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

AMA Statement - Didn't even MENTION John Taylor!

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

AMA Statement - Didn't even MENTION John Taylor!

Old 05-21-2017, 05:22 AM
  #1  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default AMA Statement - Didn't even MENTION John Taylor!

I'm appalled at AMA's lack of even a modicum of professional courtesy. They didn't even mention John Taylor in their statement, let alone have the decency to thank him!

“AMA is encouraged to see the Court affirm the strength of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, otherwise known as Section 336, under which our members operate. For decades, AMA members have registered their aircraft with AMA and have followed our community-based safety programming. It is our belief that a community-based program works better than a federally mandated program to manage the recreational community. “We have long held that federal registration of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) makes sense at an appropriate threshold of weight, capability and other safety-related characteristics. However, federal registration shouldn’t apply at such a low threshold that it includes toys. It also shouldn’t burden those who have operated harmoniously within our communities for decades, and who already comply with
AMA’s registration system.”


Click image for larger version

Name:	AMAStatementonFederalCourtofAppealsRulingontheFAARegistrationRule.pdf
Views:	21
Size:	309.0 KB
ID:	2216175
Old 05-21-2017, 09:45 AM
  #2  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,182
Likes: 0
Received 49 Likes on 47 Posts
Default

But Franklin, they can't mention him. To say anything about John Taylor is to admit they basically got their asses kicked or that they didn't do what they claimed they were. To use an Asian statement, to acknowledge John would make the AMA executive board lose face in the eyes of the members
Old 05-21-2017, 12:22 PM
  #3  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
But Franklin, they can't mention him. To say anything about John Taylor is to admit they basically got their asses kicked or that they didn't do what they claimed they were. To use an Asian statement, to acknowledge John would make the AMA executive board lose face in the eyes of the members
I agree. What's disappointing is that whoever is in charge back in Muncie should never have let this be released. And who's that? Oh yeah, Dave Mathewson is in charge of the staff (including Chad). As I've pointed out, DM is getting a salary that puts him in the top 5% of all earners in the entire state. Yet DM let the staff release this --- hardly top 5% performance from the staff, let alone top 5% performance from him.
Old 05-21-2017, 04:15 PM
  #4  
Dick T.
My Feedback: (243)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Visalia, CA
Posts: 1,524
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

They do mention John Taylor in the video that was just released. I agree with the OP as that was my first reaction upon reading it.

I also agree this isn't the end of the issue but I did register, put the numbers on my flying machines where they will remain.

To those who got their knickers in a knot defying the registration, get over it. The Feds already know everything about you so if having registered keeps the FAA at bay while I enjoy my hobby it is worth it. Abandoning your hobby and sitting if front of the TV in a snit to prove defiance only affects you. Go fly rather than melting your brain.
Old 05-21-2017, 05:12 PM
  #5  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Dick T. View Post
They do mention John Taylor in the video that was just released. I agree with the OP as that was my first reaction upon reading it.

I also agree this isn't the end of the issue but I did register, put the numbers on my flying machines where they will remain.

To those who got their knickers in a knot defying the registration, get over it. The Feds already know everything about you so if having registered keeps the FAA at bay while I enjoy my hobby it is worth it. Abandoning your hobby and sitting if front of the TV in a snit to prove defiance only affects you. Go fly rather than melting your brain.
I suffered through the video, manufactured looks of concern and clearly reading from something (could see guy on the right continuously turning body right but looking left and down to read). In over five minutes, they mentioned Taylor four time, three pretty quickly at the beginning, followed by long period of them telling us how much they're doing (despite fact they spent money and case has gone nowhere) - then a token mention at the end.

After watching the video my impression was "Us too! Us too!"

