General Electric Discussions Talk about topics related to e-powered RC flying

AMA vs FAA...

Old 12-27-2010, 01:27 AM
  #76  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
Section 3 was too restrictive so remove it completely?

How about work towards reasonable rules for everyone?

Please explain how the AMA will "administer" its own rules to non-members?

I don't think you understand what the gov't means by "administer".

Sorry, have seen too many nasty things done by the AMA to trust them or beleive a single word coming from anyone in Muncie.
See the post and the link above. It's all spelled out there. You can either accept what it is or you may not. Seems pretty clear to me.

I do not know what else to say. Best thing to do is keep an eye out for the latest info. The FAA is going to be at the AMA Expo and will have a Q & A for the folks there. If you know someone that is going to be there, perhaps your DVPs or one of your AVPs you can email him some questions to ask.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 01:54 AM
  #77  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

Murcoflyer, considering you work for the AMA, I am not supprised that you are going out of your way to defend the AMA.

The truth is on page six of the ARC document, eliminating section 3 would do nothing except make the AMA the only game in town. That is the only reason the AMA reccomended getting rid of section 3.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:00 AM
  #78  
Nitro Blast
Community Moderator
 
Nitro Blast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sunny San Diego Ca
Posts: 4,052
Default

Originally Posted by Murocflyer View Post
Best thing to do is keep an eye out for the latest info. The FAA is going to be at the AMA Expo and will have a Q & A for the folks there.

Hircflyer, a retired FAA official and I will attend.
We will be there tuned in specifically for this Q&A.
Nitro Blast is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:10 AM
  #79  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

Considering the FAA is forbidden by Federal law to comment on the rule making process, this is going to be either a rather pointless or a totally illegal Q&A. The AMA alleges (not quite true BTW) that the AMA is forbidden to comment as well. Did some new Federal law just get passed to allow the FAA to comment on rule-making in process? Nope.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:14 AM
  #80  
Nitro Blast
Community Moderator
 
Nitro Blast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sunny San Diego Ca
Posts: 4,052
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
Considering the FAA is forbidden by Federal law to comment on the rule making process, this is going to be either a rather pointless or a totally illegal Q&A. The AMA alleges (not quite true BTW) that the AMA is forbidden to comment as well. Did some new Federal law just get passed to allow the FAA to comment on rule-making in process? Nope.
Honestly, I'm perplexed as to why you haven't booked a flight out just so you could speak directly to the FAA and the AMA.

That would be an exchange worthy of attendance.
Nitro Blast is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:21 AM
  #81  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

I am not rich enough to travel that far for what is guaranteed to be a waste of time. There will be no useful answers from the FAA unless they are planning on committing a felony. All we will get is sound bites and lip service. Is anyone going to record this or will this be another AMA secret?
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:26 AM
  #82  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
Murcoflyer, considering you work for the AMA, I am not supprised that you are going out of your way to defend the AMA.

The truth is on page six of the ARC document, eliminating section 3 would do nothing except make the AMA the only game in town. That is the only reason the AMA reccomended getting rid of section 3.

I think you have me mistaken for someone else. I do not work for the AMA. I'm not sure why you want to mislead anyone by saying something like that.

I'm not going to argue this point with you. It is clear as day to me. I'll re-post it again so you can read it over once more. Although I suspect you may discount it again.

As noted above, since you feel the FAA and the AMA is trying to "pull a fast one" perhaps a trip out to Ontario in Jan is worth it.

Frank

See this here: http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/FAAARCFAQs8.pdf

Section 3 of the ARC recommendations would seem to create a situation where modelers wishing to have more latitude in their modeling activity are encourage to join a community-based organization such as the AMA, why is AMA opposed to this two-path approach and the limitations outlined in Section 3? (Added 7/24/09)


AMA opposes Section 3 impart because we feel many of the restrictions are onerous and unrealistic. More importantly, however, AMA is opposed to the two path/dual standard approach this creates. We feel this approach is totally unmanageable and has the potential for impacting our members by default. This would almost certainly be the case at locations where both AMA members and non AMA members fly, and it is foreseeable that other land use authorities could impose the stricter guidelines found in Section 3 with thoughts that this would be a more conservative safer approach.


