• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Enforcing new laws at Flite Fest

sprzout

Knower of useless information
Mentor
#61
The hobby is done mate Its just on the FAA's time table. The only way to adjust that course is to go to our representatives and put pressure on them to speak up for us to save their own butts come November election time. The FAA will not even bother with most of our pleas. they have already shown their stripes by back dooring a proposal that would never pass on its on merit. They have already made promises of keeping the hobby in tact then changed up the proposals to phase it out over time. they know they have full control and are already bought and paid for. the only way to stop that is to go thru congress and dispute the legality not only of the proposals but how they were passed into law by circumventing normal procedures.

We, Flite Test, the AMA and any other groups can petition and write up support pleas to get our hobby back and it will do nothing if we aim at the FAA. We have to go after our representatives in the house and senate if we have any chance of stopping this. Once its all in place getting it repealed will be even harder
So Bill, are you going to go the route of putting your equipment up for auction now, or wait until the hobby's good and dead and there's no value in it? LOL j/k

To some extent, I feel like there's a lot of noise being made over the "death" of the hobby when we have proposed rules that aren't even in effect yet. It's a lot like the people who decried the death of the hobby when transmitters went from 72 mhz to 2.4 ghz and people were having to swap out to new receivers to work with the new transmitters, etc.

I'm trying to be optimistic and think that it's still going to continue on. The hobby's never going to be completely dead; there will still be people flying indoors in gyms and closed stadiums and auditoriums. Not a single one of those proposed rules would prevent that from happening; that's indoors and out of the FAA's jurisdiction. I know, extreme, and there are a lot of people that won't do it at all, but flying could still happen.
 

Vimana89

Well-known member
#62
So Bill, are you going to go the route of putting your equipment up for auction now, or wait until the hobby's good and dead and there's no value in it? LOL j/k

To some extent, I feel like there's a lot of noise being made over the "death" of the hobby when we have proposed rules that aren't even in effect yet. It's a lot like the people who decried the death of the hobby when transmitters went from 72 mhz to 2.4 ghz and people were having to swap out to new receivers to work with the new transmitters, etc.

I'm trying to be optimistic and think that it's still going to continue on. The hobby's never going to be completely dead; there will still be people flying indoors in gyms and closed stadiums and auditoriums. Not a single one of those proposed rules would prevent that from happening; that's indoors and out of the FAA's jurisdiction. I know, extreme, and there are a lot of people that won't do it at all, but flying could still happen.
If the absolute worst happens, as far as the "compliant" side of the hobby, I'll be getting into indoor flyers to at least have something. As long as they don't go crazy and outright ban home builds or the parts required to make them, I'll be building some nice sub-250g park flyers for outdoors that will give a mighty mini like performance and won't require registering to fly at approved sites like club fields.
 

sprzout

Knower of useless information
Mentor
#63
If the absolute worst happens, as far as the "compliant" side of the hobby, I'll be getting into indoor flyers to at least have something. As long as they don't go crazy and outright ban home builds or the parts required to make them, I'll be building some nice sub-250g park flyers for outdoors that will give a mighty mini like performance and won't require registering to fly at approved sites like club fields.
I've already got a nice sub 250g plane - the Strix Nano Goblin. Flies for 30 min. on a Li-Ion battery, and it can SCOOT. I have my FAA number and personal info on it, even though it's under the limit. Why? Because if it goes down at the flying field, I want one of the guys out there to be nice and call me saying they found it (and if someone finds a plane with info on it, they DO call or let people at the field know so that it gets back to the rightful owner).

I think there's a LOT of panic going on, a lot of doom and gloom over proposed rules and things that aren't implemented yet and may not even be implemented. I get that people don't want liberties taken away, and we still want to enjoy the hobby, but I don't think the reality will be as bleak and desolate as people are making it out to be. I'm upset, I've said my piece on the proposed rule on the government regulations website; whether my comments (and those of others) are listened to is not really my call. All I can do is complain if it doesn't go my way, and be happy if it does.
 

