Senate passes Bill S.223 with recreational sUAS amendment denying FAA authority!
Sponsored by OK Senator Inhofe:
"
(g) Special Rule for Model Aircraft.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned
aircraft systems into FAA plans and policies,, including this section, the Administrator shall not promulgate any
rules or regulations regarding model aircraft or aircraft being developed as model aircraft if such aircraft is--
(A) flown strictly for recreational, sport, competition, or academic purposes;
(B) operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a
nationwide community-based organization; and
(C) limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection,
flight test, and operational safety program currently administered by a community-based organization.
(2) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.--For purposes of this subsection, the term ``model aircraft'' means a
nonhuman-carrying (unmanned) radio-controlled aircraft capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere, navigating
the airspace and flown within visual line-of-sight of the operator for the exclusive and intended use for sport,
recreation, competition, or academic purposes."
Why didn't the AMA let anyone knw they were secretly working to get this passed without anyone knowing?
Sounds llike sneaky sleazy politics to me. But the AMA will instantly gain upto $100 Billion in dues!
No oversight over all that new money either!
I don't trust them and I am a member!
No AMA dues - no flying.
No autonomous systems period
Limited FPV, even an AR Parrot will be illegal to use because it doesn't meet AMA rules.
AMA can change rules at will to ban all FPV!
This can only be stopped at the House of Representatives now.
Write and call your Representative now or say good buy to all your stuff.
Comments
Randy, the AMA specifically says all flying is to be Line of Sight. They firuther require FPV to have a second person on a buddy box and expressly forbid any kind of autonomous or semi-autonomous systems.
BTW, Everything under 55# is an sUAS, over that it is a UAS. Model aircraft are sUAS and some, esp. AMA "large model aircraft? are UAS. UAV is not used as a properterm anymore.
Lets be sensible, if model aircraft pilots including FPV/UAV stay 5NM from an airport and stay below 400 ftAGL there should not be any risk of the aircraft crashing into a 777 unless the 777 is making an emergency landing. I'm sure similar laws exist in the US as they do in Australia, requiring licenced aircraft to stay above 500ft and above 1000ft when over populated areas. In that case the only time a licence aircraft is in the same altitude as model aircraft is during take off and landing, and if model aircraft stays 5NM from airports no collision risk exists.
If a model aircraft/UAV needs to enter controlled airspace for whatever reason, as long as it has an airways clearance, transponder, and radio contact with ATC, I can't a safety issue with that either.Agree, from a national UAV Org, set up rules and standards. As a AMA member I do not know of any rule that says use FPV so long as your model is in line of sight. Also it does not say you can not have a UAV either so long as it is within line of site. The concern is someone UAV flying into a 777 on approach to a landing.... We need a air park in Iowa or Nevada for long rang flying. The real problem is anything useful and fun can be used for bad things.... Oh yes I am sure power has a place here but what about the folks in Iowa that do not have an AMA field within 200 miles!!!!!!
There needs to be an alternative... this is the USA and we have at least two political parties....
I also understand he is not a very good pilot havin at one point was admonished by the FAA for landing his Cessna 340 on a closed runway, with people and equiptment on it, then took off on the taxi way. He told the press " he won't guarantee he'll be more vigilant". And this artard is making aviation legislation?
He should have his pilot license permanently pulled. I almost killed pople and won't be careful in the future? Sounds like a threat to me.
Yup, RC only.
My contingeny plan includes standards for autonomous models to include RC "over-ride".
The AMA forbids all autonomous and semi-autonomous systems.
Note that freeflight, infrared and tethered flight are not included in the amendment either.
well can we build one bigger than 65 lbs and put a "trained rat" in it and fly under ultralight rules ??
and if i fly pure autopilot no rc control would,nt that be out of their over site ??
I would rather be ruled by my own government than a dictatorial private organization.
All the amendment does is give the AMA no laws to follow.
Would it be OK if the NRA was allowed to be exempt from all firearms laws?
AAA members can srive as fast as they want and park anywhere while the rest of us have to do 65MPH and put money in meters?
Why didn't Inhofe write it so all recreational users can "follow" CBO rules instead of "participate in".
Inhode is either misguided by the AMA, a moron or corrupt. No other options IMHO.
Giving law making powers and imunity to a private corporation (even NPO) is never a good idea.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next