Another Drone Pilot does it Again
03-22-2015, 05:29 AM
#726
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-22-2015, 07:29 AM
#728
Point is, if that person ignores the AMA rules written in the book supplied with the model aircraft, Provided of course they even have them in there now, just tosses it away without any thought, how will that person know they are violating the rules set forth for flying model aircraft? It is their actions that will cascade down to our hobby eventually and next you know, here we will sit with thousands of dollars worth of planes that was can no longer enjoy.
Knowledge is key here, so how do the buyers of these quads and such that are causing problems be taught that there are places to fly and places not to fly? How do we protect our rights to fly safely and in accordance to the AMA guidelines, and prevent the FAA and other entities of our corrupted government system from denying all of us legal flyers from our hobby?
Knowledge is key here, so how do the buyers of these quads and such that are causing problems be taught that there are places to fly and places not to fly? How do we protect our rights to fly safely and in accordance to the AMA guidelines, and prevent the FAA and other entities of our corrupted government system from denying all of us legal flyers from our hobby?
03-22-2015, 07:53 AM
#729
http://news.yahoo.com/video/alarming...013849222.html
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
We as responsible (And I wonder about that from some of the statements made here) AMA/CBO R/C recreational Hobby/sport pilots have to get every one we know to respond, in our favor. to the NPRM. We have to let the FAA know that it's the outsiders that are the problem and the FAA should amend the NPRM to reflect that it's the NON informed that are flying these R/C Aircraft in an irresponsible and dangerous meaner. I Believe that manufactures, Local hobby shops and Mail order sellers are part of the problem ... Even though they ad a prefix to th instruction saying that these R/C models should be flown according to the Safety Code of the AMA there is NO WAY to know if these people understand or have even read these warnings placed in the instructions.
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
Added just for DISCUSSION
This Certificate has nothing to do with weather they are competent to fly or not, Just that they know there are Rules and they have read and understand the obligation of Operating toy model aircraft in the NAS. And if operating without said certificate there are consequences mush the same as driving with out a licences.
Like I stated This is mainly to keep the FAA from regulating Hobby/Sport Recreational R/Cer's out of existence. and will make every one aware of at least the existence of the rules and regs pertaining to model flying. It would not be of great difficulty for Sellers of R/C models inform coustamers at time of purchase where to obtain the proper certificate before they fly. Also if during these News Reports of Toy Airplanes interfering with man carrying Aircraft they (News Media) explain there are RULES and a certificate required to flying R/C Craft and where anyone can log on and receive instruction and pass the test for the certificate required to fly R/C toys in the NAS.
Of course there will be many here that will disagree with me (Mainly because they like to argue) but (and I'm climbing up on my SOAP BOX here. AGAIN
33,000 comments out of 750,000 AMA members commenting on the last NPRM ain't gona make it this time. The FAA is way set on regulating any thing that FLYs in the NAS. Congress/AMA/CBO has "Peissedemoff" by telling them they can't regulate toy airplanes flying in the NAS for which they have sole responsibility from CONGRESS to Promote Aviation and insure safety for the flying public and every on the ground.
Now the Important part.
"GO COMMENT ON THE NPRM" before time runs out. Not much time left.
JMHO and U all know what Opinions are Like
Gees this was going o be just a short comment on a guy flying a toy airpalne near so choppers
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
We as responsible (And I wonder about that from some of the statements made here) AMA/CBO R/C recreational Hobby/sport pilots have to get every one we know to respond, in our favor. to the NPRM. We have to let the FAA know that it's the outsiders that are the problem and the FAA should amend the NPRM to reflect that it's the NON informed that are flying these R/C Aircraft in an irresponsible and dangerous meaner. I Believe that manufactures, Local hobby shops and Mail order sellers are part of the problem ... Even though they ad a prefix to th instruction saying that these R/C models should be flown according to the Safety Code of the AMA there is NO WAY to know if these people understand or have even read these warnings placed in the instructions.
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
Added just for DISCUSSION
This Certificate has nothing to do with weather they are competent to fly or not, Just that they know there are Rules and they have read and understand the obligation of Operating toy model aircraft in the NAS. And if operating without said certificate there are consequences mush the same as driving with out a licences.
Like I stated This is mainly to keep the FAA from regulating Hobby/Sport Recreational R/Cer's out of existence. and will make every one aware of at least the existence of the rules and regs pertaining to model flying. It would not be of great difficulty for Sellers of R/C models inform coustamers at time of purchase where to obtain the proper certificate before they fly. Also if during these News Reports of Toy Airplanes interfering with man carrying Aircraft they (News Media) explain there are RULES and a certificate required to flying R/C Craft and where anyone can log on and receive instruction and pass the test for the certificate required to fly R/C toys in the NAS.
