Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Another Drone Pilot does it Again

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Another Drone Pilot does it Again

Old 10-31-2014, 03:54 PM
  #26  
FLAPHappy
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (209)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Gentlemen, I posted this thread because it was in the News (FOX) and happened in the U.K. As you all know there have been numerous articles on R/C Models including Quad Copters that are violating the Altitude Restrictions of no more than 400' ft within x amount miles, I think 4, but beyond that, I am not sure. Like out in a Desert, miles from any town and no Air Traffic.
The main point I was trying to make is, an irresponsible pilot flew his quad copter at 1500 ' altitude on purpose, which put the full scale pilot in danger, and his passengers., In my way of thing about this, it really doesn't make any difference if it a full size Jet or Prop Aircraft, damage could be done to people and the aircraft they are flying on. These types of careless R/C Pilots are damaging our good reputation, and exposing the model industry into future restrictions. I would not like that.
Old 10-31-2014, 04:38 PM
  #27  
binns aero
 
binns aero's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: west milford nj
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

WELL NOW !!!!!!!, "QUAD-COPTERS,THE AMA,AND THE ALMIGHTY BUCK"
Old 11-01-2014, 08:17 AM
  #28  
Len Todd
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Baldwin, MI
Posts: 1,479
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

In the Amateur Radio Operator (Ham) world, Operators are licensed by the FCC and you have to show proof of that license before you can buy equipment from reputable dealers. In the past, this has contributed to eliminating most of the "Problem Children" from abusing Ham privileges. However, being able to buy Ham gear via the internet has somewhat degraded the control of access to the equipment by unlicensed operators. In spite of easy access, the problems are still relatively minimal and the FCC deals with the extreme "Problem Children" w/o threatening the hobby or the remaining operators.

A licensed Ham Radio Operator has to prove knowledge of the applicable rules and regulations and understands that if they are violated, the license may be taken away. The license is a privilege! In the good ol'e days you had to be a Ham to use RC equipment. I am not sure why they ever stopped that. But, ... Is what we are seeing today with these RC Idiots a direct result of taking the licensing requirement out of the RC picture?

Also, Hams do not hesitate to correct other Hams when mistakes are being made. If need be, they also bring extreme matters to the attention of the FCC. Hams are essentially "self-regulating," except in the most persistent problem cases. When was the last time you were NOT reluctant to correct some RC bonehead? When someone corrects you for doing something wrong, how do you react? And, then, ... when someone else brings up a legit but unpopular issue, when was the last time you supported the presenter of the issue? We need to overcome these tendencies to be self-regulating.

I am not advocating the FAA licensing us. I do think maybe something along the lines of a turbine wavier (RC Pilot Cert) process could help. Maybe the AMA could run this? Maybe each state (or club) has their own Cert Org which meets the intent of a standard generic set of requirements, etc.? Also, the suppliers need to tighten up who gets their products. No RC Pilot cert (or maybe at least club affiliation) = no RC Planes, etc. With these two steps in place, not only will many of the problem children be averted, but our legitimate flyers will be a lot smarter, and we could be well positioned for "self-regulating." As it stand now, we are not seen as ready for self-regulating. What are you personally going to do to change that perception?
Old 11-01-2014, 01:56 PM
  #29  
PLANE JIM
My Feedback: (109)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: AT THE AIRPORT
Posts: 2,004
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by combatpigg View Post
It would be interesting to look into this forum's archives to ferret out all the "Progressives" at this forum who were calling folks like me "TIN FOIL HATS". for suggesting that The Drone Flyers would end up creating wasted time, energy and negative public opinion for our hobby.
There IS such a thing as having too much fun and not having enough wisdom or fore thought to know where to draw that line.
The AMA would have been miles ahead if they decided to NOT EMBRACE [that's "Yuppie Speak" to replace the word, "reject"] a mode of toy plane flight that invites such easy access for any yayhoo to abuse.
I am with you on this CP!!!!
Old 11-01-2014, 04:58 PM
  #30  
binns aero
 
binns aero's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: west milford nj
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Re-maned Russian motors,untested rocket fuel? The FAA wants to start mandating new regs for private,commercial types of space flight.Thats after the NTSB figures out what their looking for. Sounds familure. God Bless the pilots of Space-Ship-One.
Old 11-03-2014, 03:40 AM
  #31  
phlpsfrnk
Senior Member
 
phlpsfrnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bradpaul View Post
Do you condone a father and son flying a quad copter in their back yard which happens to be within 3 nm of Disney World?
I'm with you on this one Paul. why does Disney get special treatment? How about 7 Flags over (pick a state) or a TFR for the local church carnival in their parking lot down the street? Now if the father and son's back yard is directly under the ILS approach path to an airport and they want to fly it up to 1500 feet AGL, that would be a problem.

