time to stop the dromes..........NOW
03-06-2015, 10:12 AM
#801
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Follow your god however you wish...I've not bad mouthed any of your gods...just have a hard time understanding the desire of some fanatic religious followers to take the position of killing infidels.
03-06-2015, 10:28 AM
#803
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do U care if the AMA is trying to expand it's ranks it can only be good for U Me the hobby and all the people that have any responsible thing to do with RC flying in general. People should be licensed to fly RC. These things are dangerous they can "KILL" when used incorrectly. If people had to be licensed to fly and pass a knowledge test 99.999% of our problem would be MOOT.
What U fail understand is that if it were not for the efforts of the AMA for 75+ years R/C wouldn't be where it is today. Also U have a fishing licence to fish and Hunt, a drivers licence to ride a car cycle a licence to fly ... why not either have a licence to fly R/C anyplace but a CBO chartered field. Anyone wanting to fly OFF THE RESERVATION (CBO FIELD) should prove that they possess the Knowledge and the skills to fly anything they intend to fly where they intend to fly it..
In New Zeland they fly out to 4 KMs with no problems all RC flies under 400foot in New Zeland. They also I BELIEVE must belong to their equivalent of our AMA and if with 5 miles/kms of an air port hold a special certificate from their (AMA).
Any New Zelanders out that can enlighten us.
03-06-2015, 10:47 AM
#804
I'm with U 110% but not getting Political HONEST donnie man if the world doesn't stop'em they will execute every one but their own believers. That's what they profess. Nuff Said. But as fa as god's are considered, the one's I fear the most are the R/C gods that pick those airplane numbers...U know the ones that cause our airplane to find the inside of a garbage bag. LOL
03-06-2015, 11:03 AM
#805
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O'l Cranky:
I'm with U 110% but not getting Political HONEST donnie man if the world doesn't stop'em they will execute every one but their own believers. That's what they profess. Nuff Said. But as fa as god's are considered, the one's I fear the most are the R/C gods that pick those airplane numbers...U know the ones that cause our airplane to find the inside of a garbage bag. LOL
I'm with U 110% but not getting Political HONEST donnie man if the world doesn't stop'em they will execute every one but their own believers. That's what they profess. Nuff Said. But as fa as god's are considered, the one's I fear the most are the R/C gods that pick those airplane numbers...U know the ones that cause our airplane to find the inside of a garbage bag. LOL
You are an asset to AMA and should be very proud...as they should likewise be proud to have you. You, more than anyone I can remember, epetomizes what the AMAish philosophy stands for...Job well done!
03-06-2015, 11:16 AM
#806
I just can't understand why anyone would want to belong to any organization with wich they so vehemently dis agree. U don't suppose they are just joiners so they have a place to fly. Hipo-crits I'd say. Now if they were trying to in realty participate and have constructive criticizem that's different but I don't believe that. JMHO as always
03-06-2015, 11:16 AM
#807
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give it up drones (even dromes) are here to stay
When they reach the level to be part of automobile commercials they are not going away. The FAA knows this as does the AMA. Just love the spoof of Alfred Hitchcock s' "The Birds" and Amazons drone delivery plan.. Kudos to AUDI.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcV71liAMwc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcV71liAMwc
Last edited by bradpaul; 03-06-2015 at 11:19 AM.
03-06-2015, 11:26 AM
#808
When they reach the level to be part of automobile commercials they are not going away. The FAA knows this as does the AMA. Just love the spoof of Alfred Hitchcock s' "The Birds" and Amazons drone delivery plan.. Kudos to AUDI.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcV71liAMwc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcV71liAMwc
B.P. U hit the Nail square on the Head. People that fly real R/C will get board with the Quads per say.
Just like Fomeys and Most Hovering type 3D planes. Remember when Fomies and 3D planes just
made the runway congested. Most are gone now at the fields I frequent anyway.
03-06-2015, 01:01 PM
#809
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hemet , CA
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont know what to say about the drones i dont have one dont want one maybe stop buying things from places who sell them tell the stores u wont shop any more till they stop selling them i just dont know
03-06-2015, 01:13 PM
#810
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Throwing the "you are wrong" crap in your posts just makes you look like more of an idiot than the content of the rest of your posts, so you may want to lay off. I specifically said if the AMA wants to get involved with and advocate for drones fine, but the first thing they should do is get the FAA to recognize line of sight flying rc planes and helicopters as a separate category.
