New AMA rules.
 

I'm sure by now that all of us that fly "JETS" have gotten the new rules that the AMA has rendered appropiate for the time being. Although I do agree with a couple of changes, for the most part I feel I have had it up to my eye brows with jumping through all the hoops to be able to fly a "model" or "minature" aircraft powered by a turbine. 1 of the rules state that in the next 2 years I must fly atleast 20 times to be "legal"and have a someone attest to that fact by signing the paperwork included in the package we got, plus have a Notary Public put his/her stamp on it.............I can have my drinking buddy who also flys jets sign my paper and I'll sign his.....lot of good that is!!!! Let's say I get 50 flights in this year and don't fly any next, have I met the requirments? Who is policing the 200mph rule........I have seen some fly at jet meets that are going faster than 200..... but no one seems to challenge them. Why is is that I can or anyone new to the "HOBBY" or "SPORT" can purchase a RENO air racer that can go over 220mph in a race around a pylon that is withinh feet of other planes doing 220mph, some crash at times and the AMA has no prequalifications to show you can handle such a plane...................I just think it is hypocrital at best that we jet guys are so highly scrutinised...Perry

RE: New AMA rules.
 

so I need to get signed off with 2 waiver holders, one being a CD right?

RE: New AMA rules.
 

perry

do a search this has been beaten ad nauseum. the 200 mph is here and the ama won't let go, at least they did not force us to use some additional third party device to limit speed. there are not that many guys doing 200 as you allude to. checking speed at a recent event the guys who swore up and down they were doing 200 were doing 180 something. apparently someone got their knickers in a twist at a recent event about someone doing more that 200 and the gps onboard indicated 186. the notary is a one time deal for your first year. and yes if you do 50 on year it counts in the 24 month period. the rules are to change the empahsis on pilot responsibility rather than mechanical limitations. last i know of giant scale "reno" racers are also excluded from ama coverage. some one will correct me if i am wrong i am sure.

all the paperwork is on the ama website.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Pat, so what you are saying is since the AMA doesn't insure "RENO" style aircraft the pilots aren't required to show if they can handle an aircraft flying over 200mph in close prox. of other aircraft. Aren't some of the events of "RENO" style racing sanctioned by the AMA? If they are sanctioned then wouldn't AMA insurance cover a pilot if his aircraft hit someone or someones's property......ie car, motorhome,ect...........I like the 200mph rule, but I also think getting the "WAIVER" is much to do about nothing. You and I both know that there are pilots out there that have waivers and barely can fly. Before you know it, we will have to have 3rd class medical physicals,and fly with a designated instructor once a year!!!.......hey doesn't Austin have a fly in comming soon..................Perry...............any word on DFW Jet Rodeo.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

The "reno racer" has be given a clean bill of helth if they follow a guide line for race cource. Just go fly.
Darryl Usher

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Pat was 100% on with his post......enough ad nauseum......light the fires and go fly......


Even my pet penguin had something to say about chronic complainers:

RE: New AMA rules.
 

I don't want to sound harsh, but these rules were the big topic of conversation on the net from November until Feb. There are not everything to everybody, and never will be. Not sure where you have been, but for those of us who busted our asses to get some sense into the new regs., your level of *****ing isn't necessary or appreciated.

It's now mostly about pilot ability and personal responsibility. I don't have a problem with that, do you?

By the way. If you fly jets, wasn't that your decision ?!?!?!?!?!?

Think about it.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Actually, I could use a little help understanding the new rules for getting the waiver for my partner. I went and read the documents on the modelaircraft.org site and have a few questions:

1) as I understand it, a new turbine pilot does not have to do the written test anymore, correct?

2) All the newbie has to do is get on a buddy chord and demonstrate flight proficiency, then have five flights signed off on by a waiver holder and a CD waiver holder, correct?

3) newbie sends in the sign off and the notorized page and he's done? Correct?

Thanks in advance,

Sean

RE: New AMA rules.
 

sean

sounds like you got it! form 575. ain't that a b*tch

RE: New AMA rules.
 

so its our choice to fly jets huh? thats true, buts its also your choice to limit us with these (in my opinion) senseless rules. if you don't appericate it then to bad, i don't appericate this rules now do i? and seriously, if i can fly a racer at 220mph why can't i fly my turbine that fast huh? makes no sense to me. i wish someone would create a new club for jet modelers, that would be the most snesible thing, or if they AMA would allow a new branch, that would be great. oh and if you don't want us to *****, than don't makes rules like these. cause and effect.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Tom, that penguin is FUNNNNNY . ROFLMAO :D:D

RE: New AMA rules.
 

jeteffx & F-22 Urza,

You're about two or three months too late with the complaints. I for one am completely stoked at the new process. If the rules hadn't changed, I woudn't have bought both a turbine AND an airframe that can handle that turbine within the last six weeks. The new process is less burdensome than the old, and actually encourages a bit more instruction on good flying procedures by allowing the buddy box.

