Go Back  RCU Forums > Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more > The Clubhouse
Reload this Page >

Hows this for ya??? I TOLD YA!!!!

Notices
The Clubhouse If it doesn't fit in any other category and is about general RC stuff then post it here at the Clubhouse.

Hows this for ya??? I TOLD YA!!!!

Old 04-13-2016, 02:58 PM
  #1  
cublover
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (47)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sparks, NV
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Hows this for ya??? I TOLD YA!!!!

EVERYBODY SAID,,,WHATS THE BIG DEAL..JUST PAY THE 5$... WELLLLLL, DUMMIES..HERE YA GO.... more laws to come.... government get there hands into everything...and you back them...AMA,, you should be ashamed of yourselves... you should have fought this better !!!!
Now the government needs to make sure ALL of us can build...holy hell!! congrats dummies !!!



AMA Member Call to Action
Dear AMA members,

The U.S. Senate is currently considering amendments to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Re-authorization Act of 2016. We need your help today to ensure this proposed legislation fully protects the model aircraft community.

Click here now to urge your Senators to support Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596 to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016.

As you know, we are pleased that the Senate's proposed legislation preserves a community-based approach to managing the recreational community by maintaining the Special Rule for Model Aircraft. However, at the same time, we are concerned with additional provisions in this bill that could detrimentally impact our community.

These new provisions would require all UAS, including model aircraft, to meet new FAA design and production standards and impose unnecessary regulation on hobbyists who often build their own models at home. The bill also requires modelers to obtain permission from air traffic control when flying within 5 miles of towered airports which could jeopardize hundreds of existing flying sites. And if passed, the bill would require model aircraft enthusiasts to take an online FAA safety test and carry proof of passing the test when flying. These new directives would undermine the model aircraft activity and detract from the creativity, innovation and enjoyment of the hobby.

By supporting Senator Inhofe's amendment number 3596, you can help stop this from happening. This critical amendment would maintain the basic intent of the Senate's proposed legislation, while lessening the negative impact on the model aircraft community.

As always, thank you for your support of AMA and your efforts to protect our community.

Sincerely,
AMA Government Affairs
Old 04-13-2016, 03:01 PM
  #2  
cublover
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (47)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sparks, NV
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

....maybe its time to go back to being an "outlaw"!!! This is how crap goes when I join an organization to help out the hobby...I just helped us into more regulation...unreal...I revoke my AMA registration...!! I'll fly out in the middle of nowhere...
Old 04-13-2016, 05:19 PM
  #3  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cublover View Post
....maybe its time to go back to being an "outlaw"!!! This is how crap goes when I join an organization to help out the hobby...I just helped us into more regulation...unreal...I revoke my AMA registration...!! I'll fly out in the middle of nowhere...
How exactly should the MA have "fought this better"? Do you have specifics? Do you think it might be a bit difficult for an organization with 150,000 paying members to somehow force the federal government to change what they were/are going to do?
Old 04-14-2016, 09:48 AM
  #4  
The Saylors
 
The Saylors's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Tacoma, Wa
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Ya I'm real tired of uncle sam putting his nose were it really doesn't belong. it seems to be a trend in this country to punish the masses when really you should just be punishing the offenders. There will always be an idiot in a group of enthusiasts, beat that guy up instead of the rest of us. This crap upsets me and i haven't flown an rc plain in over a decade! I was considering getting a foolishly expensive follow drone for filming us on our moto cross track but forget that. The last thing that i wanna deal with is someone telling me how i can use my property and or toys.
Old 04-18-2016, 05:16 AM
  #5  
topspin
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

All of the government backlash is being fueled by acts like this one.

https://gma.yahoo.com/british-airway...opstories.html#

The problem is that all of the government regulations can't do anything about incidents like these because you can't legislate away stupid. Idiots are going to be idiots and do idiotic things no matter what kind of laws get passed.
Old 04-18-2016, 01:11 PM
  #6  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
All of the government backlash is being fueled by acts like this one.

