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

Safety Metrics & AC91-57C

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

Safety Metrics & AC91-57C

Old 11-10-2022, 05:54 AM
  #26  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Yes, you were right about the things that were already painfully obvious, congratulations. Your push to not be required to join a CBO may very well have been a contributing factor in RID being required when not flying in a FRIA. By saving these people $85 they are now subjected to having to drop $200 ( Dronetag Rid module ) on the only module I am aware of presently to have FAA approval. Congratulations again.


For the record, Iím not against safety recording and reporting. As stated, clubs have already been doing this amongst there own community. Granted the format is different. I however would prefer to let the FAA state what format and level of depth is required for each incident and make definitions as to what qualifies as an incident or near miss.
Old 11-10-2022, 07:22 AM
  #27  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Yes, you were right about the things that were already painfully obvious, congratulations.
Really, painfully obvious? Do I need to go back and pull some of your responses to those? If memory serves, I don't think you agreed that many of these would be happening.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Your push to not be required to join a CBO may very well have been a contributing factor in RID being required when not flying in a FRIA. By saving these people $85 they are now subjected to having to drop $200 ( Dronetag Rid module ) on the only module I am aware of presently to have FAA approval. Congratulations again.
DroneTag is a ONE TIME cost. The $85 (plus club fee) is an annual payment. Assuming AMA's tithe stays the same, in just three years the AMA fee exceeds the DroneTag one time cost. And the savings adds up quickly from there.


Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
For the record, Iím not against safety recording and reporting. As stated, clubs have already been doing this amongst there own community. Granted the format is different. I however would prefer to let the FAA state what format and level of depth is required for each incident and make definitions as to what qualifies as an incident or near miss.
Thus my point. It's not a Safety Management SYSTEM since there's no integration of data collection, reporting, and mitigation based on trends not just at that one club in isolation, but across the entire organization. Which is why the FAA is probably asking for that. I'm confident the FAA has reviewed the AMA's "SMS" and found it lacking. Hence the statement in the AC.
Old 11-10-2022, 07:59 AM
  #28  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Dronetag or equivalent could be a one time expense for some but not all. I have a few aircraft that access to internals is not exactly easy. If I had no access to a FRIA I would require at least 3 modules. I consider myself a fairly typical example of how many aircraft the average R/C guys own, if fact I may be a bit on the light side. Point is it’s typical for guys to buy a receiver for each operational aircraft to avoid having to swap so the same is likely to happen with RID modules.

As far as a safety reporting system is concerned, as of right now the FAA is not mandating it, I agree that it should be initiated before they make it mandatory but should be done with their guidance.
Old 11-10-2022, 09:54 AM
  #29  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Dronetag or equivalent could be a one time expense for some but not all. I have a few aircraft that access to internals is not exactly easy. If I had no access to a FRIA I would require at least 3 modules. I consider myself a fairly typical example of how many aircraft the average R/C guys own, if fact I may be a bit on the light side. Point is itís typical for guys to buy a receiver for each operational aircraft to avoid having to swap so the same is likely to happen with RID modules.
That's more a consequence of the type of aircraft one flies than anything else. For aircraft that it's difficult to access the internals, the FAA should rightfully ask how are you checking those same internals for loose connections, physical security of mechanicals, wire chafing, leaks, etc.? That's an expectation of FAA, so if it's so "not exactly easy" to put the equivalent of a AA battery in place, then it's "not exactly easy" to do the other checks the FAA expects.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
As far as a safety reporting system is concerned, as of right now the FAA is not mandating it, I agree that it should be initiated before they make it mandatory but should be done with their guidance.
That's not how the government writes regulations. They don't tell you what exactly you have to collect. They give you a broad statement and then it's up to YOU (the organization) to show HOW you're going to meet it and PROVE that you actually are. They're called performance based standards. And in places where those do exist, the FAA hasn't told them exactly what to collect, but rather the industry as a whole have coalesced around a set of metrics for consistency.
Old 11-10-2022, 10:14 AM
  #30  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

