Look... as I write this I am getting the final things together to Demo a large scale, twin cylinder Biplane for a club event we are hosting for area retired and nursing home patients...Today!

There will likely be area news coverage, TV and newspaper... I hope and pray things go well and ultimately is a positive event for our community...there are no guarantees in life but we have a sharp group of guys that take ample precautions...ultimately anything could happen though...it is just the nature of life... she it happens... we've got to grow up, quite being selective and do the best we can... where we can.

Not only is the FAA now involved in this incident, it looks like some lawmakers in the Virginia legislature are talking about legislation....................................... .

http://www.wtop.com/120/3432477/Dron...at-Va-bull-run

And yes RC planes can crash. Actually a spectator at Shea Stadium was killed by a RC demonstration in 1979. That is why you will never see the AMA condoning flying over crowds in stadiums.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/lawnmower.asp

In any case both this incident and the wedding video incident were "Commercial Video/FPV" and outside AMA control. Looks more and more that commercial operations are just asking to be regulated as they just can't control themselves.

Imagine that.......
Of course they are looking for themselves to be regulated. That is what the pending sUAS rules are all about. Right now they have no authorization to be flying at all.

Well it should be reasonable for folks in business to be regulated such that they do not endanger the public. Kind of like airliner aircrew, over the road truck drivers, train drivers, ship drivers and the like.

MY concern is that politricians will overstep their bounds, shoe laces, belts, and suspenders as they are wont to do and do damage to my hobby.

Five people received injuries and you make light of it. Do you routinely fly over crowds of people?

Frank

Brad,
Sorry, that last post was meant for crank, not sure I like this new format yet.

"Oh my Gawd... the crowd was horrified...so much so, some were even laughing... Let's make as much out of every incident as we can! Just like the author of that report...Hopefully it gets posted on many other forums and ultimately goes viral..."

Regards
Frank

You guys are hard to believe...it was Brad that brought this to light...then goes on to point out how its not a hobbyist AMA related matter... Your Freudian post was more on target than you will admit.

And as a test of sorts, I purposely injected some info about something good that our club was doing for the community...and no one wished us well...

I guess perpetuating negative crap and setting on the edge of their seats waiting to say "I told you so, I told you so" is the order of the day for many...

Unbelievable!

I wondered why that was in the thread since based on previous remarks of yours over the years I know that you and the folks you play with wouldn't fly over the crowd. Well, how about a report? Did it go well and how much TV time did you get?

Seriously, there are MANY more times when we get local news coverage for doing something safe, fun, and inviting to others than bad stuff. One of the issues most seem to have missed and your 'test' pointed out is that GENERALLY the bad stuff is 1 or 2 folks and almost ALL of the good stuff is groups of modelers. There is a nugget in that we need to look at because it points to something that has cost us flying fields and will continue to dog us. My club lost TWO flying fields in the same year because of this though there is no way to prove that in a court of law when the land lord pulls the lease after an egregious endangerment of the public it is hard to say it was just a business decision.

As a group "we" tend to be safe. When we fly and do something on the edge, most of us know Fred, the field Nazi who will ream us for our perceived infraction. The problem is the "10%" who do what they want when and how they want. Usually they don't fly when the 'crowds' are out because they hate dealing with Fred which is why I (and most good officers in the club) rarely stop him unless he is getting to aggressive and or offensive in his approach to some poor flyer who was struggling to get it right rather than pointing out unsafe activities to a careless pilot. That is where most of our 'problems' with safety reside - the lack of individual acceptance of safety regulations and personal commitment to safe operations. Safe operations cannot be mandated by rules, though Fred doesn't understand that, but MUST be the personal commitment of the pilot.

I could not tell in the video if the craft was controlled by a modeler who is part of the 10% or simply a purchased craft the organization deployed. However at the very start it was painfully clear to me this individual was one of the 10% (in society if not modeling) because it does not take a rocket scientist to see many of the dangers the public was exposed to and our 'black sheep' insist they can control and take care of anything.

I have not figured out how to keep the 10% from muddying the water for all of us, but it is beginning to happen and this video is another example.

First, we have to stop perpetuating negative things that can be construed as being related to our hobby and realize things are just what they are... that video depicts some idiot doing something that has nothing to do with the AMA, my hobby or anything else that I support but with all that being said the more we perpetuate crap like that the more it will be construed as relevant to us and our hobby...As some ones tag line reads; "It is not possible to write in such a way that cannot be misinterpreted by a reader determined to do so"... We should simply reject any notion that such events relate to our hobby and the first line of defense is not to give the idiots any publicity that will be used against us... The idiots do what idiots do... and I guarantee idiots will never be in short supply.

Now, why not get back to things AMA?

If the property owner of the even gave permission and they were flown below 500 feet then no laws or regulations were broken unless there are some local laws. Sounds like somebody making a mountain of a mole hill if you ask me. Things like this should be handled by civil court, not by slapping on another rule that nobody will follow.

Exactly! It gets real old how the self righteous continue to make a case and *******ize what they perceive as the red headed step child of the hobby...as someone that hasn't any plans for FPV, I can truly understand from the perspective of one that had that same type of agenda focused on myself...and by that very virtue endure residual silliness now.