When all this started the AMA made the choice to exclude anything but FPV with a second pilot on a buddy box. So at the point the AMA felt it was perfectly fine to throw all the other people flying outside that definition "under the bus" precisely because they felt being associated with drones and the people flying them threatened our hobby. The AMA understood that many of the people buying these things have no training, no experience and by simple statistics a large percentage will have no common sense. The AMA was smart enough to recognize a recipe for disaster when it saw it, but later they realized how many people were buying these things and changed their decision in order to sign them up as dues paying members. In fact they are lobbying to make it a law that anyone flying one MUST join a recognized CBO, ie. the AMA. I think, even if the AMA can get the regulations they are hoping for at first, down the road things will change as more and more idiots get these things and do stupid things with them. If the AMA does not make it clear now that rc flying and drones are two distinct categories we will all pay the price when the regulations are tightened.
When all this started the AMA made the choice to exclude anything but FPV with a second pilot on a buddy box. So at the point the AMA felt it was perfectly fine to throw all the other people flying outside that definition "under the bus" precisely because they felt being associated with drones and the people flying them threatened our hobby. The AMA understood that many of the people buying these things have no training, no experience and by simple statistics a large percentage will have no common sense. The AMA was smart enough to recognize a recipe for disaster when it saw it, but later they realized how many people were buying these things and changed their decision in order to sign them up as dues paying members. In fact they are lobbying to make it a law that anyone flying one MUST join a recognized CBO, ie. the AMA. I think, even if the AMA can get the regulations they are hoping for at first, down the road things will change as more and more idiots get these things and do stupid things with them. If the AMA does not make it clear now that rc flying and drones are two distinct categories we will all pay the price when the regulations are tightened.
Because I no longer fly RC fixed wing (may get an FPV powered Glider kit) or single rotor aircraft you think I should be banned from the AMA? Get real dude, multicopters are here to stay, thousands are sold monthly in the U.S. and just like when other new products came out like jets, RTF, and FPV many of the long time members moaned and complained about that. Changing times requires changing minds.
Last edited by JerryEl; 03-06-2015 at 02:34 PM.
03-06-2015, 05:10 PM
#811
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]
i dont know what to say about the drones i dont have one dont want one maybe stop buying things from places who sell them tell the stores u wont shop any more till they stop selling them i just dont know
03-06-2015, 05:59 PM
#812
My Feedback: (551)
Anyone remember the "Zagi" flying wing? They sold a hundred thousand of them one year, then a year later they literally couldn't give them away. The company that made them went bankrupt and several of the copy-cat sellers lost their shirts as well. Commercial uses aside, the recreational quad is a fad.
03-06-2015, 06:18 PM
#813
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone remember the "Zagi" flying wing? They sold a hundred thousand of them one year, then a year later they literally couldn't give them away. The company that made them went bankrupt and several of the copy-cat sellers lost their shirts as well. Commercial uses aside, the recreational quad is a fad.
03-07-2015, 05:31 AM
#814
Anyone remember the "Zagi" flying wing? They sold a hundred thousand of them one year, then a year later they literally couldn't give them away. The company that made them went bankrupt and several of the copy-cat sellers lost their shirts as well. Commercial uses aside, the recreational quad is a fad.
There is a faction out there that "If I Don't Do It, Nobody should be allowed to."
03-07-2015, 05:40 AM
#815
So, there are many segments to this. When we started with giant scale aircraft, for some, the sky was falling, then ARFs came along, 3D came along, same thing, then foamies, then electrics, There are a lot of folks that are afraid of change... And change can be good or bad, but there is one thing you cannot do: stop change. It is the human fabric.
And this "drone" thing believe me, it will be worth billions, and a booster for the economy in a very short period of time. While most cannot see this, it boomed in the military market:-)
Gerry
PS: and I still fly giant scale, others stil fly zaggis (not many), others 3d, others free flight and rubber power, and U control. As I said things change... But some people are still shooting 35mm for fun. I still have my 35mm nikons, I know I can do back and shoot some film anytime. Things rarely disappear entirely...
Last edited by GerKonig; 03-07-2015 at 07:06 AM. Reason: typo
03-07-2015, 07:09 AM
#816
My Feedback: (25)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Westerly,
RI
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think they've made it perfectly clear the differences. But we are ALL members and multicopters are the fastest growing number of new members. How can you say this is bad when they stress the common sense "rules" of safe flying to the newbies?
Because I no longer fly RC fixed wing (may get an FPV powered Glider kit) or single rotor aircraft you think I should be banned from the AMA?
Because I no longer fly RC fixed wing (may get an FPV powered Glider kit) or single rotor aircraft you think I should be banned from the AMA?
As a hobby, rc flying has existed for decades without drawing attention to itself, and for good reason. We were just a bunch of dorky guys out in a field playing with our toys. We were, in general, only a safety risk to ourselves like most other activities. Drones obviously do attract a huge amount of attention and the way many people fly them they a safety issue and public image nightmare. The likelihood that in the future more and more laws are passed at every level to limit drones is serious. If rc planes operating under line of sight rules are lumped in with drones you can bet a lot of those rules and regulations will impact rc plane flyers. I for one don't want to register my planes or get a license to fly. I strongly disagree with anyone that views that as reasonable. We're talking about toys, not passenger carrying motor vehicles. Just wait until you tell a new person interested in rc they have to go to the state licensing department to get an rc license and register the foamy they just bought before they can fly at your field.
