Originally Posted by
cj_rumley
I wonder when it will start to sink in for some that "these things" and "model airplanes" are now one and the same under the law. I remember back before AMA got involved in the sUAS ARC, the purpose of which was to define a class of UA that would be limited in size, mass and performance and therefore would be less of a threat to manned aircraft and people on the ground, and so could excepted from parts of contemplated UA regulatory requirements that could only be met by a few major aircraft companies. Model airplanes were then the only class of aircraft in the US that were not regulated. AMA was there to advise the ARC what a model airplane is (was), and nothing more. I guess they forgot what they were there for, because the attention of the ARC was drawn to regulating model aircraft and it has been all downhill from there. Now 'model aircraft' and 'civil sUAS' are synonymous. You are subject to the same regulation those "people who want one or already own one here crying to defend the drones /FPVs and all the nuts with a credit card flying them" are.
Just a clarification CJ. At the time of the sUAS ARC multirotors were yet to hit the market and the FPV/autonomous was largely constrained to conventional wing/tail model aircraft. The only was to differentiate a conventional model aircraft from a "drone" was how it was controled.
Take a scale model P51 add a camera a video downlink anf fly FPV. Add a multi axis gyro board and GPS and fly autonomously. Those that single out multi rotors just show there ignorance of what the issue actually is.