THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

Well, I'm not trying to light a fire near a gas pump, but after reading all the threads about how the FAA is trying/going to regulate the AMA and Jets and a 400ft max alt..it makes me wonder if the military use of UAV's have any play in this. It seems like with in the past 4 years the goverment has paid more attention to the use of UAVs and our hobby that we so dearly love. and now want to regulate it. I'm typically pro FAA and just as red blooded american as the next man, but i feel like the simplicity of this hobby is becoming interconnected and made complex to the point its kind of depresing and the fun is slowly fading away. Some long time Turbine pilots are getting out of the hobby..My question is how hard is the AMA going to bat for us and our views in this hobby?
Where is the accountability of the few pilots who are doing silly,stupid and unsafe things with the FPV systems?
Why all the sudden does the FAA feel the need to regulate Jets?
Why does the FAA feel the need to regulate a max Alt we can fly?
with all fairness i dont think its nessary to fly above 1000feet. typically you cant see that high very well with out a FPV system.
Why are jets all the sudden being restricted? Is it the Speed? is it the safety? I thought The AMA was tough enough on safety with the jets
already.
Sure would be nice to have the cliff notes edition/ laymen's version of the proposed regulations.:)

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: blhollo2

Well, I'm not trying to light a fire near a gas pump, but after reading all the threads about how the FAA is trying/going to regulate the AMA and Jets and a 400ft max alt..[/qutote]

Some have suggested that might happen, but the latest indications are that the FAA is disposed to allowing us to keep doing what we have been doing with the caveat that we need to detail for them how we plan to do it safely. And by safely I mean how we will address their concerns about flying "see & avoid", what our plan is for loss of control/range, pilot error, and a couple of other things like that. I would not panic and I would not start thinking that the FAA is out to get turbines.

Nobody outside of the FAA has seen the actual rule. Nobody will until they FAA publishes the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) sometime in June or possibly July. That will be followed by a 60 to possibly 120 day comment period, then some more FAA internal processing and the final rule is expected in late 2012 or possibly 2013.

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

and the yet to be seen/disproven caveat
that "us" means AMA-Only, JoeHobbyist non-AmA to be left in the cold <400 Turbineless <55 regs

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

I wonder - do Top Fuel dragster folks have to belong to NHRA to run?

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

You race in the class you belong:eek: You pay your dues and run in the class you are registered in. Nhra IHRA or what ever.

Also you take the training and pass the tests and prove you are qualified to drive the type of vehicle you are driving or you do not drive.
One of the safest sports in the world;)

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

So you have to belong to an organization to participate in the hobby/sport/lifestyle? Like the turbine flyers might have to in order to operate under the sanctioning body's guidelines?

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

That's the way the AMA Gov't Affairs rep presented it - hear the webinar and see the PPT slides on the JPO site or AMA's. You'll fly MA per the sUAS rules or AMA's alternative rules. Don't bet the farm on flying turbines under the sUAS rules.

Not the same for driving a dragster. No gummit regs there, and you participate in your choice of organizations if competing under the same rules as your opponents matters to you. No org required if you want no-holds-barred action and money is no object. I expect for most participants it is a matter of economics as to what org they belong and what rules they follow. It's a big bucks game, few indies can afford it. Sponsors pay for it in proportion to how they measure the value of the exposure of their product logo.

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

CJR
you are still stuck in their flawed statement, you need to completely step out of the flaw-

Q: "I wonder - do Top Fuel dragster folks have to belong to NHRA to run?"

