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

Crickets....

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

Crickets....

Old 10-09-2022, 01:20 PM
  #1026  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
The company was founded in 2006 by Frank Wang (Wāng Tāo, 汪滔).[10] Born in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, he enrolled as a college student in the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) in 2003. He was part of the HKUST team participating in ABU Robocon and won third prize.[11]

Wang built the first prototypes of DJI's projects in his dorm room, selling the flight control components to universities and Chinese electric companies. He used the proceeds to move to the industrial hub of Shenzhen and hired a small number of staff in 2006. The company struggled at first, with a high degree of churn among employees that has been attributed to Wang's abrasive personality and perfectionist expectations of his employees. The company sold a modest amount of components during this period, relying as well on financial support from Wang's family friend, Lu Di, who provided US$90,000 and managed the company's finances.[12] In 2009, DJI's components allowed a team to successfully pilot a drone around the peak of Mt. Everest.[6]
You're wasting time reprinting the Wikipedia page. I said the current DOD ban on DJI drones would have a chilling effect on the droners, i.e. Would a veteran use a drone deemed to be sending critical info to the Chinese military? What chilling effect in general will it have that using DJI drones is supporting the Communist Chinese in their cold war against the US. You replied with some in-house military mumbo-jumbo about DJI back when DJI wasn't even a thing. There were no "droners" in 2009. For some reason you have to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, and argue for the sake of arguing.
Old 10-09-2022, 01:57 PM
  #1027  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,345
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
For some reason you have to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, and argue for the sake of arguing.
AND blame the other party for arguing. (see post above!). LOL

Astro
Old 10-09-2022, 02:04 PM
  #1028  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
You're wasting time reprinting the Wikipedia page. I said the current DOD ban on DJI drones would have a chilling effect on the droners, i.e. Would a veteran use a drone deemed to be sending critical info to the Chinese military? What chilling effect in general will it have that using DJI drones is supporting the Communist Chinese in their cold war against the US. You replied with some in-house military mumbo-jumbo about DJI back when DJI wasn't even a thing. There were no "droners" in 2009. For some reason you have to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, and argue for the sake of arguing.

There a freaking joke.

Mike
Old 10-09-2022, 03:37 PM
  #1029  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
There a freaking joke.

Mike
About your tagline, "Someone please explain to me how flying with FPV goggles on is LOS Flying." There is article about that on jrupprechtlaw.com. Jonathan Rupprecht was the lead attorney for RaceDayQuauds in their losing lawsuit last July over Remote ID which was rejected by the US Court of Appeals. RDQ lost not only on the 4th amendment claim but on every other process claim saying the FAA didn't follow the rules. Jonathan Rupprecht won't put his name on it, but he posted this by RDQ saying FPV goggles comply with LOS rules if you can take off the goggles and see your drone. It's hogwash of course, or their wouldn't be a spotter rule. But if you want to wade through 20-plus paragraphs of gibberish by the same people who lost bigly on every one of their other arguments, here it is. Scroll down to First Person View Flyers:
https://jrupprechtlaw.com/remote-identification/

Tyler Brennan of RaceDayQuads is a veteran and F15 pilot and seems like an all around good guy. Where he got off track on drones is anyone's guess, but nothing he says about the RC flying hobby can be taken seriously. As in the case of AMA, the only explanation is FPV rots the brain, even F15 pilots.

Last edited by ECHO24; 10-09-2022 at 03:55 PM.
Old 10-09-2022, 04:42 PM
  #1030  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

@speedracerntrixie,
Here's another deterrent and a drag on RC flying in general. With RDQ's lawsuit defeated there is no longer any grey area about FPV. It is illegal. The outlaw FPV "influencers" on YouTube are scrambling to distance themselves from the lawbreakers and trying to look like law abiding citizens. The reason is posting FPV videos on YouTube makes them commercial operators and subject to Part 107 penalties. And there have been some big ones, a $182,000 fine in one case. It's balancing act because their business is based entirely on illegal FPV, which will eventually go away because of Remote ID. There will be no getting around it. The FAA has thought this through tying everything to registration and a potential $250,000 fine / 3 years in prison for blowing it off.

