Len Todd

If you were at the forum you would have heard it for yourself. If you were at the forum and did not hear what was said, maybe you were too busy jumping to conclusions. If you were not at the forum, how do you even know what was or was not said? Maybe you might want to give the AMA a call and ask them what was said, and then constructively contribute to our discussion..

BTW: Thanks for posting the statement from the FCC's Letter. You may want to consider stepping back a minute and actually reading what was previously posted and then take another look at the letter. Again, I never said anyone had to be an AMA member to be a Part 101 flier. I specifically said Part 101 fliers have to a CBO member, which is exactly what the AMA's Governmental Affairs Rep. said! (Ref. Section 336)

Like I said, the AMA's conclusions about either being a Part 101 or Part 107 flier was news to a lot of us. According to them, there are no fliers in between Parts 101 and 107 (i.e. Non-CBO member fliers who are not required to meet the Part 107 requirements.) Apparently, one has to apply the 2012 law that excludes hobbyist and the two FAA Regulations and the FAA's Letter to piece together the conclusion that the AMA's Governmental Affairs Rep stated. Like I said, the AMA's statements were news to us!

On a personal note: You are exhibiting the classic shoot the messenger syndrome here. I posted this for a friendly discussion. Apparently you are beyond that. If you want verification from the AMA, please do give them a call. And, ... don't forget to correct yourself here after you get the facts from them. Otherwise some uniformed individual could come along an accuse you of miss-informing folks. For me: I am done with you.

Now back to thread's subject.