FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
03-22-2011, 06:46 AM
#326
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: daven
Now I am stuck on Al Frankens spam mail list... No response to my letter, but I get to hear his own self promotion.
Now I am stuck on Al Frankens spam mail list... No response to my letter, but I get to hear his own self promotion.
03-22-2011, 07:50 AM
#327
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: lilburn,
GA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
I'm getting really sick and tired of hearing about this privilege not right crap. Nothing personal to the above author, but you sir have forgotten or have never understood what it is the founders of this republic had in mind for its citizens. I have a right (self evident and god given) to engage in just about any activity I see fit just so long as it does not pose undue harm to the property or risk to the safety of my fellow citizens. "It neither pics my pocket nor breaks my leg". Someone far wiser than most who will ever post on this forum not only retorted that quote when challenged by individuals such as you, but also had the good sence to note that "when the people fear their government there is tyranny, when the government fears its people there is liberty". This federal government and all of its associated bureaucracies no longer fear reprisal for undue harm brought upon the citizenry by their actions. This has become a government of fiat and edict ruled by an elite bureaucracy which is inclined to frequently end run around even the elected representatives of the people. (Let alone their constitutional rights). The FAA like most other bureacucracies today has 3 primary objectives directing it. 1- Justifying its existence. 2- Expanding the scope and depth of its perview. 3- last and least satisfying the requirements of its charter. The lesson I put forth here is that bureaucracy begets bureaucracy. We do NOT need a federal entity of any kind regulating us. End rant.
03-22-2011, 08:31 AM
#329
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
One might wish for what-isn't in the face of what-is. What we like to have is continued use as it-was granted thirty years ago. To wish for more is fine. To argue for sake of argument in the face of what-is only threatens further the status of what-is. Reality is too often a circumstance less appreciated until it is altered to less than "what-was". Then and only then can what-is be appreciated for what-was-once more than what-it-is at that point.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
03-22-2011, 08:36 AM
#330
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: Machinepro76
I'm getting really sick and tired of hearing about this privilege not right crap. Nothing personal to the above author, but you sir have forgotten or have never understood what it is the founders of this republic had in mind for its citizens. I have a right (self evident and god given) to engage in just about any activity I see fit just so long as it does not pose undue harm to the property or risk to the safety of my fellow citizens. ''It neither pics my pocket nor breaks my leg''. Someone far wiser than most who will ever post on this forum not only retorted that quote when challenged by individuals such as you, but also had the good sence to note that ''when the people fear their government there is tyranny, when the government fears its people there is liberty''. This federal government and all of its associated bureaucracies no longer fear reprisal for undue harm brought upon the citizenry by their actions. This has become a government of fiat and edict ruled by an elite bureaucracy which is inclined to frequently end run around even the elected representatives of the people. (Let alone their constitutional rights). The FAA like most other bureacucracies today has 3 primary objectives directing it. 1- Justifying its existence. 2- Expanding the scope and depth of its perview. 3- last and least satisfying the requirements of its charter. The lesson I put forth here is that bureaucracy begets bureaucracy. We do NOT need a federal entity of any kind regulating us. End rant.
I'm getting really sick and tired of hearing about this privilege not right crap. Nothing personal to the above author, but you sir have forgotten or have never understood what it is the founders of this republic had in mind for its citizens. I have a right (self evident and god given) to engage in just about any activity I see fit just so long as it does not pose undue harm to the property or risk to the safety of my fellow citizens. ''It neither pics my pocket nor breaks my leg''. Someone far wiser than most who will ever post on this forum not only retorted that quote when challenged by individuals such as you, but also had the good sence to note that ''when the people fear their government there is tyranny, when the government fears its people there is liberty''. This federal government and all of its associated bureaucracies no longer fear reprisal for undue harm brought upon the citizenry by their actions. This has become a government of fiat and edict ruled by an elite bureaucracy which is inclined to frequently end run around even the elected representatives of the people. (Let alone their constitutional rights). The FAA like most other bureacucracies today has 3 primary objectives directing it. 1- Justifying its existence. 2- Expanding the scope and depth of its perview. 3- last and least satisfying the requirements of its charter. The lesson I put forth here is that bureaucracy begets bureaucracy. We do NOT need a federal entity of any kind regulating us. End rant.
