Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
The EAA Get's It, why not the AMA? >

The EAA Get's It, why not the AMA?

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

The EAA Get's It, why not the AMA?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-22-2020 | 01:12 PM
  #76  
mach5nchimchim's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Penn State, PA
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m
Because ... wait for it ... wait for it ... I'm not paid to advocate. But if it makes you feel better to continue to beat that drum, go right ahead.
This guy thinks he's a Navy JAG when it comes to FAA vs AMA/EAA stuff.
Old 01-22-2020 | 01:17 PM
  #77  
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,608
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: State College, PA
Default

Originally Posted by mach5nchimchim
This guy thinks he's a Navy JAG when it comes to FAA vs AMA/EAA stuff.
Well, given that I helped open the first new military training airspace in the US in the last 20 years, including working with FAA offices in SF and LA, airline groups, and AOPA among others, I'd say I have some experience working these types of policy issues.
Old 01-23-2020 | 04:48 PM
  #78  
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
My Feedback: (29)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,711
Received 204 Likes on 175 Posts
From: Happy Valley, Oregon
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m
Well, given that I helped open the first new military training airspace in the US in the last 20 years, including working with FAA offices in SF and LA, airline groups, and AOPA among others, I'd say I have some experience working these types of policy issues.

Have you not heard? Experience in these forums means nothing.
Old 01-24-2020 | 10:41 AM
  #79  
mach5nchimchim's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Penn State, PA
Default

I like the EAA advocating for traditional model rc flying. So everyone is pretty much in agreement that UAS should alway yield and give the right away to a full scale, even if the full scale drops below 600, 500, 400 etc and invades our airspace, So how is a goggle wearer using pov with no spotter ever going to know to try and avoid right a stray full size unless the plane is in his field of vision for his POV goggles; they won't be able to take emergency avoidance action since they are fully submersed in their goggles for their flight.
Old 01-24-2020 | 11:44 AM
  #80  
astrohog's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Bellingham, WA
Default

Originally Posted by mach5nchimchim
I like the EAA advocating for traditional model rc flying. So everyone is pretty much in agreement that UAS should alway yield and give the right away to a full scale, even if the full scale drops below 600, 500, 400 etc and invades our airspace, So how is a goggle wearer using pov with no spotter ever going to know to try and avoid right a stray full size unless the plane is in his field of vision for his POV goggles; they won't be able to take emergency avoidance action since they are fully submersed in their goggles for their flight.
FPV is not considered “traditional”
Old 01-24-2020 | 11:53 AM
  #81  
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
My Feedback: (11)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 28,288
Received 444 Likes on 363 Posts
From: Jacksonville, FL
Default

FPV with a spotter, within LOS of the operator or spotter I have no issue with, to me thats the same as any other form of the hobby. Multi-GP is an example. They fly well below the tree line.
Old 01-24-2020 | 12:05 PM
  #82  
astrohog's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Bellingham, WA
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey
FPV with a spotter, within LOS of the operator or spotter I have no issue with, to me thats the same as any other form of the hobby. Multi-GP is an example. They fly well below the tree line.
I agree with this. Common sense, really. At the end of the day, what the FAA is trying to do is keep manned aircraft safe. FPV racing is not a threat to manned aircraft.

Astro
Old 01-24-2020 | 12:08 PM
  #83  
mach5nchimchim's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Penn State, PA
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog
FPV is not considered “traditional”
i know, im anti goggles...
Old 01-24-2020 | 12:10 PM
  #84  
mach5nchimchim's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Penn State, PA
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey
FPV with a spotter, within LOS of the operator or spotter I have no issue with, to me thats the same as any other form of the hobby. Multi-GP is an example. They fly well below the tree line.
yes, that's ok, but fpv with no spotter; that's trouble, you have no vision except the goggles field of vision.

I have no issues with those structured indoor fpv races, i've watch a few races on tv and they are pretty neat.
Old 01-24-2020 | 12:15 PM
  #85  
astrohog's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Bellingham, WA
Default

Originally Posted by mach5nchimchim
I have no issues with those structured indoor fpv races, i've watch a few races on tv and they are pretty neat.
Well that’s good, because they certainly pose no threat.....

Astro
Old 01-24-2020 | 02:00 PM
  #86  
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
My Feedback: (11)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 28,288
Received 444 Likes on 363 Posts
From: Jacksonville, FL
Default

Thats why I stressed the use of a LOS spotter.

I have a bunch of flight hours from my military time and a fair bit of time flying civilian planes and I don't want to be hit by someone that can't see behind or beside them,

But in the big scheme of things from a risk management perspective, I worry a lot more about birds then drones when flying low altitude.
Old 01-26-2020 | 10:10 PM
  #87  
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 10,629
Received 139 Likes on 132 Posts
From: Marysville, WA
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey
Thats why I stressed the use of a LOS spotter.

I have a bunch of flight hours from my military time and a fair bit of time flying civilian planes and I don't want to be hit by someone that can't see behind or beside them,

But in the big scheme of things from a risk management perspective, I worry a lot more about birds then drones when flying low altitude.
As you should. The big difference is birds don't know any better, people flying drones should but probably don't care

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.