Another Drone Pilot does it Again
06-10-2015, 05:40 AM
#1701
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Ya, not the brightest move on either one of them. There's a time and place, and in the middle of a public street sure doesn't seem like the right place. The guy said something about it flying over his house, perhaps it did earlier. Either way, not the best way to deal with it.
06-10-2015, 05:57 AM
#1702
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (209)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warningshot: I regret making that statement, and apologize to anyone that got offended. Politics and Religion have no place in any forum. I got carried away for a moment and it won't happen again. We just should discuss what the thread is about and keep on the subject matter..
06-10-2015, 07:30 AM
#1703
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warningshot: I regret making that statement, and apologize to anyone that got offended. Politics and Religion have no place in any forum. I got carried away for a moment and it won't happen again. We just should discuss what the thread is about and keep on the subject matter..
06-10-2015, 10:23 AM
#1704
Warningshot: I regret making that statement, and apologize to anyone that got offended. Politics and Religion have no place in any forum. I got carried away for a moment and it won't happen again. We just should discuss what the thread is about and keep on the subject matter..
06-10-2015, 10:50 AM
#1705
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-10-2015, 11:43 AM
#1707
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe...but people like that tend to be self absorbed with "I done the right thing"...and maybe he did...other than the usual sensationalism of some video, few if any extraneous facts are known. Seems the civil courts (small claims) may get an exercise...and I am happy with if that turns out to be the case...otherwise probably just a bunch of idiots having their fun...LOL Either way, matters little...
06-10-2015, 01:10 PM
#1708
Then there are the fireman who sprayed some a------le's drone that was flying over, and getting to close, to a fire they were trying to put out. Dang shame he got away uncathed.
06-10-2015, 01:13 PM
#1709
Maybe...but people like that tend to be self absorbed with "I done the right thing"...and maybe he did...other than the usual sensationalism of some video, few if any extraneous facts are known. Seems the civil courts (small claims) may get an exercise...and I am happy with if that turns out to be the case...otherwise probably just a bunch of idiots having their fun...LOL Either way, matters little...
06-10-2015, 04:46 PM
#1713
Banned
My Feedback: (788)
A brief interlude from the digging up of negative footage and further supporting of Quadrama.
http://www.homesnacks.net/youve-neve...anteed-121366/
http://www.homesnacks.net/youve-neve...anteed-121366/
06-10-2015, 05:41 PM
#1714
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that religion has no business in thsi thread but politics does. As I've stated before, the libtard politics of *****footing around with punishment dosn't solve a dang thing - it only exacerbates it. What did they do to the guy that flew at 2500 feet almost into a landing commuter jet? They took his drone asway and then GAVE IT BACK! Punish these people with the most sever punishment allowed (like $10.000 fines and jail time) and you will discourage others from doing the same stupid things. And that is plalin and simple politics!
06-11-2015, 05:58 AM
#1717
Originally Posted by [email protected]
all talk and no action on the drones
Yep , we get it , you don't like "drones" ......
Really , I'm curious here and I'll bet others are too . What , exactly , is it that troubles you so about these so called "drones" ? First , let's establish what specifically bothers you so much . Is it ;
That it has no wings and flys in a more helicopter like manner ?
That it carries a camera that allows a so called "bird's eye view" ?
That it could be flown out of the operator's sight and yet still remain under the operator's control ?
That it could be pre programmed to fly a specific route without further external control from the operator ? (using , of course , GPS inputs)
I ask because "traditional" model airplanes have themselves too been so modified to accomplish the above named missions and have in fact done so before the "drones" (by which I suspect you may mean "quads") . Except for maybe the fly like a helicopter part , it was good ol high wing traditional balsa airplanes that paved the path for all the advancements in technology you seem to fear and rail against , without really seeming to realize that in the scope of the hobby flying of model aircraft , "they" are pretty much "us" , using the technology that the advancements of time and hard work have brought us . Can the new technology be abused ? Sure it can , and I'm sure there will be a set of penalties put in place reflective of any risks brought fourth by the new abilities . There never were laws against reckless flying before Wilbur and Orville and as we all know it didn't take long after the public got it's hands on the new technology that "anti barnstorming" laws came into being . Same with this , a new tech , some growing pains , and before ya know it Amazon is drone drop shipping your latest and greatest purchase right to your front door . Our only possible "problem" in any of this is to keep clear the line between commercial and hobby use , and to keep the hobby side from getting any black eyes in the press for reckless flying . So long as we hobbyists can keep a responsible public face and distance ourselves from any who chose to fly FPV beyond the limits of our AMA doc #550 , we really should have nothing to fear of the new technology . Our organization has determined a safe use of this great new tech .. They have laid out mostly sensible guidelines for it's use . I'm all good with that , even if I will likely never strap on a set of video goggles .....
