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

FAA Sued In Federal Court Over Drone Registration Rules

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

FAA Sued In Federal Court Over Drone Registration Rules

Old 01-08-2016, 09:17 AM
  #201  
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 f16man View Post
I'm in lets can the bum , he has not contributed any thing worth while that I have ever come across ,,, adios amigo!!
I'll try much harder to add value just for you. Just need the criteria.
Old 01-08-2016, 10:29 AM
  #202  
jim billings
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by TheEdge View Post
Fact of the matter is Jim, if after reading each of these threads and seeing how as many as 2 unique members a day complain about Porcia and his constant character issues then there's not much else I can tell you.
No one else upsets so many people on a continual basis and arrogantly dismisses it even though the complaints are on the rise.
Perhaps your unaware of his prior history, reputation and fame for being banned multiple times elsewhere for the exact same problem.
That's what its about. He has heard how he spoils it for others but remains unchanged, that to me isn't very considerate of other fellow hobby members.
I haven't read all thread replies by both of you, but I have read enough that it's obvious you are the antagonist in a thread when Portia makes a statement modifying, correcting, or challenging another's replies on a subject. If you have evidence he is wrong, then present it and let the discussion continue on subject.
I have observed he "spoils it" for others that despise Hobby King, the Chinese, and the AMA by presenting a thoughtful explanation of the subject or precipitating a debate. Your and their behaviour quickly turns to childish rants and raves when the discussion sours on your position. Use your obvious experience and intellect to support the thread's subject with Facts and Figures (Portia usually does.)
As far as "upsets people" and "been banned" are concerned, those reasons for stiffling another's viewpoint are -blank-. (Think 'human history' and fill in the blank.)
Old 01-08-2016, 10:35 AM
  #203  
TheEdge
My Feedback: (788)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bonita, CA
Posts: 1,030
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

As you pointed out with your opening remark, " I haven't read all thread replies by both of you"

This itself is why I think you don't see it the way many others do.
Old 01-08-2016, 10:39 AM
  #204  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TheEdge View Post
As you pointed out with your opening remark, " I haven't read all thread replies by both of you"

This itself is why I think you don't see it the way many others do.
He isn't referring to many others, he's referring specifically to you.
Old 01-08-2016, 10:47 AM
  #205  
TheEdge
My Feedback: (788)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bonita, CA
Posts: 1,030
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chris P. Bacon View Post
He isn't referring to many others, he's referring specifically to you.
Nice pompons Chrissy
Old 01-08-2016, 10:57 AM
  #206  
jim billings
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by TheEdge View Post
As you pointed out with your opening remark, " I haven't read all thread replies by both of you"

This itself is why I think you don't see it the way many others do.
Maybe you missed "I have read enough..." and the rest of my statement. You are correct in that I don't see it the way many others do, those with a passion to declare their position to be absolute and protected from challenge.
Old 01-08-2016, 10:59 AM
  #207  
TheEdge
My Feedback: (788)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bonita, CA
Posts: 1,030
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jim billings View Post
Maybe you missed "I have read enough..." and the rest of my statement. You are correct in that I don't see it the way many others do, those with a passion to declare their position to be absolute and protected from challenge.
Read, heard and absorbed your comments Jim, thank you, I appreciate it.
Old 01-08-2016, 12:50 PM
  #208  
F-16 viperman
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: , CA
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think I missed the boat on this But, I'll be outta town this weekend anyway. Would have liked to take a bunch of t-shirts with this image to the convention and make sure the Feds see them since they'll be holding hands with AMA. I would have asked each one to let Me know when They get My point.
Old 01-08-2016, 12:59 PM
  #209  
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

