View Poll Results: Was it a mistake or not for the AMA to embrace drones ?
Voters: 356. You may not vote on this poll
Yes or No , Do you think the AMA was right or wrong to embrace DRONES ?
12-15-2015, 12:52 PM
#426
Thank You Franklin , I appreciate the info and I went to USA Today and found the news story you referred to here . I found it interesting that beyond the AMA's expression of displeasure there was a transportation analyst quoted who thinks the FAA ruling hasn't got a chance if challenged in court . Did you notice that part of the story and if so , do you think the gent is correct ? Sport , I'm not quite sure here what this statement is in regards to ? Those in the FAA know what ? That this is an unneeded burden on model aviation that addresses a "problem" that doesn't exist with us in the first place ? Do you think the FAA felt they had to include everything with a TX so as not to be seen as discriminatory against the drone flyers ?
12-15-2015, 12:57 PM
#427
Well guys , call me all kinds of "Tin Foil Hat" here , but a very interesting thing I noticed is that of the "No" voters , there are several names I've never seen around RCU before . Checking their profiles , I see at least two with zero posts to the forum and a join date sometime in the mid 2000s . One guy even lists himself as not a US resident and still felt the need to vote on something that doesn't affect him ? It's a pretty lame state of affairs when folks are so desperate to push their minority views and have to resort to such transparent BS as I see here .
Now , guys on the "No" side , this is it ! , You chance to attack me since I can't PROVE these are sockpuppet votes , but tell ya what , go look at the profiles of the three "NO" voters whose screen names begin with W and then with a straight face come here and tell me they ain't socks !
Pretty telling that even with sockpuppet votes , the "Yes , it IS a mistake" votes outnumber the "NO it was not a mistake" votes 75% to 25% .
Guess it's time for a few more socks in the mix , eh guys ?
Now , guys on the "No" side , this is it ! , You chance to attack me since I can't PROVE these are sockpuppet votes , but tell ya what , go look at the profiles of the three "NO" voters whose screen names begin with W and then with a straight face come here and tell me they ain't socks !
Pretty telling that even with sockpuppet votes , the "Yes , it IS a mistake" votes outnumber the "NO it was not a mistake" votes 75% to 25% .
Guess it's time for a few more socks in the mix , eh guys ?
12-15-2015, 01:01 PM
#429
#2 A lot of folks here , 75% in fact , seem to think it IS true . Maybe a perspective problem on your end ?
#3 , Sense is a very subjective commodity here on internet forums . You sense the question to be in error . I don't . Now , since I have yet to see any forced participation here at RCU , I have to wonder why you haven't the sense to find a thread more suitable to your liking than one in which you believe the question is in error ?
12-15-2015, 01:04 PM
#430
12-15-2015, 01:12 PM
#432
http://www.nar.org/high-power-rocketry-info/
All the info needed on the not so model rockets. Once a rocket goes above a G motor, you are in a whole different league. I do believe however, rocket motors such as those used by the Mythbusters when they launched a few cars, or sent the the iron of destruction down the rail and obliterated a car, those do require a license to transport, and use.
12-15-2015, 01:22 PM
#433
Well guys , call me all kinds of "Tin Foil Hat" here , but a very interesting thing I noticed is that of the "No" voters , there are several names I've never seen around RCU before . Checking their profiles , I see at least two with zero posts to the forum and a join date sometime in the mid 2000s . One guy even lists himself as not a US resident and still felt the need to vote on something that doesn't affect him ? It's a pretty lame state of affairs when folks are so desperate to push their minority views and have to resort to such transparent BS as I see here .
Now , guys on the "No" side , this is it ! , You chance to attack me since I can't PROVE these are sockpuppet votes , but tell ya what , go look at the profiles of the three "NO" voters whose screen names begin with W and then with a straight face come here and tell me they ain't socks !
Pretty telling that even with sockpuppet votes , the "Yes , it IS a mistake" votes outnumber the "NO it was not a mistake" votes 75% to 25% .
Guess it's time for a few more socks in the mix , eh guys ?
Now , guys on the "No" side , this is it ! , You chance to attack me since I can't PROVE these are sockpuppet votes , but tell ya what , go look at the profiles of the three "NO" voters whose screen names begin with W and then with a straight face come here and tell me they ain't socks !
Pretty telling that even with sockpuppet votes , the "Yes , it IS a mistake" votes outnumber the "NO it was not a mistake" votes 75% to 25% .
