Are you ready to register your aircraft?
12-29-2015, 02:10 PM
#3526
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
http://atwonline.com/safety/editorial-good-rule#
Link to an article providing perspective of how the registration rule is viewed by those in aviation outside of the RC world. ATW is a respected publication in the Air Transportation industry.
Link to an article providing perspective of how the registration rule is viewed by those in aviation outside of the RC world. ATW is a respected publication in the Air Transportation industry.
12-29-2015, 02:11 PM
#3527
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Eldon, MO,
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Asking permission to fly within 5 miles of an airport? I don't think so. Informing the airport is ok but there are too many RC fields wishing 5 miles of an airport.
12-29-2015, 02:11 PM
#3528
Senior Member
My Feedback: (26)
Frontline news of the passage of DRONE registration in my local paper yesterday. It clearly stated the pilot not the drone most be registered with the FAA. It also went on to say that local law enforcement agencies would be enforcing this mandate.
12-29-2015, 03:19 PM
#3531
Thank you for the clarification and I do understand I can fly at fields non-AMA as long I am following the safety code.
I was under the impression that BLOS FPV was not allowed. So what you are saying is that if I fly 2 miles out at 400ft (in reality it is usually around 600-700ft) that I am within the "rules"?
I guess I need to re-read the AMA safety code!
I was under the impression that BLOS FPV was not allowed. So what you are saying is that if I fly 2 miles out at 400ft (in reality it is usually around 600-700ft) that I am within the "rules"?
I guess I need to re-read the AMA safety code!
Mike , please go to the AMA website and read the requirements for "AMA condoned FPV flight" . These can be found in Doc. #550 . No where no way no how are you ever to stray beyond your LOS spotter's view of the aircraft if you are to remain #550 compliant !
Now , in effect , if you want to stay trapped within the confines of the visual field of view of your launch area and never stray BLOS , GREAT ! Your #550 compliant . BUT ! The second that craft leaves your required LOS spotter's sight , the AMA will disavow any association with you for having flown BLOS !
So , we the AMA endorse BLOS ABLE equipment ........ Equipment that by it's very design is fully intended to fly BLOS ....... And then totally prohibit ALL forms of BLOS ????? No wonder why the FAA wrote their way around #336 , cause they damn well knew that all this FPV equipment , whether being operated under the guise of AMA #550 FPV or not , WAS gonna be going "off the reservation" on a regular basis and in doing so will void the AMA endorsement of the flight .
Yes sir , BLOS UAS operations DO deserve to exist , just NOT under the guise of being LOS only model aircraft ! Really , I can't wait for my first delivery by Amazon drone delivery service , I just don't feel that it or any other BLOS ABLE craft fit into the description of model aircraft as should be affiliated with the AMA .
Last edited by init4fun; 12-29-2015 at 03:22 PM.
12-29-2015, 03:53 PM
#3532
Originally Posted by TimJ 
Boy, you just don't get it. It wasn't AMA members flying BLOS. It was non members that caused the problem. The mode is not the problem. It is the people.
Oh yes , Yes I DO get it , had the AMA not embraced BLOS ABLE craft , we'd have been Scott free with our #336 exemption . You don't agree ?
I really couldn't care less , since you seem to have some vested interest in getting the whole hobby regulated for the actions of a small subset .
Let me make this perfectly clear to you Tim ;
YES , I AM WILLING TO SACRIFICE #550 FPV SO THAT THE REST OF THE HOBBY CAN CONTINUE AS IT'S ALWAYS DONE .
ANY BLOS ABLE CRAFT SHOULD BE IN A CLASSIFICATION APART FROM LOS ABLE ONLY CRAFT !
Like it , or kick your feet and cry , the two modes of flight ARE different enough to warrant a different set of regulations AND a different organization other than our LOS only representing organization . Done ......
It most certainly is the PIC Pilot IN COMMAND that is responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft also it's the same for flying R/C TOYs No mater what their configuration from a vapor to a 300lb B-29 with 4 100 cc engines to a Quad carrying a camera.
Personal Responsibility has been thrown out the window in this country and that will be our down fall in everything. Apparently that's what society wants. That's just to bad for the Human Race.
12-29-2015, 03:58 PM
#3533
I have a question: What gives the FAA the authority to use MY local law enforcement to enforce some rules they have conjured up, that are not even law? We, the citizens of my community have not given permission to law enforcement to enforce such rules. At best this is an unfunded federal mandate. If the FAA wants to come up with this stuff, then they can deal with it on their own dime.
GOD
when it comes to the NAS Just ask'em
12-29-2015, 04:03 PM
#3534
Also , I'm not surprised in the least to see the selfish protestations of some here . If any other catagory of flying had grown beyond the realm of being a model aircraft , I'd want to see it split off into it's own separate endeavor as well . Just as Bicycles aren't regulated as Motorcycles are , So too should LOS model aircraft be subject to far less regulation than Tim's flying robot cameras should . Just common sense to some that the more evolved craft with enhanced capabilities should be considered a "new breed" and have a set of sensible operating guidelines of it's own , taking into account it's DIFFERENCE from a traditionally flown LOS model aircraft . Tim wants us all lumped in together , exactly what the AMA did , and now literal toy planes have to be registered like a Cessna , GREAT JOB TIM , maybe next we can have physical exams before being allowed to hold a TX too !!!!!!
