Comment by Don Brooks on May 25, 2011 at 7:20pm

I read that article and the AMA response, and I can't say my opinion differs with their response. The article insinuates that anyone can and should fly anywhere, at any distance your batteries can take you. Buzzing the statue of liberty and flying over crowded areas of a major metro area, as highlighted in the article in question, out of range of a spotter, while easily possible with the tech that we here all play with, has never been advised.

Comment by Paul Mather on May 25, 2011 at 7:31pm

If I were in charge of the AMA, I too would distance myself as far as possible from Trappy and his utter stupidity. It's not an attack on FPV, it's an attack on stupid people.

Comment by Duane Brocious on May 25, 2011 at 7:44pm

My problem is the AMA constantly posturing that they are some kind of Gov't agency,

They want to ban all autonomous and semi-autonomuos systems and limit all FPV to LOS with RC buddy box. 

They are not just against Trappy, and most of us agree that was a stupid stunt. However AMA "safe" people have cause more severe disabling and disfiguring of by-standards as well as collisions and interfrence with passenger carrying aircraft per year than all FPV and autonomous systems combined for the last 20 years.

 

Yet, the AMA alleges itself to be "National Body" for everyone in the USA?

As long as no one challenges their false claims the AMA will soon be telling you what you can do.

I accept the FAA as a Govt entity, I do not want a private insurance company running the show.

Comment by Duane Brocious on May 25, 2011 at 8:06pm

From the AMA's letter:

"The AMA does not consider the FPV operations as reported in your article and touted by

Raphael Pirker to be an aeromodeling activity. It is more akin to a commercial Unmanned

Aircraft System (UAS) as defined by the FAA, and is likely in violation of FAA’s clarification

of AC 91-57 issued by Nicholas Sabatini in the Federal Register on February 6, 2007."

1. Trappy's stunt was not "akin to commercial UAS". That is saying commercial UAS are irresponsible and dangerous.

2. Trappy's stunt was in full compliance with  AC 91-57. The AMA's own safety standards are not. A very hypocritical statement.

Developer Comment by Doug Weibel on May 25, 2011 at 8:48pm

People who are worrying about the AMA being designated as the rulemaking body for aeromodelling should consider what will happen if they are not.  I'd rather have the AMA designated to make rules than the FAA!  The AMA is posturing to be designated as the rulemaking body because they are bloody scared of what things will look like if that responsibility is not delegated to a non-governmental body.  I am equally scared.  The last thing I want is for the FAA to do it.  And if it can be delegated to a non-governmental body, which looks quite possible, who from a practical standpoint other than the AMA could that be?  The FAA isn't going to sit still while people try to come to some consensus (good luck with that) and form some new organization....

Comment by Duane Brocious on May 25, 2011 at 9:26pm

The FAA wants to put limits on recreational aircraft.

The AMA wants to ban all autonomous and semiautonomous flying, period.

The Ama wants FPV limited to buddy boxed LOS and 400' Alt.

The AMA already bans even the AR parrot !

Yet, they think a 125 lb. turbine powered aircraft at 200 MPH with no altitude limit at an airport is just fine.

Sorry, I do not want these people in charge of anything. Give me the FAA please.

Talk about jumping out of the frying pan!

Comment by Ryan on May 25, 2011 at 10:57pm

Be careful what you wish for Duane. Government organizations tend to be quite reactionary. All it takes is for 1 incident to hit the headlines and the government agency will impose all sorts of rules and regulations probably crippling if not eliminating all the fun we can have. The best thing we can do for our hobby is to be responsible and don't stir up trouble, so we stay off of all the "regulatory" agencies to do lists.

Comment by Andrew Rabbitt on May 26, 2011 at 12:21am

The FAA has a statutory duty to foster aviation in all its forms whilst making all play together safely.

The AMA is only responsible for a subset of a subset of all forms of aviating and is by definition going to be one-sided and political.

On that basis of care, I know who I'd wish for...

Comment by Duane Brocious on May 26, 2011 at 4:33am

We are already on the FAA "to do " list.

We (recreational FPV and autonomous) have had no voice with the FAA and the AMA is doing their best to turn the FAA and Congress against us.

Comment by Ritchie on May 26, 2011 at 4:37am

It seems the AMA are flustering to try and make themselves look important so the FAA will take notice and get them to govern or at least set the rules for flight. AMA seem to have what I call "the old git syndrome" where by they hate everything new but think everything they have been doing for years is completely safe even though no proficiency has been taken. "The old git syndrome" typical of older generation in Britain who have never taken a driving test because they drove tanks in the war(s) so know how to drive. They typically sit to low and too far back to maintain control or vision. I have experienced both inside an old git vehicle (my Grandad thought a concrete barrier was a slip road even though it was only a foot wide) and outside (woman across road steamed off her drive in reverse missing a mail van by a couple feet and going straight into my rear three quarter panel).

I would hope the FAA comes out and states that no body other than itself can restrict your movements in recreational model flying.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 5
• Next ›
• Page