PsyBorg

Wake up! Time to fly!
#64
So Bill, are you going to go the route of putting your equipment up for auction now, or wait until the hobby's good and dead and there's no value in it? LOL j/k

To some extent, I feel like there's a lot of noise being made over the "death" of the hobby when we have proposed rules that aren't even in effect yet. It's a lot like the people who decried the death of the hobby when transmitters went from 72 mhz to 2.4 ghz and people were having to swap out to new receivers to work with the new transmitters, etc.

I'm trying to be optimistic and think that it's still going to continue on. The hobby's never going to be completely dead; there will still be people flying indoors in gyms and closed stadiums and auditoriums. Not a single one of those proposed rules would prevent that from happening; that's indoors and out of the FAA's jurisdiction. I know, extreme, and there are a lot of people that won't do it at all, but flying could still happen.
I am going thru my winter clean up and repainting and any parts replacements that need doing. At this point an auction IS under consideration as even if they dont ban everything It will become seriously not worth the effort to jump thru their hoops. My hope for unification in the hobby is quickly waning as far too many idiots are to dam lazy to bother researching rules and what is going on and are running their yaps about something they know nothing about. Others are too lazy to be bothered getting involved and still others are puffing up saying they will just go rogue. If we cant stop posting uninformed opinions and arguing among ourselves there is no hope for a coordinated effort over all.

As it stands right now the battle is lost. The FAA is laughing at us all knowing they will succeed in killing the hobby. Hopefully after they sneak in more stuff in other inconspicuous places and they get what they want the only way to save any of it will be IF (and I have faith in humanity to fail in everything) everyone in the hobby can come into one mass and go after the politicians to rescind any evil the FAA does with the hobby. More then likely the only way to motivate them since we have no massive slush funds to lobby with we can only use the threats of voting them out of power as the carrot to our weeping willow level stick

P.S. There will be NO legal home built anything no matter what the size.. Its in the proposal unless you want to go thru the FAA hoops to become a legal and certified vendor.
 
#65
Hey guys. There are exemptions in all of this for community based organizations written into the proposal. And at this point, it's only a proposal. This thing is going to be tweaked and retweaked before anything happens. Let's not hit the panic button yet. This still has a long way to go.
 
#66
[QUOTE="PsyBorg, post:[/quote]

P.S. There will be NO legal home built anything no matter what the size.. Its in the proposal unless you want to go thru the FAA hoops to become a legal and certified vendor.[/QUOTE]

Not exactly. AMA has exemptions under the CBA and FRIA sections of the proposal.
 

SlingShot

Maneuvering With Purpose
#67
I've already got a nice sub 250g plane - the Strix Nano Goblin. Flies for 30 min. on a Li-Ion battery, and it can SCOOT. I have my FAA number and personal info on it, even though it's under the limit. Why? Because if it goes down at the flying field, I want one of the guys out there to be nice and call me saying they found it (and if someone finds a plane with info on it, they DO call or let people at the field know so that it gets back to the rightful owner).

I think there's a LOT of panic going on, a lot of doom and gloom over proposed rules and things that aren't implemented yet and may not even be implemented. I get that people don't want liberties taken away, and we still want to enjoy the hobby, but I don't think the reality will be as bleak and desolate as people are making it out to be. I'm upset, I've said my piece on the proposed rule on the government regulations website; whether my comments (and those of others) are listened to is not really my call. All I can do is complain if it doesn't go my way, and be happy if it does.
Lots of overreaction to be sure. While it is certainly wise to keep your eyes open and keep them honest, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that the hobby is being killed. What possible motive could exist for that action? Who would benefit? And who then would be hurt? To what end?

Keep the faith. Everything is going to be OK.
 
#69
Since that is a separate document they are working on there is no recognized CBO's at this time and we don't know what it will take to become one. What we do know is that as written, The detention camps will go away with attrition.
Separate document? I don't follow. It's written in the main proposal. As for recognition, the FAA already recognizes AMA as a CBO. It's been that way since 333 was reepealed. If it weren't the 5 clubs that were tested and granted altitude exemptions last months that were in controlled airspace would have never happened. I actually spoke to VP Eric Williams at this on the phone at length about a week ago. He clarified a lot of what's being discussed.

As for the camps. He also clarified that. The only thing that would go away (in 3 years) is (possibly) the exemption from having any kind of RID. The 400 foot box etc would still be an exemption.
 