Time to put aside the 200 mph argument. Any way you look at it, that's a lot of speed, a lot of kinetic energy, and frankly, not a requirement to enjoy the hobby. The guys flying the 150 mph Eurosports have grins on their faces larger than anybody else out there!

Be thankful that we got the 95% of what we were asking for and stop complaining about the 5% we didn't.

Flanker

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Hip, Hip Hurrah!!!!!!!!!!;)[8D]:D:D:)

RE: New AMA rules.
 

take this anyways you like all i got to say is SHUT UP AND FLY!!!!!!!!:D:D:D[8D]

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Right on Flanker!!!

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Well, like others have said, the 95% we got. I don't really care about the notary, I staff two notary's at my office. 20 flights? Piece of cake, I can hot fuel that many flights in a day on my new duralite battery packs (does a touch and go count? :D)

I guess if you're flying an F-100 vs flying a Eurosport? Who knows all the problems associated with the 5%. All I know is I got two new Turbine toys in the last few weeks, I got a T38 Coming that I'll fly at way over 200 MPH at non-ama fields and I got a Tango to finish that I'm putting in a Bobcat Travel Container to go to some of the Northern Events and Western Events that I wouldn't otherwise be able to attend. This weekend I'm looking at an actual motorhome (not a trailer;)). This is the best time to be into RC Jets Ever!! Shame on the complainers, not only is it 5% of problems in the rules, the complainers are 5% of the Turbine Flying Community. While Y'all complain I'll be burning it down this summer and could care less about being limited in speed so long as I'm not limited in thrust and required to run a speed limiter. Wahoooooo!!

Sean

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Why ? Just because some of you are no longer interested, that doesn't mean that everyone has to stop talking about it. For anyone who doesn't want to read the continuing discussions ... is anyone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to read these threads ?

If limiting kinetic energy is so important, then presumably we should be campaigning to reduce the weight limit for turbines, rather than campaigning to increase it (as is being done). After all, mass affects kinetic energy too...

Lemme see ... figures could be a bit off here, as I'm doing the math in my head, but if KE = 1/2 * m * V * V, then the KE of a 20 lb aircraft going at 200 mph would be the same as a 55lb aircraft doing what ... about 120 mph ? So to be consistent, if the guy with a 20lb model is limited to 200 mph, the guy flying a 55lb model should be limited to 120 mph. Did I get the formula and the math right ?

The R/C model aircraft hobby can supply enjoyment in many ways, to many different people, and it's invalid for you to assume that everyone has the same desires, or that everyone gets their enjoyment in exactly the same way. To take your argument to its logical conclusion : You don't have to fly a turbine at all to get enjoyment from the hobby. The guy who just did his first perfect deadstick on his Avistar trainer probably has as big a smile on his face than almost anyone... so on the basis of your argument above, the AMA should presumably ban turbines altogether and insist that everyone go back to flying trainers. That kind of "logic" doesn't make any sense, does it ?

Gordon

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Disclaimer: If my post is quoted and blasted I reserve my right to totally claim that Wocketman stole my password logged on and typed it all. (or was it DavidR?)

:D

RE: New AMA rules.
 

You Eagle Drivers are all the same!

(at least the sub 200 mph ones that have Eurosport grins on their faces that don't need to go fast to compensate for a short schlong) ;)

P.S. Just kidding guys, don't get mad you speed freaks.

Proud 95 percenter that used to be a 2 percenter (according to our president).

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Perry

Why don't you use your time, your money, your ideas and your anger to start your own organization, build your own flying site and buy your own insurance to cover you and everyone else and the land owner where ever you fly. I am sure you will get at least one member.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Gordon,

I like to rip that fast passes like anyone else. I am not crazy about being limited to 200 mph but I also don't see it as that much of a hinderance. What is NOT being discussed here is that there is a movement under foot to gather information to prove that the speed is not the big issue. The AMA was making the speed a big issue back in November and Steve Ellzey, and Gordon Dickens carried a very powerfull and well documented presentation to the EC to presnet our case. Whether you agree or not ther has to be some form of limitations on these airplanes because they still are inherently more dangerous because of the volume of fuel we carry on board. You may feel that the movement towards the larger planes is not as important to you as it is to others (myself included) but the fact is that there is more of a trend toward the larger planes than towards faster planes. I like to fly fast but I also like to fly big, heavily loaded complex scale jets and find my current fleet gravitating that direction and away from the hot rods I used to fly.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Gordon,

The meaning behind my message is that the process recently undertaken by Ellzey, Dickens, and a few other well-placed members of the jet crowd was essentially a negotiation. The results of this negotiation were very positive for the jet community; a lot of barriers to obtaining new jet waivers were eliminated and manufacturers had a relatively unnecessary certification process eliminated. The result will, I believe, encourage even greater numbers of potential jet modelers to enter this segment of the hobby.

