:cool: Very , very astute observation on the Hound's part . High five (paw ?) to you Mr. Hound .....

HD: I worked on the B-52D models. They did not use them then. It looks like a Bad a** machine!!!!!!!!!!

I worked with a Buff pilot at Tinker AFB in the 80's that made THE LAST operational flight with Hound Dogs. Thank you for your service sir!

I hope everyone can see the irony in Hound Dog posting in a Drone forum!

And Your service as well.
Did Not see that but now that U mention it It was a BIG Drone
Had a BIG BANG too.

Although...If Der Schlickmeister was to ask you to "kiss it", as he did with Paula Jones, I bet you'd figure out his definition pretty dang quick!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/06/25...rn-california/

Another idiot preventing fire fighters from doing their job.....Enjoy.

And the Idiots keep on coming day after day. I'll bet if it was their house on fire, they would have different priorities.

AMA convinced Congress that the CBO could regulate the gamut of model airplane operations in the US, and nearly simultaneously put out the welcome mat for drones and their operators into the model flying community they claim domain over. So what AMA rules were being violated and what penalties are specified for for the proscribed elements of the "idiot's" activity in this instance? I'd like to know also how FAA would react to such incidents if not encumbered by Congress having usurped their authority and handing it over to a CBO. We may find out soon; FAA may be biding their time while letting the CBO prove the folly of Congress micro-managing their mission.

I don't think Congress has done anything to stop the FAA going after people who actually endanger full scale aviation.

Wow! CJ: apparently you did not read the article. The idiots flew their drones near full scale aircraft, putting human lives at Risk, and preventing the aircraft to complete their mission, which was to put out the fire. The commander forced the planes down until it was safe to fly. Now I can not specify which law was broken with a number, maybe you can? The CBO can do nothing, the FAA can, and forget congress, what have they done so far? Nothing, hell they can not make a simple decision on anything.

No, not without some look-up of rules that might apply in the situation, and that is why I asked. I certainly agree that the operations were reckless and put people and property in danger, and there should be some consequence for the perp's actions. LEO needs needs to have the answer(s) in order to make charges. They are apparently confused. The spokesman for the fire boss in a broadcast TV interview re this incident said the model airplanes were limited by law to operate within 400 ft of the surface. FAA has made no such law, though they have made it clear for decades that is what they feel is needed in the interest of avoiding conflict between models and manned aircraft, but per AMA lobbying Congress ruled to constrain FAA from regulating model aircraft, buying into AMA's argument that they (as CBO) could do the regulating. FAA doesn't have much to work with here; there seems to be a lack of objective standards in the regulation of model aircraft, but all they have is subjective rules ala 'reckless endangerment.' Charges of violating subjective rules nearly always end up being argued in a court, as they always open to interpretation. Seems to me rather chaotic for law enforcement to deal with, as in charging everyone that commits a driving infraction (speeding, running stop light,etc.) with generic "reckless endangerment" of the public. That should make traffic courts the biggest business in the country.
I am sorry, but your statement than FAA can <regulate MA> and forget Congress won't fly. Congress holds the purse, and so the power over FAA. The action by Congress pandering to AMA's wishes that FAA be reined in was within the context of an FAA funding bill.

Look, up in the sky, it's........BOOM
 

Sorry, double post.

:mad: And in tonight's news ; 6/29/15 , In Seattle at a pride rally , a woman was knocked out by a falling quadcopter being flown over the event by person(s) unknown . The woman was treated for a concussion and witnesses told police the quadcopter struck the side of a building , disabling it and sending it to the ground where it struck the young woman in the head . Police are reportedly looking for a white male with a tattoo of a woman on his body .


I replaced the word "drone" with the word "quadcopter" in the story because that's what the news report showed , a 4 bladed Heli that they claim to cost approx $1200 . Was it taking pictures/video for hire ? Or was it being piloted by yet another ignorant dolt without the good common sense to not fly directly over folk's heads ?

The rest of the wording is unchanged from the report I saw .....

i think ill go get a drone and see what makes people talk about them then i can say the right things sorry iam so stuped about the drones>

Try it U might Like it but I'll bet U get bored with it real fast . Maybe not if U do FPV and race the little ones thru the woods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsxyV-kgfio

Man, that looked like fun. piques my interest a little bit. Who knows...maybe one day...

Here's the link to the Seattle event. These things will result in more restrictions on our hobby...AMA made a huge mistake welcoming them. The media can't handle the subtle distinction of drones vs hobby planes.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...parade-n384076

Best Buy is now pushing the "Drones" here is the link: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/buying-g...eut=2529476634

Down at the bottom of the page they talk about the AMA, wooo whooooo.......

:cool: Thank You for posting the link , Franklin . I'm not computer savvy enough and every time I try to post a link , it doesn't work .

:mad: As to the last sentence in your post , I agree that the media is now and will be in the future our biggest problem . Let a Drone be used to save some poor old person who wandered off into the woods , and it'll be page 4 news at best . But let a Drone injure someone , badly , and it's front page huge letters "Menace from the skies !!!" .... The media are nothing more than modern day ghouls , I swear those sick SOBs actually get off on the carnage they so gleefully drag into our livingrooms each and every day .

No it won't, but it seems it would absolutely thrill some if this was the case. With all that's happened so far, anything horrible happen to the hobby yet? No. It's not the AMA's job to respond to every incident like this and try to differentiate this guy from AMA members. Nor do we need to differentiate a quad from a fixed wing aircraft, me thinks the average person knows the difference. So far, despite all the doom and gloom prophesying, I've yet to see any type of groundswell support for banning the hobby. Where are all the links to those stories? Crickets.......

They need to find the guy, arrest him, then fine him. After some meaningful time behind bars, he'll face a bodily injury claim that his home owner carrier (if he has insurance) will deal with. If uninsured, he'll be held civilly responsible. I'm sure the local police can find appropriate charges to file against him. The legal fees alone would be significant. Will it stop another person from doing the same thing, probably not.

Hobby planes are drones! Handle it!

;) Or not , depending on to whom one is conversing ......