#71
Separate document? I don't follow. It's written in the main proposal. As for recognition, the FAA already recognizes AMA as a CBO. It's been that way since 333 was reepealed. I actually spoke to VP Eric Williams at this on the phone at length about a week ago. He clarified a lot of what's being discussed.

As for the camps. He also clarified that. The only thing that would go away (in 3 years) is (possibly) the exemption from having any kind of RID. The 400 foot box etc would still be an exemption.
If you have any boinifyed information share it! Last I saw they (FAA) was working on the AC (advisory circular).
 
#72
Do you (or anyone) have documented proof of this recognition? So far I haven't seen that anywhere official.
Yes. :) Are you familiar with the SRM meetings? 5 AMA clubs that were near airports in controlled airspace were granted permission to exceed 400' altitude at their sites. Signed in documentation. This would not be possible if AMA were not already recognized as a CBO.

Now, do I have my own copy of the documents? No. But contact Eric Williams at AMA and he can share what you would need. He's a very approachable guy and willing to help.
 
#74
If you have any boinifyed information share it! Last I saw they (FAA) was working on the AC (advisory circular).
The reality is, what the FAA is really working on is this proposal. It's only a proposal and has almost zero support from even the commercial drone industry; and they are the ones lobbying for these regs. This is neither regulation or law yet and will inevitably be rewritten long before it ever passes. And you can bet, the 400' box is the first thing that will be scrapped; which is our hobby's biggest blow.

I'm not going to say there is no reason to worry. That would be foolish of me. But this definitely is not final and won't be any time soon. Those that are worried this will effect Flite Fest 2020 are overreacting.
 

rockyboy

Skill Collector
Mentor
#75
Yes. :) Are you familiar with the SRM meetings? 5 AMA clubs that were near airports in controlled airspace were granted permission to exceed 400' altitude at their sites. Signed in documentation. This would not be possible if AMA were not already recognized as a CBO.

Now, do I have my own copy of the documents? No. But contact Eric Williams at AMA and he can share what you would need. He's a very approachable guy and willing to help.
FAA Advisory Circular dated 5/31/2019 commits the FAA to releasing in the future the requirements to be recognized as a CBO:

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_91-57B.pdf

And on the FAA site, last updated by the FAA on December 6th 2019 - still no officially recognized CBOs exist, and requirements to be recognized as a CBO are not finalized either.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/

So yea, the FAA is working with the AMA in a limited fashion, but legally the FAA does not need to listen to a darn thing the AMA says - as we saw very specifically in the proposed new rules where they plainly say they didn't consider the AMA's input at all on the Remote ID proposed rulemaking:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2019-1100-0001 - footnote #51

"In addition to the ARC feedback, during the development of this NPRM, the FAA received two letters specific to remote identification of UAS, one from the Academy of Model Aeronautics and the other from the Small UAV Coalition. Both letters provided their respective organizations' views on the policies that the FAA should propose in this rule. Neither of these letters were considered in the development of this rule. Both letters have been placed in the docket for this rulemaking."

Eric's statements in the podcasts I've heard are carefully worded. And I agree he is very approachable and helpful - it's especially great he's able to help local clubs get through the new FAA hoops being put up all over the place. But spoken words aren't rules, laws, or regulations here - it's the written word that will be approved, implemented, and then litigated, and that's what we need to pay attention to, and comment on to our representatives and to the FAA.
 

rockyboy

Skill Collector
Mentor
#76
The reality is, what the FAA is really working on is this proposal. It's only a proposal and has almost zero support from even the commercial drone industry; and they are the ones lobbying for these regs. This is neither regulation or law yet and will inevitably be rewritten long before it ever passes. And you can bet, the 400' box is the first thing that will be scrapped; which is our hobby's biggest blow.
If we make a loud enough noise, I really hope we can make this happen. Right now I wouldn't put my money on it though.

I'm not going to say there is no reason to worry. That would be foolish of me. But this definitely is not final and won't be any time soon. Those that are worried this will effect Flite Fest 2020 are overreacting.
I agree with this completely. This is going to move at the speed of government, with many interests (hobby, commercial, and governmental) throwing wrenches into the gears.
 