That was what I thought when I posted It seems that while COMMERCIAL USE is "out of AMA control (i.e.insurance)" it is being promoted by the AMA and very relavant to us and our hobby..

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...-weed-busters/


http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...13/07/10/1478/

commercial FPV being promoted by the AMA??? Oh my gawd... This is getting sillier by the moment in here...

I hope the Commercial FPV pilots that have received Cease and Desist orders from the FAA find solice in your opinion. Perhaps Raphiel Pirker (Trappy) who has hired a lawyer to defend against monetary fines being proposed can just quote you and the judge will throw it out............................................... ..

Yes, AMA is promoting commercial sUAS and yes, it is getting really silly. See President's Perspective column in current (Sept) issues of MA.

cj

Man... I need a reading and comprehension course...I fail to see where AMA is promoting "commercial" sUAS operations... A quote within pertinent context would be greatly appreciated.

From cited column "District I Vice President Andy Argenio and several others have been diligently working on the recognition of Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS) within the AMA. An advisory group has been formed to provide dialogue necessary to understand and possibly include this new group." [more follows]

Of course model aircraft are sUAS, but as they are already included in AMA purview, one can only surmise they're talking about everything else FAA calls sUAS, inclusive of 'public' and 'civil' varieties. Commercial sUAS fall within the civil category.

You make very good extrapolations but as with most things regarding AMA's information to its members, a lot is little less than clear... I truly regret that and it is always a source for misinterpretation... thus, a lot of the problems we have.

Man, how much do you need to be spoon fed..........

From Apr EC meeting, FAA Gummit Relations heading:

"There may be an opportunity for the AMA and FAA to discuss small UAS. AMA has been contacted by various entities for help in managing that activity. Council viewed a video that was made of a meeting at HQ with AMA, Ball State University, and the Delaware County Dept. of Emergency Management. The ED reported that the UAS group needs benefits different from what we offer our members. Four different groups have been identified - the FPV user that is part of 550/560; the element of the educational aspect with opportunities with the Journalism Department at Ball State; an educational opportunity with the Civil Air Patrol, and potentially the casual commercial operator. Mathewson noted AMA does not want to get fully involved with commercial operation, but we can provide these entities and others with guidelines on operating safely within the national airspace. We could offer things such as our ability to administrate a national program; ability to provide credentials, recordkeeping, coordination, marketing, advocacy, and coverage when they are doing their activity. Many of our members want to help as a volunteer resource using this platform; they want to help in search and rescue; accident reconstruction, etc. Mathewson expanded on how AMA could be a resource for education, communications, publications, safety rules and responsibilities, and other benefits. He said we have the infrastructure in place to provide this, could implement a program very cost-effectively and it would not be a huge investment. The benefits for AMA would be the opportunity for AMA to grow its membership, to be the leader in this industry, and provide the safety guidelines that build our credibility and relationships with that community as well as with the FAA. A workgroup was created that will discuss opportunities; the results will be reported to Council.

Comments included: AMA could become a resource to the FAA; Council should be cautious of FAA’s perception of the AMA if they decide to get involved with the UAS group; this would create risks for AMA but also creates opportunities; the under 4.2-pound category of UASs is AMA’s biggest opportunity to work with the FAA and help manage that aspect; the ED does not see AMA getting involved in the heavy commercial domestic UAS arena. No one on Council was opposed to moving forward with investigating opportunities. The next step is to talk with the community and recognized experts, brainstorm ideas, and explore opportunities."

Still don't see "promote" commercial UASs...exacting control or influence, I'll concede...but that might be construed as "retard" commercial UASs operations LOL. But either way, it clearly shows AMA's desire to grow itself regardless of all else...

Regards
Frank

You got that right...Even if they had used the word "promote" I'd be skeptical...but others, what they hey, they've been saluting the Leiter long before this episode...

How 'bout you Frank? You are on the record with having a deep disdain for FPV and I can only imagine how you must feel about AMAized "commercial" FPVing...How does that set with you now, since apparently you now feel AMA is about "promoting" FPV?

Hmmm...My guess is that you feel AMA has it all in "control" and a salute is just as appropriate now...maybe more now than ever...

Look guys, It is clear... AMA wants what most every organization eventually grows to need or want...recognition, control and growth. AMA has given me more than ample proof that they not only liken themselves to a quasi government entity but now desire a coronation...

I just wish they would promote our hobby...period.

The FAA has FARs, that is how they operate, and justifiably so. FARs have penalties and fines attached. FARs protect lives and property with rules and regulations. AMA has nothing like this to regulate the airspace for sUAS. I will throw up my hands if the FAA allows AMA wish list to continue existing after May 2015.

The time you need regulations is when something bad happens. Like when a quad copter goes down in the middle of a crowded bleacher.

The FAA can do nothing about model aircraft as the law specifically said they would be unregulated. Model aircraft is a sub class of sUAS, and FPV when flown with a spotter can be defined as model aircraft. Without a spotter I am not sure.