Just a couple years ago when all this started the AMA recognized the difference between models flown in the line of sight were different enough that they lobbied for different rules. When they saw the number of people buying drones they decided that getting new AMA members was the most important outcome, so they switched positions. They stopped lobbying for a different set of rules.
This also reminds me of the AMA effort to recruit park flyers a few years back. Without a mandate from the state requiring anyone that buys a quad copter to join a CBO like the AMA, why would they? So they can fly their quad copter over the same runway time after time? Not gonna happen. Even if some people do join, a significant number of them are going to do what they want and fly where and when they want. Just because the AMA takes their money and sends them a email link to the safety rules won't make them safer.
03-07-2015, 07:15 AM
#817
RC flies under 400foot in New Zeland.
03-07-2015, 08:46 AM
#818
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where did I say that they should be banned from the AMA? In the post you quoted I explicitly wrote: "I specifically said if the AMA wants to get involved with and advocate for drones fine..." It's funny how people can read so much into something that's not there or right in front of their eyes. Personally I think drones are very cool. I don't have one only because I have enough toys and interests already. Pretty sure if I had one I would want to do some of the things I'm not supposed to though according to the new regs.
As a hobby, rc flying has existed for decades without drawing attention to itself, and for good reason. We were just a bunch of dorky guys out in a field playing with our toys. We were, in general, only a safety risk to ourselves like most other activities. Drones obviously do attract a huge amount of attention and the way many people fly them they a safety issue and public image nightmare. The likelihood that in the future more and more laws are passed at every level to limit drones is serious. If rc planes operating under line of sight rules are lumped in with drones you can bet a lot of those rules and regulations will impact rc plane flyers. I for one don't want to register my planes or get a license to fly. I strongly disagree with anyone that views that as reasonable. We're talking about toys, not passenger carrying motor vehicles. Just wait until you tell a new person interested in rc they have to go to the state licensing department to get an rc license and register the foamy they just bought before they can fly at your field.
Just a couple years ago when all this started the AMA recognized the difference between models flown in the line of sight were different enough that they lobbied for different rules. When they saw the number of people buying drones they decided that getting new AMA members was the most important outcome, so they switched positions. They stopped lobbying for a different set of rules.
This also reminds me of the AMA effort to recruit park flyers a few years back. Without a mandate from the state requiring anyone that buys a quad copter to join a CBO like the AMA, why would they? So they can fly their quad copter over the same runway time after time? Not gonna happen. Even if some people do join, a significant number of them are going to do what they want and fly where and when they want. Just because the AMA takes their money and sends them a email link to the safety rules won't make them safer.
As a hobby, rc flying has existed for decades without drawing attention to itself, and for good reason. We were just a bunch of dorky guys out in a field playing with our toys. We were, in general, only a safety risk to ourselves like most other activities. Drones obviously do attract a huge amount of attention and the way many people fly them they a safety issue and public image nightmare. The likelihood that in the future more and more laws are passed at every level to limit drones is serious. If rc planes operating under line of sight rules are lumped in with drones you can bet a lot of those rules and regulations will impact rc plane flyers. I for one don't want to register my planes or get a license to fly. I strongly disagree with anyone that views that as reasonable. We're talking about toys, not passenger carrying motor vehicles. Just wait until you tell a new person interested in rc they have to go to the state licensing department to get an rc license and register the foamy they just bought before they can fly at your field.
Just a couple years ago when all this started the AMA recognized the difference between models flown in the line of sight were different enough that they lobbied for different rules. When they saw the number of people buying drones they decided that getting new AMA members was the most important outcome, so they switched positions. They stopped lobbying for a different set of rules.
This also reminds me of the AMA effort to recruit park flyers a few years back. Without a mandate from the state requiring anyone that buys a quad copter to join a CBO like the AMA, why would they? So they can fly their quad copter over the same runway time after time? Not gonna happen. Even if some people do join, a significant number of them are going to do what they want and fly where and when they want. Just because the AMA takes their money and sends them a email link to the safety rules won't make them safer.
03-07-2015, 10:34 AM
#819
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: OZark,
MO
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well with the vast number of nearly self flying machines being sold the crap is going to continue. But it is mostly idiots and non AMA in my opinion. The media is feeding on it some what. An example is not many mention the quad that dumped itself on the White House lawn was owned by a government employee. This is hearsay as well.
Personally I can't wait for delivery drones to bring me free equipment......now where did I put the butterfly net?
