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

The AMA members kick their own organization to the curb!

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

The AMA members kick their own organization to the curb!

Old 12-25-2015, 04:22 AM
  #1  
Luchnia
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (21)
 
Luchnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Amelia, VA
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default The AMA members kick their own organization to the curb!

Did the bulk of AMA members kick the AMA to the curb and put a major roadblock on the AMA efforts by not adhering to their request NOT to register with the FAA? Some have stated that around 50000 have agreed with the FAA and registered to obey the FAA non-law guidelines.

Of that huge number of FAA registered toy "drone" pilots one would wonder how many are AMA members? Many are because they have posted on the various forums that they indeed did register. Can you imagine the impact that this will have on what the AMA is attempting to accomplish? This will certainly affect their efforts and I am guessing that the AMA will change their direction now since they know the bulk of their members do not support them in this matter.

The AMA members that registered have indeed punched the AMA in the face and shown where there is no allegiance toward the AMA. Whether we like it or not this will have a major impact on the AMA. At some point the numbers of AMA members that went against the AMA's request may be known.
Old 12-25-2015, 04:37 AM
  #2  
Granpooba
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queensbury, NY
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Luchnia View Post
Did the bulk of AMA members kick the AMA to the curb and put a major roadblock on the AMA efforts by not adhering to their request NOT to register with the FAA? Some have stated that around 50000 have agreed with the FAA and registered to obey the FAA non-law guidelines.

Of that huge number of FAA registered toy "drone" pilots one would wonder how many are AMA members? Many are because they have posted on the various forums that they indeed did register. Can you imagine the impact that this will have on what the AMA is attempting to accomplish? This will certainly affect their efforts and I am guessing that the AMA will change their direction now since they know the bulk of their members do not support them in this matter.

The AMA members that registered have indeed punched the AMA in the face and shown where there is no allegiance toward the AMA. Whether we like it or not this will have a major impact on the AMA. At some point the numbers of AMA members that went against the AMA's request may be known.
" Personally " speaking, I have done neither ! I am in what you might call a wait and see mode.

But what you had better understand and get through your head is that the AMA is stating a " REQUEST ". While the FAA is stating a " LAW ".

Now, which one are you going to abide by ?

Last edited by Granpooba; 12-25-2015 at 04:44 AM.
Old 12-25-2015, 04:42 AM
  #3  
Granpooba
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queensbury, NY
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

On a second personal thought, I myself having been an RC Model Airplane hobbyist for many years have been hung out to dry by the AMA, so that they could embrace and grow their memberships of the DRONE community.
Old 12-25-2015, 04:43 AM
  #4  
flyinwalenda
My Feedback: (5)
 
flyinwalenda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Northeast, PA
Posts: 3,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm not happy with the ama for various reasons but they are all we have....for now. Following the flock,running to register is not the best course of action now,in my opinion. Sec. 336 is the law according to Congress.

Last edited by flyinwalenda; 12-25-2015 at 04:57 AM.
Old 12-25-2015, 04:46 AM
  #5  
Granpooba
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queensbury, NY
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

A third personal note : Merry Christmas to all !
Old 12-25-2015, 05:07 AM
  #6  
flyinwalenda
My Feedback: (5)
 
flyinwalenda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Northeast, PA
Posts: 3,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yes , Merry Christmas !
Lets see how long it will be until the usual suspects chime in here to disrupt this thread. It's always refreshing to have a good discussion...until the trolls come in !
Old 12-25-2015, 06:22 AM
  #7  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

They already started, see post 4 where the first one came in. Always interesting to see you make comments about "the usual suspects" when you are right there along with them. The hypocrisy never ends....

Let me guess, the next response will be...see, I told you so! Good stuff!
Old 12-25-2015, 06:38 AM
  #8  
Gizmo-RCU
My Feedback: (27)
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Athol, ID
Posts: 2,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm in the holding pattern right now. To bad AMA wasn't proactive when they had the chance, they just saw potential new members and their eyes glazed over.........

