I personally think it was a mistake to authorize it but, considering the clout of Amazon, it was just a matter of time

actually, this is a good thing.
the sooner they learn of the real problems,hazards,and whatever else can go wrong with drone delivery, the sooner everyone will move on to some other scheme.

I like the way you think.

Mike

for everybody that keeps believing it is difficult to fly a model airplane up around 10,000ft:

World Record Set by AMA Members

Four AMA members have learned that an RC flight they made in 2019 has set a new record. The record for highest altitude RC model aircraft flight was ratified in August by the Guinness Book of World Records. The modified RVJet Flying Wing reached an altitude of 34,800 feet.

Well , at least it ain't only drones that are giving the FAA heartburn , , , anyone else see the news story of the multiple pilots who reported some A hole flying on a jetpack at around 3000 feet near the Los Angeles airport ?

LOL

Mike

Please tell me you don't actually beleive there is a guy flying around LA with a jet pack?

Why shouldn't he? Two professional pilots made the report. Trained observers. Tell me you don't think there are morons out there with more money than sense.

Mike

LOL. I can't believe you can't believe that he believes it. I mean, his beliefs obviously don't align with yours, so it would stand to reason (if you had any) that he would believe this and you wouldn't, right? I mean, a jetpack? really? Must be some kind of CRAZY conspiracy theory..... LOL

https://www.latimes.com/business/sto...cess-exclusive


I mean, they HAVE been around since the 60's.

C'mon Speed, try to keep up....

Astro

I have watched this unfold since the beginning and the AMA has not been able to make progress while it still hangs on to the idea of forcing the FAA's hand. I believe the FAA like Transport Canada will eventually simply lump all remote piloted vehicles into one and make up one set of rules for everyone like our part IX of the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
Scroll down to part IX https://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/....html#s-900.01

Once something like this comes into effect then the AMA will be able to apply for an exemption for its members ONLY, just like we have done in Canada with MAAC. A PDF of the exemption is included

It's California, ANYTHING is possible out there

I gotta admit that when I saw the news story my first thought was that maybe it was some type of RC aircraft akin to the "Flying Witch" or "Snoopy's Doghouse" but made to look like a guy with a jetpack , and then being curious I did a search and learned just how totally possibly it could have actually been a guy with a few rockets strapped to his butt , the age of jetpacks having finally arrived .

I now forsee a future of a billion numbskulls who already can't drive cars now crashing into each other while drunk zipping around on their jetpacks ;

"Oh look , fireworks !!!! , no ? Harry just crashed into the Empire State building again ? , See I told you he flys like a nut when he's been into the sauce !!!!"

Transport Canada Is going to enforce the law/rules Things are picking up with the success in tracking and finding these operators who skirt the rules. The FAA is starting as well. Good I say we need as much separation as we can get from the membership and the non members who have no intention of following rules or safety guidelines..

https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-c...n-toronto.html

https://blackburnnews.com/chatham/ch...charged-fined/

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/cri...ed-from-flying

That's what the ATC said ; "Only in LA !"

So, let me see if I have this straight, ANYONE that's not a member of MAAC or AMA member is lower than dirt? So, what about MAAC and AMA members that break the rules? ARE THEY EXEMPT JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE MEMBERS? As I see it:

• the guy in the first story should have gotten jail time, in addition to the $2750 in fines.
• the second guy should have been fined considerably more and jail time, even though it was a one off deal since he was over a hospital and a helipad with active air ambulances in the vicinity
• the third guy got what he should have.

What isn't mentioned is if they were MAAC members or not. Without knowing that little tidbit of information, your post loses all credibility because, if they are/were, it shows they are no better than the AMA members that don't follow the safety code or non-members that fly where ever and when ever, just because they can

Andy, I thought for sure being a jet guy you would at least run some quick numbers in your head. First thing is what engines are commercially available in the higher thrust ranges. My short search found a max thrust rating of 50 lbs. So for an average weight guy plus engines adds up to 4 engines ( 200lbs ) for a 1:1 power to weight ratio. Now for vertical take off and climb to 3,000' 1:1 is not going to cut it. 1:1.25 would be minimum. So add more engines, now up to 6 engines producing 300lbs of thrust at FULL THROTTLE. Oh wait, we haven't added fuel yet. How much fuel does a 50lb thrust turbine consume at full throttle? I can't find any specs but I would guess at 20oz per minute. Now that's 120oz per minute for all 6. But wait again we haven't figured in the weight of fuel or the amount of time it takes to get to 3,000' and back to the ground. That could easily be 15-20 gallons of fuel. Let's see now, how much does Kerosene weigh per gallon? Looks to be around 6.5lbs per gallon so add about 130lbs for fuel. There goes the power to weight ratio, oh well add more engines right? Oh wait, then we need more fuel..........


Ok so that about eliminates the vertical take off and landing jet pack. That leaves us with the wing type that have to be launched from a manned aircraft in flight. Hmmmm wouldn't the FAA have a flight plan of the launching aircraft, especially in such a congested corridor?


My guess at this point is that the pilots saw a promotional inflatable that got away.

Speedy, in his "expert" opinion, says it's impossible...

YouTube then Search:
"Jetman Dubai Takeoff - 4K"
(especially ironic since our "expert" above ruled out VTO ... AND ... said that winged have to be launched from plane)

And it's not the only example (again, YouTube search):
"Watch Men Wearing JetPacks Incredibly Fly Alongside a Jumbo Jet"
"Alpha Jetman – Human Flight And Beyond 4K"
"LOFT: The Jetman Story - (Official Teaser) 4K
"JetPack Aviation flying at the RedBull Air Races 2018"

Many private pilots don't file flight plans for local flights, they aren't required. I know I wouldn't file a flight plan to go from the closest GA airport to to my house to my work locations, it's less than 40 miles as the crow flies. I'd contact Seattle Center, tell them I'm flying direct to the appropriate airport from my departure point and get my altitude assignment. Everything is done at that point, other than landing at my destination. I would be flying through controlled air space the whole way and through the traffic patterns of THREE major airports, possibly landing at one of two of them depending on my work schedule

Might want to bone up on the current state of RC rule making in the US and the pending NPRM before wasting any more energy on this from left field.

This will soon be law:
https://www.wileyconnect.com/home/2019/12/26/its-finally-here-the-faa-releases-remote-id-nprm

Speed , before you say any more , please do a search of "Man crosses English Channel on Flyboard" and read the story . Now please don't come back to me with "but it's not a jetpack , it's a flyboard" , to the untrained eye that flying contraption looks VERY much like a jetpack and functions just as one expects a jetpack would , so well so that it permitted this gent to cross the channel without wings .

like I said , Google is your friend , and yes indeed it's still VERY possible that the pilots DID see an actual living , breathing , flying A hole on a contraption looking for all the world like , , well , like a jetpack

LOL, I see that he did do VTO, not clear on how high he went but his solution to the fuel weight issue was to burn everything he had getting to altitude and then parachute down.

I'm sure you are correct for some areas. I seriously doubt you will get anywhere near LAX without air traffic control knowing about it.

In less than five minutes I found several examples of what you seem to believe cannot happen. I'm sure there's many more.

As another wise man in these pages said "Google is your friend."

Impesseve for certain however a 20 mile horizontal flight at low altitude should require less fuel then a climb to 3,000' and back. Hard to argue the fuel requirement issue. That being said, if I am wrong I will admit it. More then what can be said about a couple of our regulars.

By all means, show me a video where somone did a VTO, climbed to 3,000' and came back and landed under power.