AMA says, "Wait to register"
12-21-2015, 05:41 PM
#178
My Feedback: (2)
"& it keeps the FAA from Doing a lot worse to us"
What makes you think it would keep the FAA from doing anything else? They seem to think they have unlimited powers. Lets say that everyone who is a normal RC flyer registers their plane. Yet in spite of that things still happen.. maybe even worse things.. Do you think for one minute that the Regulators will say. "oh well we have this program in place so nothing else should be done".
A silly notion.
What makes you think it would keep the FAA from doing anything else? They seem to think they have unlimited powers. Lets say that everyone who is a normal RC flyer registers their plane. Yet in spite of that things still happen.. maybe even worse things.. Do you think for one minute that the Regulators will say. "oh well we have this program in place so nothing else should be done".
A silly notion.
12-21-2015, 05:53 PM
#179
Guys & Gals,
Registration was a piece of cake, no big deal! If the requirement gets canned later I can just throw the card away. It cost nothing! Let the AMA do battle, meanwhile I can fly without any second thoughts!
Happy Flying!
Bullseye52
Registration was a piece of cake, no big deal! If the requirement gets canned later I can just throw the card away. It cost nothing! Let the AMA do battle, meanwhile I can fly without any second thoughts!
Happy Flying!
Bullseye52
12-21-2015, 06:01 PM
#180
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lynchburg, Va.
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of people do the stupid irresponsible things they do so they have something "sensational" to post on Facebook or YouTube trying to garner attention. I would hate to be one of the first few to be busted by the FAA for flagrant violations to the posted rules which could have the potential to cause some sort of major disaster. I think that the FAA will make examples out of them, jail time and extremely large fines will be .forthcoming with major press conferences to the mainstream media so the word gets out.
The biggest weapon in the FAA's arsenal is peoples fear of the consequences of stupid, reckless or irresponsible behavior. Then of coarse you still have those who are not bright enough to comprehend that.
The biggest weapon in the FAA's arsenal is peoples fear of the consequences of stupid, reckless or irresponsible behavior. Then of coarse you still have those who are not bright enough to comprehend that.
12-21-2015, 07:08 PM
#181
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Hi Scale , 
In my area , the 5 second news blurb that counts for coverage of this has it correct that drones gotta register , but not a single news outlet has once mentioned that this also affects ALL flying things above 1/2 pound , drone or not . And the AMA ? 99.9999 percent of the public still thinks that's the American Medical Association , and have never not once heard speak of the Academy of Model Aeronautics during the oh so brief few seconds the news outlets have (or really should i say haven't) devoted to this .
12-21-2015, 07:25 PM
#182
My Feedback: (23)
I have also registered. A Painless experience. No questions about type of air craft. Now I have a number and piece of mind. One of my clubs has a 400 ft rule now and they are a Giant Scale plane club. IMAC and 3D flying. I just need to get an altimeter now!
12-21-2015, 07:30 PM
#183
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lynchburg, Va.
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You also have the American Motorcyclist Association which has overseen Pro motorcycle motocross offroad and roadracing in the USA under the same AMA moniker for 40+ years. They would really be better served to consider a name change that would be unique to them and them alone to gain name recognition.
12-21-2015, 09:10 PM
#184
"& it keeps the FAA from Doing a lot worse to us"
What makes you think it would keep the FAA from doing anything else? They seem to think they have unlimited powers. Lets say that everyone who is a normal RC flyer registers their plane. Yet in spite of that things still happen.. maybe even worse things.. Do you think for one minute that the Regulators will say. "oh well we have this program in place so nothing else should be done".
A silly notion.
What makes you think it would keep the FAA from doing anything else? They seem to think they have unlimited powers. Lets say that everyone who is a normal RC flyer registers their plane. Yet in spite of that things still happen.. maybe even worse things.. Do you think for one minute that the Regulators will say. "oh well we have this program in place so nothing else should be done".
A silly notion.
12-21-2015, 09:12 PM
#185
Well, after an hour and a half, trying various things, I still cannot get registered. I have login set up, have been able sometimes to get my profile information stored, and one time got to where I could enter my credit card info, but could never get to the last step of getting my number. I was using Firefox, then tried IE, but no go. Closed and re-opened browser windows, tried everything I could but even when I can get part way through, it just hangs up, sometimes with error messages from the site saying a token is missing, frequently Firefox says that the redirection will not go to a valid address. Shades of Obamacare! No problems with any other websites.