...or be deterred by more gun laws and background checks, regardless of what our Dear Leader says, or does with his phone and pen
Old 01-08-2016, 01:12 PM
  #210  
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 F-16 viperman View Post
I think I missed the boat on this But, I'll be outta town this weekend anyway. Would have liked to take a bunch of t-shirts with this image to the convention and make sure the Feds see them since they'll be holding hands with AMA. I would have asked each one to let Me know when They get My point.
Someone already put something similar to this on a t-shirt and even made stickers, although I don't think Herman was on there, same sentiment though. AMA and FAA will certainly be at the Expo but I'm not sure it will be a love fest. Going to be awkward given the press releases of late from the AMA and the aggressive stance they are taking regarding the registration etc etc. Wonder if anyone is going to be live or pod casting the Q and A.
Old 01-08-2016, 01:35 PM
  #211  
MTIPilot
My Feedback: (121)
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Mount Juliet, TN
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This never should have come to this. Had the AMA done the right thing in the first place and separated traditional line of site model aircraft from drone flying which has caused basically all the problems, we wouldn't be dealing with this problem. No matter how much you try to trash traditional model flying, there is no doubt that it's been drone technology and the ease in which that can be operated by people who are highly irresponsible that has caused the issues.
Old 01-08-2016, 02:02 PM
  #212  
F-16 viperman
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: , CA
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
Someone already put something similar to this on a t-shirt and even made stickers, although I don't think Herman was on there, same sentiment though. AMA and FAA will certainly be at the Expo but I'm not sure it will be a love fest. Going to be awkward given the press releases of late from the AMA and the aggressive stance they are taking regarding the registration etc etc. Wonder if anyone is going to be live or pod casting the Q and A.
Hopefully members will ask the right questions. The most important IMO are #1 Is AMA recognized as a national CBO pursuant to section 336? If the answer is Yes, Then #2 Why ignore the law?. If the answer is the DOT has the authority to require registration, Then section 336 will never apply however, if the FAA requires it, then FAA is ignoring the law or hopes no one notices or will do anything about it. If the answer to question 1 is no, then it is clear that it's because FAA knows as soon as the answer is publicly Yes, They'll have to abide by section 336. In order for this registration thing to be legal We should be registering with the DOT as section 336 never said anything regarding the DOT.
Old 01-08-2016, 04:53 PM
  #213  
ltc
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Mendon, MA
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 16 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MTIPilot View Post
This never should have come to this. Had the AMA done the right thing in the first place and separated traditional line of site model aircraft from drone flying which has caused basically all the problems, we wouldn't be dealing with this problem. No matter how much you try to trash traditional model flying, there is no doubt that it's been drone technology and the ease in which that can be operated by people who are highly irresponsible that has caused the issues.
Bingo!
Old 01-09-2016, 06:36 AM
  #214  
jmiles1941
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The FAA's response: “The FAA disagrees with the comments asserting that the registration of model aircraft is prohibited by section 336 of Public Law 112-95. While section 336 bars the FAA from promulgating new rules or regulations that apply only to model aircraft, the prohibition against future rulemaking is not a complete bar on rulemaking and does not exempt model aircraft from complying with existing statutory and regulatory requirements. As previously addressed, Public Law 112-95 identifies model aircraft as aircraft and as such, the existing statutory aircraft registration requirements implemented by part 47 apply.
This action simply provides a burden-relieving alternative that sUAS owners may use for aircraft registration. Model aircraft operated under section 336 as well as other small unmanned aircraft are not required to use the provisions of part 48. Owners of such aircraft have the option to comply with the existing requirements in part 47 that govern aircraft registration or may opt to use the new streamlined, web-based system in part 48.”
Old 01-09-2016, 06:53 AM
  #215  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jmiles1941 View Post
The FAA's response: “The FAA disagrees with the comments asserting that the registration of model aircraft is prohibited by section 336 of Public Law 112-95. While section 336 bars the FAA from promulgating new rules or regulations that apply only to model aircraft, the prohibition against future rulemaking is not a complete bar on rulemaking and does not exempt model aircraft from complying with existing statutory and regulatory requirements. As previously addressed, Public Law 112-95 identifies model aircraft as aircraft and as such, the existing statutory aircraft registration requirements implemented by part 47 apply.

