Comment on tbe FAA NPRM
#101
Thanks.
#102
Is that all you are here or is to banter back and forth? Then go ahead, an accusation on an internet forum really doesn't ruin my day like it does yours.
I said, "If it is not you, it is someone who is trying to "frame" you." Quit whining that people are picking on you, it is not very becoming of a grown man to constantly whine. I have tried very hard to respect your posts and positions, but I just cannot due to your inability to stay factual and your constant whining that, somehow, you are being picked on. You want respect? EARN IT.
It is very clear the Mach5 account (whether it is you or someone else) was created solely to disrupt this forum. Not a single one of the posts from that account has added anything of merit to these threads, just sideways remarks about Franklin. I think it is clear that it is a troll account. Trolling is against the rules of RCU. Get it?
Astro
I said, "If it is not you, it is someone who is trying to "frame" you." Quit whining that people are picking on you, it is not very becoming of a grown man to constantly whine. I have tried very hard to respect your posts and positions, but I just cannot due to your inability to stay factual and your constant whining that, somehow, you are being picked on. You want respect? EARN IT.
It is very clear the Mach5 account (whether it is you or someone else) was created solely to disrupt this forum. Not a single one of the posts from that account has added anything of merit to these threads, just sideways remarks about Franklin. I think it is clear that it is a troll account. Trolling is against the rules of RCU. Get it?
Astro
#104
Wrong, go back and reread my posts sir. I replied to a few posts that speed posted about his field or his opinions. Franklin then responds to my post calling me out, and I respond who's back to Franklin "Who'sthis guy" as in why is he bringing my up when I never even replied or brought him up, in response to him bringing me up; I never said anything about Franklin, I was showing appreciation for some of Speed's posts and Franklin is the one who brought my account up, not the other way around.
I didn't cast the first stone...
Your apology for jumping the gun and to conclusions will be accepted...
I didn't cast the first stone...
Your apology for jumping the gun and to conclusions will be accepted...
Grog manned up and identified himself and was met with a welcome as a fellow interested party to the AMA discussions . Everyone already knows Grog's , Speedy's , Franklin's , and my AMA number , so how bout you Mr. shifty locations , are you gonna identify yourself with your AMA number to earn a bit of forum cred or are ya gonna troll from the edges of anonymity ????
#106
Nope , playing the name game with your location from Oregon to Pennsylvania is ALL the proof the board needs to deem you a troll .
Grog manned up and identified himself and was met with a welcome as a fellow interested party to the AMA discussions . Everyone already knows Grog's , Speedy's , Franklin's , and my AMA number , so how bout you Mr. shifty locations , are you gonna identify yourself with your AMA number to earn a bit of forum cred or are ya gonna troll from the edges of anonymity ????
Grog manned up and identified himself and was met with a welcome as a fellow interested party to the AMA discussions . Everyone already knows Grog's , Speedy's , Franklin's , and my AMA number , so how bout you Mr. shifty locations , are you gonna identify yourself with your AMA number to earn a bit of forum cred or are ya gonna troll from the edges of anonymity ????
Just curious, how does an AMA number give any "cred" in an internet forum??
#107
Well , at the very least , one could provide their AMA number to prove they have a bit of skin in the game . Sure , opinions from outside the AMA matter too , but it would be nice to know upfront which is which , am I speaking to a fellow AMA member or someone who isn't AMA ? Perspectives from inside VS outside may be vastly different , and I think it's a fair question given that this is the AMA subforum here after all .....
#109
Well , at the very least , one could provide their AMA number to prove they have a bit of skin in the game . Sure , opinions from outside the AMA matter too , but it would be nice to know upfront which is which , am I speaking to a fellow AMA member or someone who isn't AMA ? Perspectives from inside VS outside may be vastly different , and I think it's a fair question given that this is the AMA subforum here after all .....
Bottom line, typing out a random number here proves nothing and has nothing to do with the value of a person's opinion.
#110
#111
My Feedback: (29)
Or could this " show us your AMA number " be a ploy to exclude our R/C brother from Canada should he choose to join the conversation?
Personally I think what would add some "cred " would be achievements we have gained while in the hobby. Doesn't nessesarily mean competition records but could mean the length of time as an AMA member, ever held a club office, ever been a CD, complexity of models built, have you designed your own models, what is your current project etc. I find it quite funny that to the best of my recollection I am the only one whom has ever posted pictures of their handiwork, funny how posting pictures of a model airplane on a model airplane site was deemed off topic and seemed to rub some wrong. IMO if we want to establish some " cred " then show us you are active in the hobby other then pounding on a keyboard daily. No Init4fun, this is not directed just at you but everyone in this thread.
