Now that you figured that out you may want to check with your car insurance, home/rentors insurance and just about any other insurance you have, including your health insurance and you'll quicky find out that insurance companies don't like to be in business with you, without asking or adding more coverage first. Wouldn't it be great if we could just live in a world where money grew on trees instead of having to always find ways of trying to beat the system? That would be realy nice. Welcome to reality!

No need check anything I already know about insurance companies and their tactics.
But anyway from the sound of your post you totaly missed my point.

I get your point, the AMA should make some things more clear. get it. I just always thought that doing just about anything for compensation, when related to insurance, meant reading into it further. The AMA spells it out loud and clear on the insurance documents.

And think about it Ira, how many people do you think try to make money from flying RC operations, without being directly attached to some kind of company that specializes in that service, like a UAV company? Afterall this is a hobby and most people I know just like to do this kind of stuff for the love of the sport, not for the money.

Well, we pretty much know what your in it for......



Ronnie

Hey ... I'm sure you made it to Hoss' PM list. Why aren't you playing along in his game?

I don't need anybody to help me out, plus I don't know what the he77 your talking about anyway

I just don't like you on my own.....



Ronnie

STL

I was refering to someone who may fly at a couple of air shows a year
not someone who flys UAV's are is a professional rc pilot. And yes most
people are in rc for the hobby but dont mind makeing a few extra bucks
when called on to perform at a air show.

Well it's going to be hard to do Ira and for a lot of obvious reasons. Same reason they made worker's comp a law, since so many companies tried to work their way around it.

What's the difference if you do 1 show or 100 shows? Are you going to report to the AMA each time you host a compensated show, or are you going to only report your show when there is an accident? Many of companies tried this method when trying to insure their employees on the day their employees were injured.

Also the "for compensation" the AMA has now is only for designated air-ops based fields. So I assume both the AMA and their insurance provider had safety on their mind as well.

I have no idea what a air-ops based field is not that I can see that it matters.

What about GA23911 airspace? What happens if I brake it and fly above 20k at 95 knots and do an immelman up there? Will I have to have a ClassZ or P. Oh and I'll be staying in GA239112 for 20mins. LMFAO

Well, to answer your question "What about" that

either
A) You subscribe to the theory that the FAA does indeed regulate model flight activity and does indeed impose airspace restrictions on models, AC on model flight decscription, does indeed issue waivers to restritctions to modelers that apply, has already had model flight waiver revokations (911 & corona area)

or

B) The FAA doesnt regulate models so there is no applicable regulation, AC, NOTAM, waiver, or any other imposition or infringement on wild azz random anywhere anytime model flying by the FAA.

I am leaning toward A.
If you pizzoff the FAA with a model, you will feel the current sting of the FAA on your model flying.

p103 doesnt make us register & inspect Ultralights, yet does clearly have regulations as to when, where, & how much weight they can fly. That is the FAA regulating the ultralights, yet saying it is a self regulated industry. Self regulated, as long as you are within the FAA regulations, like the weight & fuel FAA regulated caps

I'm with you Kid, A all the way. What the heck is UAS 400???? It's rules and regs regulating models. In part it separates professional modelers and professional RC pilots, from hobbyists. Every sentence in that 12 page document is a rule, policy or provision on RC aircraft a.k.a. models, for both professional and non-professional RC pilots.

What the FAA doesn't regulate is non commercial (no job too small) RC activity a.k.a. hobbyists. And of course they only regulate hobbyists up until the point you want to find out whether or not AC 91-57 is just a "memo" or perhaps something a little more kick to it, especially when it's limits are surpassed.

A field designated for RC operations. And yes, that matters. I don't think the AMA wants to worry or not whether you'll be performing your commercial airshows in areas designated for RC flight, or a carnival parking lot. Thus the policy for paid instructors.

From what I have read it does not matter where you are to be compensated. But then again STL you continually post info here
that is supposed to be from the AMA and the FAA that no else
has heard of including people from both of the organizations.

I might add im talking reimbursment for expenses not being
outright paid for pilot instruction.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/500-H.pdf

#4

Off topic and getting trite, STL. Topic is getting paid for demo flights at air shows, not for instructing at AMA club sites. I know you enjoy nettling Ira et al with subject matter that is tangential to the topic when you have nothing on-topic to offer, but enough is enough. Whether AMA sanctioned ASTs get compensated seems more in line with topic of this thread. Since AMA has budgeted for their support, it is inferred that there is some sort of compensation involved. I asked about this previously (there is little on the AMA web site except for a list of the ASTs), and you replied linking compensation to contest winnings - which made no sense to me because air shows aren't contests. I waited for input from others, but non materialized. Can you cite a link to anything resembling an authoritative source that confirms/elaborates on your reply?

