Are you ready to register your aircraft?
12-14-2015, 10:34 AM
#2326
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMA Reacts to DOT UAS Registration Rule
MUNCIE, Ind. – Dave Mathewson, executive director of the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) which is the world’s largest community-based organization, today made the following statement on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) rule for small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) registration:
“AMA is disappointed with the new rule for UAS registration. As a member of the task force that helped develop recommendations for this rule, AMA argued that registration makes sense at some level and for UAS flyers operating outside the guidance of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes. Unfortunately, the new rule is counter to Congress’s intent in the Special Rule for Model Aircraft and makes the registration process an unnecessary burden for our more than 185,000 members who have been operating safely for decades.
“The Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 clearly states that the FAA is prohibited from promulgating any new rules for recreational users operating within the safety guidelines of a community-based organization (CBO). Meanwhile, the FAA’s contention that model aircraft should be considered aircraft is currently the subject of pending litigation. Congress by no means intended to grant a free pass to flyers within this system. Instead, it left risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines to organizations like AMA.
“AMA’s eighty years of experience demonstrates that this voluntary, community-based approach to managing recreational flyers is highly effective. Our members follow a comprehensive set of safety and privacy guidelines, which are constantly evolving to accommodate new technologies and new modeling disciplines.
“At the same time, AMA understands that new legions of flyers need to be educated on how to fly safely and responsibly. That’s why AMA has been working closely with the FAA and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) on the Know Before You Fly campaign. Education programs like these are one of the best ways to ensure the safety of our airspace.”
# # #
Background on the FAA Interpretative Rule of Section 336
On June 23, 2014, the FAA released its “Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft,” (referred to as the “Interpretive Rule”), which imposed new restrictions on the use of model aircraft in direct contradiction to Section 336 and against the intent of Congress. The Interpretive Rule expands the definition of aircraft to include model aircraft, with which AMA disagrees. AMA has filed a petition to overturn the Interpretive Rule, which is still the subject of pending litigation.
About AMA
The Academy of Model Aeronautics, founded in 1936, continues to be devoted to national airspace safety. It serves as the nation’s collective voice for approximately 185,000 modelers in 2,400 clubs in the United States and Puerto Rico. Headquartered in Muncie, Indiana, AMA is a membership organization representing those who fly model aircraft for recreation and educational purposes. For more information, visit www.modelaircraft.org.
The above is from AMA http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...stration-rule/
MUNCIE, Ind. – Dave Mathewson, executive director of the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) which is the world’s largest community-based organization, today made the following statement on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) rule for small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) registration:
“AMA is disappointed with the new rule for UAS registration. As a member of the task force that helped develop recommendations for this rule, AMA argued that registration makes sense at some level and for UAS flyers operating outside the guidance of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes. Unfortunately, the new rule is counter to Congress’s intent in the Special Rule for Model Aircraft and makes the registration process an unnecessary burden for our more than 185,000 members who have been operating safely for decades.
“The Special Rule for Model Aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 clearly states that the FAA is prohibited from promulgating any new rules for recreational users operating within the safety guidelines of a community-based organization (CBO). Meanwhile, the FAA’s contention that model aircraft should be considered aircraft is currently the subject of pending litigation. Congress by no means intended to grant a free pass to flyers within this system. Instead, it left risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines to organizations like AMA.
“AMA’s eighty years of experience demonstrates that this voluntary, community-based approach to managing recreational flyers is highly effective. Our members follow a comprehensive set of safety and privacy guidelines, which are constantly evolving to accommodate new technologies and new modeling disciplines.
“At the same time, AMA understands that new legions of flyers need to be educated on how to fly safely and responsibly. That’s why AMA has been working closely with the FAA and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) on the Know Before You Fly campaign. Education programs like these are one of the best ways to ensure the safety of our airspace.”
# # #
Background on the FAA Interpretative Rule of Section 336
On June 23, 2014, the FAA released its “Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft,” (referred to as the “Interpretive Rule”), which imposed new restrictions on the use of model aircraft in direct contradiction to Section 336 and against the intent of Congress. The Interpretive Rule expands the definition of aircraft to include model aircraft, with which AMA disagrees. AMA has filed a petition to overturn the Interpretive Rule, which is still the subject of pending litigation.
About AMA
The Academy of Model Aeronautics, founded in 1936, continues to be devoted to national airspace safety. It serves as the nation’s collective voice for approximately 185,000 modelers in 2,400 clubs in the United States and Puerto Rico. Headquartered in Muncie, Indiana, AMA is a membership organization representing those who fly model aircraft for recreation and educational purposes. For more information, visit www.modelaircraft.org.
