And of course the FAA or whomever is aware of only a small amount of the total reportable events. Right? Like the AMA is aware?

I'd venture to say the numbers reported for full size are much closer to the other end of the spectrum and far more credible than anything reported out of Muncie.

Part of the FAA's JOB is to report such things. Is it part of AOPA's job to report accidents/incidents? Is it part of NBAA's job? How about the RAA? ALPA? Yet you and others want to apply the standards of a government agency to a 'private, dues paying organization'.

if I'm ever a a car accident, I'll be sure to report it to AAA as well as the state and my insurance company.

R_Strowe

Based on previous posts by various members, this seems to be the case.

Apparently, Speedracerntrixie can determine which ones are important, depending on what suits his particular needs at any given moment.

Maybe he would like to explain to chime in and explain which laws are OK to break and when it is okay to break them.

Astro

Or you can share your thoughts on when it's OK to be a troll.

I don’t think the question is whether it’s OK to break laws, but more about having laws on the books that are either impossible or impractical to enforce.

Take the 400’ rule for example. Unlike a full-scale aircraft (most of which have altitude-reporting altimeters and capability), there is no legal requirement (yet) for such on R/C aircraft. So how can you enforce such a rule? Without actual proof of exceeding 400’ AGL, it simply becomes opinion, which doesn’t float in court.

Do we all TRY to abide by the regulation? Of course. But at least at the present time, it is not possible to prove a violation without other requirements met.

R_Strowe

Not true. At least one member here makes it very clear that the 400' rule just doesn't work for him so he will do what pleases him. The AMA is also broadcasting, "Fly as you always have".

Astro

I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question. Looking only at 49 USC 44809(a), (b), and (c) - from your perspective as an EXPERT recreational sUAS operator - please share with us which specific parts YOU believe you may ignore? For example, if you believe you can ignore the 400 foot limit in class G, you would cite 49 USC 44809(a)(6) as a provision you can ignore.

For your convenience, I've appended a link to the law:
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?...edition=prelim

While I do agree with 99% of what is said here, I have in fact flown over 400'. I have no desire to be dis honest about that. There is no data that supports that flying below 400' is going to prevent any collision between a model airplane and a full scale airplane. The only such collision that I am aware of was between a 40% model and a Pitts special that happened at 30'.

You obviously don't even know the meaning of troll. You just use the term ubiquitously to mean anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Astro

Speedracerntrixie is above answering any questions posed of him here if he feels he has been "mistreated" by whomever happens to pose the question, OR, if by answering said question, he knows he will directly contradict himself, or possibly tarnish his toy airplane expert status cred.

Astro

LOL, and you have failed to answer questions that I have asked of you. That's the whole issue with this forum. You, Astro, Hydro and a few others feel you have a higher degree of entitlement then others. Guess what Commander? YOU DON'T.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...3e5fe864a6.png
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...3ad6078a54.png

This is just golden! Speedracerntrixie logic at its finest!

There is no data to support that driving 20 MPH in a school zone is going to prevent any collision between a car and a child either, so I think I'll just drive as fast as pleases me!

Narcissistic much?

Astro

Speed,

Is propworn a troll?

Are you a troll?

Or only those who disagree with you?

Astro

There is definitely an ‘arbitrariness’ to 400’, when the better solution would be to chart fixed sites (just like glider ports and drop zones).

My point (which I think you agree with) is that, if you were cited for exceeding 400’, the response would be “prove it” (which I would agree with as well).

I have personally appeared in court for a ‘75 in 60’, and left with no violation or fine, because the officer (the ‘proof’) did not appear. The same principal would apply here, because the FAA has no ‘proof’.

As you and I have brought up before as well, there is also the safety argument. Reminds me of the old adage “altitude is safety and speed is life”.

R_Strowe

More trolling evidence.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...6e6835af22.png
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...a177b5b672.png
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...110942733a.png

By the way, Speed, I love that first screenshot. If more people followed that these boards would actually become a respected place for information and debate.

R_Strowe

Utterly stupid comparison. Why not quote my entire statement? Why cherry pick to fit your narrative? Since you love your FACTS......You have been tagged as a troll by moderation....FACT!

I agree. The problem is that Astro is going to attack anything I say, that's what trolls do. If I allow him to continue it steps on my freedom of speech. That is unacceptable. If he doesn't like what I have to say he should just ignore it. If he wants to debate then do so like an adult. Following me into other forums to derail my advise is not only disrespectful to me but the fellow modeler seeking help. Quite childish behavior.

Poor analogy. A better one would be is it safer to do 60mph in the left lane of the highway when the rest of the traffic is going much faster (say 75mph+)

R_Strowe

PS: The answer is no, it is actually creating a more dangerous situation. And no cop or court in the land is going to cite you for ‘moving with the traffic’.

:eek: Speed , please take a step back and realize what you just did .... You just posted the content of Jester's PRIVATE message to you in open forum !!!! Is "winning" an argument here really THAT important to you that you would betray a man's words that were spoken in private ? I got a quick news flash for ya here ; You didn't win ANYTHING , instead you just lost , big time , because whether Jester thinks Franklin is a troll or not , you just lost the trust of your allies by exposing their private correspondence to the public in a desperate attempt to bolster your point !

I kept the pertinent information needed to make my logical point. That's why. Read the words. Words matter. The logic you used in that post was flawed whether your whole post was quoted or not. The logic you used in that post is EXACTLY the same logic I used in the scenario I presented, it just didn't suit YOUR narrative, just like about everything else you post here. Read the words. Words have meaning.

Not fact. You can screen shot all you want. Context, context, context.

For instance, your screenshot showing where I asked the moderator for clarification of what rules were broken went unanswered except for the same reply you received, stating that it is best not to post when it might provoke an emotional response. By reporting every post you do not like, you force moderation to get involved, where they probably wouldn't bother otherwise.

More context. The screenshot you show where I made a seemingly left-field comment was in a thread where the OP had already complained how your off-topic and unsolicited responses were out of line.

Astro

READ THE FREAKING WORDS people!!!!

My analogy was WORD FOR WORD to Speedy's justification for flying over 400'.

Don't let your personal beliefs and feelings get in the way of the words and the facts.

Astro

Do you mind clarifying JUST WHERE I HAVE EVER SHOWN THAT I FEEL I'M ENTITLED? Just because I was flight time away from getting my General Aviation pilot's license several years ago and, like Franklin, spent several years working on Navy aircraft both ashore and afloat and NOW I make sure those building commercial aircraft know how to do their jobs so that the planes you could be flying on are actually safe to fly on(that is when management stays out of the way) DOESN'T MAKE ME FEEL THAT I'M ENTITLED. I could say, and be correct, that I grew up and have spent a majority of my life in aviation. I ALSO DON'T CLAIM TO BE ENTITLED TO BREAK LAWS BECAUSE THEY ARE INCONVENIENT.

;) With all due respect Captain Strowe , I can tell you've never driven in Massachusetts !

Here , it is not uncommon for the police to stop an entire highway full of cars for speeding , and ticket every single one of them . The one time it happened to me I was riding a motorcycle and contested the ticket in court . My excuse to the judge was your exact words , I was moving with the flow of traffic , which didn't seem to engender any sympathy at all till I explained to him that I was on a motorcycle , and that if in traffic situations like that you focus more on your speedometer than on the road/traffic dynamic , you will end up dead . The judge liked my argument and found me not guilty of speeding even though I was likely going well over the posted limit . Here in lovely Taxachusetts the cops cut NO one a break and if your gonna get one , it'll be from the judge if ya tell him a reasonable enough story , as I did that day :)