You are assuming that the FAA is going to impose the same standards onto hobbyists most of whom have zero practical knowledge of full scale requirements. As already demonstrated by the FAA in the knowledge test they are fully aware that they are not able to hold us to the same standard. The same standards simply can’t apply between manned aircraft and UAS. Even manned home built aircraft have a different set of requirements then a production civil aircraft. The idea that the FAA would ever be interested in obtaining maintenance records on R/C aircraft flown for recreation is absolutely ridiculous, they are already short staffed for the workload they have, example giving Boeing the green light to do their own inspections regarding 737 Max flight control augmentation.
Old 11-10-2022, 01:11 PM
  #31  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
You are assuming that the FAA is going to impose the same standards onto hobbyists most of whom have zero practical knowledge of full scale requirements. As already demonstrated by the FAA in the knowledge test they are fully aware that they are not able to hold us to the same standard. The same standards simply canít apply between manned aircraft and UAS. Even manned home built aircraft have a different set of requirements then a production civil aircraft.
Never assumed or said they'd impose the same standards. And just because they're not holding you to the same standard does not mean NO standards. Hence the language in the AC.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
The idea that the FAA would ever be interested in obtaining maintenance records on R/C aircraft flown for recreation is absolutely ridiculous ... (emphasis added)
Really? I've appended below some noteworthy passages from AC91-57C for your convenience.


AC91-57C, 3.3.2.1.1.3:
"... The FAA recommends including information on ... the 'Dirty Dozen' human behaviors in aircraft maintenance (emphasis added)."

AC91-57C, 3.3.2.4.1:
"... A comprehensive set of safety guidelines should include guidance for UA maintenance, inspections, and minimum conditions for safe operations to ensure recreational flyers are taking proper care of their UA between flights (emphasis added)"

AC91-57C, 3.3.2.4.1.1:
"... For homebuilt UA or those without manufacturer instructions, safety guidelines should provide general maintenance guidance. Refer to AC 107-2, Paragraphs 7.2.1.1 and 7.3.5, Benefits of Recordkeeping, for further recommendations (emphasis added)."

Old 11-10-2022, 01:40 PM
  #32  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

So your saying that I need to create maintenance records for all my models and upload them to an FAA database? I mean I’m fairly confident that what the word “ Obtaining “ meant in the post you quoted.

Once again having said that, I’m not opposed to FAA or AMA or Flite Test etc. to come up with a comprehensive check list. Perhaps one that would also cover the dangers of flying in public venues without a spotter.
Old 11-10-2022, 02:08 PM
  #33  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

LOL. You literally went from saying this:
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
The idea that the FAA would ever be interested in obtaining maintenance records on R/C aircraft flown for recreation is absolutely ridiculous
To this:
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
Iím not opposed to FAA or AMA or Flite Test etc. to come up with a comprehensive check list.

So much for admitting when you've misspoken!

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
So your saying that I need to create maintenance records for all my models and upload them to an FAA database?
Is that really what you thought he posted? Because I didn't read anything like that at all.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
I mean Iím fairly confident that what the word ď Obtaining ď meant in the post you quoted.
HUH?

Astro



Old 11-10-2022, 02:31 PM
  #34  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Astro, your lack of comprehension is not my problem.
Old 11-10-2022, 03:07 PM
  #35  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Dronetag or equivalent could be a one time expense for some but not all. I have a few aircraft that access to internals is not exactly easy. If I had no access to a FRIA I would require at least 3 modules. I consider myself a fairly typical example of how many aircraft the average R/C guys own, if fact I may be a bit on the light side. Point is it’s typical for guys to buy a receiver for each operational aircraft to avoid having to swap so the same is likely to happen with RID modules.

As far as a safety reporting system is concerned, as of right now the FAA is not mandating it, I agree that it should be initiated before they make it mandatory but should be done with their guidance.
In that video Tyler Dobbs says AMA has been working with module developers for over a year. Not clear if it's just modules but 22 MOCs. The latest uses aircraft power and is the size of a stick of gum. The rest about FRIAs was dull administrative talk. Remote ID is what those AMA dimwits are excited about, "We are actively engaged on this. We're not just sitting on or hands. We have committees dedicated to this", and on and on. Fantastic news for non-AMA members! - Hey everyone who will never set foot on an AMA field, Chad wants you to know he is on it!