The above is from AMA http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...stration-rule/
12-14-2015, 11:29 AM
#2328
Tim: what do you make of this? http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certific...t_registry/UA/
12-14-2015, 11:29 AM
#2329
Couldn't help but notice FAA mentioned comments that originated in a "form letter" or "form letter campaign" five times, and I also notice that it appears those same comments were resoundingly rejected.
12-14-2015, 11:48 AM
#2332
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southbury CT
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here it is guys.....It happened. We now must register our aircraft and put it on our planes. Sorry if this was posted already. http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releas...9856&cid=TW378
12-14-2015, 11:53 AM
#2333
Senior Member
Feels like that's about the only thing their not regulating yet. I mean the sex part. They are regulating behavior during pregnancy and how you raise the child....
12-14-2015, 12:02 PM
#2334
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: rosharon, TX
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
united state v. causby - majority justice wrote this
"if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise buildings could not be erected, trees could not be planted, and even fences could not be run" . . . Thus, a landowner "owns at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land," and invasions of that airspace "are in the same category as invasions of the surface."[SUP][1][/SUP]
The majority opinion cited the law (49 U.S.C. § 180) where Congress defined the "navigable airspace" in the public domain, as that above the "minimum safe altitude" which varies from 500 to 1000 feet depending on time of day, aircraft, and type of terrain. Since the aircraft passing over Causby's property were at 83 feet, the court determined the flight path was an easement, a form of property right. Because the government had taken the easement through private property, Causby was owed compensation under the Takings Clause.
Just let some fed show up on my property and tell me I have to register to fly my foamie!
"if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise buildings could not be erected, trees could not be planted, and even fences could not be run" . . . Thus, a landowner "owns at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land," and invasions of that airspace "are in the same category as invasions of the surface."[SUP][1][/SUP]
The majority opinion cited the law (49 U.S.C. § 180) where Congress defined the "navigable airspace" in the public domain, as that above the "minimum safe altitude" which varies from 500 to 1000 feet depending on time of day, aircraft, and type of terrain. Since the aircraft passing over Causby's property were at 83 feet, the court determined the flight path was an easement, a form of property right. Because the government had taken the easement through private property, Causby was owed compensation under the Takings Clause.
Just let some fed show up on my property and tell me I have to register to fly my foamie!
Last edited by mandude3287; 12-14-2015 at 12:04 PM.
12-14-2015, 12:24 PM
#2335
12-14-2015, 12:42 PM
#2336
I did word search for "form letter" and noted that it appeared five times (pgs 56, 90, 105, 124, & 150).
On pg 56 it referred contention that only sUAS with specific capability should be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 90 said that exiting use of AMA number should suffice as alternative. Result: REJECTED
On pg 105 statement that imposition of fee would be burden and be a barrier to education. Result: REJECTED
On pg 124 there was no way to define component on models that could be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 150 contention that registration would have no effect on rogue operators. Result: REJECTED
Perhaps some will have heartburn over my use of "REJECTED," in which case substitute "Not adopted."
On pg 56 it referred contention that only sUAS with specific capability should be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 90 said that exiting use of AMA number should suffice as alternative. Result: REJECTED
On pg 105 statement that imposition of fee would be burden and be a barrier to education. Result: REJECTED
On pg 124 there was no way to define component on models that could be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 150 contention that registration would have no effect on rogue operators. Result: REJECTED
Perhaps some will have heartburn over my use of "REJECTED," in which case substitute "Not adopted."
Last edited by franklin_m; 12-14-2015 at 01:08 PM. Reason: added "t" in "Not"
12-14-2015, 12:51 PM
#2337
Tim: what do you make of this? http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certific...t_registry/UA/
12-14-2015, 01:02 PM
#2339
If the AMA had shunned Drone Activities right from the Get Go, that would have put some teeth into the latest objections that they have filed.
The AMA will NEVER be able to say with pride that "We did EVERYTHING we possibly could to protect our membership from Federal Regulations".
The AMA will NEVER be able to say with pride that "We did EVERYTHING we possibly could to protect our membership from Federal Regulations".
12-14-2015, 01:03 PM
#2340
So in other words, you don't really know, have no reference number and no link. Par for the course.
Astro says:
Astro says:
12-14-2015, 01:06 PM
#2341
I did word search for "form letter" and noted that it appeared five times (pgs 56, 90, 105, 124, & 150).
On pg 56 it referred contention that only sUAS with specific capability should be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 90 said that exiting use of AMA number should suffice as alternative. Result: REJECTED
On pg 105 statement that imposition of fee would be burden and be a barrier to education. Result: REJECTED
On pg 124 there was no way to define component on models that could be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 150 contention that registration would have no effect on rogue operators. Result: REJECTED
Perhaps some will have heartburn over my use of "REJECTED," in which case substitute "No adopted."