I think the LOS flyers should be in separate division from FPV fliers, who actually are not really fliers but just operators, program it and it does it all. ..........bet if tracking were done there will be more serious problems with the FPV crowd than LOS fliers?
A serious consideration is will "DRONES" cause an increase in AMA insurance down the line?
Old 12-25-2015, 06:42 AM
  #9  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,189
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

I don't see what will be accomplished by waiting and I did not want to be caught up in a last min rush to register, IMO the AMA has been talking to FAA for about ten years on this subject and if they could not come to a
agreement in that length of time I doubt they will in sixty days of course I could be wrong but I doubt it. Another thing the AMA did that I don't feel was the best idea was to include the CBO language in the bill 336.
Old 12-25-2015, 06:46 AM
  #10  
SunDevilPilot
 
SunDevilPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Exactly what will holding off registering with the FAA do for the AMA?

I'd say it sends a message to the FAA that the AMA members are a bunch of rogue drone operators with no concern for the full scale planes. (Likely not true, but a bad message). I'd rather work with the FAA as a partner than an enemy.

Wouldnt it be better for the AMA argue that we are not the problem, we fully complied with registration, but we need to work together to make some adjustments to the process?

I've registered.
Old 12-25-2015, 06:50 AM
  #11  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Luchnia View Post
Did the bulk of AMA members kick the AMA to the curb and put a major roadblock on the AMA efforts by not adhering to their request NOT to register with the FAA? Some have stated that around 50000 have agreed with the FAA and registered to obey the FAA non-law guidelines.

Of that huge number of FAA registered toy "drone" pilots one would wonder how many are AMA members? Many are because they have posted on the various forums that they indeed did register. Can you imagine the impact that this will have on what the AMA is attempting to accomplish? This will certainly affect their efforts and I am guessing that the AMA will change their direction now since they know the bulk of their members do not support them in this matter.

The AMA members that registered have indeed punched the AMA in the face and shown where there is no allegiance toward the AMA. Whether we like it or not this will have a major impact on the AMA. At some point the numbers of AMA members that went against the AMA's request may be known.
Never let a good conspiracy get in the way of explaining something. A week after the registration the theories run wild. As if members signing up but some kind of roadblock up in front what the AMA was doing. Punched in the face.....that is funny. Love the ominus ending too...those that registered might be found out by the AMA. I bet they are all quaking in their boots.
Old 12-25-2015, 06:56 AM
  #12  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Luchnia View Post
Did the bulk of AMA members kick the AMA to the curb and put a major roadblock on the AMA efforts by not adhering to their request NOT to register with the FAA? Some have stated that around 50000 have agreed with the FAA and registered to obey the FAA non-law guidelines.

Of that huge number of FAA registered toy "drone" pilots one would wonder how many are AMA members? Many are because they have posted on the various forums that they indeed did register. Can you imagine the impact that this will have on what the AMA is attempting to accomplish? This will certainly affect their efforts and I am guessing that the AMA will change their direction now since they know the bulk of their members do not support them in this matter.

The AMA members that registered have indeed punched the AMA in the face and shown where there is no allegiance toward the AMA. Whether we like it or not this will have a major impact on the AMA. At some point the numbers of AMA members that went against the AMA's request may be known.
As folks contemplate this question, consider who is and is not aware of newly published rule. If, as some have contended that the overwhelming majority of non-AMA members are not aware of safety rules at all, then it may be safe to assume they're also not aware of requirement to register. Therefore, it may be a good assumption that the majority of folks who are aware of the requirement are indeed AMA members.

So, is it then a good assumption that the majority of the 60K that have registered are AMA members? Perhaps. If so, that's approaching 1/3 of the membership (even including all those free youth memberships they gave away). If paying membership is closer to 120k ish, then 60K registrations are approaching 1/2 of membership.
Old 12-25-2015, 06:57 AM
  #13  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Holding off past 21 January costs $5 (first 30 days free).

Two logical disconnects. First, at the same time AMA is asking it's members to do that, they're arguing that imposition of a $5 fee is burdensome. So, somehow it's not burdensome for AMA to ask its members to incur a $5 cost, but it is when the FAA does it? Secondly, if the $5 every three years is burdensome as argued by AMA, then why is the AMA's $75 a year not burdensome? Another logical disconnect.