Only two thumbs up in the comments. The rest be like, "How come when I see a Drone committee that is writing these laws. There is NO ONE from the AMA representing us", and, "So glad I’m a lifetime member of the AMA and our leadership is content, if not happy about the members being regulated". Well friend, there used be a law that said model aircraft were not drones and did not need to be regulated. AMA loves drones. So AMA saw to it that law repealed. Now model aircraft are drones!

As for the geriatric running the place, grandpa not only misstates the network requirement, he still thinks the "limited exception" for drones is "the special rule" (for model aircraft). Keep up the good work boys! Thanks to AMA I can keep at it with RC. For a while there I thought I was going to have to start making robots and atomic clocks.







Last edited by ECHO24; 11-10-2022 at 03:41 PM.
Old 11-10-2022, 03:18 PM
  #36  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

You know Echo, you remind me of banned RCU member Appowner AKA Retiredat38.
Old 11-10-2022, 03:47 PM
  #37  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Astro, your lack of comprehension is not my problem.
LOL, MY comprehension? READ IT. It is not a complete sentence and does not make sense.

Astro
Old 11-10-2022, 03:54 PM
  #38  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog View Post
LOL, MY comprehension? READ IT. It is not a complete sentence and does not make sense.

Astro
Doesnít make sense TO YOU, again not my problem.
Old 11-10-2022, 04:04 PM
  #39  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
You know Echo, you remind me of banned RCU member Appowner AKA Retiredat38.
The way your thinking is deteriorating you will soon be one of Rich Hanson's checkers partners. Franklin is now responsible for Remote ID? Take another toke on the fantasy bong.
Old 11-10-2022, 04:15 PM
  #40  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

You two really do have compression issues. I said the requirement not to be a CBO member may have been a factor. How does that turn into Franklin being responsible?
Old 11-10-2022, 04:20 PM
  #41  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
You two really do have compression issues. I said the requirement not to be a CBO member may have been a factor. How does that turn into Franklin being responsible?
"Your push to not be required to join a CBO may very well have been a contributing factor in RID being required when not flying in a FRIA."

You need a reality check.

Old 11-10-2022, 04:28 PM
  #42  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

What about the words MAY and CONTRIBUTING have you thinking I place all responsibility onto Franklin? It’s time for you two to read and comprehend exactly what I write and not what you want to use to keep the pi$$ing contest going.
Old 11-10-2022, 04:37 PM
  #43  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
What about the words MAY and CONTRIBUTING have you thinking I place all responsibility onto Franklin? Itís time for you two to read and comprehend exactly what I write and not what you want to use to keep the pi$$ing contest going.
Try taking on one person at a time instead of everyone on an entire thread. Maybe you'll think more clearly

Also, alluding to a ban on someone is the refuge of someone with nothing else left to say. Same with insults. Grow up.
Old 11-10-2022, 04:41 PM
  #44  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Doesnít make sense TO YOU, again not my problem.
LOL. You are the only one with the secret decoder ring? LOL

It isn't proper English. It is a fact that it doesn't make sense, NOT an opinion. The fact that it makes sense to you is very telling......
And just another example of your narcissistic, self-righteous, speedy-is-never-wrong attitude.

Astro
Old 11-10-2022, 04:43 PM
  #45  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
You two really do have compression issues.
Yep, everyone else has COMPRESSION issues, but not you. LOL. Freud couldn't have stated it better!

Astro
Old 11-10-2022, 04:46 PM
  #46  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Try taking on one person at a time instead of everyone on an entire thread. Maybe you'll think more clearly

Also, alluding to a ban on someone is the refuge of someone with nothing else left to say. Same with insults. Grow up.
Just another of speedys tactics when he is called out. Desperate last resort when one finds himself backed into a corner.

Astro
Old 11-10-2022, 05:47 PM
  #47  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Try taking on one person at a time instead of everyone on an entire thread. Maybe you'll think more clearly

Also, alluding to a ban on someone is the refuge of someone with nothing else left to say. Same with insults. Grow up.

