ORIGINAL: J_R
The only definition of autonomous so far is a plane that requires no pilot input to take off, fly, and land. The plane used in the Tran-Alantic crossing was not autonomous, by that definition.
yeah, yeah, I know Abel, the key phrase is "so far".
Very perceptive, JR
However, the rule applies to R/C aircraft as stated. The rule prohibits R/C aircraft from being equipped so as to be capable of autonomous flight (unless there is another addendum that I didn't know about and hence did not ask Ms Hager to provide). If that is so, then TAM would fit the definition, as it was so equipped and in fact did operate autonomously for most of its flight. Where is the definition you related here (particularly as it pertains to no pilot input to take off and land) to be found in AMA rules, particularly in association with the rule banning autonomous operation?
I don't expect you to be able to explain it - nobody with a normal, rational mind could, as 'autonomous remote controlled model airplane' is clearly an oxymoron. It is either controllable remotely by a human pilot OR (exclusive or) it is autonomous. It cannot be both. Of course a measly detail like a logical paradox isn't something DB would let stand in his way of saving the world.
Abel