This action simply provides a burden-relieving alternative that sUAS owners may use for aircraft registration. Model aircraft operated under section 336 as well as other small unmanned aircraft are not required to use the provisions of part 48. Owners of such aircraft have the option to comply with the existing requirements in part 47 that govern aircraft registration or may opt to use the new streamlined, web-based system in part 48.”
Exactly why I think AMA is gonna lose the court case. We have to ask ourselves what happens to AMA if they do? With membership revenue already on a downward trend since 2007 (based on constant 2014 dollars of AMA membership revenue from AMA 990 tax forms), and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly MRs, not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly the growing number of foam aircraft, and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly every more types of electric aircraft, to me I see less need for the AMA over time. If insurance is already secondary for members, why continue paying $75 a year when I can pay FAA $5 for three and take my chances on something that invokes my homeowners?
Old 01-09-2016, 07:37 AM
  #216  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Exactly why I think AMA is gonna lose the court case. We have to ask ourselves what happens to AMA if they do? With membership revenue already on a downward trend since 2007 (based on constant 2014 dollars of AMA membership revenue from AMA 990 tax forms), and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly MRs, not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly the growing number of foam aircraft, and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly every more types of electric aircraft, to me I see less need for the AMA over time. If insurance is already secondary for members, why continue paying $75 a year when I can pay FAA $5 for three and take my chances on something that invokes my homeowners?
Doesn't matter if you are AMA or not, a liability claim against you will always invoke your homeowners right up to the limit of coverage before AMA coverage is invoked.
Old 01-09-2016, 08:13 AM
  #217  
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 franklin_m View Post
Exactly why I think AMA is gonna lose the court case. We have to ask ourselves what happens to AMA if they do? With membership revenue already on a downward trend since 2007 (based on constant 2014 dollars of AMA membership revenue from AMA 990 tax forms), and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly MRs, not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly the growing number of foam aircraft, and not necessarily needing an AMA field to fly every more types of electric aircraft, to me I see less need for the AMA over time. If insurance is already secondary for members, why continue paying $75 a year when I can pay FAA $5 for three and take my chances on something that invokes my homeowners?
Again with the foamies....lol know many parks that can deal with the giant scale T-28 out now? They are getting bigger and bigger. Check out page 115 in the Dec AMA mag...Max Moxey's 210 inch B-17 built from....foam! People keep conflating the FAA reg with the AMA membership, and in the process significantly diminish the value of an AMA membership, it's usually reduced to a magazine and secondary insurance. And yes, I realize the membership "value" is very different from person to person. If you think it's bad now with people flying all over the place, do away with the AMA and chartered fields to fly at (ie SAFE) and consider what could happen there.

The AMA isn't going anywhere anytime soon, membership ebbs and flows, like any other org. If anything there will be an influx of MR pilots, it's the single biggest booming discipline this hobby has seen in years. But what would happen if the AMA did disappear...are you thinking the FAA is somehow going to take over where the AMA left off? A $5.00 registration with the feds isn't even remotely similar to the AMA membership. Are they going to be helping any club or member in any way?

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	comingtoaparknearyou.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	1.96 MB
ID:	2140464  

Last edited by porcia83; 01-09-2016 at 08:15 AM.
Old 01-09-2016, 08:43 AM
  #218  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

For those in denial about the explosion of FPV racing in our hobby the FAI recently released their provisional rules for FPU, Radio Control FPV Racing Model Aircraft. Yes, FPV racing is happening at the international level.

http://www.fai.org/downloads/ciam/SC4_F3FPV_2016
Old 01-09-2016, 09:47 AM
  #219  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by cj_rumley View Post
Doesn't matter if you are AMA or not, a liability claim against you will always invoke your homeowners right up to the limit of coverage before AMA coverage is invoked.
Yep. Which is why, if you don't fly stuff that requires AMA field size areas (and there's more and more of these all the time thanks to HobbyKing and even GreatPlanes), value of AMA goes down.
Old 01-09-2016, 09:55 AM
  #220  
jmiles1941
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Yep. Which is why, if you don't fly stuff that requires AMA field size areas (and there's more and more of these all the time thanks to HobbyKing and even GreatPlanes), value of AMA goes down.