Frank
Old 11-03-2014, 09:23 AM
  #32  
JohnShe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by phlpsfrnk View Post
I'm with you on this one Paul. why does Disney get special treatment? How about 7 Flags over (pick a state) or a TFR for the local church carnival in their parking lot down the street? Now if the father and son's back yard is directly under the ILS approach path to an airport and they want to fly it up to 1500 feet AGL, that would be a problem.

Frank
Good point Frank. I suspect that they haven't asked for a flight restriction yet. But, I bet they will soon enough. very likely the final UAS regulations will specifically pose restrictions and require specific approvals of any kind of UAS flyover.
Old 11-03-2014, 10:24 AM
  #33  
bradpaul
 
bradpaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka, FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
Good point Frank. I suspect that they haven't asked for a flight restriction yet. But, I bet they will soon enough. very likely the final UAS regulations will specifically pose restrictions and require specific approvals of any kind of UAS flyover.
I have no problem with Disney, Six Flags, Busch Gardens, Universal Parks, the NFL, MLB or sports stadiums to ask for and get a TFR FOR THEIR PROPERTY. I do have a BIG PROBLEM with a corporate or private entity getting a TFR OVER OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY that IS NOT in the landing or approach pattern to a tower controlled airport. . The threat to the safety of the NAS rationalization is being abused.
Old 11-03-2014, 10:46 AM
  #34  
Hossfly
 
Hossfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New Caney, TX
Posts: 6,130
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
Good point Frank. I suspect that they haven't asked for a flight restriction yet. But, I bet they will soon enough. very likely the final UAS regulations will specifically pose restrictions and require specific approvals of any kind of UAS flyover.
Fellows, you can think-on-it all you want. Disney World has the $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$,$$$,$$$ and then some. $$$$$4 are the favorite fruits for a congress person.
Whatever the most $$$$$$$ wants then the $$$$$$$ gets. There will be adequate Drouge, quadcopter stuff to keep the U.S. mfgers. busy but IMO restrictions will be fitted for the entertainment world and manufacturing/Importers to continue. Toy airplane folks will most likely get some serious restrictions which will IMO at this time not bother the business people that like to survey, watch for whatever, P&M and such. Toy aircraft will most likely receive little if any of the "blessings".
If they are allowed, I do hope they are restrictive in some manner that keeps non-adults from playing with them.
For those that think turbines can kick out all such things as a Drone, well you have some learning to set you straight. BTDT. Some of the smaller engines will shatter if most anything hits a compressor of an engine. I was an instructor pilot in the USAF T-38 for 2 years. That engine way back then was easy to have a problem. Making a go-around (pre-solo student) from a landing approach at a practice facility, both engines failed. I took control, got one restarted and made it to home base. The flame-outS were because of driving through some low rain-showers which I violated the rules to get a couple landings in. Bad Me. The left engine had lost turbine blades.
Later in the Airline, 727, I lost a whole inside of #1 engine on a climb-out from Denver's Stapelton airport. Everything in the engine hull left through the cowling.
I lost a DC-8 engine at about 12000 MSL ft when some kind of bird hit it. For you newbies to any kind of aviation, models, whatever, never take anything for granted in the aviation world. Many Many Aviators in these forums. LISTEN TO THEM. Non-survivors, desk jobbers, bureaucrats, crooks, etc., will never agree that there is a rather dangerous world out there.
Old 11-05-2014, 06:31 AM
  #35  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I would think that Styrofoam and plastic would be easier to digest than flesh and bone, but IMO the discussion does not matter. Even though the engine may digest it, and keep running, there will be damage. And if there is damage there is a possibility that the engine could quit no matter that it usually keeps running. The "Miracle on the Hudson" was caused by a flock of geese with many birds stuffed into each engine. It is now possible to pilot a flock of UAV from one controller or transmitter. If we don't stop people from flying near full aircraft then maybe a flock of UAV's will bring down an airplane.
Old 11-05-2014, 06:36 AM
  #36  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by bradpaul View Post
I have no problem with Disney, Six Flags, Busch Gardens, Universal Parks, the NFL, MLB or sports stadiums to ask for and get a TFR FOR THEIR PROPERTY. I do have a BIG PROBLEM with a corporate or private entity getting a TFR OVER OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY that IS NOT in the landing or approach pattern to a tower controlled airport. . The threat to the safety of the NAS rationalization is being abused.
Uhh, Disney, Six Flags, Gusch Gardens IS private property!
Old 11-05-2014, 06:41 AM
  #37  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,982
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