On pg 56 it referred contention that only sUAS with specific capability should be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 90 said that exiting use of AMA number should suffice as alternative. Result: REJECTED
On pg 105 statement that imposition of fee would be burden and be a barrier to education. Result: REJECTED
On pg 124 there was no way to define component on models that could be registered. Result: REJECTED
On pg 150 contention that registration would have no effect on rogue operators. Result: REJECTED
Perhaps some will have heartburn over my use of "REJECTED," in which case substitute "No adopted."
12-14-2015, 01:14 PM
#2343
12-14-2015, 01:22 PM
#2344
Moving forward, given that we're already suing FAA, I don't think the AMA will earn any good will if they do anything but fully embrace and support this rule. Given that FAA has the authority to recognize (or not) organizations as CBOs, I can't see how the FAA would formally recognize AMA as a CBO when AMA isn't actively and fully supporting FAA rules.
12-14-2015, 01:31 PM
#2345
Well.....here it is.......https://www.faa.gov/news/press_relea...m?newsId=19856
Time to register your junk.........http://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/ ..............
Time to register your junk.........http://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/ ..............
12-14-2015, 01:46 PM
#2346
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all honesty, so would I.
Moving forward, given that we're already suing FAA, I don't think the AMA will earn any good will if they do anything but fully embrace and support this rule. Given that FAA has the authority to recognize (or not) organizations as CBOs, I can't see how the FAA would formally recognize AMA as a CBO when AMA isn't actively and fully supporting FAA rules.
Moving forward, given that we're already suing FAA, I don't think the AMA will earn any good will if they do anything but fully embrace and support this rule. Given that FAA has the authority to recognize (or not) organizations as CBOs, I can't see how the FAA would formally recognize AMA as a CBO when AMA isn't actively and fully supporting FAA rules.
12-14-2015, 01:51 PM
#2347
Eight Levels of Control
THE BEST SLAVE IS ONE WHO THINKS HE IS FREE…
SaulAlinskydied about 43 years ago, but his writings influenced those in political control of our nation today.......
Died: June 12, 1972, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Ca
Education: University of Chicago
Spouse: Irene Alinsky
Books: Rules for Radicals, Reveille for Radicals
Anyone out there think that this stuff isn't happening today in the U.S.? All eight rules are currently in play.
How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky: There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.
1) Healthcare– Control healthcare and you control the people.
2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control– Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)
6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools
8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
9) Register all pilots that fly any TOY s in the NAS.
Does any of this sound like what is happening to the United States? Alinskymerely simplified Vladimir Lenin's original scheme for world conquest by communism, under Russian rule.
Stalin described his converts as "Useful Idiots." The Useful Idiots have destroyed every nation in which they have seized power and control. It is presently happening at an alarming rate in the U.S. If people can read this and still say everything is just fine…they are “useful idiots.
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere."
Last edited by HoundDog; 12-14-2015 at 01:53 PM. Reason: add # 9
12-14-2015, 01:53 PM
#2348
Senior Member
It's kind of confusing. I mean if I pay my 5 bucks to sign up for this obamadrone program and I can't afford one will I be fined or will they send me a free drone. I mean I crashed my foamie and can't afford a new one right now. I know the law requires I have a drone but damn I am poor. I don't want the IRS to put me in jail......Or would that be the FAA or the dot that I would be in trouble with???
12-14-2015, 02:08 PM
#2350
Originally Posted by franklin_m 
In all honesty, so would I.
Moving forward, given that we're already suing FAA, I don't think the AMA will earn any good will if they do anything but fully embrace and support this rule. Given that FAA has the authority to recognize (or not) organizations as CBOs, I can't see how the FAA would formally recognize AMA as a CBO when AMA isn't actively and fully supporting FAA rules.
CBO, in context, is a euphemism for AMA monopoly. Everybody knows that except for some congress critters that didn't realize they were granting a concession to a sole-source provider. I bet a lot of them know it now..........and AMA lobbying for the next round of FAA Re-authorization won't be the cake walk it was on the first shot. I'm looking forward especially to seeing the response to the item on AMA's agenda that would require that they be recognized as a CBO.
Then they require U to have your AMA number in your TOY but instead of $5 for 3 years they charge from nothing to $75 per year for the privilege to fly at your own field U paid/Pay to own rent Keep up.
Can't win for loosing. But it's the Only GIG in town so now if U don't comply U can end up paying a steep fine and possibly Jail time. Think I'd rather have the AMA in charge they can't put U in Jail or fine U, Just denie U.