AMA safety code says there should be minimum 3 miles field separation...does anyone know if there is an FCC regulation regarding operating RC transmitters within 3 miles of a chartered flying site? I've been surfing the FCC website and can't find anything, and am wondering if the 3 mile rule is an actual FCC regulation (which should make it legally enforcable) versus an AMA recomendation.
We have a group of rogues flying within 3 miles and I'm gathering ammo.

If it is a law, I haven't seen it anywhere. Good luck with those other pilots. This has been a debate for many years, Not much can be done about it if they are flying in an area where they have permission to do so.

Best thing to do is invite them into your club so they will fly "with" you, not "against" you.

Frank

The three mile rule is for the distance between AMA charter clubs and other AMA members trying to fly in the vicinity. A new club will not get a charter if it is less than three miles from an existing club, unless:

1) It is proven there will be no interference between clubs. Usually done by flying a plane at each field with two receivers. One to receiver is used to fly it, and one is connected to a glitch counter on another channel, and two TXs on that channel are powered up and exercised (one at each field).

2) A frequency sharing agreement is signed by the board members of both clubs

3) The new club operates on 2.4GHz only (may still require both boards to agree).

We have two clubs that are only 1.4 miles apart, and the new club chose to just operate on 2.4GHz only. The two clubs have members in common, and cooperate with each other on events, so for specific events, the established club closes its field to allow the newer club to host an "all freqs allowed" event.

If you just have "rogue flyers" that have no AMA memberships, there's probably not much you can do. I don't believe the FCC has any regulations that would apply.

With the selection of 2.4GHz radios now available, I think I'd just start converting my aircraft over, and not take a chance on getting shot down.

My understanding is that these guys specifically DON'T want to fly at our club...the old story about not wanting to be part of an organized club and having to pay dues. However they are on county property; the guy from the county really perked his ears up when I talked to him about the liability issue; we are able to cover liability to the county as the landowner whereas rogues can't offer that up. If these guys were outside 3 miles I wouldn't be so hot on the issue, as well as the fact that numerous flyers at our club say they have suffered radio interference, but yesterday it happened to me, and I lost a brand new plane. As noted, I'll probably start switching over to 2.4, but these guys flying within 3 miles and darn well know we're there just really torques me the wrong way.
Thanks for the replies.

To be clear, clubs getting a charter has nothing to do with flying sites. Lots of clubs have no flying site, some have multiple. What it will effect is getting an insurance certificate for the land owner.

And it is correct, the FCC has not rules that directly effect the 3 mile rule. However, they do have a rule about malicious interference. So if you know there is a field and you fly close enough to cause an issue then it is possible that you could be caught by that rule.

Bummer about your plane. Sorry to hear that. I do think they are taking as much of a risk as you guys if they are flying so close to you. Not much you can do unfortunately. It sucks, but thank goodness for 2.4 systems.

Frank

If you are an AMA member, then you are in violation of the Safety Code if you fly while knowing those persons are possibly flying less than the 3 mile distance. The Safety Code is an AMA thing and non-AMA members can very well ignore it.
>>>>
AMA Safety Code, RC #6:
"6. I will not knowingly operate my model aircraft within three (3) miles of any preexisting flying site without a frequency-management agreement. A frequencymanagement agreement may be an allocation of frequencies for each site, a day-use agreement between sites, or testing which determines that no interference exists. A frequency-management agreement may exist between two or more AMA chartered clubs, AMA clubs and individual AMA members, or individual AMAmembers. Frequency-management agreements, including an interference test report if the agreement indicates no interference exists, will be signed by all parties and copies provided to AMA Headquarters.
<<<<

If you know of their place prior to turning on your transmitter, then their site is "preexisting" in the real world.

Another "Sounds Good Rule" that punishes only those that it is supposed to help. [sm=angry_smile.gif]

Nice try, but WE are the pre-existing flying site, these guys are flying off a parking lot at a boat ramp.

Deleted. Question answered

No try for anything. I'm on your side, however in the courtroom, your wishful thinking won't hold water. READ the WORDS again. [sm=what_smile.gif]

edited: wishful vice wisful

Nice try,but your pre-existing site doesnt mean squat in the grand scheme.the AMA is not a law making branch of government.The rules that it operates on are for its members.Anyone and I mean anyone can own and operate a r/c airplane anywhere they have permission to.The AMA does not have rights to any frequencies or airspace.If these guys are flying from a boat in the middle of the lake,they have as much right to as you do flying from a chartered field so long as they have permission.The FCC did its job by setting aside frequencies for the hobby not the AMA.You might have an angle with the county,but they cant force the guys to join you.They may make them stop flying on the property,but,that would be messy.they will know who shut them down.

Are you indicating that AMA would then consider the newcomers to be "pre-existing" and would insist that the established club have a frequency agreement with the non-club flyers? That the existing club would be in violation of AMA safety code without such an agreement? If not, then what are you saying?

Wouldn't that mean that anyone could essentially shut down an AMA club from flying by merely encroaching on the 3 mile limit?

The "pre-existing flying site" is the one that was established first. The newer club must prove there is no interference with the established site, or get the pre-existing club to sign a frequency sharing agreement. In our case, the new 2.4GHz club's charter (1.4 miles away) was held back until president of the pre-existing club (me) told the AMA rep that we understood and agreed the new club would be 2.4GHz only.