Last edited by init4fun; 06-11-2015 at 06:04 AM.
06-11-2015, 07:31 AM
#1718
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So long as we hobbyists can keep a responsible public face and distance ourselves from any who chose to fly FPV beyond the limits of our AMA doc #550 , we really should have nothing to fear of the new technology . Our organization has determined a safe use of this great new tech .. They have laid out mostly sensible guidelines for it's use . I'm all good with that , even if I will likely never strap on a set of video goggles .....
It would truly amaze many of the responders here that FPV can be conducted very safely outside the limits of doc. 550...but throwing up the video du jour depicting the worst of FPV is the only strategy some know... all the while, inadvertently or openly calling for regulation that they say they are trying to prevent... How weird is that?
06-11-2015, 08:04 AM
#1719
Your last few sentences seems to predicate the whole dissertation on modelers flying FPV quads under the control of AMA programming. If so, I think that's a big part of the rub for many...the lack of AMA control for the general public...only the good following members that pay to be controlled are responsible enough in the eyes of many here.
It would truly amaze many of the responders here that FPV can be conducted very safely outside the limits of doc. 550...but throwing up the video du jour depicting the worst of FPV is the only strategy some know... all the while, inadvertently or openly calling for regulation that they say they are trying to prevent... How weird is that?
It would truly amaze many of the responders here that FPV can be conducted very safely outside the limits of doc. 550...but throwing up the video du jour depicting the worst of FPV is the only strategy some know... all the while, inadvertently or openly calling for regulation that they say they are trying to prevent... How weird is that?
I understand your view , and agree 100% that someone can fly FPV , or any other model aircraft safely without paying AMA dues , simply by following the good common sense laid out in hobby publications like doc #550 . I use #550 as an example of a safe set of operating guidelines only , and have never said anyone can't be safely following good practice without sending in their $58 . If you or anyone else , and I have asked this question before to no response , if anyone knows of any other hobbyist organizations advocating for safe use , I'm all ears . But till the time such becomes available , I can only refer to the only set of safe practices I know to exist . I know if FPV is flown , and #550 is followed , that is considered to be within accepted community best practices . I can't and won't , put the same disclaimer in every post on this subject ; that to fly safely , while following accepted practice , only requires the practice be followed , and anyone AMA member or not is welcome , in fact well advised , to follow the good common sense accepted practices laid out in guidelines like #550 . Does that clear it up for ya ?
06-11-2015, 08:30 AM
#1720
PS , To bring a bit more focus to my post ;
Some time ago , my Son got interested in model rockets . Even though we never joined the NAR (National Association of Rocketry) I read all their safety rules , followed the good advice contained within, and thanks to their safety code my Son enjoyed launching rockets without ever once hurting himself or anyone else . He , as most youth do , got bored quickly with launching rockets and the hobby was abandoned . We may even have joined the NAR if he really took to the hobby , but he didn't . Either way , member or not , I feel that by following the NAR's safety code , I was following the community based organization's best accepted practices , and our rocket's flights were just as safe as anyone else following the same code , paid NAR member or not .
06-11-2015, 08:31 AM
#1721
Hey Flap Happy , I Know Sport's "devil's advocate" position can be annoying to some , I understand some folks aren't looking to play "point and counterpoint" with every idea they post . But that's Sport . It's who he is , But , also , for better or worse he IS one of us , an old technologically curious guy like the rest of us . If he says something you agree with , great . If he says something you disagree with , it's your choice to either challenge him on it or just ignore it completely . But to tell a fellow RC nut he can't post just cause you don't like his posts is taking things just a bit TOO seriously , in my not so humble opinion .
I'll bet if he stops seeing responses to his politically motivated posts , he'll stop posting them . It's the response that keeps such material in print . If you and no one else responded to off topic chatter , don't ya think the thread would return to the stated subject all the quicker ?
If you are offended by this and my last two posts, politics or no, I think you need to chill out and put things into perspective.
06-11-2015, 08:45 AM
#1722
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand your view , and agree 100% that someone can fly FPV , or any other model aircraft safely without paying AMA dues , simply by following the good common sense laid out in hobby publications like doc #550 . I use #550 as an example of a safe set of operating guidelines only , and have never said anyone can't be safely following good practice without sending in their $58 . If you or anyone else , and I have asked this question before to no response , if anyone knows of any other hobbyist organizations advocating for safe use , I'm all ears . But till the time such becomes available , I can only refer to the only set of safe practices I know to exist . I know if FPV is flown , and #550 is followed , that is considered to be within accepted community best practices . I can't and won't , put the same disclaimer in every post on this subject ; that to fly safely , while following accepted practice , only requires the practice be followed , and anyone AMA member or not is welcome , in fact well advised , to follow the good common sense accepted practices laid out in guidelines like #550 . Does that clear it up for ya ?