Guess it's time for a few more socks in the mix , eh guys ?
They're the same ones who would cheat at online Pinochle and feel good about it.
12-15-2015, 02:57 PM
#436
Thank You Franklin , I appreciate the info and I went to USA Today and found the news story you referred to here . I found it interesting that beyond the AMA's expression of displeasure there was a transportation analyst quoted who thinks the FAA ruling hasn't got a chance if challenged in court . Did you notice that part of the story and if so , do you think the gent is correct ?
12-15-2015, 03:10 PM
#437
Thank You Franklin , I appreciate your taking the time to answer my post . PS , I did see your post in the other thread about the AMA and it's present day value to those who made it what it is all these years , and You said it very well ....
12-15-2015, 03:15 PM
#438
Well said Hairy , this was the sentiment behind my poll in the first place . I felt there was no way the FAA would regulate drones and leave model aviation alone when the supposedly premier model aircraft association had jumped in bed with the drone ops even before any binding rulemaking had happened ...
12-15-2015, 03:55 PM
#439
My Feedback: (14)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Browns Mills, NJ
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not have mattered if the AMA embraced them or not. Their (FAA) job is to control and protect the airspace, period.
Last edited by 108buzz; 12-15-2015 at 04:02 PM.
12-15-2015, 06:35 PM
#442
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-15-2015, 08:31 PM
#444
The only thing is "That Nothing Maters' It's all over but the shouting. As i see it we Dodged a great big bullet. The FAA/DOT could have made everyone pay boko dollars to register every thing U fly. Thank your Lucky stars it's only the pilots/owners name thewant registered. This is so if U crash and anywhere U should not be they know who to look for. Only an Idiot thinks that anyone flying anywhere they should not is going to put their name or Registration on board is delusional.
The FAA doesn't even care about anyone that flies at an AMA field nor do they care about anyone flying Quads Where, When, And How they are supposed to. What they do care are the DROBERS that fly conaty to the AMA's safety code or above the 400' Ceiling or within 5 miles of a towered airport.
Also when have U seen any airliner below or even close to the 400' level farther out than 1.25 miles. Ounce again if U figure a 3 degree glide slope intersects the 400' AGL about 1.25 miles from the runway threshold. and out at the edge of the 5 mile ATA (Air port Traffic Area) In other words flying 5 miles from the center of an airport at 400' you will be more then 600 feet below any landing IFR traffic. And the same for VFR Traffic because they are required to maintain 1000' AGL till in a position to land that's approximately between 1/2 to 1 mile from the runway. Out beyond the 5 mile ATA towers and approach controllers keep IFR traffic and most VFR traffic well above1000' and most of the time farther out than 5 miles at or above the minimum vectoring altitude 25 miles out is close to 3000'AGL depending on terrain.
Again be glad all the FAA wants is for U to register and put that number on what U fly. They don't want to know what U fly.
The FAA doesn't even care about anyone that flies at an AMA field nor do they care about anyone flying Quads Where, When, And How they are supposed to. What they do care are the DROBERS that fly conaty to the AMA's safety code or above the 400' Ceiling or within 5 miles of a towered airport.
Also when have U seen any airliner below or even close to the 400' level farther out than 1.25 miles. Ounce again if U figure a 3 degree glide slope intersects the 400' AGL about 1.25 miles from the runway threshold. and out at the edge of the 5 mile ATA (Air port Traffic Area) In other words flying 5 miles from the center of an airport at 400' you will be more then 600 feet below any landing IFR traffic. And the same for VFR Traffic because they are required to maintain 1000' AGL till in a position to land that's approximately between 1/2 to 1 mile from the runway. Out beyond the 5 mile ATA towers and approach controllers keep IFR traffic and most VFR traffic well above1000' and most of the time farther out than 5 miles at or above the minimum vectoring altitude 25 miles out is close to 3000'AGL depending on terrain.
Again be glad all the FAA wants is for U to register and put that number on what U fly. They don't want to know what U fly.
Last edited by HoundDog; 12-15-2015 at 08:39 PM.
12-15-2015, 08:37 PM
#445
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sanger,
CA
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#1 , Nope , not affiliated with any news outlet , in fact , not affiliated with ANY company , been retired a few years now . Thanks for asking though..
#2 A lot of folks here , 75% in fact , seem to think it IS true . Maybe a perspective problem on your end ?
