Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

I agree they are quite simple and very similar. What I don’t understand is why do the couple dozen of you guys on this forum have such a problem with it? In Canada we have been flying these things without problems for years. I am not talking about the clowns that insist they don’t have to follow common sense rules I am talking the members of our organization MAAC. Transport Canada (same as your FAA) recognizes MAAC as the authority for modeling in Canada. Together they have reviewed their safety policy and guidelines and agree they are sufficient. Our safety record with full size aircraft is impeccable. Simply fly in the manner agreed upon and there should never be a conflict. At registered fields and events there are no altitude restriction or ban on FPV.

Transport Canada simply controls all things in our airspace. That’s the way it’s written. Local police, provincial police, federal police (RCMP) and agents of Transport Canada can issue fines and summons for alleged violations. The official attending the incident is allowed to use their discretion whether to issue a summons/ticket. You will have the opportunity to argue your case in the courts same as any other charge.

As to the clowns that insist they can do what they want the only concern we as members of MAAC have is the reflection on the rest of us in the eyes of the general public. Transport Canada has said they will deal with these individuals and companies as their identities become known as long as we continue to fly in the manner of the past we should see no changes in the way we have been enjoying our hobby.

Transport Canada has a hotline if someone wants to report violators or someone flying in an unsafe manner.

JohnShe

It would appear that some of them, not all, are unable to separate the commercial from the recreational.

On the recreational side, here in the US, we have it made, we have our AMA and FAA who both want to see recreational model aviation to continue to be safe and successful. The may be struggling to work together, with lots of mixed signals, but things will work out. The evidence of this is out there plain as day and quite overwhelming.

Unfortunately, some people ignore facts and used their twisted gut for reasoning.

The commercial will have to deal with the FAA and that is their problem, not mine. They might get some, or all, of what they want or they might not. But, it will have no effect on the recreational side.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

From talking with those I know in the US that's exactly the feeling I get. Same as here, fly reasonably, fly safe, learn your responsibilities as a recreational model flyer and you can enjoy the hobby as you always have. AMA membership is not a requirement no different than before as long as your reasonable. I fly regularly in the US and have not noticed any change and there are a lot of multirotors flying. I have not witnessed any unsafe behaviour at any of the fields I have attended everyone seems quite reasonable. New multirotor pilots will often announce their intention to take to the air giving everyone a chance to keep your eyes on the model.

There are always going to be a few who will object more so if they think there is a safety issue. When I first started flying my hotliner I took it easy to get used to it. Lots of comments on how fast it was and how it could climb to the limit of sight in no time. I mistakenly told a few that I was only at half throttle. A few days of flying and I opened it up on the way up and I thought it really booked. The more I got used to it I let it cook across the field. The combo I was using is a known combo and it can hit 150 mph. It sure seem like it. Grumbling started about first the thing coming apart at that speed then if I lost it doing a high speed pass it might end up in the crowd. It was pointed out the airframe was rated for 150 plus and some of the jets that flew at the field were faster. It didn't mater a couple of guys continue to beach to this day. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Dennis

CHARLES WINTER

Hi Guys, Saw on TV the other night a company that is manufacturing TETHERED DRONES. It's an approach to be in more control of the Drone. The company is "Drone Aviation Holding Corp." You can GOOGLE it or go the OTC "Over The Counter" identification DRNE. It shows a Blimp and Quad Copter on Tethered line that goes up 1000 ft. Their big PITCH for the Tethering, is they avoid the FAA restrictions. Just another approach to the situation developing now. Col. Chuck Winter

rcrmel

Happy new year old buddy! Mel.

JohnShe

Cool, tetherdrone! All I need is a big Louisville Slugger to knock one out of the sky.

CHARLES WINTER

Hi Mel, Glad to hear from you. The Blimp Drones have been shoot at and received many holes but continue to stay aloft for hours. Check the Web Site out. Very interesting. Col. Chuck Winter
My F7F at Castle Airport "IMAA Fly-In" May 2014 Great SMOKE SYSTEM

binns aero

Trolls?,Idiots? Happy New Year to All!, I'm here so lets start the beat down,go ahead let me have it!

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Ok guys, lets quit the silly antics. If you can't discuss the issue without resorting to posting silly off topic nonsense or attacking other members then you shouldn't post here. Otherwise I'll remove the posts from the thread as they have not to add to the discussion at all.

Ken

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

Personally, I think the entire thread should be deleted. The original poster should have known that by denigrating an entire category of people in the rc community , this thread would devolve into a flame war. Multirotor aircraft and FPV are two of the most dynamic and fastest growing segments of the rc industry. As far as a lot of us are concerned, the very first post was meant as an attack upon a very large group of people.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

maybe... I posted a video of a hawk stopping a drome and it was deleted.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Have What sounds like U got it all right
What more do we need. Gota call an Spade a Spade Right

Besides nobudy from "JOYSEE" is ever wrong.