The problem would be; prove to whom? Those other fliers have no governing body nor do they have any respect for an existing field. If they are legally allowed to fly there, then there is nothing stopping them. Is there?

Frank

Correct. These are AMA rules/regs. As I stated in my previous post, if they are not AMA members, there's not much that can be done.

"the guy from the county really perked his ears up when I talked to him about the liability issue"

and folks wonder why nonmembers hate ama
for trying to get legal public flying shutdown so the club wont have to follow the Fed rules about sharing the freqs.


Frank & PKH are on the mark.
The "existing" bit is just AMA rules to restrict AMA members, without any bearing whatsoever to restrict nonmembers. Hoss is right on the mark that you have acknoledged the existance of freq conflic and so you are now bound by AMA rules to not fly while the nonmembers have no such restriction.

You have to remember that the Fed gave The People those freqs,
with the rule that you cant interfere with a freq in use.
That means the moment a club switches off the tx anyone nearby is free to start using it. There is no site 'dibs' or established/existing reservations for the public freqs. My extreme case example of that is how the non-members can just switch on 3 mins before the club site is open for the day and the club cannot interfere with that freq that is use.

By posting that you know about the conflict, you probably just opened a world of liability for your club. The club has to follow AMA rules on freq conflicts, and if the nonmembers want to gripe to your AMA District Freq Dude guess who the ama district guy will shutdown till a freq sharing plan is signed by both parties.

We have to share the public freqs.
Just because you've been lucky and had nobody around to share with so far doesnt mean you are exempted from the Fed sharing requirements. And any AMA actions will be to shutdown the club flying till there is a sharing plan.... the nonmembers will still fly while you are shutdown.



We get this topic alot.
Your choices are to use the public 72 freqs that you have to share moment by moment,
or the 2.4 that practically eliminate detrimental interference with other users,
or scrape up a bunch of money and get some freqs from the feds for your own use.

There's your solution. If the guys are not AMA members and are flying on public land with no coverage for the county then the "guy from the county" has exposed the county (that's you too, the taxpayer) to all sorts of liabilities. Give him another shot at getting them off county property. If he fails, go to his superiors or go pulblic.

As for non-members hating the AMA, I would suppose that maybe they hate organaization and rules even more. I want to do my thing regardless of how it effects others. They know they are causing a conflict and it sounds like they are doing it willfully.

That's a great solution. Support model aviation for everyone that complies with your dictates of how it should be done. Jimmy Hoffa would have loved it.

Abel

Yea, right. A better solution would be to let a few *****holes shut down an organized and established flying site. Anarchists would love it.

We're not talking about a few fliers going out in BFE to fly rogue, they are on the way to shutting down flying for everyone. For some folks, their self-proclaimed independence is little more than a selfish disregard for organization in general and consideration of others in particular.

Here is link to a pdf version of FCC Title 47, Part 95.

Sections 95.201 - 95.225 (pages 542-550) contain "R/C Rules" 1 - 25 that apply to our hobby:

[link=http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/cfr/1998/47cfr95.pdf]FCC Title 47, Part 95[/link]

It's an interesting dilemma. The group apparently has no interest in joining the club, and the club has no way to negotiate frequency use with an unorganized group.

What would you suggest?

Robo
Yes, that is exactly what the AMA club is doing.
Only AMA clubs can have "conflict", the Public has "interfering with freq in use" problems.
3mins before the club site opens for the day, the freq is not in use and there is no public interference problems so the nonmembers can switch on and use the freq for as long as they can keep the tx on..... but even before the site opens for the day the AMA club KNOWS about a "conflict" and cant switch on till a signed freq sharing plan is in place.


As for running around trying to get flying sites shut down,
how would that club feel if someone contacted their AMA District FreqDude and mentioned the Known Conflict and had the club shut down by the AMA?

Remember, Muncie added non-member sites to the list of entities that a freq sharing plan can be between. AMA has provided the rules about conflict that restrict only its members, as well as providing the definition of sharing plan to have clubs sign with non-members. Why add non-member entities to the types of sharing plans? Because clubs are supposed to get said freq sharing plans with non-member entities. AMA has laid out the rules clubs have to follow...... SO DO IT! rather than come up with something, anything, to do other than follow Muncies rules.

Is the strategy for that club to
Continue breaking Muncies freq conflict rules
and hope they can get a flying site shutdown before someone forces them to obey AMA rules?
Great plan, I really love the part that deals with the now Irate Rogues simply moving off county land but still using the freqs within conflict range (we can assume every last Rogue that got his site shutdown by the club will be a stand up guy and not sit somewhere a mile away with a Dial-a-Freq tx shooting down club planes... I'm sure they will be enamored with the club for getting their site shut down)

Do those Rogues hate the AMA?
All doubt will be removed once the club shuts down their site.
Way to promote the hobby, break your own rules to be intentionally detrimental to public flyers.

You represent AMA (or the highway) so well. Have you considered running for office?

Abel

KE has already answered your question. Check your membership manual for a current version of AMA's position on frequency sharing agreements.

Abel

Have any of the members of your club contacted the other group about a frequency sharing agreement? I would think if you approached them in a reasonable manner that a compromise could be reached. After all, they can get shot down just as easily as you.