GOD
ya know the FAA. Their the Ones U must convince,
Not your fellow R/C TOY flyers.
12-29-2015, 04:05 PM
#3535
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I apologize if I gave that impression. Currently the AMA rules do not allow BLOS flight. AMA Document 550 will contain rules for FPV.
Last edited by TimJ; 12-29-2015 at 04:13 PM.
12-29-2015, 04:25 PM
#3536
Ah , I see the problem now ........All this time , I've been talkin to DOG when all along I shoulda been talkin to GOD my bad , won't let it happen again
12-29-2015, 04:33 PM
#3537
After 7 million or there abouts posts in these forums ... Has anybody changed their Mind on any subject presented here, ever? Come on Now, be Honest Yes or No and this Yes Or No doesn't read backwards either I Hope but some people can twist anything.
12-29-2015, 09:04 PM
#3538
Oh yes , Yes I DO get it , had the AMA not embraced BLOS ABLE craft , we'd have been Scott free with our #336 exemption .
12-29-2015, 09:10 PM
#3539
The guy claimed he didn't know POTUS was on the island, which is unbelievable
12-29-2015, 09:39 PM
#3541
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't see a mention of the guidance method described in the FAA guidelines. In fact, they specifically mentioned paper airplanes and Frisbees being exempted because of weight - not guidance. I believe free-flight is considered an aircraft. Rocket, gas, glow, electric, rubber band or hand-launch.
Hopefully this regulation will just collapse under the sheer weight of stupidity.
Hopefully this regulation will just collapse under the sheer weight of stupidity.
I am guessing that virtually all of the 333 waivers that the FAA has approved contain a clause that prohibits flight BLOS. I do not know of any instance where the FAA has permitted BLOS flight, for either commercial or hobby purposes.
12-29-2015, 10:05 PM
#3542
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-30-2015, 04:05 AM
#3543
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-30-2015, 04:45 AM
#3544
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see what you are saying, but........how is the normal Joe Blow supposed to know about TFR's? I only know about registration because I'm on RCU. And if he was compliant and not doing anything that was reckless or threatening, why should he be punished monetarily or with jail time?
https://www.faa.gov/uas/b4ufly/
Last edited by Rob2160; 12-30-2015 at 04:49 AM.
12-30-2015, 05:07 AM
#3545
Sadly, I think the 130,000 or so paying members of AMA are going to have a relatively muted voice against such groups. It's also the reason I think it's not a matter of IF non-commercial sUAS are capped at 400 feet AGL, but rather a matter of WHEN. Altitude separation is the simplest most reliable, and easily enforceable way to keep sUAS/UAS away from manned aircraft. Other alternatives like making AMA fields some sort of special use airspace is not starter - AOPA and manned aircraft groups will get that squashed. Lastly, allowing one set of rules for members of a dues paying organization and other set of rules for non-members probably won't survive this process - the whole equal protection under the law thing. AOPA members don't get waivers from FARs. BoatUS members don't get waivers from USCG or waterways rules. AAA members don't get ability to drive faster than non members.
12-30-2015, 05:42 AM
#3546
Sadly, I think the 130,000 or so paying members of AMA are going to have a relatively muted voice against such groups. It's also the reason I think it's not a matter of IF non-commercial sUAS are capped at 400 feet AGL, but rather a matter of WHEN. Altitude separation is the simplest most reliable, and easily enforceable way to keep sUAS/UAS away from manned aircraft. Other alternatives like making AMA fields some sort of special use airspace is not starter - AOPA and manned aircraft groups will get that squashed. Lastly, allowing one set of rules for members of a dues paying organization and other set of rules for non-members probably won't survive this process - the whole equal protection under the law thing. AOPA members don't get waivers from FARs. BoatUS members don't get waivers from USCG or waterways rules. AAA members don't get ability to drive faster than non members.
12-30-2015, 05:47 AM
#3547
The drones that are being forced to register (along with our AMA approved #550 FPV equipped craft) aren't able to be flown BLOS if the pilot so desires ? Sport , really , are you SO desperate to contradict someone that you have to post such nonsense ?
Really ?
A DJI Phantom , which most certainly is required to register , CAN"T be flown BLOS ?
Dude , please fact check your postings BEFORE ya post them . Pointing out such an obvious error gives me no great pleasure , in fact , it leads me to wonder if you really have been following along all this FAA registration business , or if you just drop in to post , ahem , , "facts" like you just posted as a bit of "hit and run" stirring of the pot ?
12-30-2015, 06:16 AM
#3548
12-30-2015, 06:17 AM
#3549
12-30-2015, 06:21 AM
#3550