AMA would prefer to see a single set of guidelines managed by a community-based organization that establishes the standards for all of model aviation. AMA is actively developing a
comprehensive set of model aviation guidelines from its current safety standards for submittal to the FAA and hopefully acceptance and approval before the sUAS SFAR becomes a reality in 2011.


This may sound to some like the Academy is trying to force all modelers to join the AMA. Certainly AMA believes there is strength in numbers and the health and welfare of the hobby
undoubtedly depends upon the presence of a strong national organization that can speak for and advocate the interests of the aeromodeling community. But, forcing modelers to join the AMA is by no means the intent of the Academy’s approach to the sUAS rulemaking. AMA’s sole aim is to work through this issue that has been somewhat forced upon us, and achieve an end result that allows the modelers to continue to enjoy the hobby in much the same way as they have in the past.

Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:29 AM
  #83  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by Nitro Blast View Post
Hircflyer, a retired FAA official and I will attend.
We will be there tuned in specifically for this Q&A.
I wish I could be there as well but it doesn't look like I'll be able to make it. Looking forward to hearing how it goes.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:34 AM
  #84  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
I am not rich enough to travel that far for what is guaranteed to be a waste of time. There will be no useful answers from the FAA unless they are planning on committing a felony. All we will get is sound bites and lip service. Is anyone going to record this or will this be another AMA secret?
If you can relax a bit and read the links that have been provided to you, you might have seen this:

The FAA has been invited to the AMA Expo in January. They have accepted. Our intent is to hold a roundtable Q&A session to help clarify a number of issues. This roundtable will be open to those in attendance and will also be taped and posted online. The Expo will also signal the beginning of an increased awareness campaign to keep the model aviation community as informed as possible as we move into 2011 and the eventual release of the NPRM.
That came from this here: http://www.modelaircraft.org/news/ama-faa.aspx

None of this is a secret and the AMA has been pretty transparent about all this information.

As a matter of fact, there is plenty of info out there on the Internet and in the forums for you to make sure no one is pulling the wool over your eyes.

Here are the ones I know about:

1. FAA/ARC FAQs
http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/FAAARCFAQs8.pdf

2. Similar discussion thread on FG
http://www.flyinggiants.com/forums/s...20#post1334563

3. UAV discussion thread on RCG
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1328930

4. Sailplane discussion on RCG
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1350433

5. Update on FAA (from AMA website)
http://www.modelaircraft.org/news/ama-faa.aspx

6. Jan 10 EC Meeting
http://www.modelaircraft.org/members...ecminutes.aspx

7. Fact sheet on UAS (from FAA)
http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives...FACT_Sheet.pdf

8. sUAS Recommendations ARC (from the AMA website)
http://www.modelaircraft.org/faa/recommendations.pdf/

9. sUAS NPRM Info (From Rich Hanson)
http://www.modelaircraft.org/forums/tm.aspx?m=10959

That's all I have to say to you about this and all I ask is that you read this info over and keep an open mind.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:38 AM
  #85  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

So that isn't you moderating the AMA forum?

"Murcoflyer"
"Frank"
"Leader Member -DIV"
"STF Member"


If it is then why are you hiding your AMA connection here?
I think there is someithing in WF rules about divulging affiliations.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:41 AM
  #86  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

Wasted so much space with off-topic material I almost missed that you said the Q&A will be recorded.
Try and keep it simple.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:43 AM
  #87  
Nitro Blast
Community Moderator
 
Nitro Blast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sunny San Diego Ca
Posts: 4,052
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
BTW Frank, You never answered my question: Is the Q&A going to be recorded?
Chill out. You didnt ask Frank, you asked ANYONE. Take a deep breath before replying again, and check yourself please.
How can he know if it is going to be recorded? Moderating a forum does not mean there is any association with the AMA.
Nitro Blast is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:53 AM
  #88  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
So that isn't you moderating the AMA forum?

