mirwin

My Feedback: (1)

Apparently, the FAA is living up their motto, "We're not happy unless you're unhappy."

I've been following this potential problem, and I wonder if anybody else is as concerned as I am.

Nothing is carved in stone yet, but AMA seems to think that these will be some of the restrictions:

- Altitude limit of 400
- Increased minimum distance from full scale airfield
- Max aircraft weight of 55 pounds
- Total ban of all gas turbine engines
- Max speed of 100 MPH

Rebel Flyer

Sounds like there might be a few jets heading to a museum near you...

400'ft??? Glider guys aren't happey unless they are above that mark, specked out.

They weigh what they weigh. Let them weigh the parts. Lets see who will be the first to bring a scale to a flying event at the registration tent.

AMA will be losing alot of private fields as soon as the FAA makes these rules...And MONEY! Along with my membership.

Why don't they start to restrict how low we go, or the swastica...

I guess I've said enough. I going to get my popcorn now.

Rebel Flyer

saramos

I don't know your source, but one of our club members attended the AMA/FAA meeting that was held at the AMA Convention last month. There was no talk of specific restrictions. At this point, the FAA is looking at using the AMA rules as the guidline for their definition of recreational RC flying. They say that thier plan is to regulate what they will classify as UAVs and commercial use, and that operations of RCs that meet accepted guidlines will not be regulated. At this point in time, the only organization to present guidelines to the FAA is the AMA. It is true that nothing is yet set in stone, but I think the chances of the FAA limiting speed, type of power, or altitude more strictly than the current AMA guidlines is unlikely. On the other hand, I would not be suprised if they placed restrictions on some types of airspace. The important thing is to continue to pay attention to developements, and if you feel it is appropriate, to participate when the period for public comment is opened. There's an article in the current AMA magazine. While I have not visited the AMA website, the magizine article said there is a section devoted to the FAA developments online.

Scott

Chip_Mull

My Feedback: (1)

I've been predicting this since our little friend at Madera tried sabotaging the air races. We have published articles to be cautious and not waken the sleeping dragon yet we still have modelers wanting to build 60% scale Decathalons, why? It's been done, giant r/C models that is. The US Air Force radio controlled F-100s for years as target drones. The FAA had an R/C Boeing 707. No matter how much you despise or flat out hate the AMA, when the call comes to write the FAA or your senator or congressman take it seriously.

I'll get off the soap box but take this seriously as it WILL impact your/our hobby.

MajorTomski

You folks are aware that there is a comment period before every FAA rule goes into effect? If they recieve too much negative feed back they have been know to correct the parts of a proposal that get the most flack.

Chip_Mull

My Feedback: (1)

Exactly, that's why when the AMA puts the word out you had better RESPOND! Major Tomski, I forgot the exact wording of the period of review. What's it called again?

Dash7ATP

A few months ago I saw a video on YouTube of some fellows flying a "model aircraft" with onboard video, and that's what they were using to fly it by. It was pretty much a flagrant violation of the AMA regulations. They were flying over a busy bridge in a large metro area, and I think very near buildings. I doubt there was any way it was in sight of the pilot or observer at all times.

Of course you could argue that the only reason to be concerned about AMA regulations is if you are concerned about the insurance. Obviously, they were not.  AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS WHAT WE SHOULD ALL BE CONCERNED ABOUT!  If that model had struck the bridge (it was a suspension bridge and they were buzzing the towers) and fallen on the roadway possibly causing an accident,  believe me, the FAA would have gotten involved. 

The casual attitude of the guys flying this "model" bothered me as much as anything else..  We need to police ourselves while we still can.

Dash

bps

My Feedback: (3)

If you had a chance to read the latest AMA magazine article about this subject the FAA seemed to talk tough to the AMA. I fear we are much to small of a group to have any real impact upon the rule making process. I hope I am very wrong here.

jbdismukes

My Feedback: (2)

Agree! The occaisonal misdeeds of a reckless few will get the media attention that hurts all RCers.

Oberst

This topic might be even better in the AMA Forum don't you think?


Pete

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Many of us on these forums are Pilots. The one thing that all of you can do is to educate yourselves with the facts. If your members of any organization or association related to aviation that could help with any proposed rules that could impede our hobby, you need to do so. The A.M.A. is our voice, contact them and get the facts. Also Organizations like Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and A.O.P.A. (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association) can be advocates for modelers as well. From modelers come Pilots and these organizations missions are to promote aviation.

As mentioned above the FAA always has a lengthy comment period, so make yourself heard. Policing our hobby is also a good policy. People do stupid things and with today's cheap and quickly flight ready models, you may see more people flying in areas where they are not promoting our hobby in a positive light.

Oberst

I couldn't agree with you more.








Pete

G-Pete

Scott, the ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee was commenced in June of 2008. This committee submitted the proposed rules to the FAA in March 2009 - somehow the AMA got wind of it.

In 2009 I found articles over the AMA section of RCU and looked into that deeper. The proposed rules (some of them in the first post here), I posted here and in the Jet forum. Two days later the threads were deleted - the moderators didn't want to stir the community.

The RC community is too small to have an impact on the ARC and FAA decision - especially when you don't get support from the Forums like RCU.

When the government creates a committee, it expects results. The committee will not submit the AMA has a 75 year impeccable safety record and no changes are necessary. The committee has to bring result and WILL propose the RC aircrafts are a threat to the aviation and strict rules has to be formed and executed.

Again, I posted that two years ago and nobody was listening....
Now it's too late - just pray you can fly next season. As for me ALL my birds make over 100mph - so the whole fleet is grounded.

