Originally Posted by
init4fun
Hi Sport ,
Courts are full of Lawyers arguing "the intent of the law" every day . With this law , were it to be broken on a level requiring court involvement , you can bet that the first thing to be laid out would be that "Visual line of sight" is intended to mean that you can actually SEE the model your supposedly controlling , hence the redundant use of "visual" and "sight" . There is no jury in the US , even in light of the OJ verdict , that would believe in your "next galaxy" definition of VLOS .
Yes, but the law does not define it and for techical people a visual line of sight is an imaginary line determined visually, possibly with optics. The AMA rules redifine this and the law does not. My point is that Congress did not bother because they expect model airplanes to be flown per AMA rules not FAA regulations.