+1
03-22-2011, 08:45 AM
#331
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: FliteMetal
One might wish for what-isn't in the face of what-is. What we like to have is continued use as it-was granted thirty years ago. To wish for more is fine. To argue for sake of argument in the face of what-is only threatens further the status of what-is. Reality is too often a circumstance less appreciated until it is altered to less than ''what-was''. Then and only then can what-is be appreciated for what-was-once more than what-it-is at that point.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
One might wish for what-isn't in the face of what-is. What we like to have is continued use as it-was granted thirty years ago. To wish for more is fine. To argue for sake of argument in the face of what-is only threatens further the status of what-is. Reality is too often a circumstance less appreciated until it is altered to less than ''what-was''. Then and only then can what-is be appreciated for what-was-once more than what-it-is at that point.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
George
03-22-2011, 08:54 AM
#332
Junior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tyler,
TX
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
Any one else get the letter that the adminment to model aircraft passed?
|
03-22-2011, 09:03 AM
#333
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: STKNRUD
That depends on what ''what is'' is or what ''wasn't isn't''. I don't think we need to worry whether anyone is reading this thread! I need another cup of coffee.
George
ORIGINAL: FliteMetal
One might wish for what-isn't in the face of what-is. What we like to have is continued use as it-was granted thirty years ago. To wish for more is fine. To argue for sake of argument in the face of what-is only threatens further the status of what-is. Reality is too often a circumstance less appreciated until it is altered to less than ''what-was''. Then and only then can what-is be appreciated for what-was-once more than what-it-is at that point.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
One might wish for what-isn't in the face of what-is. What we like to have is continued use as it-was granted thirty years ago. To wish for more is fine. To argue for sake of argument in the face of what-is only threatens further the status of what-is. Reality is too often a circumstance less appreciated until it is altered to less than ''what-was''. Then and only then can what-is be appreciated for what-was-once more than what-it-is at that point.
Dialog and the freedom to maintain dialog are the ultimate what-is when reviewing that which at that time was perceived as acceptable or ignored, overlooked, mis-understood, and mis-represented. Ultimately, nothing is static, set in stone. You either participate in the process or suffer the consequence of what-is.
George
Marty
03-22-2011, 09:05 AM
#334
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: daven
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
03-22-2011, 09:07 AM
#335
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
I believe this speaks for the power of what-is with respect to what-is-desired and dialog required within the process to retain what-was as the most recent version of what-is. Beneath my most recent reply to John is his response to my original follow-up. As you
have already observed, John has composed a broadcast response to which I returned a personal reply urging him to exercise his
sphere of influence in the HOR to pass the bill as-it-is and further to receive the President's signature... amidst current affairs this
could very well get signed instead of vetoed.
Dear Senator Cornyn,
Thank you for your personal reply to my recent email relative to S. 223. Our continued use of the air space for recreational use is
important to over a million model airplane hobbyist who grow up to be 1:1 aviation enthusiasts if not actual pilots who in many cases
defend the freedom we enjoy.
Your continued support within your sphere of influence is greatly appreciated by all those who are aware of this continuing issue as it
is addressed in the House Of Representatives and further to the President's signature. I pray your sphere of influence crosses party
and the balance of Congress to effect acceptance of what is proposed in S. 223 such that it does not threaten recreational radio
control modeling.
Sincerely,
Wm. E. Clayman, Jr.
Houston, TX
- Original Message -
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:39 AM
Subject: Thank You For Contacting My Office
Dear Mr. Clayman Jr:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding model aircraft and the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act
(S. 223). I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important matter.