"Murcoflyer"
"Frank"
"Leader Member -DIV"
"STF Member"

If it is then why are you hiding your AMA connection here?
I think there is someithing in WF rules about divulging affiliations.
That's no secret at all. I certainly do not work for the AMA. I volunteer my time as a forum moderator in the AMA forum to help it run smoothly. I am not paid for doing that just like the mods here on WF are not paid for their services.

I am as you noted, a Leader Member in my district and am happy to help in that capacity.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 03:03 AM
  #89  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

You are still "working for the AMA" volunteer or not. That IMHO makes you suspect of bias. You are affiliated with the AMA and should disclose that in your posts.

"If you are a manufacturer, vendor, sponsored representative, retailer or the like for an r/c related company or product you must identify yourself in your signature. Any member affiliated with a company not identifying themselves as such is at risk of revocation from this website. This is identified, but not limited to a member who gains anything financially whether in cash, product, discount or the like." (bolding mine)
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 03:48 AM
  #90  
Rockin Robbins
Super Contributor
 
Rockin Robbins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 1,883
Default

dbcsiso, you seem to be in a non-falsifiable position here, where you don't believe anything at all coming from the AMA. Then why are you concerned at all about what they do? Is there anything at all they could do or say to bring you on board? Then why spend so much energy against an organization you have no truck with?

I don't like 'em either. Their sole occupation seems to be to control flying fields and prohibit anyone else from flying there. I just ignore them like the vast majority of other fliers out there. That's not going to change any time soon.
Rockin Robbins is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 03:56 AM
  #91  
crxmanpat
Community Moderator
 
crxmanpat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,906
Default

Rockin,

The AMA does not "control flying fields". That is strictly up to the club that runs the field. If they are an AMA sanctioned club, then it is a good bet that you will be required to be an AMA member to also be a club member and use the site.

The only site the AMA does directly control is the flying site at HQ in Muncie.

Just thought I'd clear that up for you.
crxmanpat is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:07 AM
  #92  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
You are still "working for the AMA" volunteer or not. That IMHO makes you suspect of bias. You are affiliated with the AMA and should disclose that in your posts.

Don't confuse bias with facts. I provided you nothing but the facts and you simply chose not to accept them. I'm sorry you have an ax to grind with an organization whose purpose is to promote development of model aviation as a recognized sport and worthwhile recreation activity. That's not an issue I have to be concerned about. All I ask is that you get your facts straight before making false claims and accusations. You have done that a number of times here this evening and it serves no one any useful purpose in doing so.

Have a great evening and wonderful Holiday Season.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:11 AM
  #93  
rcers
Super Contributor
 
rcers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trophy Club TX
Posts: 6,314
Default

Forcing everyone to join the AMA to fly and get that in FAA regs. O yea, that is going to happen, for certain.

This has certainly made me smile tonight.

Mike
rcers is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:15 AM
  #94  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

I am an AMA member and I do not trust the current leadership. I do not believe most of what the AMA says but I do want to try and figure out what they are doing, or trying to do.

I am also a USA citizen and don't believe what most politicians say. I do want to try and figure out what they are doing, or trying to do.

I am not giving up on the AMA because a handful in control are doing things I think are wrong, no more than I give up on the USA because I think what the current administration is doing is wrong.

I want equal treatment and rules for everyone. I do not want to see any private organization making laws or forcing anyone to join their organization to fly model airplanes.

That would be like turning the BATF over to the NRA, Breweries and Tobacco companies and letting them write the laws for guns, alcohol and tobacco. Not a good idea.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:25 AM
  #95  
rcers
Super Contributor
 
rcers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trophy Club TX
Posts: 6,314
Default

Originally Posted by dbcisco View Post
I am not giving up on the AMA because a handful in control are doing things I think are wrong, no more than I give up on the USA because I think what the current administration is doing is wrong.
Well that is good. I don't agree with the AMA on 100% either. I am sure glad, today, right now, we have a central organized body representing the needs of the RC body, AMA or not.