Abel

I'd just do what ya want an forget about stl. He's just passin' gas as usual......



Ronnie

Quote what I said so I can understand what you want me to provide as a source. I believe you've confused 2 seperate points.

Also realize this is a discussion and sometimes comparisons are utilized.

Referring to Post #86 0f this thread:

I gave the person an example of a method of receiving a soft money compensation. Just turn the airshow into a competition flight and pay them in winnings and you have your solution. I think I made several attempts to explain certain methods of payment solutions. These are what you call "legal loopholes". These methods are used in more then just our little world. They are especially popular in the political arena and the financial markets.

Ohhhhhhh..... Now respond to OP's inquiry with a direct answer. Does AMA allow "legal loopholes" that are popular in the political arena and financial markets to apply to demonstration pilots getting paid? OP is concerned about AMA insurance covering him, and not using "legal ratholes" to squirm out of paying a claim. Enough with the examples from other sectors. What would AMA do? is the question.

Abel

I wasn't answering the OP's question. I was answering another question in line with the discussion from another member.

There is no legal solution for the OP unless he wants to file for a waiver from the FAA and follow the rest of their compliance. Then he's gotta break open his wallet and start removing for his private insurance company.

Do you actually think for a second that the FAA thinks that any provision against their policies and regulations could be considered "too small" for their standards???

If I'm wrong about all this Abel, why doesn't he just take it upon himself to go about it the way he thinks it should be. We wouldn't be having this discussion if he knew what he was doing could get him in trouble, not only financially if something went wrong, but also legally.

Yes. Model airplanes in general are "too small" for them to bother with, as long as we don't create problems for them. They said as much (see full text of AC 91-57). Where they expect problems they enforce the law, to wit the situation with commercial use of model aircraft for AP. I suppose they expect that such use entails flying over houses and people (photos that are sold to realtors are obviously taken over houses, newsworthy events for marketable photo-journalism opportunities gather people), so they do chose to direct enforcement activity at that. Another example of 'too small" to bother with is the weight limit on model airplanes of 25 Kg as defined by ICAO. FAA is responsible for ensuring compliance with ICAO standards, which the US is signatory to, but though the standard have been around for years, it has not risen high enough on FAA's priority list to get codified in US law.
AMA also deems some deviations from the letter of their rules "too small" to make an issue of. The instruction for hire on a 'casual' basis is such a case, and variance from general non-commercial model use policy is specifically allowed.

Well frankly Dion, we aren't having a meaningful discussion about it largely because your Pied Piper act has drawn it off on many tangential paths. There are people here that could offer him some advice that is germane to his situation (as the fellow that just posted about show teams might). A lower noise level from your one man lounge act might give them an opportunity to get a word in edgewise.

Sorry for being so blunt, but this thread has been annoying tedious due to the constant diversion to subjects with no bearing on the topic, and your contribution to that tedium has stood out above the rest.

Abel

Removed by Hoss Fly. Contains air show information: may be a social thing.

I gave some examples too but you made sarcastic remarks about mine, but anyway
do you know anyone that flys models that has been regulated by the FAA? I dont
and I have been in this hobby quite a while.

Let me spell out somthing in common sense terms the reason the AMA has the rule
about not being paid is they dont want anyone to start up a business useing their
insurance that it plane and simple. they really dont care about the person that goes
once are twice a year and makes a few bucks flying their plane they have no way
of knowing about it anyway. Of course the AMA cant admit this but just use common
sense for a min. As far as the FAA if they did regulate models they would have no
way of knowing if a couple of guys went flying and one gave the other a few bucks
to help him learn to fly are someone was asked to fly at a air show and they got
a few bucks after the show.

As I said in one of my first post in this thread if you go out out and solicit busness
and do what you solicit for on a regular basis it would be easy for someone to
make the case that you are in business thats where you could be in for some
problems.

Hoss I don't think you are wrong re the Show Teams being history, but they are still possibly relevant to this discussion. Change my inquiry to "...... Air Show Teams were allowed to be compensated?"

Abel