Will go have a beer or two, then try again tomorrow.
Will go have a beer or two, then try again tomorrow.
I had pretty much the same problems - darn site kept telling me it didn't support my browsers (latest Firefox & IE). Ended up downloading Chrome (I hate that browser) and then got it through on the first try.
12-21-2015, 09:21 PM
#186
Wouldn't that be fun?
12-21-2015, 10:37 PM
#187
At this point altimeters are not required I say unless you want for your own personal info I would not get one, And don't give the clubs any ideas as I don't think clubs should be trying enforce such rules.
12-22-2015, 03:50 AM
#188
IMO, if AMA is going to win it's argument in court regarding the FAA's interpretation of PL112-95 section 336, then it comes down to two points:
(1) Under 49 USC, the FAA was granted authority to regulate "aircraft." And in 49 USC 40102(a)(6), it unambiguously states that "aircraft means any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air [emphasis added]."It seems that for the AMA to prevail, then they have to somehow demonstrate that "model aircraft" are in fact NOT "a contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air."
(2) Section 336 does mention CBOs and may provide some additional operational latitude not to conflict with the fundamental authority of the FAA as defined above. Of note though, despite claims about what is possible under the programming of a CBO, to date the AMA has not been formally recognized as one by the FAA despite the AMA's letter requesting it. Therefore, no such latitude exists yet as there are no CBOs designated.
I'm no lawyer, but I do have some experience writing and implementing public policy and specifically policy governing aviation and law enforcement, and having that language reviewed by government lawyers. It will be interesting to see if the AMA prevails in front of the federal court; I think it will likely fail based on a plain language reading of point (1) above. There is simply no way that I can see how AMA can argue that model aircraft do not meet that definition.
Based on my opinion that AMA will not prevail for reason (1) above, and thinking FAA may well never recognize them as a CBO in light of their actions, I registered yesterday.
(1) Under 49 USC, the FAA was granted authority to regulate "aircraft." And in 49 USC 40102(a)(6), it unambiguously states that "aircraft means any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air [emphasis added]."It seems that for the AMA to prevail, then they have to somehow demonstrate that "model aircraft" are in fact NOT "a contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air."
(2) Section 336 does mention CBOs and may provide some additional operational latitude not to conflict with the fundamental authority of the FAA as defined above. Of note though, despite claims about what is possible under the programming of a CBO, to date the AMA has not been formally recognized as one by the FAA despite the AMA's letter requesting it. Therefore, no such latitude exists yet as there are no CBOs designated.
I'm no lawyer, but I do have some experience writing and implementing public policy and specifically policy governing aviation and law enforcement, and having that language reviewed by government lawyers. It will be interesting to see if the AMA prevails in front of the federal court; I think it will likely fail based on a plain language reading of point (1) above. There is simply no way that I can see how AMA can argue that model aircraft do not meet that definition.
Based on my opinion that AMA will not prevail for reason (1) above, and thinking FAA may well never recognize them as a CBO in light of their actions, I registered yesterday.
Last edited by franklin_m; 12-22-2015 at 04:18 AM.
12-22-2015, 04:48 AM
#189
Hi Scale , In my area , the 5 second news blurb that counts for coverage of this has it correct that drones gotta register , but not a single news outlet has once mentioned that this also affects ALL flying things above 1/2 pound , drone or not . And the AMA ? 99.9999 percent of the public still thinks that's the American Medical Association , and have never not once heard speak of the Academy of Model Aeronautics during the oh so brief few seconds the news outlets have (or really should i say haven't) devoted to this .
12-22-2015, 05:08 AM
#190
12-22-2015, 05:10 AM
#192
IMO, if AMA is going to win it's argument in court regarding the FAA's interpretation of PL112-95 section 336, then it comes down to two points:
(1) Under 49 USC, the FAA was granted authority to regulate "aircraft." And in 49 USC 40102(a)(6), it unambiguously states that "aircraft means any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air [emphasis added]."It seems that for the AMA to prevail, then they have to somehow demonstrate that "model aircraft" are in fact NOT "a contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air."
(2) Section 336 does mention CBOs and may provide some additional operational latitude not to conflict with the fundamental authority of the FAA as defined above. Of note though, despite claims about what is possible under the programming of a CBO, to date the AMA has not been formally recognized as one by the FAA despite the AMA's letter requesting it. Therefore, no such latitude exists yet as there are no CBOs designated.