*As you may know, during Senate consideration of S. 223, Senator Inhofe proposed an amendment to exempt model aircraft used for
recreational, sport, competition or academic purposes from regulations or policies set forth by the FAA. I support common-sense
policies that relieve citizens of excessive and unnecessary regulation. You will be pleased to learn that Senator Inhofe's amendment
passed with unanimous support and was included in the Senate-passed version of S. 223.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov
03-22-2011, 09:22 AM
#338
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: YellowAircraft
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
ORIGINAL: daven
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
I agree with you that just because we disagree with a politicians point of view, doesn't mean we have to call them a moron and I probably disagree with Al Franken on the majority of his points of view I won't call him a moron for that. I will however call him a moron for thinking he could make a movie out an SNL character.
Marty
03-22-2011, 09:22 AM
#339
My Feedback: (10)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Las Vegas,
NV
Posts: 1,944
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
Why take a shot at me personally? Did I call anyone out? Nope...I just offered an opinion but it seems I struck a nerve. I guess if the shoe fits...
03-22-2011, 09:23 AM
#340
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: YellowAircraft
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
ORIGINAL: daven
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
Shawn,
Now you've gone to far. Not-withstanding your ever so self serving New Year's Resolution, I can provide some links here to some really insulting things you have called people you disagree with! What a hypocrite!
George
03-22-2011, 09:33 AM
#342
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: afterburner
Shaun,
I agree with you that just because we disagree with a politicians point of view, doesn't mean we have to call them a moron and I probably disagree with Al Franken on the majority of his points of view I won't call him a moron for that. I will however call him a moron for thinking he could make a movie out an SNL character.
Marty
ORIGINAL: YellowAircraft
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
ORIGINAL: daven
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
I agree with you that just because we disagree with a politicians point of view, doesn't mean we have to call them a moron and I probably disagree with Al Franken on the majority of his points of view I won't call him a moron for that. I will however call him a moron for thinking he could make a movie out an SNL character.
Marty
LOLOL!!!
Ok, touche! A friend and colleague of mine was in that movie, so I like I guess I kinda liked it for that reason. Otherwise, you got me.
03-22-2011, 09:36 AM
#343
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: InboundLZ
Why take a shot at me personally? Did I call anyone out? Nope...I just offered an opinion but it seems I struck a nerve. I guess if the shoe fits...
Why take a shot at me personally? Did I call anyone out? Nope...I just offered an opinion but it seems I struck a nerve. I guess if the shoe fits...
Oh puh-leeze.
I'm sure you weren't talking about anyone in particular, and I'm sure you meant it as a compliment....
Either way, don't take that so seriously. I doubt you remember, but we've actually met a couple of times and I thought you were a nice guy, so if it was a "shot", it was a bean-bag shot.
03-22-2011, 09:50 AM
#345
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: STKNRUD
Shawn,
Now you've gone to far. Not-withstanding your ever so self serving New Year's Resolution, I can provide some links here to some really insulting things you have called people you disagree with! What a hypocrite!
George
ORIGINAL: YellowAircraft
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
ORIGINAL: daven
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
yeah I can block it to my spam folder, but would rather complain about the moron
Yep,
That's the kind of thing I was talking about. Why does the guy have to be called a moron? What makes him a moron, other than disagreeing with you politically? Has someone rewritten the definition of 'moron?' I can think of a few negative things I could say about the man, but he's nobody's moron. He's a pretty talented writer who has donated a great deal of time/effort and money to the USO (a charitable organization whose mission and purpose is pretty noble if you ask me). I realize that in the current political climate, the anti-intellectualism movement has taken a foot-hold so maybe a Magna Cum Laude from Harvard makes a guy more moronic than not, but honestly the name-calling, insults and total disregard for anything good a person ever did in their life if they disagree with you politically is getting really old.
Shawn,
Now you've gone to far. Not-withstanding your ever so self serving New Year's Resolution, I can provide some links here to some really insulting things you have called people you disagree with! What a hypocrite!
George
George,
Be my guest. My resolution doesn't really serve me alone, but don't let that stop you from calling it 'self-serving.' Your [improper] use of 'notwithstanding' doesn't disqualify anything. I really am trying to see past peoples' ideologies and instead see the whole picture (which is usually far better than the snapshot you might get from the divisive labels we use nowadays). Anyway, I don't usually insult people simply for disagreeing with me. There's usually more to the discussion than that
Anyway, you don't have a whole lot of credibility with me since that whole '...I don't agree with you on absolutely anything, no matter what..' comment. I sent you a whole laundry list of things I bet we agree on, but I mysteriously never heard back... Either you didn't have what it takes to admit you were wrong, or you didn't want to face the fact that you might have spoken too soon when you labeled me.