Of course there will be many here that will disagree with me (Mainly because they like to argue) but (and I'm climbing up on my SOAP BOX here. AGAIN
33,000 comments out of 750,000 AMA members commenting on the last NPRM ain't gona make it this time. The FAA is way set on regulating any thing that FLYs in the NAS. Congress/AMA/CBO has "Peissedemoff" by telling them they can't regulate toy airplanes flying in the NAS for which they have sole responsibility from CONGRESS to Promote Aviation and insure safety for the flying public and every on the ground.
Now the Important part.
"GO COMMENT ON THE NPRM" before time runs out. Not much time left.
JMHO and U all know what Opinions are Like
Gees this was going o be just a short comment on a guy flying a toy airpalne near so choppers
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-22-2015 at 07:56 AM.
03-22-2015, 08:09 AM
#730
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://news.yahoo.com/video/alarming...013849222.html
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
We as responsible (And I wonder about that from some of the statements made here) AMA/CBO R/C recreational Hobby/sport pilots have to get every one we know to respond, in our favor. to the NPRM. We have to let the FAA know that it's the outsiders that are the problem and the FAA should amend the NPRM to reflect that it's the NON informed that are flying these R/C Aircraft in an irresponsible and dangerous meaner. I Believe that manufactures, Local hobby shops and Mail order sellers are part of the problem ... Even though they ad a prefix to th instruction saying that these R/C models should be flown according to the Safety Code of the AMA there is NO WAY to know if these people understand or have even read these warnings placed in the instructions.
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
Added just for DISCUSSION
This Certificate has nothing to do with weather they are competent to fly or not, Just that they know there are Rules and they have read and understand the obligation of Operating toy model aircraft in the NAS. And if operating without said certificate there are consequences mush the same as driving with out a licences.
Like I stated This is mainly to keep the FAA from regulating Hobby/Sport Recreational R/Cer's out of existence. and will make every one aware of at least the existence of the rules and regs pertaining to model flying. It would not be of great difficulty for Sellers of R/C models inform coustamers at time of purchase where to obtain the proper certificate before they fly. Also if during these News Reports of Toy Airplanes interfering with man carrying Aircraft they (News Media) explain there are RULES and a certificate required to flying R/C Craft and where anyone can log on and receive instruction and pass the test for the certificate required to fly R/C toys in the NAS.
Of course there will be many here that will disagree with me (Mainly because they like to argue) but (and I'm climbing up on my SOAP BOX here. AGAIN
33,000 comments out of 750,000 AMA members commenting on the last NPRM ain't gona make it this time. The FAA is way set on regulating any thing that FLYs in the NAS. Congress/AMA/CBO has "Peissedemoff" by telling them they can't regulate toy airplanes flying in the NAS for which they have sole responsibility from CONGRESS to Promote Aviation and insure safety for the flying public and every on the ground.
Now the Important part.
"GO COMMENT ON THE NPRM" before time runs out. Not much time left.
JMHO and U all know what Opinions are Like
Gees this was going o be just a short comment on a guy flying a toy airpalne near so choppers
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
We as responsible (And I wonder about that from some of the statements made here) AMA/CBO R/C recreational Hobby/sport pilots have to get every one we know to respond, in our favor. to the NPRM. We have to let the FAA know that it's the outsiders that are the problem and the FAA should amend the NPRM to reflect that it's the NON informed that are flying these R/C Aircraft in an irresponsible and dangerous meaner. I Believe that manufactures, Local hobby shops and Mail order sellers are part of the problem ... Even though they ad a prefix to th instruction saying that these R/C models should be flown according to the Safety Code of the AMA there is NO WAY to know if these people understand or have even read these warnings placed in the instructions.
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
Added just for DISCUSSION
This Certificate has nothing to do with weather they are competent to fly or not, Just that they know there are Rules and they have read and understand the obligation of Operating toy model aircraft in the NAS. And if operating without said certificate there are consequences mush the same as driving with out a licences.
Like I stated This is mainly to keep the FAA from regulating Hobby/Sport Recreational R/Cer's out of existence. and will make every one aware of at least the existence of the rules and regs pertaining to model flying. It would not be of great difficulty for Sellers of R/C models inform coustamers at time of purchase where to obtain the proper certificate before they fly. Also if during these News Reports of Toy Airplanes interfering with man carrying Aircraft they (News Media) explain there are RULES and a certificate required to flying R/C Craft and where anyone can log on and receive instruction and pass the test for the certificate required to fly R/C toys in the NAS.