Even the dullest FPV idiots are figuring out that not broadcasting is a sign that person has also probably not registered. There is a lot of stupid talk on FPV forums about how to spoof a Remote ID signal. That spoofing RID would be another crime in itself shows the type of people naturally attracted to FPV. It might take a while, but like AMA it will all come crashing down for the FPVers.
Old 10-10-2022, 03:20 AM
  #1031  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
About your tagline, "Someone please explain to me how flying with FPV goggles on is LOS Flying." There is article about that on jrupprechtlaw.com. Jonathan Rupprecht was the lead attorney for RaceDayQuauds in their losing lawsuit last July over Remote ID which was rejected by the US Court of Appeals. RDQ lost not only on the 4th amendment claim but on every other process claim saying the FAA didn't follow the rules. Jonathan Rupprecht won't put his name on it, but he posted this by RDQ saying FPV goggles comply with LOS rules if you can take off the goggles and see your drone. It's hogwash of course, or their wouldn't be a spotter rule. But if you want to wade through 20-plus paragraphs of gibberish by the same people who lost bigly on every one of their other arguments, here it is. Scroll down to First Person View Flyers:
https://jrupprechtlaw.com/remote-identification/

Tyler Brennan of RaceDayQuads is a veteran and F15 pilot and seems like an all around good guy. Where he got off track on drones is anyone's guess, but nothing he says about the RC flying hobby can be taken seriously. As in the case of AMA, the only explanation is FPV rots the brain, even F15 pilots.

I kinda followed along on that site when all of this first came down than just stopped checking in due to lack of success on his part. I still don't see how FPV is line of sight flying. I watch people to this day at local flying fields flying way beyond line of sight routinely "just because they can" is the answer I get when I ask about the rule. All the rules in the world will not stop anyone from doing as they please.

Mike
Old 10-10-2022, 03:23 AM
  #1032  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
@speedracerntrixie,
Here's another deterrent and a drag on RC flying in general. With RDQ's lawsuit defeated there is no longer any grey area about FPV. It is illegal. The outlaw FPV "influencers" on YouTube are scrambling to distance themselves from the lawbreakers and trying to look like law abiding citizens. The reason is posting FPV videos on YouTube makes them commercial operators and subject to Part 107 penalties. And there have been some big ones, a $182,000 fine in one case. It's balancing act because their business is based entirely on illegal FPV, which will eventually go away because of Remote ID. There will be no getting around it. The FAA has thought this through tying everything to registration and a potential $250,000 fine / 3 years in prison for blowing it off.

Even the dullest FPV idiots are figuring out that not broadcasting is a sign that person has also probably not registered. There is a lot of stupid talk on FPV forums about how to spoof a Remote ID signal. That spoofing RID would be another crime in itself shows the type of people naturally attracted to FPV. It might take a while, but like AMA it will all come crashing down for the FPVers.

Just curious was that one reduced like all the others ? There was a list posted awhile back online that showed all the fines issued but how they were settled for pennies on the dollar.

Mike
Old 10-10-2022, 06:03 PM
  #1033  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
Just curious was that one reduced like all the others ? There was a list posted awhile back online that showed all the fines issued but how they were settled for pennies on the dollar.

Mike
One issue with prosecuting illegal FPVers based on videos on YouTube is it has to be proved when the video was shot. A trick some illegal street racers use on YouTube is to wait until one day after the statute of limitations has passed to post their videos. In the case of the $182,000 FAA fine the guy was live-streaming, which put a time-stamp on the offense. His name is Mikey (54 years old) and there is an interview on the YouTube channel Geeksvana about it if you're interested in the details.

Edit: The FAA isn't going get blood from a turnip. To determine the appropriate fine the FAA had asked for the guy's last 10 years tax returns. Apparently he has no assets (after his wife left him over his drone habit).

