ORIGINAL: mongo
their screw up is not a basis for us to try and cover their collective asses with a bs definition.
they need to retract their action, and try to get it right.
what screw up?
and I'm having difficulty determining why you figure this is BS:
"A model aircraft is defined as a non-human-carrying device capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere not exceeding the limitations established in this Code, exclusively for recreation, sport, and/or competition activities. The operators of radio control model aircraft shall control the aircraft from the ground and maintain unenhanced visual contact with the aircraft throughout the entire flight operation. No aircraft shall be equipped with devices that would allow for autonomous flight."
Seems pretty straight forward to me. "Established in this code" carries thru the weight limitations and thrust limitations, and establishes the fact that the model is either 1) uncontrolled (free flight), 2)controlled physically (C/L), or 3)under continuous control by a pilot on the ground (no chase aircraft) in visual contact with the model.
That means no autopilot on a free-flight Model (remember, the definition is for
MODEL AIRCRAFT, not
model RC Aircraft)
It does shoot down any more insured attempts at an altitude record, since binoculars and or telescopes are necessary-and Maynard used them on his altitude record flight way back when...