Guys,
I am the author of that post.
Didn't know this was here as I don't visit RCUniverse much. My focus has been on the commercial side of things until lately.

I have been the brunt of those !QUOT!lively!QUOT! discussions on other sites.

I have been turned onto the point of contact at the AMA who is discussing this with the FAA and as soon as possible I am going to be talking to him to get some questions answered.

A brief history of why I am now interested in what the AMA is doing and where myself and several others have been over the last year.

About a year ago a group of us you by now have probably heard about (the RCAPA) got wind that the FAA was going to mandate regulation (the NPRM you are talking about. Which by the way is not out that I can find either. I will check on it to be sure) for !QUOT!UAV'S!QUOT!
From those sporadic and very limited discussions we were told that R/C aircraft were going to get lumped in there. Then we were told that only if they were used for commercial purposes were they going to be included. Then that kind of changed again...well you get the idea.
Now after a year of working we have finally gotten through to the people at the FAA who are working on this. Finally we are getting some direct answers to the questions regarding who and what.
They are not pretty.
The who is ALL model aircraft in one way shape or form and the what is some sort of increased regulation.
Mr. Steve Swartz at the FAA told me directly he has been talking to the AMA and is !QUOT!concerned!QUOT! about the outdated AC 91-57 and the !QUOT!guidelines!QUOT! the AMA has regarding altitudes and distance from a manned aircraft airport.
This led me to be more than interested in what the AMA is doing and ironically right after that I read President Browns article in MODEL AVIATION.
It concerned me as being way too generic in nature and not something that the FAA is going to take seriously. I too am a certified pilot and could as a pilot see lots of problems with the generic idea presented.
I have been trying to get some direct contact with the AMA to sort out the position and !QUOT!plan!QUOT! they have been discussing with the FAA. In hopes that I can help with it and at the same time maybe we can bring something to the table that will help us out in the commercial area as well. The RCAPA has the position that we are not much different than a hobbyist and we don't want to be over burdened by regulation that is not really necessary. The RCAPA wants to basically self regulate also.

Contrary to what some seem to think about me. I am not out to ruin the hobby or try to have everyone attend my !QUOT!special flight school!QUOT! I am secretly developing.
I am just trying to help. I think I have a unique ability to see both sides of the issue and as such can lend a hand with both parties. In fact myself and others think any training that needs done can be easily done on-line at NO cost to the individual.
I am most concerned with the fact that the FAA people admitted know little to nothing about what we do at the hobby level or the commercial level. They have just been told to !QUOT!fix!QUOT! the !QUOT!problem!QUOT!. Typical government. Somebody in a position of power gets his or her proverbial shorts twisted and we as the public suffer. Homeland Security, the FBI and all those government agencies have been and are looking at the potential threat a small unmanned aircraft present to the country so I am sure they have been bugging the FAA about this as well.

I don't want to see the hobby taken away or overbearing regulation placed upon us at any level. I do however see room to make improvements on BOTH sides of the fence. The FAA can do more to educate full scale operators on R/C operations and the AMA can do more to educate the general hobbyist on the hazards associated with our hobby in some areas.

I am a member of the AOPA. Have been for about 13 years. They are one of the strongest forces opposed to letting us do our own thing. The AOPA if you don't know is the Aircraft owners and pilots association. They have over 400,000 members across the country. They represent all of general aviation and have lots of money and ties to the people that be on the hill. I have been in contact with Randy Kenagy the AOPA person in charge of the UAV activities and is the person that is working with the FAA on all of this.

In addition I am a member of the ASTM F38 committee on Unmanned Aircraft systems. These are the industry folks that are working to get the guys like Aerosonde, Boeing, Raytheon, etc...industry standards so they can be self regulating also. These are the real folks the FAA has their sites set on. These guys want to fly on a filed flight plan just like every other aircraft in the country. They want to fly up there with your wife and kids going to see grandma.
However these guys want to do it just as safely and are willing to work with EVERYONE to ensure they are getting the job done and looking for the best way to do it without the FAA burdening them with regulations they cannot handle right now. Let's face it most if not all of those aircraft have roots in the very models we enjoy flying for sport and fun and in fact over 75% of the UAS that the military is looking at or buying are the same size, shape and equipped as what we fly at the field.


Starting to see how all of this is tying together now?


So there is a nutshell version of who I am and what I am about with regards to this.

The RCAPA can be found on the net. There are over 600 people registered as members so the !QUOT!commercial!QUOT! side of the hobby is growing quickly.
I am a member of that group and have been for sometime now. I am one of the small group that is dedicated to working this issue to a solution that is acceptable to EVERYONE involved. We are always looking for more help so if you can spare a few hours a week drop the RCAPA an e-mail and volunteer.
My vest is getting a bit tattered these days with all the bullets being fired at me, but a few repairs and it will be good as new so fire away.....