Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
09-30-2008, 06:26 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lewis Center, OH
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
I would like to know your position on FPV (First Person Video) flying and how it may (or may not) be integrated into the AMA. Currently based on the rules this type of "flying by video" AKA "Video Piloting" is not allowed, but there are discussions of adopting rules to allow this type of flying. (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=911761)
09-30-2008, 04:00 PM
#2
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
My position is we need to ensure our AMA Safety Code maintains a safe flying environment for us while, at the same time, does not inhibit the growth of this new and exciting technology. I do not think we can, nor should we, try to regulate technology. I foresee a merging of our present radio technology with the UAS in the not too distant future. Just last month, our President, Dave Mathewson and I met with the President and CEO of Hobby Lobby, Jay Graves and his Director of Sales, Jason Cole to discuss this very subject. Both gentlemen are very supportive of AMA and want to ensure their product is in compliance with AMA. In short, the AMA Safety Committee is addressing the FPV. I feel confident we will have, at a minimum, the requirement for an observer when using FPV and that the model will not be flown outside the standard boundaries of the flying site.
Mark
Mark
10-01-2008, 06:42 AM
#3
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
ORIGINAL: marktsmith
My position is we need to ensure our AMA Safety Code maintains a safe flying environment for us while, at the same time, does not inhibit the growth of this new and exciting technology. I do not think we can, nor should we, try to regulate technology. I foresee a merging of our present radio technology with the UAS in the not too distant future. Just last month, our President, Dave Mathewson and I met with the President and CEO of Hobby Lobby, Jay Graves and his Director of Sales, Jason Cole to discuss this very subject. Both gentlemen are very supportive of AMA and want to ensure their product is in compliance with AMA. In short, the AMA Safety Committee is addressing the FPV. I feel confident we will have, at a minimum, the requirement for an observer when using FPV and that the model will not be flown outside the standard boundaries of the flying site.
Mark
My position is we need to ensure our AMA Safety Code maintains a safe flying environment for us while, at the same time, does not inhibit the growth of this new and exciting technology. I do not think we can, nor should we, try to regulate technology. I foresee a merging of our present radio technology with the UAS in the not too distant future. Just last month, our President, Dave Mathewson and I met with the President and CEO of Hobby Lobby, Jay Graves and his Director of Sales, Jason Cole to discuss this very subject. Both gentlemen are very supportive of AMA and want to ensure their product is in compliance with AMA. In short, the AMA Safety Committee is addressing the FPV. I feel confident we will have, at a minimum, the requirement for an observer when using FPV and that the model will not be flown outside the standard boundaries of the flying site.
Mark
I do not believe with this kind of safety net as well as the perameters you stated that any current AMA rules would be violated as primary control is still in the hands of a pilot with eyes on the plane.
Do you agree/disagree?
Thank you, Phil
10-01-2008, 07:29 AM
#4
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
Phil, per my previous posting, this issue is currently under consideration by the Safety Committee which is comprised of several talented and dedicated modelers. I support the committee structure process and want to review their recommendations and accompanying rationale before I offer my opinion because I simply do not have all the facts.
Mark
Mark
10-01-2008, 08:29 PM
#5
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lewis Center, OH
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
Obviously everyone has opinions about what is or is not safe, and the question about using a spotter with the master trainer box has been brought up as a potential way to be "ok" based on the current rules.
In my opinion, requiring a spotter or buddy box is a deal killer for me and a lot of other people. The guidelines suggested here I think are good one's: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=911761
I believe the safety committee is aware of those recommended guidelines written by those who understand that aspect of the hobby well, but if you have direct contact with those on the committee please forward that information to them.
Because of the current restrictions, I've done very little flying at AMA fields this year, maybe only four or five times. It really isn't worth it for me to pay AMA dues and club dues and not be able to use the field. I'm seriously considering not renewing this year.
IMHO the AMA needs to agressively fight the FAA regarding new restrictions (in committe AND legally if necessary). When we accept the premise that we have to give up more rights just to make people feel comfortable, then we might as well just lie down and let the goverment run every part of our lives. I'll get off my soapbox now.
Tim Stanfield
AMA 874660
In my opinion, requiring a spotter or buddy box is a deal killer for me and a lot of other people. The guidelines suggested here I think are good one's: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=911761
I believe the safety committee is aware of those recommended guidelines written by those who understand that aspect of the hobby well, but if you have direct contact with those on the committee please forward that information to them.
Because of the current restrictions, I've done very little flying at AMA fields this year, maybe only four or five times. It really isn't worth it for me to pay AMA dues and club dues and not be able to use the field. I'm seriously considering not renewing this year.
IMHO the AMA needs to agressively fight the FAA regarding new restrictions (in committe AND legally if necessary). When we accept the premise that we have to give up more rights just to make people feel comfortable, then we might as well just lie down and let the goverment run every part of our lives. I'll get off my soapbox now.
Tim Stanfield
AMA 874660
10-02-2008, 10:35 AM
#6
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
Tim, thank you for your comments which I have forwarded to our Safety Committee. Please rest assured, no informed modeler wants more FAA oversight and thus, we have our best and brightest working on this.
Mark
Mark
10-02-2008, 01:31 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fairfax,
VA
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Position on FPV (First Person Video) Flying
Mark,
I believe the rules we have posted over on RCG have been submitted to the safety committee. I know as a fact I handed a copy over to Rich Hanson when I met him in DC. Plus I believe Bob Underwood and David Gee have an electronic copy of the proposed guidelines... If you have questions I'm sure you can contact them regarding our efforts.
I believe the rules we have posted over on RCG have been submitted to the safety committee. I know as a fact I handed a copy over to Rich Hanson when I met him in DC. Plus I believe Bob Underwood and David Gee have an electronic copy of the proposed guidelines... If you have questions I'm sure you can contact them regarding our efforts.
