Joining AMA

[Bricks]

Here's why joining AMA is going to be beneficial (at least right now):

The AMA is currently the only recognized Community Based Organization (CBO) by the FAA.

Flite Test is not, at least not yet. Will they be a CBO? Likely, yes, but their application is still under review and will likely need to meet the following requirements, as listed on the FAA webpage:


Community Based Organizations (CBOs) that meet the statutory definition in Section 44809(h) of the Exception for Limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft, may apply for FAA recognition:

• Described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
• Exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
• Mission of which is demonstrably the furtherance of model aviation;
• Provide a comprehensive set of safety guidelines for all aspects of model aviation;
• Provide programming and support for any local charter organizations, affiliates, or clubs; and
• Provide assistance and support in the development and operation of locally designated model aircraft flying sites

Now, does the above mean that FTCA won't get CBO status? No. I think they likely will, but it's probably not going to be until after the first of the year at the earliest, and likely not until first quarter of 2023 with how government bodies are going to go on vacation between now and the first of the year.

Why does that CBO status mean anything? Because CBOs are the only ones that can apply for FRIA status (FAA Recognized Identification Areas) for a flying site. You want to fly aircraft, you will need to be either flying with a Remote ID device (which the only ones that are currently planned are in the $200 price range), or you'll need to be flying at a FRIA, which will need to be established by a CBO. Seeing that the AMA is the only CBO recognized by the FAA at this time, they're getting the jump on submitting for FRIAs for AMA established fields like the field at Muncie, or my current club's location here in San Diego (we're actually part of the trial submission for a small group of clubs for FRIAs). Anyone who wants to fly at a FRIA established by the AMA, I can almost guarantee is going to need to be an AMA member.

So...do you need to join the AMA? No. But if you want to participate in AMA events, or fly at AMA fields, yes, and I can almost guarantee you'll need it to fly at AMA established FRIAs because they'll likely be AMA fields.

And if you're just going to be illegal and not pay attention to the laws, that's on you - this isn't going to apply to you anyway.

These rules sound like they were written by AMA for AMA to keep there control.

 

[sprzout]

Any local club can become a CBO the FRIA just makes it easier in general for the club aspect.

In reality AMA is not needed if each club wanted to become a CBO and filled out the application properly.

A CBO is nothing more than a nonprofit community organization, there are thousands and thousands of them, just about every organization in your local community is a CBO..

As others have said, in theory.

In reality, however, if you're going to want to be a CBO, I doubt they're going to let just anyone claim to be a CBO for the FAA. I think there's going to be some liability that they're going to have to absorb, especially if they're saying, "We're going to help these people under our organization fly without having to use Remote IDs in our FRIAs." That's that organization taking on liability, whether explicit or implicit, and I can bet that the FAA isn't going to be handing out CBO recognition to just anyone who doesn't want to take on that liability. FTCA saying, "We're not going to be responsible for any accidents by having our members just sign waivers," might not sit well with the FAA.

I'm waiting to see who else gets approved; I'm sure there's going to be others, but looking at the requirements, I can also see CBOs like the Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts of America not getting approved on these items:

(h) Community-based Organization Defined.-In this section, the term "community-based organization" means a membership-based association entity that-
(1) is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
(2) is exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
(3) the mission of which is demonstrably the furtherance of model aviation;
(4) provides a comprehensive set of safety guidelines for all aspects of model aviation addressing the assembly and operation of model aircraft and that emphasize safe aeromodelling operations within the national airspace system and the protection and safety of individuals and property on the ground, and may provide a comprehensive set of safety rules and programming for the operation of unmanned aircraft that have the advanced flight capabilities enabling active, sustained, and controlled navigation of the aircraft beyond visual line of sight of the operator;
(5) provides programming and support for any local charter organizations, affiliates, or clubs; and
(6) provides assistance and support in the development and operation of locally designated model aircraft flying sites.