Of course there will be many here that will disagree with me (Mainly because they like to argue) but (and I'm climbing up on my SOAP BOX here. AGAIN
33,000 comments out of 750,000 AMA members commenting on the last NPRM ain't gona make it this time. The FAA is way set on regulating any thing that FLYs in the NAS. Congress/AMA/CBO has "Peissedemoff" by telling them they can't regulate toy airplanes flying in the NAS for which they have sole responsibility from CONGRESS to Promote Aviation and insure safety for the flying public and every on the ground.
Now the Important part.
"GO COMMENT ON THE NPRM" before time runs out. Not much time left.
JMHO and U all know what Opinions are Like
Gees this was going o be just a short comment on a guy flying a toy airpalne near so choppers
03-22-2015, 08:18 AM
#731
Wrong it is an unmanned aircraft that can fly autonomously or by itself with no control from the ground. IE a flying robot. From the male bee that fly's on command from the queen bee.
03-22-2015, 08:35 AM
#732
Thanks for UR kind comment(s).
03-22-2015, 08:57 AM
#735
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can only guess... that's why so many human drones get so defensive about their programming...without proper programming they are completely useless.
Maybe if fledgeling drones were made to take some test of their programming knowledge that would make all the other senior human drones feel better knowing that proper programming has been installed in junior drones as well.
Ahh...now I feel better...LOL
03-22-2015, 09:03 AM
#736
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://news.yahoo.com/video/alarming...013849222.html
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
It doesn't mater if this guy did or didn't break any AMA safety code (Rules) nor does it mater if he broke any FAR's nor does it mater if he Lied or did not lie to the authority's ... The real problem is that it is another nail in the R/C coffin by being broadcast on National TV as another intrusion with maned aircraft and presented to the NON R/C public as a danger to human life.
There are things your AMA/CBO could be doing to at least try to mitigate the damage done by sensationalism in the media. They have PR people on staff and also under contract to push the image they want to convey, but it all seems designed to polish AMA itself rather than protect model aviation. In a fairly recent incident in Canada where a drone in the approach path of an airliner was the subject of media sensationalism, MAAC responded instantly and without pulling any punches to soften their outrage over the incident, and get the message out that the perp "isn't one of us." Where have the PR minions from AMA been when similar instances have occurred here? I recall in response to a news item about a court decision in the FAA case against Pirker, one of the best perps that created bad press for us, AMA issued a statement they "were studying" the matter. Apparently what they concluded from that 'study' was it might piss of the commercial sUAS crowd they are trying to romance, and so they had no comment to make on Pirker's misbehavior.
03-22-2015, 09:29 AM
#737
http://news.yahoo.com/video/alarming...013849222.html
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
In the interest of our Hobby/Sport being taken over and regulated out of exorbitance I believe that for any persons to fly/operate any R/C device in the NAS be required to obtain a certificate proving they have read understand and will comply with all safety rules and at least know When, where and where and not to fly any R/C Models. Weather they belong to a CBO/AMA or not obtain a Certificate proving that they have completed a computer administered test on the proper operation of R/C Aircraft. A web site could be set up for anyone wishing to Fly R/C. Log on read the provided material take a short multiple choice test. Upon completion they are graded (advised of the questions they Missed and the correct answers provided and the reason why that answer is correct. If they Don't Pass the computer administrated test they can be advised of the other place on the web site for further study and in 24 hours may retest. At the successful completion of the test said certificate Would be issued and logged on a national database then printed and to be carried by the Person flying any R/C device in the NAS. Much like the AMA card we all carry when we are executing the privilege of flying an R/C craft in the NAS.
03-22-2015, 10:05 AM
#738
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yet you continue on for several paragraphs about how anybody that would fly a model airplane should have the rules pounded into his head and be required to hold a certificate. Honestly HoundDog, your rationale is hard to follow.
