Take a look at this site. It has a diagram of a typical winch launch of a sailplane. Although it is an FAI launch, it is typical of what is used in AMA contests as well. Note that the projected lauch altitude is 260 meters and the length of the winch line is 200 meters.
http://www.hsa.lr.tudelft.nl/~frits/F3B.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5296236/

All righty guys let's get this one back on track, no national politics, just AMA related.

Thanks Art...

Thanks Art,

I couldn’t agree more!! We as R/C enthusiasts need to do everything possible to keep or beloved R/C hobby alive and not be restricted or banned. We need to set all of our differences aside and come together as a unified group and understand that the AMA might have a lot of PR work to do to save our hobby. If we get FREE, very positive PR in a very powerful movie that millions and millions of Americans have seen and millions more will see, that’s great!!! As far as I’m concerned, I could care less who delivers the R/C message along as it is positive, it is perceived positive by the viewers and I can keep on flying R/C. If we argue over FREE positive PR to millions of Americans we are headed for failure and we will deserve it. We need to all pull together and help the AMA keep our hobby alive! The only pony I have in this race is my 40 years of flying R/C and the continued use of my R/C aircraft. I could care less how we win the R/C race as long it is legal.

.

Thank you, for that MR_Matt! I firmly believe that our success hinges on us all being one powerful unified R/C group.

I guess this isn't the place to say that anyone who believes anything that Michael Moore says needs to have their heads examined, so I won't say it.

The representation of the AMA in Washington without AMA representation other than DB is disturbing. Sure, he could be on the up-and-up, but oversight and consensus with the EC should be enforced strictly.

SS-
Been there, done that. Try out the Search function in this forum and look for an old thread "What is a Model Airplane?" When you find it, note the that dates on the postings in this discussion predate anything out of AMA on the issue. You may also note that the participants in this discussion did a credible job of coming up with a definition that is reasonable, minimally restrictive, and provides a clear distinction between model airplanes and UAVs that FAA has recognized a need to regulate. I expect the people at AMA saw it - and apparently decided 'Not Invented Here." Then DB invented a ban on autonomous operation of model airplanes as a fix for the problem and scammed the rest of the EC to jam it down our throats.
Ya'll got any other ideas about what we should do rather than complaining?

Abel

For now...VOTE for someone else this fall.

Yep.

--Bill Harris

AMA 607983 and proud of it.
District 5 and embarassed. Let's change that!

"Dave Brown, step down"

I have a thought; Do you really think the FAA, AMA or 'big brother' organization can come check each individual that just says to heck with it? Have you ever seen a store clerk trying to direct traffic with 200 shopping-crazed patrons at a 10 minute bargain sale? [sm=spinnyeyes.gif] Self regulation, or Government regulation of a million modelers only works if the individuals want it to. If we say we are going to be bound by AMA rules (good or stupid) then we will be, but if the FAA or AMA come up with a set of rules we choose to ignore it will be chaos.

Good regulations are made with the end user and 'policing' abilities in mind. Bad regulations just fail if they don't arrest everyone... The loss of flying sites, etc. is a deterrent, but not the end of the hobby if we get crazy with the rules. How much of a field does it take to fly an electric? Who has a private field? Who is willing to use their own homeowner's insurance on their private property? Who's afraid of Dave Brown? Who was proud to be in District V - prime? (FL) or District V - poor cousins (the rest of us) [:@]

quint

What burns my behind is DB goes across the pond to land a record setting flight across the Alantic, but is out to get these guys that are setting records flying up to 25,000 ft. if it is in fact true. But I would expect this kind of crap from DB. Sure they are probally breaking some kind of rule, but if this type of high flying record was done with in the rules, would DB be there to land the bird, you bet he would.

U'mm the people that was discussed were not setting records, they were high but not that high, but they posted their escapades on the web! Besides he isn't busting anybody.

Vote and mention these things at your club.

Funny that after DB participated in the autonomous flight across the Atlantic he can out against autonomous flight.

Add that to his list or erract behavior and outsource him.

--Bill Harris

AMA 607983 and proud of it.
District 5 and embarassed. Let's change that!

"Dave Brown, step down"

What good does it do the government to talk to AMA or Dave Brown. If people are actually breaking laws and FAA guidlines then why would they follow AMA rules and guidlines? It was my understanding that AMA does not cover UAVs so anyone involved in that as a hobby would not care what AMA thinks. AMA has a problem when it comes to acting as a rules enforcer. The only thing they can do is deny insurance. If AMA has already told you that their membership does not cover your activity and you don't need their insurance then AMA can pass all the rules they want but they can't prevent the activity. So the whole thing sounds silly to me. The only point in the FAA talking to Dave Brown would be the hope that AMA can educate its membership. I doubt the FAA can prevent you from flying in uncontrolled airspace. Isn't that at least 1,200 ft AGL unless near an airport? AMA can try to restrict the movements of its members but it walks a line. If it knocks out a population such as the UAV group then they don't stop doing UAV work, they just stop joining AMA. Then AMA just looses what control they had of them.

EC120,
I am glad SOMEONE notice that trivial little set of details. I think you are right on target with the education bit.

Hi ya'll,
I read all that is said including Dave Brown's output.
It seems it all could be a problem but know one suggests it has been or
when it will be, correct?
Question> how can you consider correcting a problem when it has not
occured or can be expected at some time?
Model Airplanes have been flying in the USA for over 70 years and have
created some incidences that could be counted on one hand. No envolement of any note with a full scale machine.
Would 70 years be the equivilent of millions of flights, say only 5 million?
If there were 5 incidents in that time then odds of a incident would be one
million to one? Any insurance company would love those odds?
Bottom line? It would appear that EVERYONE is manufacturing problems
which experience says never have happened and in all probability never
will. Someone said the best way to create a problem is to stir it up!
So, keep at it and we will be in trouble?
SUL

Hal [email protected]

One of our modeling greats has spoken. It is best for us to listen!

DB was making the point that we shouldn't be flying airplanes at 10,000 feet altitude.

Has anyone considered that it just might be 'bad headwork' (which is a synonim for stupid) to try to maintain control of a R/C airplane that is over 2 miles away (even if it is straight up?)

What if your telemetry stopped working and you lost control?

Not all the guys doing this are rocket scientists...

Just my $.02

dunno hal:

i would think that the guy what had the incedent with the goodyear blimp in the skys out in california 20 some odd years ago would count as a major occurance. it evven made the local papers here in nowheresvville tx.

I agree. Problem is, is who is stirring up the trouble. FAA or DB?

Don't forget that it is the AMA election year. What better way to look needed than be in the middle of a "crisis". All politicians do it, why should ours be any different.

Eric.

I was also curious about the mention of commercial model aircraft. I guess that if someone was using (and getting paid for) a heli to video at a wedding, the FAA and not the AMA would need to regulate that, right? AMA insurance, as it discludes commercial flight, would be null and void, right?

What about a competitive pilot that competes for a cash prize? Is that not a commercial pilot and commercial aircraft? Would not only the competition, but all testing of that model be FAA regulated, by what DB's article said?