methinks, paul is referring to the 3 nm around the mentioned locations part of the tfr. or whatever the "buffer zone" around them is set at.
Old 11-05-2014, 10:26 AM
  #38  
bradpaul
 
bradpaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka, FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mongo View Post
methinks, paul is referring to the 3 nm around the mentioned locations part of the tfr. or whatever the "buffer zone" around them is set at.
Yeah with SP you often have to explain things like the 3 nm exclusion zone. But it does bring up a question on how the exclusion zones are calculated? Is it from a fixed point or from any boundary of an protected site? For something like a venue for a event that is easy to determine but what about an airport or an site like Disney that has multiple widely separated amusement parks?
Old 11-05-2014, 11:27 AM
  #39  
phlpsfrnk
Senior Member
 
phlpsfrnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bradpaul View Post
Yeah with SP you often have to explain things like the 3 nm exclusion zone. But it does bring up a question on how the exclusion zones are calculated? Is it from a fixed point or from any boundary of an protected site? For something like a venue for a event that is easy to determine but what about an airport or an site like Disney that has multiple widely separated amusement parks?
I can't speak for Disney but airports use the geographic center of the active runways as the central point. As a guess the venues may use the geographic center of the property boundaries but that is just my opinion.

Frank
Old 11-05-2014, 11:44 AM
  #40  
bradpaul
 
bradpaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka, FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by phlpsfrnk View Post
I can't speak for Disney but airports use the geographic center of the active runways as the central point. As a guess the venues may use the geographic center of the property boundaries but that is just my opinion.

Frank
if in the case of Disney that the 3mn is from the geographic center of the Disney property then the exclusion zone would probably be entirely within Disney property and my objection would be moot.
Old 11-05-2014, 12:04 PM
  #41  
phlpsfrnk
Senior Member
 
phlpsfrnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bradpaul View Post
if in the case of Disney that the 3mn is from the geographic center of the Disney property then the exclusion zone would probably be entirely within Disney property and my objection would be moot.
I'm not that familiar with the area. Check the map at the link:

http://02b954f.netsolhost.com/amatfr.html

Frank
Old 11-05-2014, 12:35 PM
  #42  
Maximilionalpha
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hither & Yonder, USA
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You guys keep complaining about how some other yahoo, is "illegally", flying his/her rc aircraft, above a certain altitude. What you're not taking into consideration though, is the fact that, whether we like it or not, the government is going to either, BAN, or, Severely Restrict, our fun hobby, in the near future, anyway! So, you guys stick to your, 400', and below, flying styles, because you truly do believe, that an entity can actually own God's big blue creation and tell you that you can only play in it, up to a certain altitude, while they can pollute the heck out of it, fly their drone all up and down it, to spy on you and even manipulate it, with H.A.A.R.P! I'll from now on, call you guys....400 Below!
Old 11-05-2014, 05:28 PM
  #43  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I know that its going to p.o. allot of people but I wish these where band from the beginning, they are going to destroy this hobby, you did not hear or see this kind of thing really before. These dang things are being g flown everywhere . Where we always fly in designated areas. They're now calling our RC airplanes drones, bull my RC airplanes are not drones, am getting tired of hearing about these stupid people taking this hobby down!
Old 11-05-2014, 05:53 PM
  #44  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Maximilionalpha View Post
You guys keep complaining about how some other yahoo, is "illegally", flying his/her rc aircraft, above a certain altitude. What you're not taking into consideration though, is the fact that, whether we like it or not, the government is going to either, BAN, or, Severely Restrict, our fun hobby, in the near future, anyway! So, you guys stick to your, 400', and below, flying styles, because you truly do believe, that an entity can actually own God's big blue creation and tell you that you can only play in it, up to a certain altitude, while they can pollute the heck out of it, fly their drone all up and down it, to spy on you and even manipulate it, with H.A.A.R.P! I'll from now on, call you guys....400 Below!

There will be no ban, nor will there be "severe restrictions". That comment is right up there with the scare tactics being used by the media sometimes. The technology, and some irresponsible and reckless people have caused some in the government to look closely at this type of flying. It's part of progress, for better (and worse)


Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
I know that its going to p.o. allot of people but I wish these where band from the beginning, they are going to destroy this hobby, you did not hear or see this kind of thing really before. These dang things are being g flown everywhere . Where we always fly in designated areas. They're now calling our RC airplanes drones, bull my RC airplanes are not drones, am getting tired of hearing about these stupid people taking this hobby down!
Banning is impossible, and impracticle, and really at the end of the day, reactionary and completely unfair. And actually, while you might not have seen this kind of thing before, I believe the first time I ever heard of a security concern regarding RC was when the guy wanted to pack a ducted fan F86 Saber and F4 Phantom with explosives and fly them into a target. That was about 3 years ago:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...one/50593792/1

Notice how they called that plane a "DRONE". Ya, a fixed wing aircraft. Looks like you fly airplanes, do you think those should have been banned back then? Probably not. I didn't see word one in that story about a quad or multirotor, did you?

