modelaircrafter

I think that MAAC, (Canada) and AMA (USA) should drop ALL "drone" and FPV and UAV, (BAN) and let those folks form their own organization. Let's see if they can get insurance coverage given the plethora of bad actors within their midst. Let's have the guys that love to see the vehicle IN FLIGHT as a part of their love of things that fly. JMHO.

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

What's old is new all over again.

I heard the same thing with helicopters became big.

Then again when giant scale 3D because en vouge

Fly within the rules, who cares what you're flying. Come to a club, get educated, be safe.

That's like restricting Corvettes because they can go too fast.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

That is a horrible analogy and is not the same whatsoever.

Astro

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

I agree, just about every time some new thing comes along there are plenty of guys that scream it's going to be the end of the hobby. Only thing different this time is the FAA has gotten involved. As much as I dislike BLOS and FPV banning them or excluding them makes as much sense as banning firearms.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

It's not about FPV flight being a, "new thing" and therefore a threat, it is about it being completely and fundamentally different from traditional flight and how it affects the NAS in a completely different manner, requiring completely different regulation. It simply doesn't fit the fundamental scope of what the AMA has been for so many decades. The back and forth narrative between AMA members that are "pro FPV" or "anti FPV" within the organization proves nothing and has been around for nearly a decade now. The proof is in the pudding; Millions of new drone operators have registered with the FAA, yet the AMA's membership has seen a decline. To me, that is organic proof of the distinct differences between FPV vehicles and their operators and traditional models and their respective operators.

Astro