In this line of response, I think AMA is actually helping the FAA make a case for one set of rules for everyone. FAA is must consider the "equal protection" clause when rule making. The NAS is the taxpayer's resource; giving special dispensation to CBO members over non-members might run counter to that. FAA is not in the business of helping private non-profits pad their membership, they have to look out for the interests of all NAS users - including those who can't afford $75 a year.

Honestly, I don't see FAA approving two sets of rules, one for CBO members and another for non-CBO members.

Last edited by franklin_m; 12-25-2015 at 07:42 AM.
Old 12-25-2015, 09:28 AM
  #14  
Luchnia
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (21)
 
Luchnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Amelia, VA
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
Never let a good conspiracy get in the way of explaining something. A week after the registration the theories run wild. As if members signing up but some kind of roadblock up in front what the AMA was doing. Punched in the face.....that is funny. Love the ominus ending too...those that registered might be found out by the AMA. I bet they are all quaking in their boots.
Interesting perception.

You like the ominus ending? Why thank you
Old 12-25-2015, 10:17 AM
  #15  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Luchnia View Post
Interesting perception.

You like the ominus ending? Why thank you
I give credit where credit is due....like a great cliffhanging ending of a movie!
Old 12-25-2015, 10:28 AM
  #16  
combatpigg
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Those with existing aircraft can hold off on registration and still legally fly all the way to the deadline.
The AMA asked me to hold off registering for what I hope is OUR mutual benefit.
I fail to see why I should not abide by this request for the time being.
Old 12-25-2015, 12:04 PM
  #17  
flyinwalenda
My Feedback: (5)
 
flyinwalenda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Northeast, PA
Posts: 3,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
They already started, see post 4 where the first one came in. Always interesting to see you make comments about "the usual suspects" when you are right there along with them. The hypocrisy never ends....

Let me guess, the next response will be...see, I told you so! Good stuff!
Tom,
No I won't do that but Thank You from all of us here on this new thread and all of the other AMA/FAA,etc... threads on this site where you have tried to dominate and derail the conversations; that if nothing else you are at least ......predictable !
Old 12-25-2015, 12:57 PM
  #18  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,561
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Luchnia View Post
Interesting perception.

You like the ominus ending? Why thank you
Hi Luchnia ,

Did the AMA give it's membership list to the FAA ? I ask because if the FAA has no access to the AMA's membership records , how would the FAA know how many of the registrants were AMA members or not ? Maybe most or all of the registrants so far are folks with new drones . Maybe most of the registrants are AMA members . Without a way for the FAA to cross reference who's an AMA member or not how could this be used against the AMA that some ? most ? all ? AMA members went against the AMA's directive to wait ?
Old 12-25-2015, 02:15 PM
  #19  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SunDevilPilot View Post
Exactly what will holding off registering with the FAA do for the AMA?

I'd say it sends a message to the FAA that the AMA members are a bunch of rogue drone operators with no concern for the full scale planes. (Likely not true, but a bad message). I'd rather work with the FAA as a partner than an enemy.

Wouldnt it be better for the AMA argue that we are not the problem, we fully complied with registration, but we need to work together to make some adjustments to the process?

I've registered.
I would counter that we are not rogue operators but just following the law under Sec.336 a law passed by congress. While I'm no AMA fan by any means I will honor the request to wait. I figure what the heck give them a chance, How will it pan out? Who knows. We actually have till 2-19 to register anyway.
Have a look at this.

