Sport_Pilot

Because they have before, though that was probably vehicular charges I am thinking of. Not charges on interfering with an emergency crew.

Sport_Pilot

And capitalism with no (or very very little) regulation as I said before.

JohnShe

Right, greed.

JohnShe

It's the same as if he had interfered with an ambulance. He is in serious trouble. LOL! Aviation charges, if any will be an FAA issue and they can certainly act if they choose to. Now that 112-95 is signed, they might have some clout.

Sport_Pilot

They have acted when someone threw stones at a helicopter I believe. There are some regulation on obstuction of aircraft.

Sport_Pilot

I disagree that they are one and the same. But greed is good for economic health. The issue is not greed but not letting greed consume oneself or the economic system.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

I am sorry but my tin foil hat strongly suggests that either the airspace is navigable or it is not. Kind of like being pregnant - they are or they are not. Since you insist that you are the local expert on the FAA regulations, try quoting the one that substantiates your latest silliness. We wouldn't want everyone to get the idea that you tell lies all the time.

An example of your total inconsistency is followed by In short you are suggesting that it is OK to interfere with a flying licensed aircraft under 400 feet. Great idea! I want you to be riding one of those emergency birds when it hits one of your buddies sUAV. Then you can tell us exactly how wonderfully safe it is.

Please try to be consistent, even when you launch your lame personal attacks. It will make more folks love you.

cj_rumley

Wrong. The charges levied against the perp had nothing to do with FAA or its mandates.
Please stop replying to my posts. Whether you are agreeing or 'correcting,' your muddling only raises the noise floor of the forum.

JohnShe

Right, regulations!

bradpaul

Some here would have you believe that if any of the 911 terrorists survived that the charges would be dropped so the FAA could prosecute them for flying a commercial aircraft without a license.

Not me but it is consistent with the position of other posters.

JohnShe

You have to be kidding? Which posters?

Personally I would consider adding it to the charges of mass murder, but it would be moot.

Sport_Pilot

As Reagan said "there you go again". Obviously you twist the truth to meet your own desire.

I never said any such thing. Navigable airspace is defined by the FARS and not me. I described it as FAA reps said years ago. Here is the definition from CFR Part 14 Section 1.1.

Navigable airspace means airspace at
and above the minimum flight altitudes
prescribed by or under this chapter,
including airspace needed for safe
takeoff and landing.


So obviously when using a helicopter which can fly lower than other aircraft, and especially one which is about to land. Then the navigable airspace changes around the aircraft.

Sport_Pilot

I agree, but I have doubts the FAA will. They have suprised me before.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Really? Ya think? Why is that? You argued strongly that there should be no FAA involvement below 400 feet when we were talking about commercial operators and now you claim it is different? I need another layer of tin foil to deal with your constant personal attacks coupled with the twisting and turning you do when questioned closely.

Speaking of twisting things to meet your own desires, please tell us why you are NOW depending on the FAA when they were not even involved in the incident? Sure sounds to many like you just enjoy stirring the pot and pretending to be a drama queen unless you are now taking the position that the Federal Government has control on what local charges may and may not be filed.

Please explain which of your inconsistencies we are supposed to believe today.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

time to get rid of the drone and get something new on here

bradpaul

Well it has now gotten so bad that drones are the new target for congressional candidates to take aim at. ( pun intended)

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/...drone-20140416

cj_rumley

Before this thread I thought a pol campaigning for the loony-tunes vote was himself mad. Now I'm not ROFL about it.

Sport_Pilot

This has been brought up before. When a helicopter is in the area all model or UAV flying should cease. I have never changed my position. You simply refuse to understand.

Sport_Pilot

Not sure if this is good or bad.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Probably will be a real shock for you guys...but I'd vote for him in a heartbeat!

bruceal

The other day I was made aware of a video that was shot at a park across the street from our club's flying field. It was made by a club member flying his quad without FPV. Besides flying over people, there is a heliport right next door. Our club has been directly across the street for six years without incident. Our policy has always been to either land or get down low when a helicopter is approaching. Likewise, helicopter pilots will usually go around our field on approach if they see cars parked there.

I spoke to the owner of the heliport to reassure him that people flying in the park is a concern for both of us. His son who is co owner told me that he has seen this activity for himself. I told them that if a club member is caught flying in the park they will be removed from the club. I don't care what a person is flying, it's never ok to fly over people especially in such close proximity to full scale air traffic.

Our club allows quads and cameras but not FPV. This person could have flown his quad at the field if he wanted too. His actions prove our point, why fly over goose crap and a swamp when there is a marina and park to see across the street.

Sport_Pilot

As would I, but not sure if the publicity is good for sUAV's and by extension R/C models.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

That ought to do it...

bruceal

Meaning? The point is that if you are willing to fly over people and intrude on full scale airspace, we don't want you in our club. And that goes for every form of model aviation.

Sport_Pilot

I think he mean't that the individual could keep doing the same thing without being a member. Perhaps he would expect you to turn him to the cops or Feds.