't matter where is comes from.
Rafael
Rafael
While I partially agree, the rules on flying your drone posted on the AOPA site are prescriptive. They're not worded like "..here's what drone fliers are being told..." It's guidance for their readers on how to fly safely. Is that education? Sure. Is it also forming the basis of a safety code? Could be. And why not? They've already got all the other parts of CBO requirements.
08-10-2016, 07:44 AM
#7
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Franklin on the drone side, I could see money to be made by the AOPA, so it is a possibility. If the AOPA is looking to increase their bottom line, this could be more than education. They could be scoping the waters to see if it would be worth it for them to jump into that market.
Interesting theory, but I still believe what Rafael has posted.
Interesting theory, but I still believe what Rafael has posted.
08-10-2016, 08:44 AM
#9
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This could very well be possible , but the possibility of AOPA as a CBO will be downplayed and minimalized here by those that see a second CBO as a challenge to the only operating CBO at present . Kinda like the reaction was to the SFA , Instead of being seen as a second option , this will be seen as a threat and will never be accepted by those that LCS so rightly termed "the AMAish" .
08-10-2016, 11:05 AM
#11
Exactly. It seems odd at first for AOPA to be a CBO as per Sec 336, but I can warm up to the idea real quick. "CBO, such as AMA" in government regulatory material is getting really trite, and has been from the start a thin veil covering a monopoly with government sanction. No CBO is better than one, but multiple CBOs would make it tolerable.
08-10-2016, 12:36 PM
#14
That very well may happen who knows, but I think it would be a good idea to have multiple CBO’s since congress has passed a law that revolves around RC aircraft having a CBO.
08-10-2016, 01:16 PM
#15
I believe more choices = better (MOST of the time!)
I'm not pro or con for multiple CBO's, but here are some thoughts:
AOPA as a CBO would most likely be more restrictive than the AMA (to modelers) as they would likely be looking to protect the majority of their members (full-scale pilots). The whole reason the FAA is even messing with RC in the first place!!!!
I also believe that in this situation, IF there were multiple CBO's, and they all had widely varying safety rules, it would eventually force the FAA to either draft their own set of guidelines or adopt a single set of guidelines just for simplicity's sake.
Please think through all potentialities before simply adopting the more = better mantra.
Astro
I'm not pro or con for multiple CBO's, but here are some thoughts:
AOPA as a CBO would most likely be more restrictive than the AMA (to modelers) as they would likely be looking to protect the majority of their members (full-scale pilots). The whole reason the FAA is even messing with RC in the first place!!!!
I also believe that in this situation, IF there were multiple CBO's, and they all had widely varying safety rules, it would eventually force the FAA to either draft their own set of guidelines or adopt a single set of guidelines just for simplicity's sake.
Please think through all potentialities before simply adopting the more = better mantra.
Astro
08-10-2016, 04:29 PM
#20
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Swing and a miss...but par for the course on petty antics. A weak and not even close comparison...but at least I made you smile.
But ya...more choice is almost always a good thing, but folks over the age of 12 understand there are limitations to this.
But ya...more choice is almost always a good thing, but folks over the age of 12 understand there are limitations to this.
08-10-2016, 05:21 PM
#24
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah man, it looks like the stupid AOPA also thinks benefits are for members!! What BS. Just another money grab:
https://www.aopa.org/membership/membership-benefits
I asked AAA yesterday why they don't offer their services to non-members, because they too are another organization that feels benefits are for members only.!!
https://www.aopa.org/membership/membership-benefits
I asked AAA yesterday why they don't offer their services to non-members, because they too are another organization that feels benefits are for members only.!!