#77
Maybe this is going to be a bit of a rant!!! (Sorry in advance)

My .02 cents......

I am just as disgusted as everyone else when it comes to the FAA trying to take over the airways from people that are flying RC Model Aircraft and Quadcopters!!! (Notice I am not saying DRONES, because I don't fly drones and most people in this hobby don't either--they are flying radio controlled aircrafts and quadcopters!!) Drones to me are autonomous (stupid) GPS guided air vehicles partially controlled on take off and landings, mostly used my the military and other agencies, some for good and some not so good--!!. I think the media generally paints a bad picture of drones!! We need to let the media know we are Radio Control Pilots, not drone pilots!!!! We are controlling the aircraft we are flying!!!

After reading a lot of the comments, I do agree that there is a lot of doom and gloom already written and there may surely be a lot more if/when the FAA attempts take over of airspace and forbids the RC Modeler to fly in it. I am trying to remain calm as many others probably are and see what goes on. I am not telling anyone else to do this, but my plan>>> is to continue flying my RC Gliders as normal, I will fly safely and responsibly, below 400 feet, not near an airport and not to purposefully irritate law enforcement or my neighbors or anyone for that matter because I believe in America no one should be able to take away "use" of the airspace from any US citizen!! That includes the FAA!! We can share the airspace!!! I believe even if the FAA allows drones in the airspace there should be a way we can fly too--we can co-exist. Whatever happened to "SEE AND AVOID", this is how you fly a full scale aircraft in VFR conditions (see Part 91--from the FAA). If the FAA allows drones to have priority in the airspace---we just continue to fly and avoid them----really simple because after all we are "radio controlling" our aircraft!! Drones, however, are on a pre-programmed GPS flight course not controlled by a person (usually)---so we just stay out of their way. Treat them like hot air balloons --give them the right of way and continue flying around them. I know this may be a simplification---but truthfully this is my plan going forward no matter what the FAA does!!!

The other part of all these new proposed rules is the "enforcement" of the non-fly (airspace) areas. How and who does this anyway? Is the FAA suddenly going to hire thousands of people to check all this airspace in America twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week?? Is every cop in every small town going to be charged with protecting airspace when he is already busy with life on the ground. I mean if the FAA was really interested in "SAFETY" after all, they would just leave the RC Modelers alone and worry about the DRONES they are going to let fly all over the airspace autonomously. What is going to happen when a drone (not man controlled) falls out of the sky from a mechanical failure and destroys property, or possibly worse. What is safe about multiple autonomous vehicles flying over people and property?? I would like to see the safety statistics the FAA has compiled on future safety of the airways with totally autonomous flying scenarios. I mean the FAA must think that the RC Modeler has a huge body count or destruction of property in order to remove us completely from the all the airspace-----it DOES NOT exist!!! We are safer just by the fact that we are "controlling" our aircraft!!! I have been flying a long time and I don't think there has been an intentional confirmed death from an RC plane that I can recall.

I am standing by and trying to remain optimistic that the FAA will do the right thing, but I will tell the FAA what I think of their proposed ruling in writing and action (RC flying)!! No one owns the sky!!!! No one has the right to take use of the sky away from a US citizen as far as I know.
 
#78
If we make a loud enough noise, I really hope we can make this happen. Right now I wouldn't put my money on it though.



I agree with this completely. This is going to move at the speed of government, with many interests (hobby, commercial, and governmental) throwing wrenches into the gears.
I would totally put my money on this proposal being scrapped and rewritten. :) It's a rough draft and only that; and literally nobody, including the commercial lobbyists support it in it's current wording.

That's not to say I don't share your concerns. I do. But I wouldn't sell and scrap your hanger yet. At the very least, you can absolutely count on a successful Flite Fest 2020 with no further restrictions than we already have.

You do realize, even if this first draft did pass (and it won't), it would be four years before we saw any effect. So, build, fly and be happy...and see you at Flite Fest 2020. :)
 

sprzout

Knower of useless information
Mentor
#79
Maybe this is going to be a bit of a rant!!! (Sorry in advance)

My .02 cents......