https://gma.yahoo.com/british-airway...opstories.html#

The problem is that all of the government regulations can't do anything about incidents like these because you can't legislate away stupid. Idiots are going to be idiots and do idiotic things no matter what kind of laws get passed.
I don't know that what is happening in another country is really having any affect on what we do here, especially when it's just a "might have happened" sort of thing. Some of the reports are already saying "might have", and there isn't any proof it was a drone. Regardless, you are right in regards to being unable to make a law for every silly/stupid/unsafe thing people will do. There will always be someone who breaks the law.
Old 04-18-2016, 08:34 PM
  #7  
skylark-flier
 
skylark-flier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, Luray
Posts: 2,146
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

"after a suspected drone hit the plane as it headed"

"Police said the pilot reported that he thought an object, apparently a drone, had struck the front of the aircraft."

Any actual PROOF of a "drone" strike? Any drone wreckage found? Anyone actually SEE this "drone"? He "thought" something MIGHT have hit his plane?

I'm no kind of drone advocate but I think the above are valid questions. What I see is a totally unsubstantiated claim - nothing more.
Old 04-19-2016, 08:14 AM
  #8  
topspin
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Airline pilots are exceptionally observant individuals when it comes to flying objects. Almost all of them have hit a bird or birds at one time or another and they know exactly what the looks like and sounds like. If the pilots reported they may have hit a drone then they certainly hit something that was not a bird and you can bet a balloon would not make a sound.

I am fairly convinced that it was some idiot flying a quad copter trying to get some really *****en video of a close encounter with an airliner. In spit of my feelings on the subject I'm open to suggestions as to what else it might be.
Old 04-19-2016, 09:35 AM
  #9  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
All of the government backlash is being fueled by acts like this one.

https://gma.yahoo.com/british-airway...opstories.html#

The problem is that all of the government regulations can't do anything about incidents like these because you can't legislate away stupid. Idiots are going to be idiots and do idiotic things no matter what kind of laws get passed.
IMO that one was a bird or bogus. No damage to the plane no evidence of a drone.
Old 04-19-2016, 09:40 AM
  #10  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
Airline pilots are exceptionally observant individuals when it comes to flying objects. Almost all of them have hit a bird or birds at one time or another and they know exactly what the looks like and sounds like. If the pilots reported they may have hit a drone then they certainly hit something that was not a bird and you can bet a balloon would not make a sound.

I am fairly convinced that it was some idiot flying a quad copter trying to get some really *****en video of a close encounter with an airliner. In spit of my feelings on the subject I'm open to suggestions as to what else it might be.
Like the pilots that made all of the UFO reports in the past? Or the pilots who thought the engine's were out when actually the pilot had pulled the throttle back and put a 747 into a tail spin. Or the pilot who thought the auto pilot was engaged and the plane went totally off course when he went to the restroom and the co pilot didn't even notice. How about the one that wandered into soviet airspace an got shot down?

The point is that pilots are human and make mistakes, sometimes huge mistakes. The fact is the pilot never said he hit a drone, he said he THOUGHT he hit a drone. In other words he really did not know.

IMO 90% of drone sightings are bogus. It's the modern version of UFO sightings.

Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 04-19-2016 at 09:45 AM.
Old 04-19-2016, 01:22 PM
  #11  
topspin
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sterling, VA
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
IMO that one was a bird or bogus. No damage to the plane no evidence of a drone.
That's not accurate, there was damage but not deemed serious enough to warrant grounding the airplane.
Old 04-19-2016, 01:29 PM
  #12  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
That's not accurate, there was damage but not deemed serious enough to warrant grounding the airplane.
That's not accurate according to the story you linked to.

The plane "was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight," British Airways said.