Franklin I thought in 2015 FAA reconized AMA as the CBO (community based organization ) and we were suppose to fly at their fields and under their safety guidelines and insurance !! am I incorrect ??
Old 01-09-2016, 09:56 AM
  #221  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
Again with the foamies....lol know many parks that can deal with the giant scale T-28 out now? They are getting bigger and bigger. Check out page 115 in the Dec AMA mag...Max Moxey's 210 inch B-17 built from....foam! People keep conflating the FAA reg with the AMA membership, and in the process significantly diminish the value of an AMA membership, it's usually reduced to a magazine and secondary insurance. And yes, I realize the membership "value" is very different from person to person. If you think it's bad now with people flying all over the place, do away with the AMA and chartered fields to fly at (ie SAFE) and consider what could happen there.

The AMA isn't going anywhere anytime soon, membership ebbs and flows, like any other org. If anything there will be an influx of MR pilots, it's the single biggest booming discipline this hobby has seen in years. But what would happen if the AMA did disappear...are you thinking the FAA is somehow going to take over where the AMA left off? A $5.00 registration with the feds isn't even remotely similar to the AMA membership. Are they going to be helping any club or member in any way?
Porcia, I don't disagree that there will be an AMA for a while. Just as I agree that there will continue to be need for places to fly large aircraft. But I am trying to point out what I believe is a trend. Is it scientific? No. But just look at the ads you get in the mail from TH, HobbyKing, HH, etc. The number and different types of small things far outweigh the large stuff. I don't get as much value out of AMA as others, simply because I don't want to fly large stuff bad enough to spend an additional $100 a year for club membership.

I don't have any Freudian issues driving a need to fly large planes or look down my nose at those who fly small stuff. I can satisfy my flying requirements within 100 feet of my home, where I can put two or three batteries of flying in and be home before I'd have even gotten to the nearest flying field. To me it's about convenience. I argue a 22in ws model like Stevens Adrenaline Rush on a 3S traveling over 60mph or more, and all but disappears when wings level, is just as demanding as a much larger plane much further away.
Old 01-09-2016, 09:59 AM
  #222  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jmiles1941 View Post
Franklin I thought in 2015 FAA reconized AMA as the CBO (community based organization ) and we were suppose to fly at their fields and under their safety guidelines and insurance !! am I incorrect ??
Last week I forwarded this to AMA: "Is AMA membership required to meet the provisions of PL112-95(a)(2)?" To which the responded "As for the safety guideline, there are specific bullet points that require an AMA membership to comply such as flying with jets or giant scale. For most basic day-to-day flying, you can abide by most of the safety guideline without being an AMA member."
Old 01-09-2016, 10:02 AM
  #223  
jmiles1941
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Last week I forwarded this to AMA: "Is AMA membership required to meet the provisions of PL112-95(a)(2)?" To which the responded "As for the safety guideline, there are specific bullet points that require an AMA membership to comply such as flying with jets or giant scale. For most basic day-to-day flying, you can abide by most of the safety guideline without being an AMA member."

well it covers cause all my planes are 35% up to 45% I have my AMA renewed , my IMAC renewed and registered with the FAA guess I am all legal
Old 01-09-2016, 10:15 AM
  #224  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jmiles1941 View Post
well it covers cause all my planes are 35% up to 45% I have my AMA renewed , my IMAC renewed and registered with the FAA guess I am all legal
That's good. To each his own as long as it complies with law and regulation. As I said above, I don't have an burning need to fly very large airplanes, and I get just more from flying smaller stuff, and flying them precisely, especially in the wind or under less than ideal conditions. Of all the stuff I have, my favorite is still the Stevens Aero Adrenaline Rush...20 odd inch wingspan, hand carved airfoil about 3/8 inch thick, and with a 3s and medusa inrunner does over 60. All but disappears when it goes wings level. But that's just me.
Old 01-09-2016, 02:18 PM
  #225  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,239
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Last week I forwarded this to AMA: "Is AMA membership required to meet the provisions of PL112-95(a)(2)?" To which the responded "As for the safety guideline, there are specific bullet points that require an AMA membership to comply such as flying with jets or giant scale. For most basic day-to-day flying, you can abide by most of the safety guideline without being an AMA member."
I wonder if the AMA's position is really a fact can the FAA force someone to join the AMA in order to fly certain types of models?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.