#3 , Sense is a very subjective commodity here on internet forums . You sense the question to be in error . I don't . Now , since I have yet to see any forced participation here at RCU , I have to wonder why you haven't the sense to find a thread more suitable to your liking than one in which you believe the question is in error ?
#2 A lot of folks here , 75% in fact , seem to think it IS true . Maybe a perspective problem on your end ?
#3 , Sense is a very subjective commodity here on internet forums . You sense the question to be in error . I don't . Now , since I have yet to see any forced participation here at RCU , I have to wonder why you haven't the sense to find a thread more suitable to your liking than one in which you believe the question is in error ?
12-15-2015, 08:42 PM
#446
That's the only to keep the wolf at bay. There's power in numbers.
Last edited by HoundDog; 12-15-2015 at 08:45 PM.
12-16-2015, 04:02 AM
#447
Thank you for asking ....
12-16-2015, 04:22 AM
#448
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
That is a bit of a leap no? Providing education/vocational training and classes for future jobs in the field I don't think is the same as commercial operations. The AMA derives no profits from this, as such it's not really a "commercial" proposition. Also should be mentioned one of the other core operation of the Academy.....key work there....is to provide all types of education. This is but one facet of that.
I'm late again for duck huntin....darn it.
I'm late again for duck huntin....darn it.
12-16-2015, 04:58 AM
#449
I'm not a lawyer, but given that NTSB has already over-ruled a federal judge and established the FAA has the authority to regulate, I don't see that being re-litigated. So perhaps the only thing they can challenge the rule making process issue. However, given the strong Congressional support for action by FAA, and the FAA building more examples by the day of reasons to act sooner rather than later, then I suspect the judiciary will defer to the experts on determining whether the safety risk justified using the authority to publish before comments.
12-16-2015, 05:05 AM
#450
The only thing is "That Nothing Maters' It's all over but the shouting. As i see it we Dodged a great big bullet. The FAA/DOT could have made everyone pay boko dollars to register every thing U fly. Thank your Lucky stars it's only the pilots/owners name thewant registered. This is so if U crash and anywhere U should not be they know who to look for. Only an Idiot thinks that anyone flying anywhere they should not is going to put their name or Registration on board is delusional.
The FAA doesn't even care about anyone that flies at an AMA field nor do they care about anyone flying Quads Where, When, And How they are supposed to. What they do care are the DROBERS that fly conaty to the AMA's safety code or above the 400' Ceiling or within 5 miles of a towered airport.
Also when have U seen any airliner below or even close to the 400' level farther out than 1.25 miles. Ounce again if U figure a 3 degree glide slope intersects the 400' AGL about 1.25 miles from the runway threshold. and out at the edge of the 5 mile ATA (Air port Traffic Area) In other words flying 5 miles from the center of an airport at 400' you will be more then 600 feet below any landing IFR traffic. And the same for VFR Traffic because they are required to maintain 1000' AGL till in a position to land that's approximately between 1/2 to 1 mile from the runway. Out beyond the 5 mile ATA towers and approach controllers keep IFR traffic and most VFR traffic well above1000' and most of the time farther out than 5 miles at or above the minimum vectoring altitude 25 miles out is close to 3000'AGL depending on terrain.
Again be glad all the FAA wants is for U to register and put that number on what U fly. They don't want to know what U fly.
The FAA doesn't even care about anyone that flies at an AMA field nor do they care about anyone flying Quads Where, When, And How they are supposed to. What they do care are the DROBERS that fly conaty to the AMA's safety code or above the 400' Ceiling or within 5 miles of a towered airport.
Also when have U seen any airliner below or even close to the 400' level farther out than 1.25 miles. Ounce again if U figure a 3 degree glide slope intersects the 400' AGL about 1.25 miles from the runway threshold. and out at the edge of the 5 mile ATA (Air port Traffic Area) In other words flying 5 miles from the center of an airport at 400' you will be more then 600 feet below any landing IFR traffic. And the same for VFR Traffic because they are required to maintain 1000' AGL till in a position to land that's approximately between 1/2 to 1 mile from the runway. Out beyond the 5 mile ATA towers and approach controllers keep IFR traffic and most VFR traffic well above1000' and most of the time farther out than 5 miles at or above the minimum vectoring altitude 25 miles out is close to 3000'AGL depending on terrain.
Again be glad all the FAA wants is for U to register and put that number on what U fly. They don't want to know what U fly.