I can't imagine NO representation in the FAA game. I do like the AMA voice of "why are you trying to fix something that is not broken". Good point.

FAA track down those 150k airplanes you have no record of, don't worry about us flying gliders at 1k feet and Turbine models at 200 MPH.

Again this time the whole thing feels different. I am scared and have never been so. I don't think the AMA is up to anything devious, I think they are honestly trying to be a voice of sanity.

Hope I am right.

Mike
rcers is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:35 AM
  #96  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

The "lost planes" thing is way out of proportion. Most of them are now soda cans and reynolds wrap. The FAA just never kept track of aircraft that were scrapped as there wasn't an unregistration process. Do the same thing to your DMV and you will find the DMV "lost" millions of cars. They are sitting in junk yards or recycled and the titles are in the offices of scrap yards all over the USA, just never filed. Not the big thing the media trumped it up as.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:47 AM
  #97  
Xptical
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 31
Default

The big thing I'm wondering is will the FAA or AMA have teeth to bite alleged violators of the new rules?

I doubt the AMA will be able to do anything to a violator. Except maybe throw him or her out of the AMA.

All the articles I have seen about FAA violations involve fines levied in Civil court. Usually these incidents involved many violations over many months or years. I doubt the FAA will watch any single modeler for any appreciable period of time.

Most likely, if you violate the regs and then cause a scene (crash, airport shutdown, ICBM exchange with Russia), you'll be taken to court for a single violation of whatever and they will try and get a Judge/jury to levy a fine.

But I doubt it'll be worth their time for a fine of less than, say 5-figures. And even then, they know it'll take them years to recoup the costs. They can Garnish your wages for, what 25% of your disposable income? Maybe less. If you have a ton of disposable income, just re-negotiate your salary for other benefits (maybe a month of vacation for a 20% pay cut) or just buy like 2 or 3 more cars and soak up any extra income.


In short, no matter what the FAA/AMA decide on, neither group really has any ability to make any change to how we currently fly.
Xptical is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 05:04 AM
  #98  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

It would be enforced the way every other law is enforced. Get caught and you are arrested or fined. Of course the AMA will actually have to abide by what ever the FAA comes out with. These will not be an AC to ignore and rewrite. Maybe that is the biggest problem the AMA has with them. They won't be able to make up or abandon rules on a whim. The way is seems so far is that if the AMA rules are accepted under CBO they will only be able to change them with FAA approval. I seriously doubt the FAA will ever give them carte blanche.
dbcisco is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 05:09 AM
  #99  
Xptical
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 31
Default Re: AMA vs FAA...

It would be enforced the way every other law is enforced. Get caught and you are arrested or fined. Of course the AMA will actually have to abide by what ever the FAA comes out with. These will not be an AC to ignore and rewrite. Maybe that is the biggest problem the AMA has with them. They won't be able to make up or abandon rules on a whim. The way is seems so far is that if the AMA rules are accepted under CBO they will only be able to change them with FAA approval. I seriously doubt the FAA will ever give them carte blanche.
Like I said, every FAA article I saw about violations involved Civil Court fines being levied. I didn't see anything about aircraft owners/operators being jailed.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
Xptical is offline  
Old 12-27-2010, 05:29 AM
  #100  
dbcisco
Like to build 'em
 
dbcisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,765
Default

In cases of imrisonment it would have to be bad. Like most traffic violations are ussually fines but negligent homicide (DUI fatality) goes under negligent homicide laws. Even with just the AC in effect, cause a death with a model aircraft through negligence (drinking and flying for example) and you could be looking at hard time in PA. One of my students got four years in prison when his friend was killed because he was driving DUI (.2 blood alfohol level for anyone under 21 in PA). Two beers and bad driving put him away for 4 years.
dbcisco is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.16693 seconds with 12 queries