I am just as disgusted as everyone else when it comes to the FAA trying to take over the airways from people that are flying RC Model Aircraft and Quadcopters!!! (Notice I am not saying DRONES, because I don't fly drones and most people in this hobby don't either--they are flying radio controlled aircrafts and quadcopters!!) Drones to me are autonomous (stupid) GPS guided air vehicles partially controlled on take off and landings, mostly used my the military and other agencies, some for good and some not so good--!!. I think the media generally paints a bad picture of drones!! We need to let the media know we are Radio Control Pilots, not drone pilots!!!! We are controlling the aircraft we are flying!!!

After reading a lot of the comments, I do agree that there is a lot of doom and gloom already written and there may surely be a lot more if/when the FAA attempts take over of airspace and forbids the RC Modeler to fly in it. I am trying to remain calm as many others probably are and see what goes on. I am not telling anyone else to do this, but my plan>>> is to continue flying my RC Gliders as normal, I will fly safely and responsibly, below 400 feet, not near an airport and not to purposefully irritate law enforcement or my neighbors or anyone for that matter because I believe in America no one should be able to take away "use" of the airspace from any US citizen!! That includes the FAA!! We can share the airspace!!! I believe even if the FAA allows drones in the airspace there should be a way we can fly too--we can co-exist. Whatever happened to "SEE AND AVOID", this is how you fly a full scale aircraft in VFR conditions (see Part 91--from the FAA). If the FAA allows drones to have priority in the airspace---we just continue to fly and avoid them----really simple because after all we are "radio controlling" our aircraft!! Drones, however, are on a pre-programmed GPS flight course not controlled by a person (usually)---so we just stay out of their way. Treat them like hot air balloons --give them the right of way and continue flying around them. I know this may be a simplification---but truthfully this is my plan going forward no matter what the FAA does!!!

The other part of all these new proposed rules is the "enforcement" of the non-fly (airspace) areas. How and who does this anyway? Is the FAA suddenly going to hire thousands of people to check all this airspace in America twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week?? Is every cop in every small town going to be charged with protecting airspace when he is already busy with life on the ground. I mean if the FAA was really interested in "SAFETY" after all, they would just leave the RC Modelers alone and worry about the DRONES they are going to let fly all over the airspace autonomously. What is going to happen when a drone (not man controlled) falls out of the sky from a mechanical failure and destroys property, or possibly worse. What is safe about multiple autonomous vehicles flying over people and property?? I would like to see the safety statistics the FAA has compiled on future safety of the airways with totally autonomous flying scenarios. I mean the FAA must think that the RC Modeler has a huge body count or destruction of property in order to remove us completely from the all the airspace-----it DOES NOT exist!!! We are safer just by the fact that we are "controlling" our aircraft!!! I have been flying a long time and I don't think there has been an intentional confirmed death from an RC plane that I can recall.

I am standing by and trying to remain optimistic that the FAA will do the right thing, but I will tell the FAA what I think of their proposed ruling in writing and action (RC flying)!! No one owns the sky!!!! No one has the right to take use of the sky away from a US citizen as far as I know.
As has been said before, slow your heart rate and bring your blood pressure down below boiling. :)

Let's start with one thing - "drone". The FAA cites that a "drone" (in their language) is any Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. That is whether it is autonomous (i.e., uses GPS to navigate itself) or is one under human control - in short, anything from a slope soaring RC glider to a scale warbird to an RC flying wing to a multirotor copter to an RC helicopter or any other creation such as an RC flying elephant or RC flying witch.

On to your second point, "See And Avoid" - that will still take into effect even if this proposed rule goes through (and it will most likely not go through in its current iteration). We should be avoiding other aircraft, regardless of what we're flying. Full scale aircraft has right of way; that's part of the AMA Safety code:

I will not interfere with and will yield the right of way to all human-carrying aircraft using AMA’s See and Avoid Guidance and a spotter when appropriate.

We should ALL be following that, AMA members or not, whether you agree with the AMA or the FAA's views, as it's just smart flying.