A mission to demonstrably further model aviation could rule out organizations like the Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts, because model aviation is not their main focus and is arguably ONLY a focus for those scouts looking to pursue merit badges or programs in aviation, which may only be once or twice a year or for a very small niche.

Also, publishing a comprehensive set of safety guidelines, which is a huge issue for most people here who just say, "Use common sense", is going to be a sticking point for some. Yes, you will actually have to have rules published that detail a flight line. Yes, you will actually have to have rules for things like having a spotter for FPV. Yes, you will have to have rules posted about putting FAA numbers on your aircraft. You know, all of the rules that many people here are complaining about having to follow...Those sorts of things will put the kibosh on a CBO application.

Lastly, providing assistance and support in the development and operation of locally designated model aircraft flying sites - this means that they would need to show that they are helping to establish flying sites, maintain sites, and show that they are trying to attract new flyers to those locations. Organizations NOT doing that may not be recognized as a CBO.

Does this mean that an organization outside of the AMA couldn't be recognized as a CBO? Absolutely not. There can, and most likely will be, other organizations outside of the AMA that will be recognized. But I can see this being a swamp where people are either going to fight to be recognized, or there's going to be a lot of groups recognized that fall apart after a year or so and are no longer recognized as a CBO, thus taking their FRIA statuses with them.

I say this having worked in the telephone industry for decades, where the FCC let everyone split and create their own phone companies under divestiture. Companies came up, popped up all over, providing phone services for various customers, until they realized that they couldn't make it work, couldn't undercut the bigger companies, and either sold off their services and customers to the larger corporations like AT&T, or they went under and told those customers to find someone else. This is what I see happening to some CBOs. Let's say that "Joe's Flying Club" submits the paperwork to become a CBO. They create a list of rules, they get their tax exemptions, they develop a mission statement, and they go out into the community and set up events and flying areas that the community at large can come in and fly at. Then they apply for and get a FRIA established, and realize, "Hey, this is a heckuva lot of work to maintain!" and decide to fold because they don't want to police their organization to make sure people are following the rules they published, or they no longer qualify for the 501(c) non-profit status, or they no longer want to get out into the community and promote model aviation as one of the requirements for CBO status.

I think there's going to be denials for those "organizations" that are popping up trying to pretend to be a CBO because of that. You don't want to jump through all of the hoops, you're not serious about this, you don't get to play in the sandbox.

 

[sprzout]

These rules sound like they were written by AMA for AMA to keep there control.

If you don't like the rules, you're welcome to run for office and try to change them...that's what politics is all about, right? You're welcome to do a "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington", except that those ideals were killed decades ago.

Lastly, remember the roots of the word politics: "Poli" means many. "Tics" are bloodsucking parasites.

 

[Bricks]

CBOs. Let's say that "Joe's Flying Club" submits the paperwork to become a CBO. They create a list of rules, they get their tax exemptions, they develop a mission statement, and they go out into the community and set up events and flying areas that the community at large can come in and fly at. Then they apply for and get a FRIA established, and realize, "Hey, this is a heckuva lot of work to maintain!" and decide to fold because they don't want to police their organization to make sure people are following the rules they published, or they no longer qualify for the 501(c) non-profit status, or they no longer want to get out into the community and promote model aviation as one of the requirements for CBO status.

This is what each club is doing already I don`t see the big deal. Our club carries an extra insurance policy to cover the owner of the land our flying site is on, even thou we are an AMA club.

Want to be ultra nit picky do we follow all rules to a T nope do other clubs around us nope and how would the GODs that be even know.

 

[sprzout]

CBOs. Let's say that "Joe's Flying Club" submits the paperwork to become a CBO. They create a list of rules, they get their tax exemptions, they develop a mission statement, and they go out into the community and set up events and flying areas that the community at large can come in and fly at. Then they apply for and get a FRIA established, and realize, "Hey, this is a heckuva lot of work to maintain!" and decide to fold because they don't want to police their organization to make sure people are following the rules they published, or they no longer qualify for the 501(c) non-profit status, or they no longer want to get out into the community and promote model aviation as one of the requirements for CBO status.

