franklin_m

I'll make this easy, it's a YES or NO question for the AMA EC:
Again, this is a simple yes or no. But if AMA EC or one of its members fails to respond (and we know one regularly views these pages), then I think ALL members should note what that lack of response means. For it would be clear indication the AMA EC lacks the moral courage to go on record with a clear and unambiguous answer for its members (i.e. yes or no), and thus AMA EC is perfectly ok letting you believe something to be true that is not - therefore imposing risk on YOU - while they hide behind ambiguous statements.

This isn't about FAA enforcement, what FAA knows or doesn't know is happening, or what AMA is "working on" for the future. it's about black and white interpretation of LAW as it sits RIGHT NOT - something AMA owes its members.

Hydro Junkie

You do realize you are probably going to be opening a serious "can of worms" with a few people that you know all too well will object to this question, don't you?

franklin_m

Yep. But they object because they know the answer, and they know they're part of the problem (ignoring one part of a law ... while asking that those who ignore other parts of the law to be prosecuted)

But the real goal is for people to see the EC silence on the matter for what it is, lack of moral fiber. The AMA also knows or should know that "direct representatives of the AMA" (i.e. CDs) are knowing tolerating overt violation of law at many sanctioned events. And since AMA knows that's happening, and does nothing about it, then they are in fact encouraging blatant disregard for FARs by its members.

... And AMA wonders why FAA, other aviation stakeholders, regulators, lawmakers, the media, and the public don't take them seriously.

airsteve172

As a nonmember of the AMA I have always had a reluctance to join, in part due to the fact that something always smelled fishy to me about this organization.
With issues being discussed and brought to light, at the very least I'm gratified to know that my olfactory senses were not playing tricks on me.

franklin_m

What's ironic is that they could do real good for the hobby with a change in leadership and associated organizational strategy and priorities.

When the AMA President uses the official publication of the organization to attack an opponent in an election, and the EC does nothing about it, you get the kind of smell you detected.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (21)

This forum is a total waste of time! I hope it keeps the few who trade jibes back and forth happy. I am embarrassed to admit I even look here!
Larry

airsteve172

There's help available for compulsive disorders so that one needn't live with embarrassment.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (21)

That's exactly the type of comment I expected, I think I will go fly.
Larry

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Please expound. Embarrassed why?
If it weren't for this forum, we would all think that all is well in Maberry (Muncie), because that is what the man behind the curtain is telling us.
And yes, I am truly interested to hear why you feel as you do and were compelled to share those feelings publicly.

Astro

ECHO24

You've embarrassed yourself alright, bless you for leaving.

rgburrill

Astro, I think there are a lot of us who would like to hear why as well.

Hydro Junkie

Has anyone besides me noticed that, after 12 hours, not one AMA "Minion" has posted in this thread? I figured SOMEONE would have posted in here within 6 hours. I guess I was wrong but, then again, the AMA "Minions" might not be as gung ho about the AMA as we all thought

R_Strowe

As the law/regulation is currently written, yes, exceeding 400' AGL, in uncontrolled (class G) airspace, would be a violation of applicable FAR/CFR's.

Unless prior arrangements with the local FAA FSDO/ATC facility were made to allow exceeding 400' AGL.

This is why my 25% Stearman and my DP Ultimate 120 will stay parked in the shop. I'm not willing to risk a violation which could also effect my ATP (and by extension my livelihood).

R_Strowe
Proud member of the 5-digit "Nobility"

PS: I would have responded sooner. Been busy pushing a '76 around the country.

jcmors

The answer to the question here really is obvious, there is no spinning it in a different direction or twisting reality to be done. Most all of us here know that it is against the current regulations to fly above 400' unless there is an LOA or some other agreement to the contrary with the FAA and there have been precious few sites that have been through the process and had that granted. My opinion is there really is only one legitimate answer. Many of us here, myself included, believe that you need to follow the law and regulations in place while you try to effect changes. AMA member or not but AMA members especially need to be seen as obeying the FARs.

Hydro Junkie

You may be an AMA member but you're not one of those I was referring to, that is unless you want to be

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I wasn't holding my breath waiting for speedy to respond. He rarely answers direct questions with direct answers.

ECHO24

I think you guys are unnecessarily alienating speedracertrixie. Over 400' with pattern isn't an issue.

R_Strowe

R_Strowe

Hydro Junkie

The issues do include the 400 foot rule but it also includes all the rest that the FAA and AMA are in dispute over. As I said in another thread, IF the organizers of an event work with the local FAA office, the altitude limit could be raised or waved, within reason. IF, on the other hand, the organizers just do what they want without consulting/working with the FAA, anything that happens to the organizers or contestants due to breaking the law will be on them.

ECHO24

I was just talking about speedracertrixie. No reason to single him out. Pattern is
an established part of the hobby that has existed for decades without problems.

The larger point is AMA's attitude toward not just 400' but all rules is the prime cause
of the widespread anarchy that killed the hobby and the FAA taking over.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I'm not sure what you are trying to say?
ALL aspects of RC flying have existed for decades without any problems. Problems aren't the problem, the new laws are. Like them or not and silly as they may seem to us, they are the new reality.
Speed singled himself out by being the only one on this thread that publicly thumbed his nose at the laws. Not a good look for an AMA member to come on a public forum and openly admit to disobeying the law because HE doesn't agree with it. The AMA's whole premise is that we have effectively self-policed our saftey rules for decades by reminding other members when they are not following them. I raised that point here, and Speed essentially told me to shove it, he'll do as he pleases.....now you say it is not fair that speed is singled out for openly breaking the law.......really effective policy, it's no wonder the FAA didn't want to play with the AMA......

Astro

franklin_m

You bring up an excellent point. How can AMA tell the FAA and others that they're self-policing, when you can go to just about any club field or sanctioned event in class G and see AMA members ignoring the 400 limit? Pretty much proves that the organization may doing something, but it isn't "self-policing."

ECHO24

I've assumed at regular AMA events they would ask for permission for anything over 400'
from the local FSDO since it became a law, be it verbal or otherwise.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I wouldn't say that is a safe assumption at all!
You know what they say about assuming.....

For instance, last year, I stopped by a local field as they were having an "AMA Jamboree". Large event, parking lot full, AMA district Reps in attendance. I spoke to one of the prior club President's who was in attendance to ask if they had acquired a waiver for this event, as the FAA rules had just gone into effect and this particular field is about a mile from an active, commercial airport and is listed on the FAA drone map as having a 100' altitude limit. In short, the answer was, "no waiver, don't ask, don't tell".

I have to say, I was more than a little surprised, and that also reinforced my, "don't assume anything" rule.

Astro

ECHO24

It could also be a long-standing approval. speedracertrixie should clarify.
Also, how much over 400' feet are those pattern maneuvers?

*** The organizers of AMA event a mile from the airport are unbelievably ignorant.
Why would the droners bother with rules when AMA blows them off.