Originally Posted by
HoundDog
Half the planes flying today are not built by the pilot the great majority are the way they come out of the box. and the so called trainers all have all the auto pilots and stabilization and that will be traditional model aviation soon if not already
Flight stabilization is much different than full-on auto pilot or GPS and FPV guided systems. Flight stabilization allows easier transition into a student learning how to control his aircraft all by himself. ARF's have been around for decades and ARF's have NOT been the root of any public outcry. There have always been 'traditional modelers' who employed skilled builders to build their planes (essentially an ARF) and only enjoyed the flying aspect of the hobby. As well, there have always been the modelers who did not take part in the flying part much, but rather enjoyed and honed their skills as builders. Neither one of these types have caused the negative press and/or need for legislation that the onslaught of drones and 'droners' have.
Basically, my opinion has been formed by taking a step outside of my 'comfort zone' or 'box' and asking myself, "WHY, all of a sudden is my historically benign hobby under attack?" "WHAT has changed?" It then became very clear to me that this new technology (and who, how, when and where it is being used) is the root cause of this sudden outcry and despite the many similarities to 'traditional modeling', it is a distinctly different hobby, that needs to be handled as such. The AMA was formed by and for 'traditional modelers' (remember, that is ALL we had and knew when the AMA was formed!) and is simply not adequate or equipped to be able to manage these new technologies and the way the operators of such technologies need to operate in order to enjoy their new passions.
As for Negative press that can be changed by the FAA saying that all Quads have GEO Fencing.That will keep them from operating where they shouldn't be flown. I expect that all receivers will have it built in if the FAA has it way after Registration doesn not work. Remember hoe the OLD single conversion receivers were out lawed by the FCC. Well the Government can mandate GEO Fending for all Models/Drones.
If only it were that simple. The negative press that I believe started all of this was the "talking heads" on the six o'clock news. It is their job to generate "news" that will attract an audience in order to sell advertising. Well, they hit it out of the park with this issue! Now THEY (the uninformed media with an agenda to make $$) simply throw stories out there for the uninformed public, who go to the water cooler at work and, based on a sensationalized news story, get their co-workers up in arms about their privacy and safety, who then nag their legislators to, "do something about this", and VOILA, we find ourselves in the middle of a perfect storm.
The FAA also has legitimate concerns where this new technology is involved because it CAN, WILL and DOES affect the safety and operation of full-scale, manned commercial and GA aircraft operations. The AMA is not and will never be equipped to control model operations anywhere, except at established fields that are self-regulated within the auspices of the AMA rules by AMA-sanctioned clubs (this is the whole premise of their CBO status).
Now, there is yet ANOTHER entity that is actively involved and has a stake in the operations of drones and the National Airspace; enter the BIG-DOLLAR retailers. Again, the AMA is woefully equipped to have any effect on this group, as there is just too much $$ backing this lobby.
It is due to all of these reasons (as well as many others) that I have come to MY conclusion that the BEST possible way for the AMA to advocate in this situation, is to NOT embrace the drones, and instead advocate for the majority of its members and CLEARLY and EMPHATICALLY draw a line between drones and model aviation.
I am in NO WAY ANTI-DRONE.
I am NOT calling out to BAN drones.
I am simply saying that drones are distinctly different from 'model aircraft' and need their own advocacy group that can more adequately lobby for their own, unique needs and let 'model aviation' continue to operate safely and unfettered as it has for the last 70 or 80 years.
This is simply my opinion. It is based on facts and reality and may be somewhat biased towards how I would like to continue enjoying MY hobby, without having to sacrifice certain freedoms in order to accommodate the drones and droners who HAVE caused all this recent ruckus.
No matter what side of the fence you are on, or what your opinion on drones is, it is very clear to me that the FIRST (and quite possibly the most important) thing that MUST happen, is for all parties involved (FAA, DOT, Federal Government, Amazon, the AMA and its members, etc.) to CLEARLY DEFINE what constitutes a drone, a model aircraft, hobby operations, and commercial operations. Without a CLEAR definition of those things, it is GUARANTEED that all future legislation will be woefully pointless. There are and have been MANY definitions presented by the various participants, but I do not believe that there is any ONE definition that is recognized by all parties involved (I may be wrong, because I am not a legal professional and have no idea on which, of the various definitions floating around, may be the ONE, legal definition).
This is one thing that I believe the AMA could, and should be, advocating at this juncture. I think they are held in high enough regard as a principal CBO, that a concerted effort on their part to point out that clear definitions are a necessary first step and fundamental foundation for whatever actions take place in the future.
Regards,
Astro