It's irresponsible and reckless PILOTS that cause problems for the hobby, not the machines.
Old 11-05-2014, 06:03 PM
  #45  
Rob2160
Senior Member
 
Rob2160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
I know that its going to p.o. allot of people but I wish these where band from the beginning, they are going to destroy this hobby, you did not hear or see this kind of thing really before. These dang things are being g flown everywhere . Where we always fly in designated areas. They're now calling our RC airplanes drones, bull my RC airplanes are not drones, am getting tired of hearing about these stupid people taking this hobby down!
Not sure if this is happening in the USA now but in Australian Hobby Stores if you buy something they will give you one of these leaflets. No excuses for not knowing the rules.

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...trol_model.pdf

I was in a local electronics store two days ago, This store sells toy grade RC products but nothing hobby grade. I was buying LEDs for a lighting project on one of my models and when I explained this the sales person handed me this leaflet and explained the rules. I was impressed with that.

I don't see an issue with Multi-copters per se, but you are right, irresponsible use of them will ruin it for everyone. I have several and one has a great camera and gimbal for smooth video. Recently I spent several weekends driving around Sydney to find scenic locations to film.

There were many locations that I could have legally flown but after noting how many people were around common sense and 36 years in this hobby told me not to fly.

In some ways, these things are safer than the planes and helicopters we fly. EG, if my quads detect a loss of signal from the Transmitter they will go into fail safe mode and automatically climb, return to the starting point, land and shut down. Also if they detect an unusual situation, such as tumbling out of control it will cut power to the motors automatically.

Regardless I am a strong advocate of flying these safely and never in a situation that could injure somebody.

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	photo 2.jpg
Views:	360
Size:	948.7 KB
ID:	2045201  

Last edited by Rob2160; 11-05-2014 at 06:15 PM. Reason: typos
Old 11-05-2014, 06:19 PM
  #46  
PLANE JIM
My Feedback: (109)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: AT THE AIRPORT
Posts: 2,004
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

For years I thought drones was a term for a military target used in training -I think AMA screwed up trying to hold hands with them and thinking they could develop a relationship with the FAA and hold hands with them as well.
Old 11-05-2014, 07:10 PM
  #47  
AllModesR/C
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 425
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by PLANE JIM View Post
For years I thought drones was a term for a military target used in training
A drone is any unmanned remotely controlled aircraft.
Old 11-05-2014, 07:40 PM
  #48  
JohnShe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AllModesR/C View Post
A drone is any unmanned remotely controlled aircraft.
Not just remotely controlled. A drone can be autonomous. That is, controlled by internal programming to follow a planned course. Our model airplanes are drones. And, the technology doesn't matter. FPV, R/C, Rubber Band free flight, turbine, rocket, sail planes, even control line planes are drones. If it weren't for section 336 of the 2012 FAA modernization act, our model airplanes would be subject to all of the UAS regulations that the FAA plans to write.
Old 11-05-2014, 09:23 PM
  #49  
AllModesR/C
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 425
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
Not just remotely controlled. A drone can be autonomous..
Correct indeed.
Old 11-05-2014, 11:26 PM
  #50  
Maximilionalpha
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hither & Yonder, USA
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVS), also known as drones, are aircraft either controlled by ‘pilots’ from the ground or increasingly, autonomously following a pre-programmed mission. While there are dozens of different types of drones, they basically fall into two categories: those that are used for reconnaissance and surveillance purposes and those that are armed with missiles and bombs.
The use of drones has grown quickly in recent years because unlike manned aircraft they can stay aloft for many hours (Zephyr a British drone under development has just broken the world record by flying for over 82 hours nonstop); they are much cheaper than military aircraft and they are flown remotely so there is no danger to the flight crew.
While the British and US Reaper and Predator drones are physically in Afghanistan and Iraq, control is via satellite from Nellis and Creech USAF base outside Las Vegas, Nevada. Ground crews launch drones from the conflict zone, then operation is handed over to controllers at video screens in specially designed trailers in the Nevada desert. One person ‘flies’ the drone, another operates and monitors the cameras and sensors, while a third person is in contact with the “customers”, ground troops and commanders in the war zone. While armed drones were first used in the Balkans war, their use has dramatically escalated in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the CIA’s undeclared war in Pakistan.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.