A: No, there is no requirement by the fed government that you belong to NHRA (or other org) to run TopFuel Dragsters. Nor is there a fed requirement to run them only at track run by those orgs. The fed government dont say squat if you run a Top Fuel Dragster on your property or invited to run on a friends property, although there are a bunch of folks that dont have property appropriate to do so (just as a bunch of folks dont have property appropriate to shoot rifles on either).

simple

"Also you take the training and pass the tests and prove you are qualified to drive the type of vehicle you are driving or you do not drive. "
Not always so.
Again, you dont have to pass those tests and qualify to run on your own property.
Cause the Fed DOT aint got a problem with you playing with dragster at your ranches annual Bullets Burnouts & Beers weekend (when you invite the neighbors and deputys over for a BBQ SkeetShoot and everyone gets a turn at burning out in your dragster)

Now, compare that to the FAA saying you cant do stuff on your land unless you mail muncie a check
... well thats not the same is it


and for folks that want to compete,
no law stopping you neighbors from buying dragsters too and competing with you on your land.
Remember, there IS a world champion Cup Stacker, yet the organized and costly olympics dont have cupstacking

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

Get it through your brain that the airspace of the USA is regulated by the FAA, and for good reason. Some turd with a Big Stik flying FPV where he shouldn't be flying could bring down a plane with human beings inside it.

Okay, now go ahead and mention the midair in Colorado. I know you will.:eek:

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

Well, yeah, but it's not likely you'll run into (as in, make contact with) another dragster, uh, dragging around your property either.

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

There is a lot of misunderstanding of OMB.119 here.

It is a stretch for the FAA to apply it to safety regulations, it is for production and manufacturing standards
Nothing the AMA currently has or does meets the requirements for use by a Federal Agency.
External standards, if adopted, are applied to everyone not the group that developed them.
The organization that provides the standards reliinquishes rights and control over their standards.
The organization that provided the standard can not make futher changes to their standards except to make them stricter than the Govt accepted standard.

Read it HERE

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

One of my fellow drag racers in '79 drove her fuelie to the track. Fully street legal, all she did at the track to race was put on slicks and open the  header straight through valves.
</p>

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f.../msn/71_71.gifStreet legal fuelie? Where are the nitro fuel stations? I could use some.</p>

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

I have no idea what she did other than what I wrote.
The announcers made a point of announcing it every run she did.
I paid more attention to my own bracket racer than what others were doing.
Colchester Dragway CT not sure if it was IHRA or NHRA
I do know that the only rules I had to follow were that I had to have state insepction and driver license, wear seatbelts and a helmet and have a driveshaft loop. I did not have to me an IHRA or NHRA (or anything else) member to race.

There are several racetracks that have the same rules today that we had back then.
Beaver Springs raceway in PA has "street" racing every weekend.

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

where did this come from?

When someone mistakenly was trying to draw a parallel
between AMA required to fly at all and NHRA required to run a dragster,
I pointed out they aint the same.

I never said the EPA/DEA/BATF have to leave you completely unregulated when you run your dragster without NHRA,
just as I never said the FAA has to leave you completely unregulated when you fly without AMA.
(obviously the same fed regs that apply to the folks flying at home with AMA insurance would apply to those flying at home with Hartford/USAmA insurance)


But remember why they tried talking about NHRA in the first place-
Obviously trying to draw a similarity between needing AMA to fly and needing NHRA to drag,
but that comparison is flawed as I pointed out:
One is not required by law to join NHRA(or any other) to play with their fuelie,
whereas the OP was talking about the potential of the new regs to ban stuff unless you mail a check to a private org (cbo)
.... which would be like a fed ban on dragtesrs that NHRA is allowed to break

We dont have to join NRA, nor even play by its private safetycode (cbo-standards)
to enjoy the protections it has fought for all of us to have retain

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

I don't know af any law or regulation that says only memebrs of a small private clubs have the right to do something.

Perhaps someone could name some that get out of laws that everyone else has to follow.
IHRA, NHRA, SCCA, NRA aren't given any special exclusions from any laws.

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

The Congress of the United States, for starters...

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

Big news on this front.

Put out by the AMA this afternoon.......

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/PR-Senate-2-2011.pdf

Not quite there yet, but one step closer

Ken

RE: THE FAA And AMA..Good bye Turbine Jets?!
 

What it boils down to is this: Model aircraft are the third rail of FAA politics. Zap!