Originally Posted by
RichardGee
Skylark, you are an exception. Your RC experience is unique to the vast majority of us who've been in this hobby for decades. I've no doubt others could pipe in with their unique stories as well, but to what end? Rules are made to have a positive impact on the majority. The main reason we have been part of AMA is for the insurance. Insurance of any kind always comes with stipulations. IF insurance carriers were to craft every policy to take into consideration every exception, either we would have alot less insurance or we would be paying far more for what we have. Should I be paying for the unorthodox practices of modelers who do not live within what they consider to be a "reasonable" distance from a flying field? Regardless of how careful you are, there is simply no way your flying in a local park can be as safe as that of a pilot in a private, sanctioned club. Yet, you feel entitled to the same coverage as I have when I am adhering to a very different set of safety guidelines - I am NOT imposing a "penalty" of any kind; what I am proposing is that those who fly in public areas SHOULD NOT be given the same consideration as those who fly in PRIVATE SANCTIONED fixed base operations... that's common sense. Would the FAA allow, or the AOPA endorse, a full scale Cub landing in a public park even if the area had been roped off by the pilot and signs posted? I think not. Those who fly in public and those of us who have made the time and monetary commitment to fly at a private RC field, should be subject to different rules, guidelines, and coverage/protection. That's just common sense. Further, those who fly camera-carrying drones which can hover in another person's private space and film them AND those who fly First Person View aircraft which can be flown beyond line of site, SHOULD be subject to entirely different scrutiny AND the AMA should have made this delineation VERY, VERY clear to the FAA. IF I am wrong, then WHY is the FAA all of a sudden so interested in RC aircraft? We've been out here flying weekend after weekend for decades, and they never gave us a second look.
You have made conscious CHOICES not to live within what you find to be a reasonable distance from an RC field. That is NOT our problem.
Total BS. Radio controlled airplanes have been carrying cameras from the start. Your rules would only alienate modelers, many who fly quads as well as "traditional models". This is not a problem of AMA members flying quads, or even the uneducated mass buying quads. Its a problem with BLOS capable model aircraft which are sold and flown despite it being illegal to fly. But the problem isn't even that bad the FAA is soliciting sighting reports. Most are either made up or reports of legal flights. It's not the AMA's fault, its idiots, drone manufactures, and the FAA.