Personally I think what would add some "cred " would be achievements we have gained while in the hobby. Doesn't nessesarily mean competition records but could mean the length of time as an AMA member, ever held a club office, ever been a CD, complexity of models built, have you designed your own models, what is your current project etc. I find it quite funny that to the best of my recollection I am the only one whom has ever posted pictures of their handiwork, funny how posting pictures of a model airplane on a model airplane site was deemed off topic and seemed to rub some wrong. IMO if we want to establish some " cred " then show us you are active in the hobby other then pounding on a keyboard daily. No Init4fun, this is not directed just at you but everyone in this thread.
Last edited by speedracerntrixie; 01-24-2020 at 04:43 AM.
#112
Or could this " show us your AMA number " be a ploy to exclude our R/C brother from Canada should he choose to join the conversation?
Personally I think what would add some "cred " would be achievements we have gained while in the hobby. Doesn't nessesarily mean competition records but could mean the length of time as an AMA member, ever held a club office, ever been a CD, complexity of models built, have you designed your own models, what is your current project etc. I find it quite funny that to the best of my recollection I am the only one whom has ever posted pictures of their handiwork, funny how posting pictures of a model airplane on a model airplane site was deemed off topic and seemed to rub some wrong. IMO if we want to establish some " cred " then show us you are active in the hobby other then pounding on a keyboard daily. No Init4fun, this is not directed just at you but everyone in this thread.
Personally I think what would add some "cred " would be achievements we have gained while in the hobby. Doesn't nessesarily mean competition records but could mean the length of time as an AMA member, ever held a club office, ever been a CD, complexity of models built, have you designed your own models, what is your current project etc. I find it quite funny that to the best of my recollection I am the only one whom has ever posted pictures of their handiwork, funny how posting pictures of a model airplane on a model airplane site was deemed off topic and seemed to rub some wrong. IMO if we want to establish some " cred " then show us you are active in the hobby other then pounding on a keyboard daily. No Init4fun, this is not directed just at you but everyone in this thread.
Teaching policy making and implementation in an accredited Master's program, spending two decades making and implementing policy governing aviation operations gives one credibility in the making and implementing of public policy. Similarly, formal training in aviation safety program management and decades being accountable for managing aviation safety programs and safe aviation operations in complex, high tempo, and high risk flying gives on credibility in the making, implementing, and execution of aviation safety and operations policy.
Heck, even the "agents of the AMA" CDs do not receive any formal safety training, no formal operational risk management training, no aviation operations training ... NOTHING. So I'll put my pubic public policy making, aviation safety program management training, aviation safety program management, aviation operations management, and aviation operations and safety policy making and implementation "cred" against toy plane, AMA club officer, or even AMA CD "cred" anytime.
And this is especially true when the issue at hand is AVIATION SAFETY AND OPERATIONS PUBLIC POLICY, in the form of a proposed rule (hint hint that's public policy) governing operation of recreational sUAS in the public airspace (hint hint that Aviation Operations Public Policy) to help ensure safety in the public airspace (hint hint that's Aviation Operations Safety Public Policy).
Last edited by franklin_m; 01-24-2020 at 05:40 AM.
#113
My Feedback: (1)
Originally Posted by Speedracerntrixienmach5nchimchim
funny how posting pictures of a model airplane on a model airplane site was deemed off topic and seemed to rub some wrong.
Funny how you claim to be so experienced, yet you can't seem to find the appropriate sub-forum to post pictures of your toys! You are either being obtuse, or you are extremely ignorant. If you really were the experienced modeler and long-time forum member, you would know that the following sub-forums would be more appropriate places to post the pictures of your toys.
https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/ext...op-planes-104/
https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/pyl...on-racing-323/
https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scr...gn-3d-cad-174/
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixenmach5nchimchim
Personally I think what would add some "cred " would be achievements we have gained while in the hobby. Doesn't nessesarily mean competition records but could mean the length of time as an AMA member, ever held a club office, ever been a CD, complexity of models built, have you designed your own models, what is your current project etc.
For the sake of these threads, I thought you were going to knock it off with the spin and deflection? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that none of those things has ANY relation to the topic at hand. ZERO, ZILCH, NADA. I guess your TRUE colors are shining bright, eh? Would you quit it with your desperate posts if someone to acknowledge you as the, "Grand Poobah" of everything modeling-related?
Astro
#114
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#115
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it absolutely does not guarantee that the resulting policy is the best one -- or even a wise one.
#117
I will advocate for those 800,000, in the hopes of helping the FAA understand the legal and policy flaws with the FRIA concept as written.
