ORIGINAL: abel_pranger
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
Hi Abel
I made some calls. First, there was a good laugh about the fact that the initial definition is an oxymoron. Your absolutely right about that.
Homeland Security has contacted the AMA and asked for help with information and for input in putting together a program. Not the other way around. The AMA was up against the publishing deadline for the Safety Code that must be printed and goes out with the membership cards. It was admitted that the definition of a model sounded reasonable while they were sitting around discussing it. They have since realized that your position is correct: they must now define autonomous as it applies to model airplanes. There is concern that the definition needs to get out to modelers ASAP. It will be a topic of discussion at the next EC meeting. The mechanism and the media are uncertain at this point. They have never been in the position of having to define a word in the Safety Code, without the ability to change the code itself. Again, the time constraints come into play.
The FAA has not been the driving force in this matter. TSA and Homeland Security have
contacted the AMA on several occasions about several issues and a relationship as been formed. The FAA contacted the AMA shortly after 9-11 and not since.
In my discussions, the topic of representing all modelers was touched on. The view is that the AMA will try to represent all modelers, but, ultimately, the responsibililty of the AMA is to their membership. An example that was used was the situation were Homeland Security raises the alert to the highest level. The AMA is suggesting that at that level, and at that level only, that flying be allowed only at the fields of AMA chartered clubs. There are major concerns about how to communicate to modelers both in, and outside of the AMA, by Homeland Security, as well as those in the AMA by the AMA. Snail mail is not going to get it handled in the view of the AMA.
There is no intention, at this point, of eliminating FMA like co-pilots.
JR