There are things your AMA/CBO could be doing to at least try to mitigate the damage done by sensationalism in the media. They have PR people on staff and also under contract to push the image they want to convey, but it all seems designed to polish AMA itself rather than protect model aviation. In a fairly recent incident in Canada where a drone in the approach path of an airliner was the subject of media sensationalism, MAAC responded instantly and without pulling any punches to soften their outrage over the incident, and get the message out that the perp "isn't one of us." Where have the PR minions from AMA been when similar instances have occurred here? I recall in response to a news item about a court decision in the FAA case against Pirker, one of the best perps that created bad press for us, AMA issued a statement they "were studying" the matter. Apparently what they concluded from that 'study' was it might piss of the commercial sUAS crowd they are trying to romance, and so they had no comment to make on Pirker's misbehavior.
There are things your AMA/CBO could be doing to at least try to mitigate the damage done by sensationalism in the media. They have PR people on staff and also under contract to push the image they want to convey, but it all seems designed to polish AMA itself rather than protect model aviation. In a fairly recent incident in Canada where a drone in the approach path of an airliner was the subject of media sensationalism, MAAC responded instantly and without pulling any punches to soften their outrage over the incident, and get the message out that the perp "isn't one of us." Where have the PR minions from AMA been when similar instances have occurred here? I recall in response to a news item about a court decision in the FAA case against Pirker, one of the best perps that created bad press for us, AMA issued a statement they "were studying" the matter. Apparently what they concluded from that 'study' was it might piss of the commercial sUAS crowd they are trying to romance, and so they had no comment to make on Pirker's misbehavior.
on behalf of all of us.
Otoh, I chuckle a bit at your jumping on the media sensationalism bandwagon.
If there is any of that going on, it is right here in this forum!
Imo, the media have been pretty fair about the issue.
And why wouldn't they?
They are chomping at the bit waiting to get to employ this technology
to sensationalize the next big thing. Are you aware that
FAA has proposed a "micro" class of uav, which with the proper training,
licensing, and of course most importantly the exchange of MONEY, an operator can fly over the heads
of "non-participating" people---just like Pirker did!!!(sans fpv of course).
I just hope most of what gets said in this forum never gets out to the
public. Then we're really in trouble.
03-22-2015, 10:35 AM
#739
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good call 804, I should not have assessed the media any blame for the bad news, from our perspective. They just report what viewers would be interested in seeing because that is what sells toothpaste and toilet paper and so keeps them
ad supported.
Generally in agreement with your observation about sometimes in this forum having "met our enemy and he is us."
As for the micro class of UAS, yes I have heard of it and think it is inevitable that it will happen, like it not. If they are small enough and frangible enough to minimize the threat of injury to persons and their property, I am not opposed to the concept. OTOH, what AMA calls a park flyer for example is not innocuous enough to satisfy me in that regard.
ad supported.
Generally in agreement with your observation about sometimes in this forum having "met our enemy and he is us."
As for the micro class of UAS, yes I have heard of it and think it is inevitable that it will happen, like it not. If they are small enough and frangible enough to minimize the threat of injury to persons and their property, I am not opposed to the concept. OTOH, what AMA calls a park flyer for example is not innocuous enough to satisfy me in that regard.
Last edited by cj_rumley; 03-22-2015 at 11:10 AM.
03-22-2015, 11:51 AM
#740
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HoundDog
33,000 comments out of 750,000 AMA members commenting on the last NPRM ain't gona make it this time.
03-22-2015, 03:16 PM
#741
CJ: If having everyone prove that they know, When, Where and how they Toys are allowed and how to prove they know the Safety code and Rules. Seems a simple test to prove one knows what they need to know is a very simple way to educate the world...If U disagree Then what do U suggest we as the knowledgeable responsible TOY AIRPLANE DRIVERS do to protect our right to continue as we have for 75 years with little interference and minimal accidents.
cj: Just What suggestions can U provide?
03-22-2015, 03:21 PM
#742
Maybe 750K AMA members after the FAA makes the only CBO/AMA MANDATORY ....
LOL.
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-22-2015 at 03:23 PM.
03-22-2015, 04:35 PM
#743
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HoundDog, I think your 'first' proposed action is a hopeless task and there is nobody to do it. At best AMA should represent all modelers if there is to be a separation between 'us' and 'them.' The Communal Bathhouse Operation is counterproductive to separating modelers from the AP/AV users that bought their rigs (that are nearly indistinguishable from our models) from Wally World or a camera shop for use as 3D mobile camera platforms, and little to no experience that modeling provides regarding the need to maintain separation from manned aircraft or putting people on the ground at risk from our operations. AMA is the only game in town as far as representing modelers goes, but they have decided to represent only those that have paid them directly ( that is, not just as taxpayers that pick up their share of the tax burden) to do so, and further, in reply to 'second' proposed action are hell bent on chasing the $$$ that commercial users of similar craft have in their pockets, so the needed separation of interests you speak of isn't going to happen either. It's repetitive I know, but we are being sucked in with the same pool of users less likely to be well informed enough to operate safely and responsibly, and it is our AMA that is sucking us into that pool.