I think this will ultimately prove to by a pyrrhic victory. I think FAA will go to Congress and say they can't do the safety job so long as they're not able to regulate a big segment of users.
Old 06-19-2017, 04:55 AM
  #6  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Everyone get this last week?
Dear members,
It's been a busy week for AMA in Washington, D.C., where the government affairs team has held multiple meetings with members of Congress and other industry stakeholders to discuss FAA reauthorization and other issues. We've met with the National Aeronautic Association, National League of Cities, the National Association of Realtors and a subcommittee of the Drone Advisory Committee, among others.
We continue to urge policymakers and their staff to strengthen and protect the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336), which allows hobbyists to fly within the safety programming of a community-based organization (CBO) such as AMA.

We've also emphasized the important role that CBOs play in managing the recreational community and ensuring the safety of the skies.
AMA president Rich Hanson recently authored an op-ed in The Hill about the importance of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, which provides a good overview of the messages we're advancing on Capitol Hill. If you missed Rich's op-ed, you can read it here.

Things are starting to move quickly around FAA reauthorization and there's always the possibility that we may need your help to weigh in with your members of Congress. Please continue to monitor your email, AMA's Facebook and Twitter, as well as modelaircraft.org/gov for updates.

As always, thank you for your continued support of AMA.


Mike
Old 06-19-2017, 03:08 PM
  #7  
tailskid
My Feedback: (34)
 
tailskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tolleson, AZ
Posts: 9,536
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

I did.
Old 06-20-2017, 04:21 AM
  #8  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Two things in Rich''s OP- ED stuck out to me. The AMA has always claimed to be the driving force behind SEC. 336 but that's not mentioned. This got my attention.

" Unfortunately, some people simply use the Special Rule as a get out of jail free card and do not fully engage or operate in accordance with a CBO program. This is part of the reason why we acknowledge that some tweaks may be necessary for the Special Rule. Nevertheless, we strongly believe that the option for hobbyists to operate in a CBO structure should remain. "

So is he suggesting mandatory membership as the "tweak"??

Mike
Old 06-20-2017, 11:52 AM
  #9  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,885
Received 14 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

probably
Old 06-20-2017, 12:30 PM
  #10  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,201
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket View Post
Two things in Rich''s OP- ED stuck out to me. The AMA has always claimed to be the driving force behind SEC. 336 but that's not mentioned. This got my attention.

" Unfortunately, some people simply use the Special Rule as a get out of jail free card and do not fully engage or operate in accordance with a CBO program. This is part of the reason why we acknowledge that some tweaks may be necessary for the Special Rule. Nevertheless, we strongly believe that the option for hobbyists to operate in a CBO structure should remain. "

So is he suggesting mandatory membership as the "tweak"??

Mike
I don’t think the AMA is interested in stopping RC’s from operating in a CBO structure if they choose to, I do think they would like to stop special rules or privileges for those that belong to a CBO.
Old 06-20-2017, 12:46 PM
  #11  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d View Post
I don’t think the AMA is interested in stopping RC’s from operating in a CBO structure if they choose to, I do think they would like to stop special rules or privileges for those that belong to a CBO.
Just what " privileges" are those?

Mike
Old 06-20-2017, 02:28 PM
  #12  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,201
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket View Post
Just what " privileges" are those?

Mike
For one thing AMA members can fly higher than 400 ft.
Old 06-20-2017, 03:21 PM
  #13  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d View Post
For one thing AMA members can fly higher than 400 ft.

Really ? Hows that? Seems like anyone following the "Safety Rules" can do the same. As far as I can tell there are no "special " privileges associated with being member. Maybe I'm wrong.

Mike
Old 06-20-2017, 06:08 PM
  #14  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,201
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket View Post
Really ? Hows that? Seems like anyone following the "Safety Rules" can do the same. As far as I can tell there are no "special " privileges associated with being member. Maybe I'm wrong.

Mike
You are correct about anyone following the safety rules but then comes the gray area because some feel you have to be a AMA member to included in the AMA programing. And of course the AMA want us to think that is the case that you have to be a member.
Old 06-21-2017, 03:38 AM
  #15  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ira d View Post
You are correct about anyone following the safety rules but then comes the gray area because some feel you have to be a AMA member to included in the AMA programing. And of course the AMA want us to think that is the case that you have to be a member.
Thanks
Mike
Old 06-21-2017, 10:31 AM
  #16  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 24,593
Received 85 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

The 400 foot exemption was specifically addressed to the AMA
Old 06-22-2017, 03:09 AM
  #17  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
The 400 foot exemption was specifically addressed to the AMA


The letter you mention states

"...model aircraft may be flow consistently with Section 336 and agency guidelines at altitudes above 400 feet when following a community-based organization's safety guidelines."