Where was the damage?
Old 04-19-2016, 07:47 PM
  #13  
skylark-flier
 
skylark-flier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, Luray
Posts: 2,146
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Where did you see that? The articles I read said no damage.
Old 04-19-2016, 07:54 PM
  #14  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
That's not accurate, there was damage but not deemed serious enough to warrant grounding the airplane.
.
I saw nothing to indicate any damage at all.
Old 04-20-2016, 02:17 AM
  #15  
dingo9882
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sandy Hook, CT
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry everybody....I have to say this. Instead of us debating about what really happened with all of the reports or the could have, would have, and should have comments, here is the important question: What do we do now??? What steps and legal actions are at our disposal to hinder, or prevent this vote legally? Instead of us whining and writing to our elected officials (If your in CT....they don't listen anyway...just like any other state, in which you get an automated response back). Because the last time I checked, we are not protected under the Constitution to fly our model airplane. Seriously......this is an actual question for the real lawyers in the room....what can we do? If you said to me that if we took some of our money....sort of like a class action lawsuit....I would do it. That is how much this hobby means to me. I see what they do to our Second Amendment rights here is CT.....and that a protected right....just look what they are doing to this and it is not a right....
Old 04-20-2016, 03:19 AM
  #16  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dingo9882 View Post
Sorry everybody....I have to say this. Instead of us debating about what really happened with all of the reports or the could have, would have, and should have comments, here is the important question: What do we do now??? What steps and legal actions are at our disposal to hinder, or prevent this vote legally? Instead of us whining and writing to our elected officials (If your in CT....they don't listen anyway...just like any other state, in which you get an automated response back). Because the last time I checked, we are not protected under the Constitution to fly our model airplane. Seriously......this is an actual question for the real lawyers in the room....what can we do? If you said to me that if we took some of our money....sort of like a class action lawsuit....I would do it. That is how much this hobby means to me. I see what they do to our Second Amendment rights here is CT.....and that a protected right....just look what they are doing to this and it is not a right....
The 9th Amendment gives us the right to fly our model airplanes. The only thing that could possibly overrule that is the commerce clause.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti.../9th+Amendment
Old 04-20-2016, 11:08 AM
  #17  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dingo9882 View Post
Sorry everybody....I have to say this. Instead of us debating about what really happened with all of the reports or the could have, would have, and should have comments, here is the important question: What do we do now??? What steps and legal actions are at our disposal to hinder, or prevent this vote legally? Instead of us whining and writing to our elected officials (If your in CT....they don't listen anyway...just like any other state, in which you get an automated response back). Because the last time I checked, we are not protected under the Constitution to fly our model airplane. Seriously......this is an actual question for the real lawyers in the room....what can we do? If you said to me that if we took some of our money....sort of like a class action lawsuit....I would do it. That is how much this hobby means to me. I see what they do to our Second Amendment rights here is CT.....and that a protected right....just look what they are doing to this and it is not a right....
There are certainly no shortage of gunshops in CT, and all of them are doing gangbusters in terms of sales. Head over the Hoffman's in Newington on any Saturday or Sunday and watch the police directing traffic in and out of the parking lot it's so busy. You're right though, there is no specific constitutional right to fly your airplane, and to take it one step further you have some restrictions on what you can do with your plane as it might fly in the national airspace. I get the dismay in having the FAA involved in our hobby, but technology has sort of brought that to be, and I for one don't want any company out there flying over my head without some rules and regs in play.

What can you do? Continue to go and fly and have fun. Promote the hobby by interacting with the public in a positive manner. Write your representatives and let them know what your position in on the undue burden that is proposed on our hobby. You can also make donations to the AMA and earmark that donation for lobbying efforts.
Old 04-22-2016, 01:36 PM
  #18  
RC Pilot 007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

maybe game over
Old 04-23-2016, 05:15 AM
  #19  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by topspin View Post
That's not accurate, there was damage but not deemed serious enough to warrant grounding the airplane.
Was the damage caused by the plastic grocery bag?
Old 04-25-2016, 07:27 AM
  #20  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

There was no damage. just a figment.
Old 04-25-2016, 12:17 PM
  #21  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
There was no damage. just a figment.
Yup, exactly. Not hearing to much from the folks that were up in arms about this back when it was a "drone strike" either.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.