Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Yes or No , Do you think the AMA was right or wrong to embrace DRONES ?

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.
View Poll Results: Was it a mistake or not for the AMA to embrace drones ?
Yes
77.25%
No
22.75%
Voters: 356. You may not vote on this poll

Yes or No , Do you think the AMA was right or wrong to embrace DRONES ?

Old 01-10-2016, 02:22 PM
  #676  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You know as well as I do who is causing the trouble, if you are not flying out of the line of sight, then it ain't you!
Old 01-10-2016, 02:40 PM
  #677  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
You know as well as I do who is causing the trouble, if you are not flying out of the line of sight, then it ain't you!
I don't actually, nor do you. I know you feel you do, and I might as well, but we have no data to back up either position. That's part of the reason why I think people need to be clear on what they are saying rather than casting a wide net and labeling all as one.

Don't forget beyond line of site started well before multi-rotors came around, and many of the MR's do NOT fly blos. I was at a club meeting the other nice and some members who are part of a neighboring club were talking about how they had to ban FPV flying, of all types, because they continued to have problems with a few members of the club. They were flying to high, to far from the club, and even getting to close to a local airport. These were all seasoned RC guys, AMA too...and they were all flying fixed wing aircraft (skysurfers and bixlers). These were NOT multi-rotors or drones.
Old 01-10-2016, 03:23 PM
  #678  
HoundDog
My Feedback: (49)
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,501
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
Here we go AGAIN with this "drone" = ONLY multi-rotor hovering and flying apparatus non-sense.

Once more, I can see someone who doesn't know jack about RC thinking this, 'cause all the ads they see (like Horizon Hobby's ads in the AMA magazine) that show multi-rotor contraptions call them "drones." But folks who've been around RC should know better. RC flying apparatus = sUAS = "drone" as far as the FAA - and FAA registration (with stipulations) - is concerned.

Tell you what: if the FAA shows up and you're flying your RC jet, tell him it's not a "drone"...and even better tell him that because YOU'VE deemed it's not a "drone" (because it's not a multi-rotor hovering and flying contraption, it's a JET!) you don't need to register. Heck, it may work out real well for you. Plunk down $27,500 and go for it!
RC flying apparatus = sUAS = "drone" as far as the FAA is concerned.

If The FAA would "NOT" consider every thing that we consider a Model and Make the Rules only for What the Sane People of the world consider "DRONES". But No the FAA wants to CONTROL every thing that is not tied to the earth and flies through any where in the NAS. What the AMA should be fighting for,,is that there has not any issues and will continue to be a non Issue when flying with in a 1/4 mile and up to 1500' AGL at all registered flying fields in the USA weather they are AMA or not. Now that the AMA & FAA are adversaries this becoming Reality is about the same chance as a snow balls chance in He[[.

http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown...ion&font=serif

Old 01-10-2016, 03:24 PM
  #679  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Oh come on, I never heard of any of this till the multi rotors, NEVER!
Old 01-10-2016, 03:38 PM
  #680  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Love the post houndDog!
Old 01-10-2016, 04:27 PM
  #681  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
Oh come on, I never heard of any of this till the multi rotors, NEVER!
That you didn't hear of it until MR's doesn't mean it wasn't happening. There are hundreds if not thousands of videos online of people flying FPV with fixed wings, way before the flying blenders came along. Honestly when I watch those video's I'm more amazed that nothing happened back then. We're talking gliders that could go upwards of 9000 feet and fly for 30 plus minutes. Absolutely irresponsible and reckless in my view. As bad or worse then some of the goofy things the "drone" pilots have done over the past year. The term "drone" has been demonized in part by the media and to some degree in equal part by RC modelers who quite frankly hate that discipline of flying.
Old 01-10-2016, 05:10 PM
  #682  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I will give you that, just because I have not heard about does not mean it was not happening, but when I started to hear all the negative that we have heard was when the multi rotors came to be. Then it's been one bad story after bad story, that has put us all in a negative light! And I do understand how people are getting upset about them flying over the yards, the guy that shot the one down won in court, did not have to pay anything, kind of sure I would have done the same thing if someone was spying on my sunbathing daughters!
Old 01-10-2016, 07:11 PM
  #683  
HoundDog
My Feedback: (49)
 
HoundDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Apache Junction AZ. WI 0WI8
Posts: 4,501
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
That you didn't hear of it until MR's doesn't mean it wasn't happening. There are hundreds if not thousands of videos online of people flying FPV with fixed wings, way before the flying blenders came along. Honestly when I watch those video's I'm more amazed that nothing happened back then. We're talking gliders that could go upwards of 9000 feet and fly for 30 plus minutes. Absolutely irresponsible and reckless in my view. As bad or worse then some of the goofy things the "drone" pilots have done over the past year. The term "drone" has been demonized in part by the media and to some degree in equal part by RC modelers who quite frankly hate that discipline of flying.
Well then if U don't approve of fixed wi FPV up at 9000' i.e. anything over 400'. Than FPV under 400' and above 100' in unpopulated areas Can't possibly harm anything. So if it can't be harmfull why do U have a such contempt for BLOS FPV especially with Quads that can stop on a dime hold position search the area for GA aircraft that aren't supposed to be there. U know the HOT DOG Pilots.

http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown...ion&font=serif
Old 01-11-2016, 06:23 AM
  #684  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Because it says so on the back of my shirt Attached Thumbnails
We can argue but it is a sUAV. The FAA doesn't care if you consider it a drone or not.

Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 01-11-2016 at 06:32 AM.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:35 AM
  #685  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

BTW here is an Air Force drone crash from 2013. It is actually a full scale F-4 used for training.

http://www.wjhg.com/home/headlines/U...215826301.html
Old 01-11-2016, 06:38 AM
  #686  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
You know as well as I do who is causing the trouble, if you are not flying out of the line of sight, then it ain't you!
Actually most indecencies were LOS. Flying them near airports and aircraft, etc. Or forest fires, not necessarily BLOS.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:40 AM
  #687  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
Oh come on, I never heard of any of this till the multi rotors, NEVER!
Just because you never heard of it, does not make it so, or not so.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:42 AM
  #688  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

We're talking gliders that could go upwards of 9000 feet and fly for 30 plus minutes. Absolutely irresponsible and reckless in my view.
Depends on where and if clear of clouds, IMO.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:45 AM
  #689  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I recall that one of the first ones the FAA got upset about was Trappy flying a fixed wing drone around the Statue of Liberty. Then others were flying them over the Brooklyn Bridge.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:47 AM
  #690  
VF84sluggo
My Feedback: (55)
 
VF84sluggo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 2,367
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by HoundDog View Post
If The FAA would "NOT" consider every thing that we consider a Model and Make the Rules only for What the Sane People of the world consider "DRONES". But No the FAA wants to CONTROL every thing that is not tied to the earth and flies through any where in the NAS.
Absolutely. Problem is, the explosion of multi-rotor "drones" with GPS integration and a camera system - which invited all the idiocy we've seen - forced the FAA's hand. They HAD to do "something"!

And as anyone who's logged any appreciable number of years on this planet should know, ANY TIME a government bureaucracy has to do "something", it will most always include placing even more onerous rules and regulations on those who had absolutely nothing to do with the problem said bureaucracy is "solving."

Oh, and I'll say this to those people that say here that these multi-rotors don't fly themselves and take some skill: My ass. I've got a DJI Phantom 2 and I've let relatives and friends fly the thing. Not ONE has crashed it. Once it's got enough GPS satellites, all the operator needs to do is coax the dadgum thing, and just let go of the sticks if he gets AFU...it'll just sit there until you get YOUR head out of your posterior. Totally gooned up? Just flick the switch and it will "come home"...a child of 5 can do it, and that's why our hobby has the FAA crawling all over it now.

Last edited by VF84sluggo; 01-11-2016 at 06:54 AM.
Old 01-11-2016, 06:59 AM
  #691  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
I recall that one of the first ones the FAA got upset about was Trappy flying a fixed wing drone around the Statue of Liberty. Then others were flying them over the Brooklyn Bridge.
Bingo...fixed wing is where it all started...but the big bad "drone" is easier to demonize rather than looking at the real cause. And then it was blos that was blamed too...but as you correctly note many instances were actually los.
Old 01-11-2016, 07:02 AM
  #692  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
Absolutely. Problem is, the explosion of multi-rotor "drones" with GPS integration and a camera system - which invited all the idiocy we've seen - forced the FAA's hand. They HAD to do "something"!

And as anyone who's logged any appreciable number of years on this planet should know, ANY TIME a government bureaucracy has to do "something", it will most always include placing even more onerous rules and regulations on those who had absolutely nothing to do with the problem said bureaucracy is "solving."

