Originally Posted by rutanman

Porcia83, I appreciate your response and respect you and the points you make, although I do not agree with all of them. In my opinion, the hobby of model aircraft (not GPS assisted vehicles) now finds itself in an area surrounded by land mines, so to speak.

The fact it even came to a one sided task force (business directed) instead of the AMA dealing directly with the FAA directly makes me a little sick. Since you mentioned Amazon - Amazon, yes is big business (along with Walmart, etc.) They are used to pushing people around and calling the shots. It feels (could be wrong) that they tried to push around the FAA. The FAA, now pissed off, had to "flex" it's muscles. Separating (model aircraft) from business related and gps assisted flying quadcopters would seem like a better approach to the FAA (along with some bowing down, etc.)

Sorry, I can't give cudos to the AMA for a press release in less than 48 hours. I would think that some higher ups would have known or had an idea what was coming from the FAA. Pre-planned press releases for each of the possible scenarios should have in the works as soon as the task force dis-banded. I just want an AMA that plans and acts ahead of time instead of being purely reactionary.

(now on to the "mine field") In another thread, I saw a message by an AMA rep that said the AMA will not reject a claim or behave any differently just because an r/c pilot has not registered with the FAA. (Was this person mistaken? Sounds like the rep is saying that it's the individual's choice to register with the FAA or not. It won't have any affect on the dealings between the AMA and the individual)

Also, if a newcomer brings a plane to an AMA field, but the newcomer is not registered. Can the new plane be flown by a club member? Who is responsible for the plane (an instructor pilot?) Do you write the instructor's FAA number and name on a piece of masking tape and affix to the aircraft?