Last edited by ECHO24; 10-10-2022 at 07:01 PM.
Old 10-10-2022, 06:35 PM
  #1034  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Ken Heron is another outlaw FPV "influencer" on YouTube trying to figure out the legal landscape. I've called him out on a couple of his videos about giving illegal advice, most notably one panel discussion with Bruce/xjet (the stupidest person on planet earth at the moment) who was advocating for hobbyists to ignore the FAA and Remote ID. I pointed out that it would be a federal crime and asked Ken if that was a violation of YouTube's terms of service. Let's just say Bruce/xjet, Ken Heron and myself are on a first name basis.
Old 10-11-2022, 02:59 AM
  #1035  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
One issue with prosecuting illegal FPVers based on videos on YouTube is it has to be proved when the video was shot. A trick some illegal street racers use on YouTube is to wait until one day after the statute of limitations has passed to post their videos. In the case of the $182,000 FAA fine the guy was live-streaming, which put a time-stamp on the offense. His name is Mikey (54 years old) and there is an interview on the YouTube channel Geeksvana about it if you're interested in the details.

Edit: The FAA isn't going get blood from a turnip. To determine the appropriate fine the FAA had asked for the guy's last 10 years tax returns. Apparently he has no assets (after his wife left him over his drone habit).
What good are big buck fines when no one actually pays them.................That's no deterrent.

Mike
Old 10-11-2022, 07:57 AM
  #1036  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
What good are big buck fines when no one actually pays them.................That's no deterrent.

Mike
In addition whatever final fine from the FAA, it cost Mikey his YouTube following. It also got the attention of the other FPV influencers on YouTube. Even if Mikey is broke some of those guys do have money, and getting YouTube ad revenue they are considered commercial operators subject to Part 107 penalties. That's part of what jacked up that fine to $182,000, at $1,5000 per offense. Encouraging others to break the law is also an enhancement. So at least in this case there's some deterrent. Going forward the FAA is going to make examples of a few of these jerks and the rest will fall in line. The drone free-for-all has gone on for a long time so it might take a while, but these so called FPV outlaws are a bunch of cowards who've just gotten away with it thanks to AMA. That's who's to blame not the FAA. It's AMA who invited these jerks into the hobby under Section 336.

As the defacto authority under 336, AMA could have said they did not consider drones or other aircraft with GPS navigation to be "model aircraft" under the 336 exemption. Let the droners to deal with the FAA on their own. Instead, AMA invited this lawless FPV faction into the hobby with documents 550 and 560, giving illegal FPV the veneer of legitimacy under Section 336. AMA didn't care that the percentage of droners who follow those rules was statistically zero, or that AMA had no control over these people. It took the droners only a few years to completely destroy the hobby. The drone "free-for-all" is even cited in the RDQ US Court of Appeals decision. It's insane when you think about it.
Old 10-11-2022, 08:33 AM
  #1037  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

The hobby is far from destroyed IMO. Although the FAA was clear that CBO membership is not a requirement, the seem to be pushing people towards the current CBO. RID unless flying at a FRIA, which most AMA club sites will become. Many of those sites have already been granted altitudes above 400í. Strong evidence that the FAA has made the distinction between the two disciplines and are working with the AMA.
Old 10-11-2022, 09:02 AM
  #1038  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,535
Received 130 Likes on 123 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
RID unless flying at a FRIA, which most AMA club sites will become. Many of those sites have already been granted altitudes above 400’.
Really? Do you have a link or can you tell us where to find the list of the many sites that have been granted the 400+ foot waiver? I would like to know where I can fly at those altitudes when I get my Electra built
Old 10-11-2022, 09:10 AM
  #1039  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie
Really? Do you have a link or can you tell us where to find the list of the many sites that have been granted the 400+ foot waiver? I would like to know where I can fly at those altitudes when I get my Electra built
You can come down and fly with me, Iíll buy lunch.
Old 10-11-2022, 09:11 AM
  #1040  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
The hobby is far from destroyed IMO. Although the FAA was clear that CBO membership is not a requirement, the seem to be pushing people towards the current CBO. RID unless flying at a FRIA, which most AMA club sites will become. Many of those sites have already been granted altitudes above 400í. Strong evidence that the FAA has made the distinction between the two disciplines and are working with the AMA.
Great. And with a new prospect, what is the best time to mention that if they decide not to join AMA or register and fly their foamy at a vacant field they could be subject to a $250,000 fine and/or 3 years in prison? That'll have them lining up for the RC flying hobby for sure.
Old 10-11-2022, 09:32 AM
  #1041  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

And of course there was the reply I got back from JR radios about RC planes and helicopters, "junior-activity in many areas globally is non-existent if not totally dead".

