NAAAAA yer funnin or really don't have a clue. A quick google on corporate oversight shows in the US by both federal and state entities while in Canada ours is federal only.<br /><br /> Again NAAAA I've spent a fair amount of time every year traveling through the US as pilot and adviser for the local university team competing in the SAE Aerodesign competition. I make a two to three week vacation and fly at as many AMA fields as I can find to and from the competitions. I cannot remember ever meeting anyone as so bound up as you few guys on this forum. Everyone I met and talked with had no comments or views like the ones expressed here. Everyone I met expressed they were an AMA club and AMA members which I detected no bitterness. I asked and received permission to fly at every club I visited.<br /><br />Are you even a member of the AMA??????<br /><br />In Canada Transport Canada put regulations in place that governs all remote piloted vehicles no mater recreational or not. The same as the FAA with an altitude limit and a limit to proximity to airfields. However exemtions for MAAC members at MAAC fields are being negotiated and we are told should be in place before the actual regulations come into effect. It was done this way to curb those who had no intention to fly by any common sense yet allow those who flew within the safety guidelines of the recognized CBO in this case MAAC at sanctioned fields the ability to fly as they always have.<br /><br />I imagine the FAA has the same ability to grant exemptions and it sounds like the AMA is working towards that end. Some of our members have attended sanctioned events in the US where altitudes well over 400 ft are common without any problem with more in the future. Glider events AMA private events such as Top Gun etc. If the intent of the FAA were to cripple the AMA over safely flying at their fields over the 400 ft ceiling there would be a specific cease and desist order by now.<br /><br />You are simply parroting Franklin have you no reasoning power of your own?