I'm no lawyer, but I do have some experience writing and implementing public policy and specifically policy governing aviation and law enforcement, and having that language reviewed by government lawyers. It will be interesting to see if the AMA prevails in front of the federal court, I think it will likely fail based on a plain language reading of point (1) above. There is simply no way that I can see how AMA can argue that model aircraft do not meet that definition.
(1) Under 49 USC, the FAA was granted authority to regulate "aircraft." And in 49 USC 40102(a)(6), it unambiguously states that "aircraft means any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air [emphasis added]."It seems that for the AMA to prevail, then they have to somehow demonstrate that "model aircraft" are in fact NOT "a contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air."
(2) Section 336 does mention CBOs and may provide some additional operational latitude not to conflict with the fundamental authority of the FAA as defined above. Of note though, despite claims about what is possible under the programming of a CBO, to date the AMA has not been formally recognized as one by the FAA despite the AMA's letter requesting it. Therefore, no such latitude exists yet as there are no CBOs designated.
I'm no lawyer, but I do have some experience writing and implementing public policy and specifically policy governing aviation and law enforcement, and having that language reviewed by government lawyers. It will be interesting to see if the AMA prevails in front of the federal court, I think it will likely fail based on a plain language reading of point (1) above. There is simply no way that I can see how AMA can argue that model aircraft do not meet that definition.
Read paragraph (b)(1) the rest only applies per that paragraph.
From USC 49 40103.
(b)Use of Airspace.— (1) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall develop plans and policy for the use of the navigable airspace and assign by regulation or order the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. The Administrator may modify or revoke an assignment when required in the public interest.
(2) The Administrator shall prescribe air traffic regulations on the flight of aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for— (A) navigating, protecting, and identifying aircraft;
(B) protecting individuals and property on the ground;
(C) using the navigable airspace efficiently; and
(D) preventing collision between aircraft, between aircraft and land or water vehicles, and between aircraft and airborne objects.
(3) To establish security provisions that will encourage and allow maximum use of the navigable airspace by civil aircraft consistent with national security, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall— (A) establish areas in the airspace the Administrator decides are necessary in the interest of national defense; and
(B) by regulation or order, restrict or prohibit flight of civil aircraft that the Administrator cannot identify, locate, and control with available facilities in those areas.
(4) Notwithstanding the military exception in section 553(a)(1) of title 5, subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5 applies to a regulation prescribed under this subsection.
(2) The Administrator shall prescribe air traffic regulations on the flight of aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for— (A) navigating, protecting, and identifying aircraft;
(B) protecting individuals and property on the ground;
(C) using the navigable airspace efficiently; and
(D) preventing collision between aircraft, between aircraft and land or water vehicles, and between aircraft and airborne objects.
(3) To establish security provisions that will encourage and allow maximum use of the navigable airspace by civil aircraft consistent with national security, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall— (A) establish areas in the airspace the Administrator decides are necessary in the interest of national defense; and
(B) by regulation or order, restrict or prohibit flight of civil aircraft that the Administrator cannot identify, locate, and control with available facilities in those areas.
(4) Notwithstanding the military exception in section 553(a)(1) of title 5, subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5 applies to a regulation prescribed under this subsection.
They can only register aircraft that will fly in navigable airspace because they were only give authority for navigable airspace and protecting the navigable airspace.
12-22-2015, 05:12 AM
#193
12-22-2015, 05:14 AM
#194
12-22-2015, 05:30 AM
#196
Let me know how that works out. Even if you're right, which I do not think you are, they're doing it anyway and so far AMA has been ineffective in stopping them.
12-22-2015, 05:33 AM
#197
Anyone could do that now if they know where to look, Anyone who owns property has their info online,, so my name & address gets posted?? then what? You know how many strangers I've given my address to over the years?? It's in the 6-7 Hundreds that I've sold crap to or bought stuff from.
12-22-2015, 05:42 AM
#199
Actually though the FAA is headstrong in this case. The proposed drone regulation had an exception for model airplanes flown under the authority of a CBO. And it does not require reconition of the CBO to be effective.
12-22-2015, 05:44 AM
#200
No navigable airspace does not include the air below 1'000 feet in populated areas and 500 feet from people and structures in rural areas so wherever you stand there is a bubble of 500 feet of non-navigable airspace.