I hope and I I do think you understand my post was not an attack on you.
You make good points about safety when someone follows doc# 550...my point was that safe flying of FPV can be maintained beyond the limits of AMA's doc #550...sure that latitude requires more attentiveness but AMA's document is really just a simple means for members to follow...but that is part of the problem with the ever evolving FPVers... the limits of 550 are just too confining for most hobbyists outside of AMA... Hard to write enough programming to cover the infinite uses of FPV, that is the "problem" we face beyond AMA's finite control... AMA has some of it right...at least the part about not covering commercial ventures...beyond that, a lot is left on the table. Just as many predict, there will be altercations where FPV will make "real" news...but many are not willing to admit that some of those will be AMA members not following doc 550...
Now, before I am tagged again as "anti AMA" again...I believe most of AMA truly cares about safety and I am certainly on board with their cause...the only problem I have is that some staunch AMAers wish to impose the limitations we ascribe to on everyone one else outside AMA. We, as AMA members, should abide by the protocol we have agreed and continue to be a model for the rest... Simply speaking...there are two ways to lead...by example or by legislation...We can take our pick but I can assure the later will only make things worse...there is ample history to support my contention...but who wants to spend their time writing that book?
06-11-2015, 09:01 AM
#1724
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
someone asked me what a drone is > it is a body with 4 arms or legs thats causeing somany people to talk about it and dont know anything to do to stop it
06-11-2015, 09:50 AM
#1725
I hope and I I do think you understand my post was not an attack on you.
You make good points about safety when someone follows doc# 550...my point was that safe flying of FPV can be maintained beyond the limits of AMA's doc #550...sure that latitude requires more attentiveness but AMA's document is really just a simple means for members to follow...but that is part of the problem with the ever evolving FPVers... the limits of 550 are just too confining for most hobbyists outside of AMA... Hard to write enough programming to cover the infinite uses of FPV, that is the "problem" we face beyond AMA's finite control... AMA has some of it right...at least the part about not covering commercial ventures...beyond that, a lot is left on the table. Just as many predict, there will be altercations where FPV will make "real" news...but many are not willing to admit that some of those will be AMA members not following doc 550...
Now, before I am tagged again as "anti AMA" again...I believe most of AMA truly cares about safety and I am certainly on board with their cause...the only problem I have is that some staunch AMAers wish to impose the limitations we ascribe to on everyone one else outside AMA. We, as AMA members, should abide by the protocol we have agreed and continue to be a model for the rest... Simply speaking...there are two ways to lead...by example or by legislation...We can take our pick but I can assure the later will only make things worse...there is ample history to support my contention...but who wants to spend their time writing that book?
You make good points about safety when someone follows doc# 550...my point was that safe flying of FPV can be maintained beyond the limits of AMA's doc #550...sure that latitude requires more attentiveness but AMA's document is really just a simple means for members to follow...but that is part of the problem with the ever evolving FPVers... the limits of 550 are just too confining for most hobbyists outside of AMA... Hard to write enough programming to cover the infinite uses of FPV, that is the "problem" we face beyond AMA's finite control... AMA has some of it right...at least the part about not covering commercial ventures...beyond that, a lot is left on the table. Just as many predict, there will be altercations where FPV will make "real" news...but many are not willing to admit that some of those will be AMA members not following doc 550...
Now, before I am tagged again as "anti AMA" again...I believe most of AMA truly cares about safety and I am certainly on board with their cause...the only problem I have is that some staunch AMAers wish to impose the limitations we ascribe to on everyone one else outside AMA. We, as AMA members, should abide by the protocol we have agreed and continue to be a model for the rest... Simply speaking...there are two ways to lead...by example or by legislation...We can take our pick but I can assure the later will only make things worse...there is ample history to support my contention...but who wants to spend their time writing that book?
No LCS , I didn't take it as an attack at me , I took it as a great opportunity to clarify my point that safety can't be bought just cause someone pays $58 , and that folks can fly safe $58 or not . I know your not anti AMA , in fact I know your very much pro AMA , just not , as you say and I agree with , for the notion that one must be AMA to fly safely . I do fear that the future will bring that AMA membership is a must in order to fly anything , the built in insurance being the reason they'll use for forcing it on everyone who wants to enjoy RC . I used to own a small sailboat , and wasn't required to join any yacht club , or even the Coast Guard , for that matter . But by following the Coast Guard's accepted safety norms , I never drowned .... It really should remain the same for model aircraft in a supposedly "free" country , be we all know how that goes , eh ?