Which is not a " AMA members only" exemption.

Mike
Old 06-22-2017, 04:29 AM
  #18  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 24,593
Received 85 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

LOL Ok, have it your way.
Old 06-22-2017, 04:35 AM
  #19  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
LOL Ok, have it your way.
I'm disappointed as a AMA EC member you find humor in this. All I was doing was clarifying what that letter contained. I read your post as it was a "members only" exemption.

Mike
Old 06-22-2017, 06:22 AM
  #20  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 24,593
Received 85 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

I'm not an EC member, just an AVP/LM

It's not you so much, but this has been hashed and rehashed so many times I'm not going to try to delve into it again.

Really in the end I'm not even sure it matters all that much, endanger the NAS by flying like a fool and causing an incident with a full scale and I don't really think it will matter if you're an AMA member or just an idiot, that person will be hung out to dry.
Old 06-22-2017, 06:46 AM
  #21  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
I'm not an EC member, just an AVP/LM

It's not you so much, but this has been hashed and rehashed so many times I'm not going to try to delve into it again.

Really in the end I'm not even sure it matters all that much, endanger the NAS by flying like a fool and causing an incident with a full scale and I don't really think it will matter if you're an AMA member or just an idiot, that person will be hung out to dry.
Ok a AVP ( my mistake) but my reply stands. Who said anything about "endanger the NAS by flying like a fool and causing an incident with a full scale " where did that come from? My point is that the 400 ft letter pertains to everyone ( not just AMA members) who follows SEC 336. As far as "hung out to dry" involving a full scale it hasn't happened to date. Now the FAA has fined a number of people for stupid stuff but those fined plea bargained them down to pennies on the dollar. A far cry from "hung out to dry"

Mike

Last edited by rcmiket; 06-22-2017 at 06:48 AM.
Old 06-22-2017, 07:24 AM
  #22  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 24,593
Received 85 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

Yes, but to fly by 336 you need to follow a CBO

There's only 1 CBO and that requires you to be a member to acknowlege the safety code.

So,.... you need to be a member to be compliant with 336 as written so if you're a member you're covered by the letter to the AMA.
Old 06-22-2017, 08:47 AM
  #23  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
Yes, but to fly by 336 you need to follow a CBO

There's only 1 CBO and that requires you to be a member to acknowlege the safety code.

So,.... you need to be a member to be compliant with 336 as written so if you're a member you're covered by the letter to the AMA.
That's debatable and has been debated for a couple of years now.. Nowhere does the FAA state you MUST be a member of the AMA to be compliant nor can the goverment require membership in the AMA. Who's to say just what a CBO is and it's not spelled out anywhere.
While I'm sure the AMA would love mandatory membership there's no way it will happen.

Mike
Old 06-22-2017, 09:06 AM
  #24  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket View Post
That's debatable and has been debated for a couple of years now.. Nowhere does the FAA state you MUST be a member of the AMA to be compliant nor can the goverment require membership in the AMA. Who's to say just what a CBO is and it's not spelled out anywhere.
While I'm sure the AMA would love mandatory membership there's no way it will happen.

Mike
If AMA dies (not a real stretch) do model airplanes die with it? I hate to think the existence of the hobby hangs on that star.
Old 06-22-2017, 09:23 AM
  #25  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,201
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cj_rumley View Post
If AMA dies (not a real stretch) do model airplanes die with it? I hate to think the existence of the hobby hangs on that star.

I think if the AMA has its way with mandatory membership enforced by law that could be a real concern , I am hoping that the FAA won’t ever go after anyone for not being a AMA member.

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.