Okay, that's one.

So the NTSB applied the use of the AMA Safety Code in their report.

A fixed wing RC plane strikes a scale one because of poor communications at a BBQ fun fly, and not an AMA sanctioned event either. Both pilots were to blame on that one.

Still no drone v aircraft examples?

Also, that one was just above ground level and no where near 400'.

Watch out, Franky might post the blimp incident next......

oops!
 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...pilot-40341228

"..Lunsford said that pilot, who was not injured, reported steering into some brush to avoid a deer on the runway..."

And although it's not explicitly stated, it sure reads like it was an AMA member flying.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=40323205

What are we doing about these birds???

Oh, so even though it was an AMA member flying, and violating AMA code (avoid ALL aircraft), it doesn't count unless it was also an AMA sanctioned event?

LoL...of course!

Although not explicitly stated, it could have also been a one handed blind pilot flying the RC plane too, but hey, let's keep speculating.

Wonder if the bipe pilot was AMA too.....:)

When birds perceive approaching aircraft, depending upon the speed, the birds either go high or tuck their wings and drop. I've seen it thousands of times on low levels. In the case of birds carrying prey, they tend to drop it. That's how these otherwise non-flying animals get ingested. I've been sitting at a picnic in southern Virginia and had a fish drop down through the tree near the table...dropped by an Osprey that got spooked by other birds.

"The club president reported that this was not an Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) sanctioned event; however, AMA rules applied." And then there's this statement: "In a follow-up conversation with a representative with the AMA..." Why would AMA comment on actions of non-AMA pilot? Even so, it appears the club president wasn't enforcing AMA rules very rigorously. What's the talking point? Oh yeah, goes something like this: "We don't need government regulation, we regulate ourselves."

So in 3 minutes you went from it might be an AMA pilot, to it was an AMA pilot. Amazing. Since you read the article, you know exactly what it said. Why not be honest about it?

In your dogged quest to try to find yet another negative AMA related item, you also somehow attribute to me something I never said, or even intimated. ie "it doesn't count". Disingenuous....sort of expect a more honest discussion.

Don't rule out the flying turtles getting spooked and dropping their catch! :rolleyes::p

If you weren't trying to intimate that it didn't count, then why make the comment "... and not an AMA sanctioned event either."

To quote a famous SECSTATE, "What difference does it make" that it wasn't an AMA sanctioned event?

Talking point indeed. The quest to find examples is a loooong and arduous one, but obviously worth it for no other reason than one can say "see, it can really happen". So I think we have a total of two now, over how many years? Against how many events? Against how many flights? I can't use the 0.0 stat here, so I guess I'll modify that to 0.00000000001.

But sure, use an example or two cobbled together over 20 plus years and lets use that as a reason to enact draconian all encompassing rules and regs. Sounds reasonable.

Bob, weave, distract....it's all the same. Have an honest conversation and you don't need to do any of those things.

Relevance?

The topic is drones vs. aircraft.

Part of the AMA's narrative, and I'm paraphrasing, is that we have an "...impeccable safety record...". Now I don't know about you, but I don't consider violation of AMA's see and avoid rule, AMA Club Presidents that can't clearly establish operational rules for events, and the resulting life threatening mid-air with a full scale aircraft to be a shining example of "impeccable" safety performance.

Were you wearing your PPE? If not, will you be wearing a hard hat and safety glasses at future picnics?

So why not apply some analytics considering the number of flights vs. number of incidents and see what you come up with?

Where exactly did the AMA say their safety record was impeccable?

Where does the FAA define a drone?

The number would be greater than 0 which is what we have now. Zero injuries and 0 fatalities. Look at the number of fatalities for boat collisions. Or full scale aviation midair's for than matter.

The NTSB does not indicate it was a "drone" anywhere in the NTSB report you referenced.

Just so you know the FAA suspended the full scale pilots license. IMO the NTSB got it wrong, but actually hard to say without first hand knowledge.