This is what each club is doing already I don`t see the big deal. Our club carries an extra insurance policy to cover the owner of the land our flying site is on, even thou we are an AMA club.

Want to be ultra nit picky do we follow all rules to a T nope do other clubs around us nope and how would the GODs that be even know.

Then apply for a CBO. See if you get accepted or rejected.

 

[Merv]

Bruce might right.

 

[Mr NCT]

Lastly, remember the roots of the word politics: "Poli" means many. "Tics" are bloodsucking parasites.

A big thank you to the Smothers Brothers

 

[CappyAmeric]

sorry what now? is there some thing magical about 6s that makes it more dangerous the an equivelent WH 3s? [for example] - I get higher voltage can 'jump' larger gaps, but we are still way below any sort of serious jumping distances. and does that allow 2 3s lipos in series? [which is all a 6s lipo is... 6 1s lipos in series all packed together...]

LOL. It is right in the AMA safety rules. No 6s LIPOs. No matter that a 6s quad may have lower prop RPM than a 4s. 6s is the sweet spot in 5” because it is lighter for the energy, and it give less sag. Ignorance abounds - no wonder the FAA loves them.

 

[JasonK]

LOL. It is right in the AMA safety rules. No 6s LIPOs. No matter that a 6s quad may have lower prop RPM than a 4s. 6s is the sweet spot in 5” because it is lighter for the energy, and it give less sag. Ignorance abounds - no wonder the FAA loves them.

so is 12S acceptable by the AMA safety rules?

 

[HVB79]

LOL. It is right in the AMA safety rules. No 6s LIPOs. No matter that a 6s quad may have lower prop RPM than a 4s. 6s is the sweet spot in 5” because it is lighter for the energy, and it give less sag. Ignorance abounds - no wonder the FAA loves them.

This is an intentional misrepresentation of the AMA safety program vs the AMA official competition class specifications.

The AMA safety rules DO NOT restrict drone racing to 4s.

The document is titled:
FPV Multi-Rotor Club Sport Racing Recommendations

It is a set of recommendations for holding "Club Sport" category FPV races. Some of the recommendations are safety related and some are related to the specifications for "Club Sport" FPV racing. "Club Sport" is a class of racing in the same way that "MultiGP Open" is a class of racing.

The AMA safety rules in no way restrict members from racing 6s quads. The AMA simply does not have an officially recognized "club sport" class for 6s drones.

Here is a link to the AMA safety rules for FPV:
Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

 

[sprzout]

LOL. It is right in the AMA safety rules. No 6s LIPOs. No matter that a 6s quad may have lower prop RPM than a 4s. 6s is the sweet spot in 5” because it is lighter for the energy, and it give less sag. Ignorance abounds - no wonder the FAA loves them.

Can you provide proof of this? I'm looking at the Safety Handbook and the Safety Code, and there is no mention of "No 6S batteries" anywhere.

 

[sprzout]

This is an intentional misrepresentation of the AMA safety program vs the AMA official competition class specifications.

The AMA safety rules DO NOT restrict drone racing to 4s.

The document is titled:
FPV Multi-Rotor Club Sport Racing Recommendations

It is a set of recommendations for holding "Club Sport" category FPV races. Some of the recommendations are safety related and some are related to the specifications for "Club Sport" FPV racing. "Club Sport" is a class of racing in the same way that "MultiGP Open" is a class of racing.

The AMA safety rules in no way restrict members from racing 6s quads. The AMA simply does not have an officially recognized "club sport" class for 6s drones.

Here is a link to the AMA safety rules for FPV:
Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

Gotta love when people bend things to suit their agenda of jumping on the "I Hate the AMA" bandwagon...

 

[Bricks]

If you don't like the rules, you're welcome to run for office and try to change them...that's what politics is all about, right? You're welcome to do a "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington", except that those ideals were killed decades ago.

Lastly, remember the roots of the word politics: "Poli" means many. "Tics" are bloodsucking parasites.

