Originally Posted by
Silent-AV8R
They are not claiming that so much as pointing out that Section 336 itself defines models as a type of aircraft. AMA goofed in using that term in 336. Once we are defined as aircraft in the law, which we are right now, then the FAA can claim us as fair game. AMA is working on changes to 336 in the next FMRA coming up this year. Hopefully this will be one of the key elements they get changed.
Originally Posted by
cj_rumley
So it's mainly a symbolic effort that folks might find inspirational. I can buy that. I do see problems with arguing we not operating 'aircraft' while at the same time claiming that FAA is not following the law re sec 336. Every stated condition for exemption from FAA regulation in 336 specifies that it applies to 'aircraft.'
My friends , your collective point is well taken , and I agree it'll be a tough fight getting the "aircraft" label removed that we've accidentally gotten stuck to ourselves . My only hope would be in getting the court to decide that since full scale aircraft operations are done for the transportation of either people or goods (or other payloads) , and since we are transporting nothing , that we truly are Models of aircraft and not actual aircraft themselves .
By the FAA's logic , the RMV (registry of motor vehicles) can force registration and insurance on my Son's model 4X4 truck , being that all trucks in the state of Massachusetts are required by law to have registration and insurance . Thank God the CDL requirement don't kick in till ya get over 10,000 pounds GVW (gross vehicle weight) , huh ?
It's reasons like this , and the removal of the hobby strangling 400 foot limit , that I support any and all action to get the FAA to do the right thing and declare all LOS RC model aircraft operations as just that , "model" aircraft operations !
After all , doesn't being a "model" in this sense refer to being something less than the actual object being "modeled" ?