Originally Posted by
franklin_m
Agree on FliteTest, but I didn't want t make a universal statement of NO fixed sites. If they establish even one, then the statement is untrue. So I just stayed away from it.
And yes, the cost of an RID module is an additional up front cost. But some number of AMA type folks are going to need those too, so I don't know that it's a huge discriminator. Especially given that it's easily transferable, prices are expected to come down in time (lowering "overhead"), and non-compliance will likely be high until prices come down some.
I tend to believe that FliteTest represents the direction the hobby is moving. Low initial barriers to entry, high emphasis on "fun", no judgement, broadly welcoming to different ways of enjoying the hobby (quads, cheap foamies, big planes, little planes, emphasis on scale, emphasis on performance, and everything in between). I am seeing more and more 3D printed planes in this universe, too (and some with a remarkable amount of detail). However, I do think FliteTest need to take safety a bit more seriously (i.e.; no more flying planes through open bonfires and/or almost directly over the heads of spectators, and/or launching planes from moving vehicles, etc. etc.).
While I tend to agree that they have no desire to be the regulating body for fixed sites (i.e.; club chartered fields), they do have their own "fixed" site that they operate from and I suspect that more and more organic groups will tend to form around facilities and locations where they can reliably and routinely operate, which in turn will require some sort of administration, maintenance and ultimately governance (in other words, a "club" field by another name). My guess is that they will operate more or less autonomously from FTCA, perhaps only using them as and avenue to obtain FRIA status. I also firmly believe that costs of RID will only continue to come down to the point where it will be a non-issue (although it may take a few years for that to happen).