Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
(Post 11716735)
Man that's some good panning and tilting to be able to see behind the flight stations and the far side of the boats... Its funny...no kidding, hilarious how the brethren come here to offer a defense when they face some of the same scrutiny they impose on others. If the panning and tilting defense is good, then its equally good for the FPVers...Hmmm... Funnier yet is to deride what I thought was a very good video in the process...
And the $1000s worth of drone capable equipment comment is funnier yet...in a sad way... Get a grip boys...the least of our worries has anything to do with hobbyists.... Take stock and look at what is really going on in this whacked world... Oh BTW don't look out of the side widow of the plane while your flying... LOL |
Whatever your rationalization... The fact remains, as it concerns AMA flying sides, that FPVing will have two pilots, one with all the strengths and weaknesses of any other pilot plus the other pilot with a first-person view. It's ridiculous to make a case that FPVing is any more dangerous than any other form of modeling.
|
Anybody see the news article for the "pocket drone"?
http://betabeat.com/2014/01/secretly...-camera-drone/ The apparent use for this may cause havac with a lot of privicy and owner rights issues. |
Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
(Post 11717193)
Anybody see the news article for the "pocket drone"?
http://betabeat.com/2014/01/secretly...-camera-drone/ The apparent use for this may cause havac with a lot of privicy and owner rights issues. |
No the Telemaster DID NOT fly over the marina, nor did it fly where it wasn't supposed to. Again, it's "line of sight, see and avoid." The very nature of FPV is to surpass this, that is the difference. Any rule can be followed, but FPV makes it easier not to. I'm only talking about FPV at a club field. The other commercial and non commercial uses for FPV is yet another matter unto itself.
|
Originally Posted by bruceal
(Post 11717210)
No the Telemaster DID NOT fly over the marina, nor did it fly where it wasn't supposed to. Again, it's "line of sight, see and avoid." The very nature of FPV is to surpass this, that is the difference. Any rule can be followed, but FPV makes it easier not to. I'm only talking about FPV at a club field. The other commercial and non commercial uses for FPV is yet another matter unto itself.
|
Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
(Post 11717010)
And I can say the exact same thing for the FPVing I've seen... So what's your point?
AMA has outlines for flying FPV, clubs have rules... As AMA members you agree to abide by those constraints... There is no reason FPV can't be allowed even at the smallest of small flying sites...just as anything else, the constraints are key...In your world, I gather from all you say, those dastardly FPVers can't conform as well as "regular" modelers.... Is that the core of the issue as you see it? |
Originally Posted by 804
(Post 11717031)
So why do you keep bringing up "flying out of bounds on purpose, for the thrill of it"? Flying way out of bounds...blatantly out of bounds to explore what is going on beyond your field of view is what these planes were designed for. I don't care what configuration the plane has, whether it's a specially equipped Telemaster or a RTF Quadcopter, if the plane is equipped to fly beyond line of sight then you will have countless incidents of these planes getting used that way when the pilot thinks that no one is watching him. |
Originally Posted by combatpigg
(Post 11717352)
Because you do not need to be too "gifted" to be able to see that this is the designed purpose of that sort of a machine.
Flying way out of bounds...blatantly out of bounds to explore what is going on beyond your field of view is what these planes were designed for. I don't care what configuration the plane has, whether it's a specially equipped Telemaster or a RTF Quadcopter, if the plane is equipped to fly beyond line of sight then you will have countless incidents of these planes getting used that way when the pilot thinks that no one is watching him. |
I would think it easier to do precision aerobatics with FPV. It would of course take a bit of getting used to, and may take some side video to do it right.
|
Originally Posted by combatpigg
(Post 11717352)
Because you do not need to be too "gifted" to be able to see that this is the designed purpose of that sort of a machine.
Flying way out of bounds...blatantly out of bounds to explore what is going on beyond your field of view is what these planes were designed for. I don't care what configuration the plane has, whether it's a specially equipped Telemaster or a RTF Quadcopter, if the plane is equipped to fly beyond line of sight then you will have countless incidents of these planes getting used that way when the pilot thinks that no one is watching him. we should ban all objects that can be used to break rules, like fast cars and powerful guns, etc. CP, your inner lib-tard-ness is showing.:cool: |
Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
(Post 11717370)
Not completely true...If I ever do FPV in will be in an aircraft, flying as I normally do...well with the possible exception of some 3D flying. To put everyone into your bag of perception is errant.
