I would. definitely agree. I believe this is an example of some very negative knee-jerk reaction by theFAA and it seems some in the county school administration. I really. hope the FAA, Congress etc.get a better, realistic handle on the whole UAS side of things. It would be a great shame to stifle the educational/scientific and economic side of UAS.

So, are you saying it is OK to injure someone with a drone?

Well, a model airplane is a type of drone. By definition, a model airplane is a drone operated for recreational purposes. The problem with your question is the people you talk to are not using a standard definition of drone or model airplane, so you little poll is utterly flawed. Had you started with standard definitions, you would have received quite different answers.

I have no recollection of encountering any super righteous quad haters in this thread or even this forum. Perhaps you could cite a few posts that would demonstrate your belief. I perceive that a quaddie is just another type of model airplane. I think that those who buy them for recreational purpose could have a lot of safe fun with them if they were properly educated.

By definition, a model airplane is a type of drone, what more can I say. And why are you so upset about it?

What is it a model of?

[QUOTE=JohnShe;11917722]Well, a model airplane is a type of drone. By definition, a model airplane is a drone operated for recreational purposes. The problem with your question is the people you talk to are not using a standard definition of drone or model airplane, so you little poll is utterly flawed. Had you started with standard definitions, you would have received quite different answers.[/QUOTE


:rolleyes: Sorry Mr. She , but it is you who are in error , and the majority of my little poll outweighs your demands to re purpose the word .


;) For FAR longer than there have been "aircraft" , of ANY type , the word "Drone" meant a worker bee .... A WORKER bee . as in , one with a specific job within the hive , and most certainly was NOT a bee created "just for the fun of being a bee" !!!!!! . Why do you think mindless drudgery is called slangly "Drone's work" ???

PS , guys like LCS have more model aircraft smarts in their little fingers than you display in ANY of your posts , so please knock off the superior attitude as it does nothing but make you look the part of the fool . You can jerk around with definitions all ya want , but to the majority of folks I'VE spoken with , the meaning of "Drone" has been clearly defined as a remotely piloted aircraft WITH A JOB TO DO , and just being an amusement for FUN ain't exactly considered a job where I come from .

:cool: And now that I'm done with dinking around with definitions , let me say this ;

I have nothing at all against AMA condoned FPV as laid out in doc. 550 . These ARE model aircraft just as much as turbines and blimps and anything else flown for fun within AMA guidelines . We have a pretty darned good set of operating conditions set out in the AMA safety code and I for one am happy to follow them . Since FPV is a condoned mode of model flight , we should support that right alongside all the other modeling uses .

Now Drones , you know , the Commercial use of our co existing technology , those scare the hell outta me !

And the reason is , that I think our leaders of our MODELING based organization have smelled GIGA $$$$ in the future of drone operations , and wants IN on the act . We as modelers , who are too buisy territorial pissing over the definitions of words , are surely gonna loose out when we eventually loose our "voice" (the AMA) to the big business of the corporate operations . The AMA is a HOBBIEST organization , why should non hobby use (DRONES) be of any concern of our's in the first place ? Isn't that what Sen. Imhoff was trying to do , keep us from getting sucked up by the regulatory cluster*** that will be coming to commercial operators ?

A military or police drone, which makes it a "warbird"

I am not sure whether that was suppose to be funny or not. I don't think I have ever seen one entered in a Scale Masters event.

The problem with a definition based on task based use is that it gets murky and requires evidence into the intent of the pilot.

A Senior Telemaster dropping candy to promote a local hobby shop? MA or DRONE
A quadcopter taking a video of the flying field (following AMA Doc 550)? MA or DRONE
A sponsored pilot doing initial flight testing for his employer? MA or DRONE
Competing with a giant scale EDGE in a flying competition that has a significant in value prize? MA or DRONE

In just one sentence you illuminate our and my problem... Guys like you want to tie us to terminology that will suck us into the black hole of government idiocy... Why not just reject that drone headed mentality?? Maybe you just can't help yourself...been on the teet too long??? Hmmm... maybe you are a drone...LOL

So what would you say about a 40% scale model of a Predator? The AMA NATS in the scale heli class was won a few years ago with a scale model of a Maryland State Police helicopter.

No, he is really saying that chocolate chip cookies are better than oatmeal cookies, and that it is OK to injure someone during a mugging in the parking lot of a stadium.

I can't believe you couldn't see that !!!!!

LOL ......... somebody understands.

I would say that would be a model of a drone but is still a model airplane unless it were used to perform the tasks of the Predator in which case it becomes a 40% sized drone.
The State Police helicopter is a model helicopter and not a model airplane.
A "quaddie" isn't a model of anything.

"The problem with a definition based on task based use is that it gets murky and requires evidence into the intent of the pilot."

Intent makes all the difference in the world...assault rifle or defense weapon...depends...if only government suck-up idiots could distinguish the difference we would need a whole lot less of the silly definitions posted in threads like this or used otherwise in media.

I did a search on the AMA website for Drone, and there is a lot of information that may clear up some of the questions, here is one example:

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/570.pdf

Really???? Even made a Google search to see quad copters used by the military and police in their line of duty?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...54_634x405.jpg

http://data3.whicdn.com/images/40362181/large.jpg
http://www.personal-drones.net/wp-co...ne_416x288.jpg

But then perhaps a multi rotor cant be a scale model because it does not carry a live pilot................. oh wait!

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...?itok=Zc1uXXTL

One of the best documents ever produced by AMA. The author had a very good grasp of reality not often found nowadays.

I agree 100%. The AMA website has a lot of information about what is a drone, different bills by congress, state laws, very informative. Check it out.

I have a problem with this kind of approach. It uses reasoning. It approaches the problem with some intelligence. That kind of thing has no place in our current world. This kind of thing will end up calming the panic driven and those that believe these things will end up killing not only our hobby but millions of the flying public. It has no place here. It's going to take away my entertainment. :D

James

lol...

Well gosh. I stand corrected.

Fox news just posted an article about Disney's No Fly Zone and why they have it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...nt-for-disney/

Check it out. Sounds like they have a legit need for the NFZ. Yah Right!

[QUOTE=JohnShe;11917722]Well, a model airplane is a type of drone. By definition, a model airplane is a drone operated for recreational purposes. The problem with your question is the people you talk to are not using a standard definition of drone or model airplane, so you little poll is utterly flawed. Had you started with standard definitions, you would have received quite different answers.[/QUOTE


That is a logical fallacy. An appeal to popularity implies that an idea is true simply because it is widely held.


That is one of many definitions of the word drone. The oxford dictionary has added a third definition "A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile" http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us..._english/drone

Despite the smiley face you are getting awfully close to making a personal attack. The rest of your statement depends on the fallacy that I have already noted.