The ama is toothless
 

Some random lawyer is challenging the FAA ruling.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngogl...tration-rules/

It still floors me that the AMA jumped into bed with the drone people, it is an obvious shameless money grab that is jeopardizing the future of our hobby. Shame on you AMA.

The AMA also has a lawsuit against the FAA WRT their "interim rule" vs. the section 336 prohibition. They have stated that they are working to get that lawsuit answered as soon as possible...

Bob

Maybe I am wrong, but I feel that the AMA is hoping to make these non-modelers, non RC flyers (read drone operators) a part of the AMA by increasing the membership roles and rake in more membership dollars.

And using our membership fees as the piggy bank for their efforts.

If that is true, they are more out of touch than I thought. These people are not going to join the AMA. "I'm gonna fly at sanctioned AMA fields." said no online drone buyer ever….

Look at the magazine, its seems like more than half the ads are for quads. It has definitely caused an explosion of growth in the "hobby." I just think its a different type of hobby and should have its own governing organization… of which nobody would follow either.

Unfortunately, I think these things do need to be regulated by the FAA. The regs for our line of sight models have been working fine, leave them alone.

After working in hobby shops for years, I could see where this was going. The FIRST question was how far out can I fly these and film with them? People were starting to use UHF systems and bragging about how many miles away they could go.

Drone users were NEVER interested in rules OR safety. I can honestly say that the AMA has lost it's way and was trying to be PC on this. They totally dropped the ball on this and the really sad part is.......they won't accept what they have done OR admit that they have made a HUGE mistake!

Exactly. And this is because the only real fun people have with these "drones/quads" is for the platform in which a camera can be mounted. The most pleasure these people get from flying a "drone/quad" with a camera attached is during playback of the video they shot while flying where they are not supposed to be, over houses, buildings, people, landmarks, highways, etc. You ever seen a drone/quad operator make a big deal about recording video showing flight over a r/c field? Of course not. That wouldn't be any fun. No, it's more fun to watch video tape of flying over areas like houses, buildings, people, landmarks, highways, etc.

Now the beginner/newbie drone/quad guy will get a lot a pleasure out of flying at a designated r/c flying field, but only until the thrill of "flying" the drone/quad wears off. After the "honeymoon", they'll be ready for the real fun stuff. The stuff that got this situation started in the very first place.

Saw this whole thing coming, you guys are right on!

Just in case you missed this.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/...co-plane-drone

I really wonder if the average model club could purchase private insurance if members could pitch the same $70/yrs they pitch to AMA......then "F" the AMA.

That may be a new deliverable, but that's not a new concept. People have been outfitting various forms of r/c items with such electronics/equipment. The question is will it be flown in accordance with FAA / AMA rules and regulations?

I posted Bob Violet's letter to AMA when he published it. AMA could listen to majority of the membership (actual modelers) then and be effective in dealing with FAA and the entire issue. But, they chose otherwise. this is not the first time a corporation chases virtual income at a larger cost. I truly believe that the modelers will survive but I don't think AMA will be viewed the same by all in the same manner that they were viewed in the past.

This is just like a politician enacting laws that nobody wants that…. If the AMA membership was asked to vote on whether or not it should have anything to do with "drones", I'm sure it would be an overwhelming no.

Anyone remember ....Sport Flyers Assoc.? It was a response to the AMA back in the 90's. Maybe it's time to go down a different road with this.....It's very plain the AMA is doing no one any good here! I want my dues spent well....NOT..... on feeding more government policies!

Wonder if they would reduce dues if someone opted out on the "Drone" magazine they send out monthly? Really not a lot of interest there anymore.

Anyone else think it's rather funny that a multirotor flier is initiating this? Ironic or do the multirotor guys have to take the stand since "they" started this mess?!

….

Many are getting free memberships from WalMart, Best Buy, Amazon, etc. Paid for by the store. A few will stay, but even the first year cash will help pay for the lawsuit.

so is that why membership went up for us paying customers?

No the membership is paid by the stores.

Because their lawyers are smart enough to see that its cheap insurance against future lawsuits when the drone knocks down the news helicopter….. this blows.

Sort of like the same as when a store says they'll pay the sales tax. So is the store paying for the drone registration through the FAA or the AMA membership? Is the store providing the actual buyer's information or the store's information when registering with the FAA and/or paying for the AMA membership?

I am not aware ot the stores offering free FAA registration. The discussion was AMA membership. And I am no AMA official so if you want ALL the details I suggest you contact them.