That being the truth, you might as well delete your last post. |
Originally Posted by 804
(Post 11717621)
Using your logic,
we should ban all objects that can be used to break rules, like fast cars and powerful guns, etc. CP, your inner lib-tard-ness is showing.:cool: I'm happy that the AMA is LIBERAL enough to allow the very dangerous stuff that we have already. It's pretty amazing to watch planes doing 200 MPH around pylon poles or flying combat at 120 MPH, with closing speeds of 240.. The saving grace is that 99.99% of all mishaps are within the confines of the designated flying areas. With drone capable RC the public and the law makers will have much less tolerance for having AMA endorsed planes that are designed to be flown out of bounds actually crashing out of bounds and doing harm.. You try to make a comparison to hot cars. Hmmm....I'm a hot rodder and every hot car I've ever owned has tested my "self control", each and every day, coming out of each and every full stop. It's a wonder that I've only been in the minor amount of trouble [engaging in a speed contest, reckless endangerment, exhibition of speed, speeding, modified exhaust] during the 40+ years I've been able to enjoy that hobby. Talk to any street rodder with a wheelie capable car and I'll bet most of them have done wheelies on the street. It's human nature to push your toys to the limit of their capabilities. Some folks have more self control than others, but imagine what the roads and highways would be like if EVERY car sold was capable of wheelies and 1/8th mile long burnouts. Are you trying to tell me that the incidents of wreckless driving would not change...? |
Originally Posted by combatpigg
(Post 11717820)
No, it's your leap of logic that makes that erroneous comparison.
I'm happy that the AMA is LIBERAL enough to allow the very dangerous stuff that we have already. It's pretty amazing to watch planes doing 200 MPH around pylon poles or flying combat at 120 MPH, with closing speeds of 240.. The saving grace is that 99.99% of all mishaps are within the confines of the designated flying areas. With drone capable RC the public and the law makers will have much less tolerance for having AMA endorsed planes that are designed to be flown out of bounds actually crashing out of bounds and doing harm.. You try to make a comparison to hot cars. Hmmm....I'm a hot rodder and every hot car I've ever owned has tested my "self control", each and every day, coming out of each and every full stop. It's a wonder that I've only been in the minor amount of trouble [engaging in a speed contest, reckless endangerment, exhibition of speed, speeding, modified exhaust] during the 40+ years I've been able to enjoy that hobby. Talk to any street rodder with a wheelie capable car and I'll bet most of them have done wheelies on the street. It's human nature to push your toys to the limit of their capabilities. Some folks have more self control than others, but imagine what the roads and highways would be like if EVERY car sold was capable of wheelies and 1/8th mile long burnouts. Are you trying to tell me that the incidents of wreckless driving would not change...? |
[QUOTE=littlecrankshaf;11717867]That seems pretty goofy...Most every car can exceed the highest posted speed limits...man, get out of the left lane and turn that left turn signal off...Dang![/QUOTE
Yes, and after the car accelerates up to it's highest speed the average driver learns that the rate of acceleration isn't exactly stupendous, it devalues / prematurely ages the car, it puts more money into the pockets of the mechanics and it wasn't enough of a thrill to risk the penalty for getting caught. This activity also has pretty close to unlimited funds and technology for enforcement. So....what was the point you were trying to make again...? It seems to have gotten obliterated. |
Originally Posted by combatpigg
(Post 11717820)
No, it's your leap of logic that makes that erroneous comparison.
I'm happy that the AMA is LIBERAL enough to allow the very dangerous stuff that we have already. It's pretty amazing to watch planes doing 200 MPH around pylon poles or flying combat at 120 MPH, with closing speeds of 240.. The saving grace is that 99.99% of all mishaps are within the confines of the designated flying areas. With drone capable RC the public and the law makers will have much less tolerance for having AMA endorsed planes that are designed to be flown out of bounds actually crashing out of bounds and doing harm.. You try to make a comparison to hot cars. Hmmm....I'm a hot rodder and every hot car I've ever owned has tested my "self control", each and every day, coming out of each and every full stop. It's a wonder that I've only been in the minor amount of trouble [engaging in a speed contest, reckless endangerment, exhibition of speed, speeding, modified exhaust] during the 40+ years I've been able to enjoy that hobby. Talk to any street rodder with a wheelie capable car and I'll bet most of them have done wheelies on the street. It's human nature to push your toys to the limit of their capabilities. Some folks have more self control than others, but imagine what the roads and highways would be like if EVERY car sold was capable of wheelies and 1/8th mile long burnouts. Are you trying to tell me that the incidents of wreckless driving would not change...? That is not disputed here. So it all just comes back around to personal responsibility and do we as a people or we as a hobby trust each other to do the right thing. Do we ban the object that we can abuse (liberal-type thinking, in my view), or do we punish the person who mis-uses the object (conservative-type thinking, in my view)? I'll always vote for the latter, and fight against folks like you who think it's ok for you to push the limits, but not for those you don't trust. |
Originally Posted by 804
(Post 11718101)
You are right that it is human nature (for some, definitely not all) to push the limits. So what.