I know I'd want to buy if AMA sold stock, their future sure looks bright!
Old 10-11-2022, 09:48 AM
  #1042  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
Great. And with a new prospect, what is the best time to mention that if they decide not to join AMA or register and fly their foamy at a vacant field they could be subject to a $250,000 fine and/or 3 years in prison? That'll have them lining up for the RC flying hobby for sure.

Easy, be RID compliant and register.
Old 10-11-2022, 09:49 AM
  #1043  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24
And of course there was the reply I got back from JR radios about RC planes and helicopters, "junior-activity in many areas globally is non-existent if not totally dead".

I know I'd want to buy if AMA sold stock, their future sure looks bright!
And just how is Tomohisa tracking this?
Old 10-11-2022, 11:31 AM
  #1044  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,345
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie
Really? Do you have a link or can you tell us where to find the list of the many sites that have been granted the 400+ foot waiver? I would like to know where I can fly at those altitudes when I get my Electra built
He doesnít have that info. Heís been asked to provide it before and couldnít, yet he keeps making the statement. Just more spin.

The resident AMA rep made/supported the same statement, but couldnít/wouldnít supply supporting data either.

Astro
Old 10-11-2022, 11:34 AM
  #1045  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,345
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
And just how is Tomohisa tracking this?
Probably by their rapidly sinking sales numbers?

Iím sure a company such as JR has a pretty good handle on sales, forecasts and demographics within their market.

Astro
Old 10-11-2022, 11:50 AM
  #1046  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
And just how is Tomohisa tracking this?
"Strong evidence that the FAA has made the distinction between the two disciplines and are working with the AMA."

That's something a bot could write. Meaning even you don't believe that (semi) upbeat assessment of the hobby. The good new is we won't have to wait long to see if there is any demand for Remote ID modules. One aspect of the hobby modules won't help are DLG's. No room. DLG's are easy to fly almost anywhere because that can be hand-caught. That will come to an end for most standard size. There are a few under 250 grams but they're expensive.


Old 10-11-2022, 11:52 AM
  #1047  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog
Probably by their rapidly sinking sales numbers?

Iím sure a company such as JR has a pretty good handle on sales, forecasts and demographics within their market.

Astro
I would agree. However JRís Democratic is the high end guy. Their lowest cost TX is $389 and go up to the Elite TX thatís $2,600. Stands to reason they donít have many youth sales.
Old 10-11-2022, 02:27 PM
  #1048  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,345
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
I would agree. However JR’s Democratic is the high end guy. Their lowest cost TX is $389 and go up to the Elite TX that’s $2,600. Stands to reason they don’t have many youth sales.
Just because they don't market primarily to youth doesn't mean they don't know what the market is. Perhaps the youth market is so small that they choose NOT to market to it? More of your usual flawed logic.

Astro
Old 10-11-2022, 02:55 PM
  #1049  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,527
Received 177 Likes on 152 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog
Just because they don't market primarily to youth doesn't mean they don't know what the market is. Perhaps the youth market is so small that they choose NOT to market to it? More of your usual flawed logic.

Astro
Yet Horizon sells thousands of low end BNF models that can be flown with a DX6I annually. The market is there, JR doesnít cater to it because they know Spektrum/Horizon already has a stronghold on that market.

Nothing flawed, just business sense.
Old 10-11-2022, 03:22 PM
  #1050  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,345
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
Yet Horizon sells thousands of low end BNF models that can be flown with a DX6I annually. The market is there, JR doesnít cater to it because they know Spektrum/Horizon already has a stronghold on that market.

Nothing flawed, just business sense.
I said YOUR LOGIC is flawed, not JR's business sense. More spin and deflection.

Astro

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.