Originally Posted by
init4fun
Sport my Friend , What I'd like is for the AMA to flourish due to being relevant to ALL aeromodeling , and not due to government mandated membership !
If the AMA had spent half the effort that Sen Inhoffe did in getting the distinction made between the separate classes of RC craft , the AMA could have promoted the best of both worlds . It has always been MY opinion that there is enough difference between LOS and BLOS RC flight to justify two completely different flight classifications , each with their own specially tailored set of operating standards and conditions , based on the relative levels of risk and competency to operate within the more technologically elaborate flight condition .
In other words , the AMA coulda promoted Drones WITHOUT tossing the rest of the hobby under the Bus . Maybe then membership mighta took an upward tick or two , as BOTH groups of traditionalists and droners feel they're being represented not at the expense of each other ?
Absolutely correct. A fairly accurate parallel might be dirt bikes...When buying a pure racing class dirt bike, it gets one classification of off-road license that covers it ONLY when used in closed course competition. The AMA should be providing insurance and support pursuant to the USE of the RC craft in question. For example, those of us who fly exclusively at an AMA sanctioned club/field that adheres to the AMA Safety Code, we should be granted specific coverage that is completely separate from all other RC aircraft being operated OUTSIDE the guidelines I just outlined. Our aircraft should also be classified according to the manner in which they are operated (private vs. public). This is very simple and a distinction the AMA should have made right out of the gate, rather than allowing ALL OF US to be thrown under the FAA's giant web of bureaucracy. As I have already stated, now that we are on the FAA radar and have already complied with their initial registration mandates, our autonomy is GONE!!!