That is not disputed here. So it all just comes back around to personal responsibility and do we as a people or we as a hobby trust each other to do the right thing. Do we ban the object that we can abuse (liberal-type thinking, in my view), or do we punish the person who mis-uses the object (conservative-type thinking, in my view)? I'll always vote for the latter, and fight against folks like you who think it's ok for you to push the limits, but not for those you don't trust. Liberally trading our liberties and freedoms for safety and security is a flawed plan. We got to re-learn to stand up for each and everyone of us and our right to make mistakes but be very willing to punishes those that cause harm to others swiftly and severely. |
Originally Posted by 804
(Post 11718101)
You are right that it is human nature (for some, definitely not all) to push the limits. So what.
That is not disputed here. So it all just comes back around to personal responsibility and do we as a people or we as a hobby trust each other to do the right thing. Do we ban the object that we can abuse (liberal-type thinking, in my view), or do we punish the person who mis-uses the object (conservative-type thinking, in my view)? I'll always vote for the latter, and fight against folks like you who think it's ok for you to push the limits, but not for those you don't trust. Banning this NEW object maintains the status quo and that is definitely conservative thinking..punishing the person who misuses an object is a bi-partisan value. Just wondering, do you copy and paste some of your miserably failed Pro-PPP arguments and recycle them here..? |
Originally Posted by combatpigg
(Post 11718326)
You've got it completely bass-ackwards.
Banning this NEW object maintains the status quo and that is definitely conservative thinking..punishing the person who misuses an object is a bi-partisan value. Just wondering, do you copy and paste some of your miserably failed Pro-PPP arguments and recycle them here..? The real issue remains, the risk of damage caused my irresponsible behavior or an accident of some sort. As a committed libtard, I believe that anybody who pays his dues to the club fully intends to act responsibly. To that end, I find banning the use of certain types of aircraft just because somebody might behave irresponsibly is not a good practice. Instead, irresponsible behavior must be punished and accidents should be accounted for and efforts made to prevent them. Actions such as thorough and careful prefilghts, spotters on duty and and other types of preventive measures are called for. Consider the conservitard disasters of prohibition and the war on drugs. Both of these programs were disastrous. To the point that prohibition was repealed and now some states are allowing the legal use of marijuana for recreation purposes. |
The problem is that some clubs don't get a second chance. Punishing an offender becomes useless.
|
Originally Posted by bruceal
(Post 11718368)
The problem is that some clubs don't get a second chance. Punishing an offender becomes useless.
|
FPV is designed to fly beyond line of sight. The chances are far greater that an FPV'r will cause a problem. Like I keep saying, not all fields can support all modelers. Here in NY there are limited places to establish a flying site and after that keep it. I'm sure there are places that people can do FPV and never pose a problem. A congested area like this just doesn't work.
|
The other thing that I never mentioned is that my club is a short distance from a nuclear power plant.
|
Originally Posted by bruceal
(Post 11718378)
FPV is designed to fly beyond line of sight.
not trying to just be argumentative but you have already said your club allows giant scale...Not hard to figure they could easily over fly the shipyard/marina...right? FWIW it the average type model that has given us our closets brushes with disaster... It really does boil down to trust doesn't it? |
Originally Posted by JohnShe
(Post 11718365)
..... I believe that anybody who pays his dues to the club fully intends to act responsibly. To that end, I find banning the use of certain types of aircraft just because somebody might behave irresponsibly is not a good practice. Instead, irresponsible behavior must be punished and accidents should be accounted for and efforts made to prevent them. Actions such as thorough and careful prefilghts, spotters on duty and and other types of preventive measures are called for.
Consider the conservitard disasters of prohibition and the war on drugs. Both of these programs were disastrous. To the point that prohibition was repealed and now some states are allowing the legal use of marijuana for recreation purposes. FPV spreads the dangers involved with this hobby much further out into the surrounding areas of the general population at a time when we need to look for ways to do a better job of confining our dangers and giving Big Brother fewer excuses to get involved with our sport. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:04 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.