Personally I can't wait for delivery drones to bring me free equipment......now where did I put the butterfly net?
03-07-2015, 11:27 AM
#820
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CJ, I have read and reread the sUAS NPRM, I am personally quite satisfied that it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers. However, I could be wrong. So, would you please clue me in to your concerns with the rule. I suppose, I could write a comment supporting it, but that would be superfluous, to my way of thinking.
03-07-2015, 11:43 AM
#821
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well with the vast number of nearly self flying machines being sold the crap is going to continue. But it is mostly idiots and non AMA in my opinion. The media is feeding on it some what. An example is not many mention the quad that dumped itself on the White House lawn was owned by a government employee. This is hearsay as well.
Personally I can't wait for delivery drones to bring me free equipment......now where did I put the butterfly net?
Personally I can't wait for delivery drones to bring me free equipment......now where did I put the butterfly net?
03-07-2015, 03:29 PM
#822
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CJ, I have read and reread the sUAS NPRM, I am personally quite satisfied that it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers. However, I could be wrong. So, would you please clue me in to your concerns with the rule. I suppose, I could write a comment supporting it, but that would be superfluous, to my way of thinking.
Because of the statutory prohibition on FAA rulemaking regarding model aircraft
that meet the above criteria, model aircraft meeting these criteria would not be subject to
the provisions of proposed part 107. Likewise, operators of model aircraft excepted from
part 107 by the statute would not need to hold an unmanned aircraft operator’s certificate
with a small UAS rating. However, the FAA emphasizes that because the prohibition on
rulemaking in section 336 of Public Law 112-95 is limited to model aircraft that meet all of
the above statutory criteria, model aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds that fail to meet all
of the statutory criteria would be subject to proposed part 107.
that meet the above criteria, model aircraft meeting these criteria would not be subject to
the provisions of proposed part 107. Likewise, operators of model aircraft excepted from
part 107 by the statute would not need to hold an unmanned aircraft operator’s certificate
with a small UAS rating. However, the FAA emphasizes that because the prohibition on
rulemaking in section 336 of Public Law 112-95 is limited to model aircraft that meet all of
the above statutory criteria, model aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds that fail to meet all
of the statutory criteria would be subject to proposed part 107.
Last edited by cj_rumley; 03-07-2015 at 03:31 PM.
03-07-2015, 06:32 PM
#823
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if you read on p. 46
Now if in saying "........ it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers" you equate "us" to mean $$AMA members as it often appears you do, that might be correct until $$AMA exploits the expanded grip of their monopoly. I don't disregard the huge majority of modelers that choose not to belong to $$AMA as insignificant, so "us" means something different to me, and the highlighted part of above paragraph totally sucks. Some jerks at FAA are in a sandbox spat with some jerks at $$AMA over who has the bigger p****es, and modelers are left to wonder if said jerks will ever get down to business and how the fallout will affect them.
Now if in saying "........ it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers" you equate "us" to mean $$AMA members as it often appears you do, that might be correct until $$AMA exploits the expanded grip of their monopoly. I don't disregard the huge majority of modelers that choose not to belong to $$AMA as insignificant, so "us" means something different to me, and the highlighted part of above paragraph totally sucks. Some jerks at FAA are in a sandbox spat with some jerks at $$AMA over who has the bigger p****es, and modelers are left to wonder if said jerks will ever get down to business and how the fallout will affect them.
03-07-2015, 06:52 PM
#824
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if you read on p. 46
Now if in saying "........ it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers" you equate "us" to mean $$AMA members as it often appears you do, that might be correct until $$AMA exploits the expanded grip of their monopoly. I don't disregard the huge majority of modelers that choose not to belong to $$AMA as insignificant, so "us" means something different to me, and the highlighted part of above paragraph totally sucks. Some jerks at FAA are in a sandbox spat with some jerks at $$AMA over who has the bigger p****es, and modelers are left to wonder if said jerks will ever get down to business and how the fallout will affect them.
Now if in saying "........ it has no negative effect on us recreational flyers" you equate "us" to mean $$AMA members as it often appears you do, that might be correct until $$AMA exploits the expanded grip of their monopoly. I don't disregard the huge majority of modelers that choose not to belong to $$AMA as insignificant, so "us" means something different to me, and the highlighted part of above paragraph totally sucks. Some jerks at FAA are in a sandbox spat with some jerks at $$AMA over who has the bigger p****es, and modelers are left to wonder if said jerks will ever get down to business and how the fallout will affect them.
03-07-2015, 07:02 PM
#825
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What part of "However, the FAA emphasizes that because the prohibition on rulemaking in section 336 of Public Law 112-95 is limited to model aircraft that meet all of the above statutory criteria," did you not understand?