#118
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or so you say. How do you know what they want? Have you asked them? Do you really think they'll support a proposal that REQUIRES all of them to buy altitude encoding telemetry capable receivers and transmitters? That prevents them from operating IC engines, and limits their aircraft choices to 2 lb and 60 MPH?
Have you considered the possibility that some of the 800,000 "left-outs" are JUST LIKE AMA MEMBERS, except that for one reason or another, they've CHOSEN not to belong to AMA?
Why do you think that big gassers and competition planes are ONLY flown at AMA fields?
Stereotyping is one of many ills of a management school education. The world is more complicated than you would like it to be, Franklin. We're talking about 800,000 INDIVIDUALS -- not a monolithic block.
Have you considered the possibility that some of the 800,000 "left-outs" are JUST LIKE AMA MEMBERS, except that for one reason or another, they've CHOSEN not to belong to AMA?
Why do you think that big gassers and competition planes are ONLY flown at AMA fields?
Stereotyping is one of many ills of a management school education. The world is more complicated than you would like it to be, Franklin. We're talking about 800,000 INDIVIDUALS -- not a monolithic block.
#119
Of course the actual truth here is that nothing anyone says in this, and similar threads, carries any import. We are all simply screaming into the wind because it makes us feel good. Nothing said in any of these threads will have even the smallest impact on what the FAA does with respect to RID or enforcement of Section 349.
Last edited by FUTABA-RC; 01-24-2020 at 08:55 AM. Reason: Thai-Pohs
#120
My Feedback: (1)
Of course the actual truth here is that nothing anyone says in this, and similar threads, carries any import. We are all simply screaming into the wind because it makes us feel good. Nothing said in any of these treads will have even the smallest impact of what the FAA does with respect to RID or enforcement of Section 349.
Astro
#121
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We need to put down the knives. It won't matter which organization we belong to, or what we've built, or how many trophies we've won, when we no longer have any place to fly. That's what's at stake here.
So I ask each one who hasn't previously responded: What NPRM comments are YOU planning to submit?
#122
Says you. I hope you're wrong. And I have some reason to believe you're wrong. My brother the Full Scale Pilot tells me that a big reason the FAA dropped the requirement to put ADS-B antennas on both the top and bottom of every private airplane was -- all the negative public comments received! The FAA actually took another look and said, "Yeah, we don't to do that".
I am still composing my response. It runs three pages long now. I am taking the time to make sure I say everything I want to say as clearly as I can. March 2, 2020 is the current deadline and there is no extra credit for how fast you make a comment.
#123
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Franklin, so it is obvious you are carrying on your personal vendetta against the AMA and by your own claims have caused much of the grief we experience now. Congratulations! The whole TajMuncie (childish) thing amply evidences this. I got it, you hate the AMA and want to see it go away. Advocating against FRIAs to accomplish this is disingenuous. But I digress.
The problem with the NPRM is not the FRIAs, it's the fact that there is no technology for direct broadcast that satisfies the LEO's needs, without creating an unfunded mandate that they acquire specialized equipment to receive the broadcast ID and/or telemetry information. Most LEO's have typical smartphone capabilities for radio (Voice/Broadband Data/WiFi/Bluetooth) plus, their emergency services radios. Unfortunately the session establishment times (pairing, associating to an SSID) make these unsuitable as the "broadcast" standard for Remote ID. Not to mention the very short ranges (300' for WiFi and 800' for Bluetooth5) that don't even cover VLOS.
So there exists no current solution for direct broadcast. ADS-B is not meant for these densities and is thus unusable for sUAS, despite the fact that aircraft to aircraft broadcast, without the latency of the Internet, is the only solution to realtime traffic information for avoidance. The punt by the FAA to Internet backhaul opened an even bigger can of worms regarding cost, coverage, privacy, how to fund the collectors (stock FAA answer, "user fees") etc. Aviation in general (all of it) will never have the relevance to force cellular carriers nor CPE (phone) makers to incorporate specialty radios or protocols to do this. So, your simple scheme of a "doohickey" for direct broadcast that is built into next gen receivers (or movable from airplane to airplane, or not) is pie in the sky. You may be an aviation safety expert, but you should talk to some wireless data experts before assuming that the NPRM as proposed is implementable.
So, we arrive at an impasse. What do you propose now?
The problem with the NPRM is not the FRIAs, it's the fact that there is no technology for direct broadcast that satisfies the LEO's needs, without creating an unfunded mandate that they acquire specialized equipment to receive the broadcast ID and/or telemetry information. Most LEO's have typical smartphone capabilities for radio (Voice/Broadband Data/WiFi/Bluetooth) plus, their emergency services radios. Unfortunately the session establishment times (pairing, associating to an SSID) make these unsuitable as the "broadcast" standard for Remote ID. Not to mention the very short ranges (300' for WiFi and 800' for Bluetooth5) that don't even cover VLOS.