Last bit - the FAA does not own the sky, but they are trying to keep people safe. It's not safe to run across a 4 lane freeway where large vehicles are traveling at high rates of speed, not only for your safety but for the drivers of those vehicles as well. As with that same respect, you don't go and fly planes in the landing/takeoff path of an airport for safety to yourself and to the pilots and passengers of said planes. The rules and laws that the FAA currently has in place (and I say currently because I'm not considering anything that's not actually in place as valid - things can and probably will change) are for our safety as well as theirs, and while you and I may fly with common sense, the fact that there ARE people out there that aren't flying with common sense (such as the guy who flew a DJI Phantom 2.5 mi out and hit a Blackhawk helicopter a few years back) makes me realize that we need laws to tell the dumb bunnies out there NOT to do it.

I don't currently agree with the proposal as it stands. But it is, as others and I have mentioned, a PROPOSAL. To say it is the end of the hobby and that it is to completely commercialize the hobby - I don't see that happening. I think it's a heavy handed proposal where people are upset, they'll seesaw back off of it a bit, then come back to something that, as with most bureaucracy, doesn't quite work for everyone but justifies their positions.

Is this PROPOSED RULE going to cause a problem for Flite Fest? No. If you think it might, save yourself the money for your visit to Malvern, because you might need it for your antacids and ulcer treatments. :) I think we're making WAY too much of this proposal and thinking it's law.
 
#80
As has been said before, slow your heart rate and bring your blood pressure down below boiling. :)

Let's start with one thing - "drone". The FAA cites that a "drone" (in their language) is any Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. That is whether it is autonomous (i.e., uses GPS to navigate itself) or is one under human control - in short, anything from a slope soaring RC glider to a scale warbird to an RC flying wing to a multirotor copter to an RC helicopter or any other creation such as an RC flying elephant or RC flying witch.

On to your second point, "See And Avoid" - that will still take into effect even if this proposed rule goes through (and it will most likely not go through in its current iteration). We should be avoiding other aircraft, regardless of what we're flying. Full scale aircraft has right of way; that's part of the AMA Safety code:

I will not interfere with and will yield the right of way to all human-carrying aircraft using AMA’s See and Avoid Guidance and a spotter when appropriate.

We should ALL be following that, AMA members or not, whether you agree with the AMA or the FAA's views, as it's just smart flying.

Last bit - the FAA does not own the sky, but they are trying to keep people safe. It's not safe to run across a 4 lane freeway where large vehicles are traveling at high rates of speed, not only for your safety but for the drivers of those vehicles as well. As with that same respect, you don't go and fly planes in the landing/takeoff path of an airport for safety to yourself and to the pilots and passengers of said planes. The rules and laws that the FAA currently has in place (and I say currently because I'm not considering anything that's not actually in place as valid - things can and probably will change) are for our safety as well as theirs, and while you and I may fly with common sense, the fact that there ARE people out there that aren't flying with common sense (such as the guy who flew a DJI Phantom 2.5 mi out and hit a Blackhawk helicopter a few years back) makes me realize that we need laws to tell the dumb bunnies out there NOT to do it.

I don't currently agree with the proposal as it stands. But it is, as others and I have mentioned, a PROPOSAL. To say it is the end of the hobby and that it is to completely commercialize the hobby - I don't see that happening. I think it's a heavy handed proposal where people are upset, they'll seesaw back off of it a bit, then come back to something that, as with most bureaucracy, doesn't quite work for everyone but justifies their positions.

Is this PROPOSED RULE going to cause a problem for Flite Fest? No. If you think it might, save yourself the money for your visit to Malvern, because you might need it for your antacids and ulcer treatments. :) I think we're making WAY too much of this proposal and thinking it's law.
Your last sentence hits the nail on the head. People are mistaking this for law. Believe it or not, even if it passes in it's current wording (again, it won't), it will not be "law". It will be "regulation" . The two are completely different things. Could the regulation become law if it passes as such (again, it won't)? Yes. But that will take a long long long time.

So again, don't trash your fleet and I'll see you at Flite Fest. :)
If the absolute worst happens, as far as the "compliant" side of the hobby, I'll be getting into indoor flyers to at least have something. As long as they don't go crazy and outright ban home builds or the parts required to make them, I'll be building some nice sub-250g park flyers for outdoors that will give a mighty mini like performance and won't require registering to fly at approved sites like club fields.
Again though, club fields will be exempt, if this passes in it's current wording (it won't).