http://jrupprechtlaw.com/myrupprecht...istration-rule

Mike
Old 12-25-2015, 02:19 PM
  #20  
Murphey
My Feedback: (11)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aurora, CO
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm curious how non AMA Drone operators even know about the FAA registration requirement. Pretty sure hobby shops and Toys R Us aren't telling them...
Murphey
Old 12-25-2015, 02:42 PM
  #21  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by combatpigg View Post
Those with existing aircraft can hold off on registration and still legally fly all the way to the deadline.
The AMA asked me to hold off registering for what I hope is OUR mutual benefit.
I fail to see why I should not abide by this request for the time being.
Having recently joined the Dark Side (opened a Christmas present early, days before the "mark before flying" edict), it seemed a small measure of prudence to register early. It's a toy-grade unabashed copy of the DJI Phantom, sans the smarts (except for stabilization) and brushless motors. The FPV link is via WiFi to a cell phone attached by a clip on the antenna housing of the Tx, so range is obviously limited - could hardly be considered BLOS capable. It is a gift from daughter, so Pa Pa can share the experience of flying it with 10 year old grandson who also received one as a gift. I think the craft and the circumstances are pretty typical - if the projected number sold is a million, these toys probably account for 8-900,000 of them. I seem them as being pretty innocuous, and though capable of some minor mischief, probably will very rarely get the notice of FAA, and will never be AMA's business. Most of the remainder will be flying cameras, with the airframe capable of the kind of stability provided by a tripod and quality optics. It is these that are most likely to attract scrutiny by FAA, simply because they will be operated where photo subjects are, and that is generally not on empty fields. AP is worthwhile hobby in its own right, and enthusiasts should look to organization of their own making, say as an AP SIG within an organization centered on photography. It is not an aeromodeling activity and AMA should not be party to it.
That my friend is a long way of saying I disagree with you as for abiding by AMA's request. I think it may be viewed from within as being to AMA HQ's benefit, but consider it will unlikely be to OUR benefit as modelers. So, even notwithstanding my recent move to the dark side, I hope for and give my support to an overwhelming showing of acceptance of the registration process, as it might just get AMA management to take a few steps down from their ivory tower and empire building ambitions.
Old 12-25-2015, 02:54 PM
  #22  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Murphey View Post
I'm curious how non AMA Drone operators even know about the FAA registration requirement. Pretty sure hobby shops and Toys R Us aren't telling them...
Murphey
You would have to live under a rock not to know about this. It's been all over the news and the net.
As a retailer we tell everyone about the registration process but it's up to them to follow though.

Mike
Old 12-25-2015, 04:00 PM
  #23  
combatpigg
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by cj_rumley View Post
Having recently joined the Dark Side (opened a Christmas present early, days before the "mark before flying" edict), it seemed a small measure of prudence to register early. It's a toy-grade unabashed copy of the DJI Phantom, sans the smarts (except for stabilization) and brushless motors. The FPV link is via WiFi to a cell phone attached by a clip on the antenna housing of the Tx, so range is obviously limited - could hardly be considered BLOS capable. It is a gift from daughter, so Pa Pa can share the experience of flying it with 10 year old grandson who also received one as a gift. I think the craft and the circumstances are pretty typical - if the projected number sold is a million, these toys probably account for 8-900,000 of them. I seem them as being pretty innocuous, and though capable of some minor mischief, probably will very rarely get the notice of FAA, and will never be AMA's business. Most of the remainder will be flying cameras, with the airframe capable of the kind of stability provided by a tripod and quality optics. It is these that are most likely to attract scrutiny by FAA, simply because they will be operated where photo subjects are, and that is generally not on empty fields. AP is worthwhile hobby in its own right, and enthusiasts should look to organization of their own making, say as an AP SIG within an organization centered on photography. It is not an aeromodeling activity and AMA should not be party to it.
That my friend is a long way of saying I disagree with you as for abiding by AMA's request. I think it may be viewed from within as being to AMA HQ's benefit, but consider it will unlikely be to OUR benefit as modelers. So, even notwithstanding my recent move to the dark side, I hope for and give my support to an overwhelming showing of acceptance of the registration process, as it might just get AMA management to take a few steps down from their ivory tower and empire building ambitions.
You are probably right CJ.
I'm just "playing a hunch" and hope I'm rewarded for procrastinating...!
Old 12-25-2015, 04:34 PM
  #24  
EloyM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (194)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Santa Ana, CA
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The Rose Parade is almost here - has to be a tempting target for the &*^%# toy drone'rs. Will one of them cause rose petals to fall over the crowd??
Old 12-25-2015, 04:57 PM
  #25  
mike31
My Feedback: (67)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: York, ME
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Meanwhile we don't have to register to vote!

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.