G-Pete

November 29, 2010 AMA President Dave Mathewson met with FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety Peggy Gilligan.
Some of the meeting minutes are printed in the Model Aviation Magazine Febuary 2011 of the AMA- Guys please read that article.

FBaity

My Feedback: (2)

This entire FAA thing sux. I am retired from a full size aviation career and found the FAA types are a PITA.

Frank Baity
AMA 38026

Zeeb

My Feedback: (41)

Well the sad part of this is that any of us who've dealt with the FAA, know that once the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) is issued for public comment, the feds have already decided what they're going to do and only folks like Boeing or some major policital contributor somewhere, have a chance of changing things by then. This is also why they won't take public comment before that NPRM, they don't want to be confused by the facts.

I have a couple of friends who went to the discussion at the AMA show and they were un-impressed with format, subject matter of the questions accepted and lack of definitive answers from the FAA guys, typical if you ask me. Like 'em or not, the AMA is our only real voice in this deal...

In the meantime I keep seeing more and more videos posted on the Internet mostly from these FPV guys doing stupid sh*t with models and this is the kind of stuff the FAA and Homeland Security are really trying to kill, I suspect we'll get rolled into the mix if the AMA isn't successful in pressing our case in the ongoing meetings.

FBaity

My Feedback: (2)

Zeep,

Well said.

Frank Baity
AMA 38026

GerKonig

OK, how about if they were NOT ATA members? Was it legal then?

I did not see the model you mention, nor did I see the bridge, but to bring a bridge down with a model... Come on! Only if it is a foamy (the bridge, not the model).

Not that I condone this, but we cannot assume they were AMA members because they flew RC....


Gerry

Tommygun

My Feedback: (2)

I'm really surprised how many fellow modelers don't even know about this. Even the owner of my LHS and numerous clients perusing inventory were unaware of any of it. They didn't even seem to care when I brought it up- I have no idea how that's even possible. So, spread the word! My other hobby, full scale boating, has effectively fought unjust proposed federal regulations. The EPA wanted a mandatory modification to all vessels to have some sort of elaborate ballast tank drainage system installed. The intent was for large, ocean going ships to store oil and lubricant tainted ballast water onboard until reaching a suitable port to dispose of it. However, the blanket regulation intially made no concessions for recreational boat owners. This would've required even small pleasure boats to have a cumbersome and expensive ballast tank system installed, thereby making continued pursuit of the pastime inpractical for most people. Boat owners spoke out, and the rule was amended with us in mind. We won. All of us need to start writing our elected officials, and we need to start contacting media. ASAP. We don't have the luxury of time, you need to act now. Boat US has an excellent "grassroots" tool kit for dealing with such proposed regulations. http://www.boatus.com/gov/toolbox/default.asp You may be saying, "what's the point, the FAA can do what it wants and politicians don't care" or, "we're too small a group to matter." You're probably right. Nonetheless, I intend to do my part. That way, at least when this becomes law, I can sleep a little better at night knowing I did all I could to help stave this off. Stop sitting around complaining on forums- get to work if this hobby means something to you!

jk464

Man that really sucks for the jet guys, they put some major money into their setups. How is the average modeler suppose to know how high or how fast his plane is? I mean I have had Q500 planes that fly 100-110ish and I think I tend to stay under 400ish feet just because thats where I like to fly. But we are definitely in the "ish" category here. I know I'm going to get flamed here but I think the weight restriction is a damned good idea, you can have a awesome fully scale detailed wwII fighter with a 50cc gasser and 80ish inch wingspan. Why do we feel the need to keep going larger? If it were up to me I would probably cap gassers at 50cc, luckily its not up to me.

jk464

http://www.suasnews.com/2010/10/2434...id-air-update/

hmm, wonder if this all comes from this incident.

It seems to me the full scale pilot was being reckless by buzzing the runway with people in close proximity.

Loopman

My Feedback: (195)

The FAA will do as it pleases as it has since its inception. Don't be so naive as to think that our collective voice is going to do any good. If the AMA as a governing body of this sport cannot effectively lobby for our benefit what makes anyone think that our singular objections will be heard by a federal regulatory body, especially one that has a long history of shooting first and asking questions later (if any questions get asked at all). In the next 2 years we will be a worthelss memory in the minds of the FAA and a great hobby with a rich history will be relegated to the past. I say fly as much as you can while you can, the end is coming.

Happy Flying (For Now) [&o]

Loopman

MajorTomski

Well thanks Frank, I appreciate that. Please remember that the next time the airliner or GA aircraft you're flying makes a perfect ILS landing in near 0-0 conditions it was an FAA flight inspection crew in an FAA airplane working with FAA cartographers and avionics techs that made that happen.

How would you feel if I categorized all AMA members who publish smart ***** statements on public webs as pea brained idiots. Oh wait that would include me!

Tom Solinski
AMA 8026

ZERO-322

My Feedback: (2)

Ok perhaps one of you or even more of you could indulge me for a sec

your an AMA member the above proposed rules have been put into effect, you are at a sanctioned AMA field flying one of your planes and your doing may be 110 or even 120 MPH at 450 or even 500 ft how would you even know ? everyone has to buy a radar gun and altmeter ? how exactly are these rules going to be enforced ? is the AMA or the FAA going to hire someone to police these fields ? I'm not saying one should willingly and knowingly break the law but I just don't see these things happening AMA FAA rules or not

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

if this is the case then take it to the media. I sure the American goverment has better things to do with there
money / time. mabey try stopping once & for all them illegal mexicans coming in over the US southern boarder.

I hear there taking away lots of jobs from legal American citizens & clogging the American health care system.