Just because you get a CBO does not mean you have to sponsor other clubs as FRIA`s. Being a CBO can stand on it`s own and not involve any other entity, as many in local communities are in the pure definition of what a CBO is.

 

[sprzout]

Just because you get a CBO does not mean you have to sponsor other clubs as FRIA`s. Being a CBO can stand on it`s own and not involve any other entity, as many in local communities are in the pure definition of what a CBO is.

So, let me ask, then, since it seems like there is disdain for the AMA on your part:

Have you gotten your club to apply for a CBO? And if not, why not?

 

[JasonK]

Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

Yup still requires a 'trainer' to learn to fly, so how does a club without someone already flying FPV start flying FPV?

... and the ability to fly the craft LOS - and orientation on a quad is hard at any meaningful range. does seem a bit less "anti-multi-rotor" then it was before [this looks updated from the last time I looked at it

that doesn't look like a general safety document, just the everything extra for flying FPV, which really shouldn't need to be anything more then 'you just have a spotter co-located with you who can always see your craft' [IE the current FAA requirements] anything else is just general RC flying safety.

 

[HVB79]

Yup still requires a 'trainer' to learn to fly, so how does a club without someone already flying FPV start flying FPV?

The document does NOT require a 'trainer' to learn to fly FPV. In fact the document does not even contain the word 'trainer'.

Once again here is the document. Please read it.
Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

Please provide a quote from the document that supports your statement.

 

[CappyAmeric]

This is an intentional misrepresentation of the AMA safety program vs the AMA official competition class specifications.

The AMA safety rules DO NOT restrict drone racing to 4s.

The document is titled:
FPV Multi-Rotor Club Sport Racing Recommendations

It is a set of recommendations for holding "Club Sport" category FPV races. Some of the recommendations are safety related and some are related to the specifications for "Club Sport" FPV racing. "Club Sport" is a class of racing in the same way that "MultiGP Open" is a class of racing.

The AMA safety rules in no way restrict members from racing 6s quads. The AMA simply does not have an officially recognized "club sport" class for 6s drones.

Here is a link to the AMA safety rules for FPV:
Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

Nonsense. The AMA web page giving guidance to becoming a CBO. Included is a link to the AMA Safety Handbook. Included in the AMA Safety Handbook is a link to setting up a “FPV Multi-Rotor Club Sport Racing“ club. The AMA recommendations specifically say LIPO and Lfe limited to 4s. Spin it they way you like, it is in the AMA Safety Handbook.

You may not know they FAA works. Their “Advisory Circulars” are “advisory” and yet if people establish procedures etc. that are contrary to the FAA’s ”advice” they eventually can be violated. The AMA is the FAA’s deputy sheriff now. Kind of like Barney.Fife.

 

[HVB79]

The AMA is hosting the 2023 MultiGP International Open at the Muncie flying site.
MultiGP open class rules allow any battery: "No Limit"
If you were correct they could not hold this event.

"Club Sport" is similar to "Club 40" for pylon planes. It is "Club" in that it is the slowest class of racing. Just because the slowest class has limits to make it more approachable to new pilots does not restrict all classes to those limits. In addition just because "Club Sport" or "Club 40" has limitations does not ban informal racing with other equipment.

 

[Merv]

...Have you gotten your club to apply for a CBO? And if not, why not?

I'm waiting to see if the FTCA is approved as a CBO. If the FTCA fails, then there is no chance any other CBO will ever be approved. The AMA will have a monopoly. If the FTCA is approved, then my club will apply for a FRIA though them.

Only time will tell if there is more than one CBO.

 

[JasonK]

The document does NOT require a 'trainer' to learn to fly FPV. In fact the document does not even contain the word 'trainer'.

Once again here is the document. Please read it.
Unmanned Aircraft Operations Utilizing First-Person View

Please provide a quote from the document that supports your statement.

maybe you should read it again

AMA FPV novice pilots undergoing training with an experienced AMA FPV pilot