Wow, if they are paying for the AMA membership, that's pretty good. Cause that's a lot more then compared to the $5.00 for three years / free if done before February 2016 FAA registration cost. Either way, I thought in order to be AMA and registered with the FAA, personal information on who will be flying the "drone" has to be provided.

AMA membership does not require FAA registration. Nor even that you have a model. I haven't flown for years and am a member.

Again........what does flying drones in the middle of the city have to do with us flying models at a model club? What a clusterΦuck!

BTW, just found out that you can get access to all the legal documents filed in the case via the US Federal "PACER" system. Case number is 14-1158. Note, you have to pay to access documents. But it looks like as of July 2015 Brendan Schulman is no longer on the case.

For lack of better wording, what I was trying to say is that both registering with the FAA and AMA membership require personal information about the person registering/becoming a member has to be provided. I wasn't saying that you have to have one in order to have the other.

So if the store is paying for one, the other, or both, what information are they providing to either the FAA and/or the AMA? If that store is paying for a year of AMA membership, I should go and buy a drone there so they can pay for my next year of AMA membership dues. I could always use a drone for target practice down at the range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGgEFOD8Jlo

But the AMA won't give out your address. And they don't have the Chinese hacking their systems.

And why a dues increase now when we here about all the donations they are making giving our money away ????? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM :(

Lawfirms to sue in Federal Court don't come cheap.

I'm 64 years old . I've been an AMA member since 1966. I'll be retiring this year hoping to enjoy my RC airplanes more than ever. Now I'm wondering where our awesome hobby is heading! Having worked in the airline industry got 30 years, I could see what was coming when moronic quad flyers post videos on YouTube flying past airliners on approach! The AMA should be livid with the FAA but more importantly the irresponsible quad flyers who are( or have) ruined our hobby! I hope a solution can be reached so we can continue flying as we have for decades. Maybe what I've said is nothing new, but I just had to express my view.

The AMA has deluded itself into believeing that the FAA's involvement will be a boon for them. Starting with the hope AMA will be recognized as the only CBO for modeling, turning them de-facto into the semi-official regulator for all model airplane (and drone) activity at the hobby level. And of course, pandering to drones in the hope of increasing membership, to replace all the old-school modelers that are going extinct.

Neither will come to pass.

As for the FAA - 332 is clear in the limits of their authority. They have no jurisdiction over aeromodeling activity and they have no legal authority or basis for requiring aeromodelers to register themselves or their craft. Of course, as with any federal agency in the reign of Emperor Obama, they simply ignore the law and hope no one will notice that they have blatantly overstepped their authority.

Same with the EPA, the DOJ, and even NASA. Don't even get me started on NASA and "climate science".

Putting a whole group of people into one category isn't really fair, nor is it generally accurate. Also, noting what "those people" consider fun isn't fair either unless you've spoken to them, or perhaps flown with them. There is a whole spectrum of MR use that is completely relevant in this hobby, and doesn't always involve a camera. If someone becomes an AMA member and enjoys flying a quad at a club field, how is that a bad thing.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TktTO-ePsoc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IRmlX6rrs2w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think I missed the boat on this But, I'll be outta town this weekend anyway. Would have liked to take a bunch of t-shirts with this image to the convention and make sure the Feds see them since they'll be holding hands with AMA. I would have asked each one to let Me know when They get My point.http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/atta...mentid=2140111:cool:

Unless you represent your self and are a lawyer.

That one has happened.

I have still yet to see that in writing from anyone other than the AMA.
Please post a link or source, Please.
Just because the AMA says they are "THE" CBO does not make them one in the eyes of congress or the FAA or any other leagal entity.

Flying mr's at clubs isn't what got the FAA involved. "Those people" flying mr's over residential areas, in final landing approaches to airports, over city buildings, people, roads, landmarks, etc. etc. are the ones who got the FAA involved. I'm sure you can post some youtube videos of camera footage of those who did exactly these things. That's the bottom line. Matter of fact, the r/c hobby didn't have this issue before mr's became involved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgXd0nIo784

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfwD7BIgm-M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d5Co-6KtLI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9rnTk6FBzs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FNVT00aPkE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ilb2XH-p1PY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U0LlchxGTA

CBO is a legal term listed in the USC. It does not need recognition. The AMA meets the requirements of the definition. The FAA does not give out recognition notices to CBO';s. Not even for the EAA or the USUA. However the FAA has mentioned them in some of their publications. Someone has posted such but I cannot find it.

Ok, but then why did AMA send the FAA a letter asking to be recognized as a CBO? Obviously the AMA thought they needed that. Unfortunately, the FAA has not responded. Perhaps because AMA is suing them?