Freedom Flyer

I saw a video piece from an old RCM Video magazine VHS tape back in the mid 80's of a guy using FPV and flying 20 miles away from his take off point. The plane was transmitting the video signal back to a television in his van so he could see where he was flying. I knew back then that this was one day going to be an issue that we would be worried about. It is really a shame that people seem to not have any common sense anymore, and think about what they are doing. I am fortunate to live in one of the least populated states in the country with only a few cities over 50,000 people and airports that have more than 10 gates. I live about 90 miles from Yellowstone National Park and there was a gentleman this last summer that took a quad-copter into the park and it malfunctioned and went into one of the geyser pools. It was of course destroyed but has prompted the "officials" to impose all sorts of regulations now as to what is allowed into the park. If RC pilots aren't concerned, we really should be. I think that this is really going to affect the higher populated areas. For me and my fellow Montanans probably not so much. So I am very grateful for our wide open spaces.our open slopeOur open LZ on our slopeAnd our views.

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

Who it's really going to affect is anyone that causes an accident, posts stupid stunts or somehow or another draws attention to themselves. The vast majority that use common sense and stay away from situations that draw attention won't have much to worry about. I personally don't have a problem with the Feds going after idiots.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

This idiot is a typical venture into the light commercial UAV taking pictures for real estate where you may have to fly in close proximity to others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDOg4D5VI8c

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

Somehow I don't think this has as much impact as a full scale flying into housing. I have yet to hear about a quadcopter or mulitrotor killing anyone in their homes. Yes, accidents happen but they happen with nearly anything that flies, rolls or otherwise moves due to mechanical means. Maybe we should ban private ownership of full scale planes seeing as how many people die each year from their misuse or accidents. I found the following news articles in less than 2 minutes and there are literally thousands. Now show me even one where someone took down a house with a quadcopter. Seems to me we have lots more to worry about with full scale than anyone ever had to worry about from some guy with a quadcopter and a camera. It seems these days that the FAA has polarised the rc community into two distinct groups of people, those that don't see any risk in anything and those that see danger around every corner. I sure hope the latter don't hunt. Then again that group would be too afraid to walk into the woods, armed or not.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/08/us/mar...use/index.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...pilot-27897651
http://abcnews.go.com/US/small-plane...ry?id=26989396
http://www.news4jax.com/news/small-p...-home/30219222
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/04...r-fla-airport/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/plane-cr...believed-dead/


Now google "people killed by quadcopter"
This is the ONLY story you will find and it's not even a "drone"
http://vr-zone.com/articles/man-kill...ter/45290.html
Seems to me that all the chicken little types should picket airports.

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

And as far as privately owned "drones" being a hazard to full scale or commercial aviation?
None there either but search about manned aircraft colliding? Read and you will see that once again, piloted planes are the problem. Maybe we should just ban all aviation just to be truly safe.........................
http://rt.com/news/167888-germany-military-jet-collide/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3367626.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...scape/3420605/

Heck, here's the whole search.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=Planes+...Air&FORM=QSRE4

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

You're dealing in false equivalences here. You're also mixing up at least two different issues. Banning scale aircraft, why? And who said anything about banning multi-rotor? The FAA hasn't polarized anybody, they are attempting to enforce some pretty common sense approaches to this technology. Anyone who doesn't see the potential safety hazard of FPV gear being flown thousands of feet with no real ability for scale aircraft to see them needs to get a reality check. A simple google search in the past 6 months shows plenty of reports by pilots of these things flying around. Although I hope it never comes to it, I think it's only a matter of time before there is more than a "near miss".

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

"Although I hope it never comes to it, I think it's only a matter of time before there is more than a "near miss"."

There have been many 'near misses'!

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Epic Fail. $15k.....oooffaa!

I only watched it once, but I thought I heard the spotter saying something about "left" and "right" not working. I wasn't to impressed with the takeoff and hovering, seemed pretty "loose". This dude was lucky there were only two cars he damaged (wonder how much the damage was and who paid). If he was hired to shoot the house, gotta wonder why he didn't do the shoot from there instead of across a big body of water.

The look on his face aftewards is priceless....like, wow...what happened? Derp!

countilaw

I think that a lot more of these accidents happen, we just don't hear about them. In the video, it appeared that neither of the gentlemen knew what they were doing.

I can only imagine the damage if those wooden rotors had struck a bystander.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

I agree and on top of that when it does happen want to bet the turkey who caused the incident won't have anything that would identify who he is and he will slither back under his rock pretending nothing has happened. "You don't have the right to hold me responsible." seems to go hand in hand with "You don't have the right to tell me what I can and cannot do" Probably the same mentality of those who don't pick up after their pets>

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

So you don't think that 2 guys getting out of a van, setting up a very complicated looking contraption won't attract attention i.e. witnesses? You're pretty naïve to think that. When I go out taking photos and video, I draw plenty of people looking. You seem to have a very skewed idea of people you know nothing about. So tell me, how many of your flying buddies have any contact information in their slimers? I bet few if any do.

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

I think you need to go back and read even the title of this thread. And no, it's not a false equivalence when the FAA considers "everything" to be aircraft. And saying that there are plenty of reports only shows that pilots are seeing something, not necessarily a quadcopter. Before quadcopters, everything was a UFO. I doubt that they are seeing much anything to be honest. Lots of people are saying that this is nothing more than FAA hype like depicted in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7eVKDHVPmg and this is the truth concerning the incident. http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/re...r-feared-crash

bradpaul

Real insight there, of course you could say "it's only a matter of time before (insert anything possible here)".