Back to Congress for a moment: My guess is that our hobby, as we know it, will remain almost completely unchanged by government regs. We've done the right thing for the most part in making ourselves heard through the JPO, AMA and the letter campaign.
03-22-2011, 10:00 AM
#346
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
Shawn,
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
03-22-2011, 10:25 AM
#347
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: STKNRUD
Shawn,
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
Shawn,
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
And with that little epistle of perspicacity, I'll assume we can agree to disagree (because I really don't think pointing out an error is an attack any more than asking a candidate for high office to name a Supreme Court decision other than Roe V. Wade is a conspiracy...)
03-22-2011, 10:32 AM
#348
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: YellowAircraft
And with that little epistle of perspicacity, I'll assume we can agree to disagree (because I really don't think pointing out an error is an attack any more than asking a candidate for high office to name a Supreme Court decision other than Roe V. Wade is a conspiracy...)
ORIGINAL: STKNRUD
Shawn,
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
Shawn,
Thanks for the lesson in word use. I guess that attack falls outside your New Years' Resolution. I really don't care what credibility I have with you Shawn, but calling some out for insulting congressmen, etc is like Charles Manson saying we should stop the killing.
George
And with that little epistle of perspicacity, I'll assume we can agree to disagree (because I really don't think pointing out an error is an attack any more than asking a candidate for high office to name a Supreme Court decision other than Roe V. Wade is a conspiracy...)
Gosh darn, ain't I impressed. I guess you win. I am going flying!
George
03-22-2011, 10:53 AM
#349
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Haltom,
TX
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
Guys: Let's put this to bed right now. Here is my senators response.
Dear Mr. Williams:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding model aircraft and the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act (S. 223). I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important matter.
As you may know, during Senate consideration of S. 223, Senator Inhofe proposed an amendment to exempt model aircraft used for recreational, sport, competition or academic purposes from regulations or policies set forth by the FAA. I support common-sense policies that relieve citizens of excessive and unnecessary regulation. You will be pleased to learn that Senator Inhofe's amendment passed with unanimous support and was included in the Senate-passed version of S. 223.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
03-22-2011, 10:54 AM
#350
RE: FAA Decision Looms on Model Aircraft Regulations
ORIGINAL: Factorypilot
The whole point is that the FAA has no business in the model aircraft industry; I'm an airline pilot - trust me, I know what the FAA is like and you do NOT want them getting their mitts into our business. I'm all for safety of flight issues, but they should be handled by the AMA and local clubs and not government regulatory actions IMHO. If they start regulating stuff like jets, you are sadly mistaken if you think they are just going to stop with that. They have no business regulating line of sight remote controlled modelling, PERIOD. What they need to do is focus on updating the damn rest requirements for the airlines and quit screwing around with stuff like this.
Just my .02
ORIGINAL: g6rcteam
to say that everyone who owns a kitplane is rich is by far the stupidist thing ive ever heard im not rich and if i were to choose what is more dangerous turbine jet models are by far more dangerous then a kitplane just look at u tube and it takes far less school traning and money to obtain a turbine waiver . just fly safe and try to think of the big picture r.c. airplanes are a big part of life as we know it and if we are to keep any r.c. models at all to not worry so much of the jets as the only plane that are to be affected all aircraft hobbies will be affected !
to say that everyone who owns a kitplane is rich is by far the stupidist thing ive ever heard im not rich and if i were to choose what is more dangerous turbine jet models are by far more dangerous then a kitplane just look at u tube and it takes far less school traning and money to obtain a turbine waiver . just fly safe and try to think of the big picture r.c. airplanes are a big part of life as we know it and if we are to keep any r.c. models at all to not worry so much of the jets as the only plane that are to be affected all aircraft hobbies will be affected !
Just my .02