The process of negotiation involves keeping one's interests in mind, not just taking a position and firmly sticking to it. It also involves understanding the other party's position. Members of the EC have not just a right but the obligation to protect the overall interests of the AMA. I for one am very proud of the way that Ellzey and crowd handled the issue, making a professional, well-reasoned presentation before the EC and addressing their concerns or interests. I am equally as proud of the EC for listening to the presentation and making a level-headed judgement.

The result is, I believe, a solution that respects the interests of all parties involved. That's a rare thing these days. If those making the presentation had become fixated on a position of "NO SPEED LIMITS!!" or "NO WEIGHT LIMITS!!" or "NO AIRCRAFT PAINTED GREEN!" or any other position, the EC would have had no choice but to rule that the jet community didn't understand the issues. We would have been forced to make much greater compromises and the final solution would not be nearly as liberal as the one we achieved.

SO, a negotiation was held and an agreement was reached. Those complaining about a 200 mph limit TODAY are late for the party. TODAY is not the time to whine and complain about it! TODAY is the time to enjoy what we DO have! After a couple of years of working under this new agreement, it might be time to re-think the speed issue, the weight issue, the pilot requirements, or limitations on green airplanes.

Peace,

Flanker

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Then all of the posts made here that attempt to justify limiting speed "for safety purposes" are undermining that movement.

Indeed - and it was basically ignored, was it not ? The JPO guys showed that speed was not a contributing factor in the documented crashes (etc), and yet the AMA essentially said "we don't give a rat's ... ass about your conclusions, we want a speed limit anyway, and we can't give you a logical explanation why so don't even bother asking" ... is that about right ?

1) While having no limitations may be the ultimate Nirvana in some ways, I am not against limits. What I am against, is (a) disparities such as only having speed limits for turbines and not for any other propulsion type, and (b) adding limits that make no sense - such as the AMA insisting on a 200 mph limit even after the presentation you mention above showed clearly that such a limit was unfounded and basically clueless.

2) If the volume of fuel carried is the issue, then why is the AMA regulating speed rather than fuel quantity ?

Let me be perfectly clear that I have nothing at all against larger planes. I think that the weight limits etc on turbine models should be no different than for non-turbine models, just as I think that the speed limit should be no different between turbines an non-turbines. Equality should not be a dirty word, even though many seem to consider it to be one.

The only reasons I have brought larger models up in the various conversations, is to show that the misguided arguments against flying models above 200 mph can equally well be applied against slower but larger models.

If the AMA were to come out with a new rule tomorrow, that says that no turbine powered models may weigh more than 40 lbs wet, then I would be just as against that rule as I am against the new 200 mph rule, because either would be needlessly removing an existing privilege that a portion of our membership previously enjoyed.

Even though I personally have no models that would fall into the above 40lb category, I would still consider it appropriate for me to stand up and defend the position of those who do... because once one starts getting into the "only a minority of pilots care about this particular rule, so it's not important at all" kind of mind set, then one should consider what would happen if the AMA membership as a whole had that kind of myopic view - turbines would not be covered by the AMA at all, because turbines are a minority within the AMA, just as the high-speed pilots are a minority within the jet community.

Later,
Gordon

RE: New AMA rules.
 

I disagree the fact that we can effectively say to the AMA, "we can live with this set of rules, grow with them, and maintian or better yet improve our safety record, then the process can carry on again and remove even more of the restrictions that have been placed on us in the past. The most significant thing that I see in the new rules is taking the restrictions off of the AIRFRAME, and placing them firmly on the pilots shoulders. Most everyone at the AMA has said that the 200 mph was/is an abitrary limit that was pulled out of the air. I really don't believe if you ripped a 220 mph pass down the far side of the runway even at a jet event, make that even at Muncie, that sky would fall. Fact is what most of us percieve as "200 mph" may very well only be 180 or 170 mph anyway. The days of speed runs are gone anyway so we have to show the length of our manhood in some other fashion.

RE: New AMA rules.
 

Actually, the rules proposal from the safety committee wasn't asking for the removal of the speed limit, only that speed limiters not be required for all aircraft. By a unanimous vote, including consideration of the data, the EC agreed.

The EC was actually very intrigued by the fact that the JPO was collecting data, even in a primative form. There was considerable discussion, and some surprise, that the AMA itself was not collecting data. I'd guess there was a 5-10 minute discussion about how to make that happen, but there was no real resolution. In the end, the SIGs, as we are, will need to collect their own data to support their positions.

Rules are evolutionary. As long as we fly safely, seek responsible changes and have the data to support our position, I believe we will avoid unreasonable restrictions that apply to the majority of turbine pilots.