Being knowledgeable of the safety code and rules is no challenge to anyone with an IQ north of par golf. The simple guidance in AC 91-57 can be compressed into about two lines of text, yet it has been the essence of of rules needed to establish an excellent safety record of modelers for over 3 decades. That is the record of all modelers even though AMA claims it as their own and corrupted it with a stragegic punctuation change and added a lot of 'don't run with scissors' level of detailed rules for their own members. I think too much detail in rules defeats the purpose of having them. It seems to say "you don't have to think, just do what we say" rather than appeal to exercise of good judgement and taking responsibility for your actions, and be reminded that if/when you screw up you risk putting every other modelers freedom to fly as well as your own.
So then, I'm not really disagreeing with what you say should be done, but have some reservations about what could accomplished in a practical sense. I am suggesting that AMA members should be asking the bosses to provide some real leadership rather than chasing the gold at the end of the rainbow, building their empire and egos (as in becoming "significant," the measure of performance they have adopted for themselves - see prexy report in Mar MA edition) and instead stick to promoting and preserving model aviation per their charter. They might better use the PR force they have assembled to respond to events reported in the media that blacken our image, at least as a part-time aside from their current direction to sell/induce more AMA memberships. They might better respond to FAA proposed rule making that more rules are not needed, rather than sticking with the current posture that more rules are fine but our dues paying members should be excluded from them.
Being knowledgeable of the safety code and rules is no challenge to anyone with an IQ north of par golf. The simple guidance in AC 91-57 can be compressed into about two lines of text, yet it has been the essence of of rules needed to establish an excellent safety record of modelers for over 3 decades. That is the record of all modelers even though AMA claims it as their own and corrupted it with a stragegic punctuation change and added a lot of 'don't run with scissors' level of detailed rules for their own members. I think too much detail in rules defeats the purpose of having them. It seems to say "you don't have to think, just do what we say" rather than appeal to exercise of good judgement and taking responsibility for your actions, and be reminded that if/when you screw up you risk putting every other modelers freedom to fly as well as your own.
So then, I'm not really disagreeing with what you say should be done, but have some reservations about what could accomplished in a practical sense. I am suggesting that AMA members should be asking the bosses to provide some real leadership rather than chasing the gold at the end of the rainbow, building their empire and egos (as in becoming "significant," the measure of performance they have adopted for themselves - see prexy report in Mar MA edition) and instead stick to promoting and preserving model aviation per their charter. They might better use the PR force they have assembled to respond to events reported in the media that blacken our image, at least as a part-time aside from their current direction to sell/induce more AMA memberships. They might better respond to FAA proposed rule making that more rules are not needed, rather than sticking with the current posture that more rules are fine but our dues paying members should be excluded from them.
03-22-2015, 04:37 PM
#744
As long as RC toys are available at Wally World, people are going to do their own thing. They're not going to be bothered with taking a test and carrying a slip in their back pocket.
03-23-2015, 04:41 AM
#747
Think the Carny has heard of the AMA, or the guy wasting his money trying to win an r/c helo with a camera that the box says will fly itself? Unlikely. They just want to get one and go buzzing around the neighborhood like they see guys doing on the 6 o'clock news.
03-23-2015, 05:19 AM
#748
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hither & Yonder, USA
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Littlecrankshaf...Are you suggesting that the cameraman, is some sort of law enforcement, who should not be eluded, especially when he hasn't been given permission to record the individual in question??? After all, isn't that what so many complaints are about in the first place, concerning so-called drones..invasion of privacy???
03-23-2015, 05:29 AM
#749
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hither & Yonder, USA
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-23-2015, 05:42 AM
#750
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not assuming what I stated about him not living there. As soon as I can dig up the article again, I'll post it, for all to read.
@Littlecrankshaf...Are you suggesting that the cameraman, is some sort of law enforcement, who should not be eluded, especially when he hasn't been given permission to record the individual in question??? After all, isn't that what so many complaints are about in the first place, concerning so-called drones..invasion of privacy???
@Littlecrankshaf...Are you suggesting that the cameraman, is some sort of law enforcement, who should not be eluded, especially when he hasn't been given permission to record the individual in question??? After all, isn't that what so many complaints are about in the first place, concerning so-called drones..invasion of privacy???