Oh, and I'll say this to those people that say here that these multi-rotors don't fly themselves and take some skill: My ass. I've got a DJI Phantom 2 and I've let relatives and friends fly the thing. Not ONE has crashed it. Once it's got enough GPS satellites, all the operator needs to do is coax the dadgum thing, and just let go of the sticks if he gets AFU...it'll just sit there until you get YOUR head out of your posterior. Totally gooned up? Just flick the switch and it will "come home"...a child of 5 can do it, and that's why our hobby has the FAA crawling all over it now.
It's probably a bit shortsighted or nave to blame the federal government's involvement in this hobby on that basis....why doesn't anyone ever consider the commercial applications as a major cause of this?
Old 01-11-2016, 07:04 AM
  #693  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
Absolutely. Problem is, the explosion of multi-rotor "drones" with GPS integration and a camera system - which invited all the idiocy we've seen - forced the FAA's hand. They HAD to do "something"!

And as anyone who's logged any appreciable number of years on this planet should know, ANY TIME a government bureaucracy has to do "something", it will most always include placing even more onerous rules and regulations on those who had absolutely nothing to do with the problem said bureaucracy is "solving."

Oh, and I'll say this to those people that say here that these multi-rotors don't fly themselves and take some skill: My ass. I've got a DJI Phantom 2 and I've let relatives and friends fly the thing. Not ONE has crashed it. Once it's got enough GPS satellites, all the operator needs to do is coax the dadgum thing, and just let go of the sticks if he gets AFU...it'll just sit there until you get YOUR head out of your posterior. Totally gooned up? Just flick the switch and it will "come home"...a child of 5 can do it, and that's why our hobby has the FAA crawling all over it now.
Most MR's are not DJI Phantom's with GPS navigation with gryo's. BTW that craft is probably illegal per the FAA (BLOS capable). You may want to stow it away, it will either be confiscated by the FAA or a real collectors item.
Old 01-11-2016, 07:42 AM
  #694  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
I recall that one of the first ones the FAA got upset about was Trappy flying a fixed wing drone around the Statue of Liberty. Then others were flying them over the Brooklyn Bridge.
Yup, not even a MR.
Old 01-11-2016, 11:44 AM
  #695  
VF84sluggo
My Feedback: (55)
 
VF84sluggo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 2,367
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
Most MR's are not DJI Phantom's with GPS navigation with gryo's. BTW that craft is probably illegal per the FAA (BLOS capable). You may want to stow it away, it will either be confiscated by the FAA or a real collectors item.
"Probably" or "is"?

Either way, thanks for the heads-up. I'm sure someone will post soon the text from the FAA regulation confirming BLOS-illegality. It will be appreciated.
Old 01-11-2016, 11:50 AM
  #696  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Flying BLOS is illegal per the FAA. It is not clear if BLOS capable aircraft are illegal. I say per because there is at least one case where the courts may say the FAA has no jurisdiction for any aircraft below navigable airspace.
Old 01-11-2016, 12:07 PM
  #697  
VF84sluggo
My Feedback: (55)
 
VF84sluggo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 2,367
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
BTW that craft is probably illegal per the FAA (BLOS capable). You may want to stow it away, it will either be confiscated by the FAA
Seems to me you are saying here that simply flying a BLOS-capable sUAS - whether engaging in BLOS ops or not - is illegal and will result in confiscation. I don't doubt you at all, I'm sure you're right...and I was just saying I'm also sure that someone will post soon the FAA language supporting your statement.
Old 01-11-2016, 12:20 PM
  #698  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
Seems to me you are saying here that simply flying a BLOS-capable sUAS - whether engaging in BLOS ops or not - is illegal and will result in confiscation. I don't doubt you at all, I'm sure you're right...and I was just saying I'm also sure that someone will post soon the FAA language supporting your statement.
I didn't say that. I said it was unclear. The FAA has implied that and the AMA were fighting over it. I agree with them if it is done as they describe. But kinda side with the FAA when this technology is sold to the uneducated masses.
Old 01-11-2016, 12:51 PM
  #699  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
"Probably" or "is"?

Either way, thanks for the heads-up. I'm sure someone will post soon the text from the FAA regulation confirming BLOS-illegality. It will be appreciated.
Originally Posted by VF84sluggo View Post
Seems to me you are saying here that simply flying a BLOS-capable sUAS - whether engaging in BLOS ops or not - is illegal and will result in confiscation. I don't doubt you at all, I'm sure you're right...and I was just saying I'm also sure that someone will post soon the FAA language supporting your statement.
You keep flying what you fly in a safe manner and have fun....ignore the doom and gloom prophecy that indicates what you have will be confiscated. It ain't happenin......even the dude in Hawaii didn't get his DJI confiscated when he buzzed the President's motorcade. Yes, I realize it wasn't subject to reg yet, but still. This is just more of the worst case scenario mixed with a dash of anti govt sprinkled in.
Old 01-11-2016, 12:53 PM
  #700  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Sorry, procia is right I am prone to hyperbole sometimes.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.