Insults? Please elaborate. Iím not the one dishing out insults. That is all you and your buddy Astro. Funny how you seem to be offended by something as simple as pointing out similarities between you and someone else.
Old 11-10-2022, 06:49 PM
  #48  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Insults? Please elaborate. I’m not the one dishing out insults. That is all you and your buddy Astro. Funny how you seem to be offended by something as simple as pointing out similarities between you and someone else.
How about instead you point out something about RC. All your talk about banning, there's an interesting thread going on over at RCGroups on the same thread subject. Franklin is still a big buggaboo there and a topic of conversation. One guy said he came over to RCU and read most of what Franklin had written there and at RCG and found it well researched and reasonable. He said this: "How is it that someone was permitted to create an entire thread targeting an individual was allowed to remain on this forum (RCG), yet the TARGET of those attacks was banned?" The reason of course is most of the administrators at RCGroups are AMA leaders and FPVers. Surprise! He was quickly attacked by the mob

Like this AMA fan boy, "The person who shall not be named would not have been banned from here unless he violated RCG rules"

Must have indeed. Our commenter not infected with AMA brain wasting disease, "This might have some credibility if RCG took similar action against the user who established an entire thread attacking him. At face value it appears to me to be an arbitrary application of the rules. If the mob agrees with your politics or your points, you have wide latitude to do things in violation of the rules without consequences. In this case the entire thread thing. By contrast, when the mob doesn't like what someone says, they fin and a way to pounce and get someone banned."

Then we get to this AMA insanity:

"YOU’RE the user who started the current thread. Which you’ve made into an “attack” on Franklin by asking questions about him.

Are you suggesting YOU should be banned?"

On-the-fence guy at RCG about joining AMA:

"I used to think the cancel culture twitter mob was juvenile. Clearly there's a new contender for top spot (RCG's AMAers). The arbitrary application of site rules - as evidenced above - only reinforce that perception. An entire thread dedicated to attacking the guy, and the individual creating it kept his account, while the subject of it lost theirs. If I was on the fence before about joining a CBO full of folks like those above, not anymore. I don't have time nor tolerance for such behaviors."

Another AMA flying monkey chimes in accusing the guy of being a Franklin sock puppet account: "Lighten up, Francis…
…or is it, Franklin? Name:  rolleyes.gif
Views: 165
Size:  1.0 KB

Banning AMA criticism has turned RCGroups advocacy forum into an ideological cesspool and intellectual wasteland. And you want that for RCU, a constant stream of inane babbling punctuated by bouts of verbal diarrhea when anything negative about AMA comes up?

Last edited by ECHO24; 11-11-2022 at 07:02 AM.
Old 11-10-2022, 07:07 PM
  #49  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

(repost in view of intervening nonsense)

In that video Tyler Dobbs says AMA has been working with module developers for over a year. Not clear if it's just modules but 22 MOCs. The latest uses aircraft power and is the size of a stick of gum. The rest about FRIAs was dull administrative talk. Remote ID is what those AMA dimwits are excited about, "We are actively engaged on this. We're not just sitting on or hands. We have committees dedicated to this", and on and on. Fantastic news for non-AMA members! - Hey everyone who will never set foot on an AMA field, Chad wants you to know he is on it!

Only two thumbs up in the comments. The rest be like, "How come when I see a Drone committee that is writing these laws. There is NO ONE from the AMA representing us", and, "So glad I’m a lifetime member of the AMA and our leadership is content, if not happy about the members being regulated". Well friend, there used be a law that said model aircraft were not drones and did not need to be regulated. AMA loves drones. So AMA saw to it that law repealed. Now model aircraft are drones!

As for the geriatric running the place, grandpa not only misstates the network requirement, he still thinks the "limited exception" for drones is "the special rule" (for model aircraft). Keep up the good work boys! Thanks to AMA I can keep at it with RC. For a while there I thought I was going to have to start making robots and atomic clocks.
Old 11-10-2022, 07:20 PM
  #50  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,051
Received 153 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

As I’ve said many times, I couldn’t care less what is said about the AMA provided what is said is factual. Don’t state your personal opinions a factual. Don’t disparage others for having a different opinion. For Astro, stop throwing amateur psychological labels on people. Today Franklin and I were actually having somewhat a productive discussion until the two of you chimed in. It shouldn’t be a surprise to you two that the tone that you take with me is going to be returned, good or bad. So if you really want me to lighten up then I suggest the same of you.


For the record Franklin was banned for two reasons. First he continually posted off topic. He posted continually about the AMA in the advocacy forum and not the AMA forum. I can only assume he was issued warnings which he ignored. Then as a banned member he created a different account. Bottom line he broke site rules which led to him being banned.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.