So there exists no current solution for direct broadcast. ADS-B is not meant for these densities and is thus unusable for sUAS, despite the fact that aircraft to aircraft broadcast, without the latency of the Internet, is the only solution to realtime traffic information for avoidance. The punt by the FAA to Internet backhaul opened an even bigger can of worms regarding cost, coverage, privacy, how to fund the collectors (stock FAA answer, "user fees") etc. Aviation in general (all of it) will never have the relevance to force cellular carriers nor CPE (phone) makers to incorporate specialty radios or protocols to do this. So, your simple scheme of a "doohickey" for direct broadcast that is built into next gen receivers (or movable from airplane to airplane, or not) is pie in the sky. You may be an aviation safety expert, but you should talk to some wireless data experts before assuming that the NPRM as proposed is implementable.
So, we arrive at an impasse. What do you propose now?
Last edited by FlyUSA; 01-24-2020 at 11:33 AM.
#124
Franklin, so it is obvious you are carrying on your personal vendetta against the AMA and by your own claims have caused much of the grief we experience now. Congratulations! The whole TajMuncie (childish) thing amply evidences this. I got it, you hate the AMA and want to see it go away. Advocating against FRIAs to accomplish this is disingenuous. But I digress.
The problem with the NPRM is not the FRIAs, it's the fact that there is no technology for direct broadcast that satisfies the LEO's needs, without creating an unfunded mandate that they acquire specialized equipment to receive the broadcast ID and/or telemetry information. Most LEO's have typical smartphone capabilities for radio (Voice/Broadband Data/WiFi/Bluetooth) plus, their emergency services radios. Unfortunately the session establishment times (pairing, associating to an SSID) make these unsuitable as the "broadcast" standard for Remote ID. Not to mention the very short ranges (300' for WiFi and 800' for Bluetooth5) that don't even cover VLOS.
So there exists no current solution for direct broadcast. ADS-B is not meant for these densities and is thus unusable for sUAS, despite the fact that aircraft to aircraft broadcast, without the latency of the Internet, is the only solution to realtime traffic information for avoidance. The punt by the FAA to Internet backhaul opened an even bigger can of worms. Aviation in general (all of it) will never have the relevance to force cellular carriers nor CPE (phone) makers to incorporate specialty radios or protocols to do this. So, your simple scheme of a "doohickey" for direct broadcast that is built into next gen receivers (or movable from airplane to airplane, or not) is pie in the sky. You may be an aviation safety expert, but you should talk to some wireless data experts before assuming that the NPRM as proposed is implementable.
So, we arrive at an impasse. What do you propose now?
The problem with the NPRM is not the FRIAs, it's the fact that there is no technology for direct broadcast that satisfies the LEO's needs, without creating an unfunded mandate that they acquire specialized equipment to receive the broadcast ID and/or telemetry information. Most LEO's have typical smartphone capabilities for radio (Voice/Broadband Data/WiFi/Bluetooth) plus, their emergency services radios. Unfortunately the session establishment times (pairing, associating to an SSID) make these unsuitable as the "broadcast" standard for Remote ID. Not to mention the very short ranges (300' for WiFi and 800' for Bluetooth5) that don't even cover VLOS.
So there exists no current solution for direct broadcast. ADS-B is not meant for these densities and is thus unusable for sUAS, despite the fact that aircraft to aircraft broadcast, without the latency of the Internet, is the only solution to realtime traffic information for avoidance. The punt by the FAA to Internet backhaul opened an even bigger can of worms. Aviation in general (all of it) will never have the relevance to force cellular carriers nor CPE (phone) makers to incorporate specialty radios or protocols to do this. So, your simple scheme of a "doohickey" for direct broadcast that is built into next gen receivers (or movable from airplane to airplane, or not) is pie in the sky. You may be an aviation safety expert, but you should talk to some wireless data experts before assuming that the NPRM as proposed is implementable.
So, we arrive at an impasse. What do you propose now?
#125
Of course the actual truth here is that nothing anyone says in this, and similar threads, carries any import. We are all simply screaming into the wind because it makes us feel good. Nothing said in any of these threads will have even the smallest impact on what the FAA does with respect to RID or enforcement of Section 349.
Gee , if the "like post" function worked down here in RCU's dungeon maybe I'd even go so far as to give it a like ....
Last edited by init4fun; 01-24-2020 at 10:50 AM.