You can become a member of the FTCA!

[Test Fly RC]

As a valid educational institution (we homeschool), I plan on applying for FRIA status for my house. I don't care if the FAA approves it or not, I'll still fly around my own property. I think it would be interesting if they got thousands of applications from folks in a situation similar to mine. I'll happily make my house a FTCA site as well!

I'm homeschooled too!

Maybe I'll apply for our property to be a FRIA

I'll still fly either way!

 

[SP0NZ]

I’m away from my computer for a few days… can someone confirm if the simple stick plans can still be converted to gcode in Inkscape for foamboard cutters? I see they added watermarks to the PDFs, wasn’t sure if they’d changed the formatting any other ways.

@w1lp33 My guess is, no. Although someone with Inkscape will need to try it to confirm. The document is password protected for everything but printing. The addition of the watermarks and the addition of the personal use statement, along with the password security are all measures that Flite Test has taken to help protect their intellectual property from the companies and individuals out there that are trying to profit from Flite Test's work.

 

[sprzout]

I think the key is for the community to step up, and start forming FTCA flying sites.

It may be something as simple as getting that local soccer field recognized as a FRIA. Or for us to find a farmer with some land they'd be willing to lease a portion of, and start an FTCA flying site there.

Again, this isn't something meant to take away from the AMA. It's a way to try to be more inclusive, get more sectured flying sites, to keep the FAA from restricting us out of the hobby. Hopefully someday there will be some crossover from FTCA events to AMA events.

If I was in charge of an FTCA flying site, and AMA clubs were welcoming, one thing I'd organize is field trip days. Where FTCA club members would travel to neighboring fields for day visits, or even overnight group trips. Like flying events or open houses, but on a smaller, more neighborly scale.

I would LOVE something like that. However, I don't see it happening at this time, as it strikes up as "competition". There is no benefit to the AMA to allow non-AMA, FTCA only members to fly. Also, something else to consider since it hasn't been asked yet - if a FRIA is established by the AMA or the FTCA (or any other CBO, for that matter) would it grant FRIA status for ANYONE flying there who is a member of any of the CBOs? I can see that being fodder for potential lawsuits if an FTCA member has a collision with an AMA member or injures an AMA member - whose insurance will cover it? WOULD their insurance cover an incident such as this?

I'm seeing a giant uphill battle for new CBOs, truthfully...

 

[w1lp33]

I kind of figured that, but though maybe we’d get lucky ;-)

Frankly I’ll take print only plans over no plans at all, especially since $24 / year is WAY less money than I expected the subscription to be.

But if no one reports back before I get home on Sunday, I’ll have a look in Inkscape and post my results.

@w1lp33 My guess is, no. Although someone with Inkscape will need to try it to confirm. The document is password protected for everything but printing. The addition of the watermarks and the addition of the personal use statement, along with the password security are all measures that Flite Test has taken to help protect their intellectual property from the companies and individuals out there that are trying to profit from Flite Test's work.

 

[Oldrover TJ]

So what kinda select plans we talking about here?

I've signed up for the spectator...but I could be easily swayed...

I build more than I fly. I find it helps me concentrate better on lectures when I have something for my hands to do. Besides 24 bucks isn't a drop in the bucket compared to the old days of flying and crashing.

 

[JasonK]

I kind of figured that, but though maybe we’d get lucky ;-)

Frankly I’ll take print only plans over no plans at all, especially since $24 / year is WAY less money than I expected the subscription to be.

But if no one reports back before I get home on Sunday, I’ll have a look in Inkscape and post my results.

I haven't used Inkscape to generate g-code, but I just downloaded it and imported the PDF and was able select the different elements (and delete everything that I wouldn't want to be part of the gcode, so I suspect it can be done.

 

[tamuct01]

I think that new CBOs are a good thing, and I do believe it will be an uphill battle for them. I look at FTCA and other CBOs as they stack up to the AMA in a similar manner as the GOA and FPC do to the NRA. There is a massive incumbent organization (the AMA), who in many people's minds have failed to stand up for the hobby and are seeking alternative ways to be represented. I won't stop being an AMA member, for now, because it's tied to my club's flying field. At a later date, I'll look at how this all shakes out and may pick just one organization. I support the mission of Flite Test and the Flite Test family, so $24 is an easy way for me to show that support.

 

[w1lp33]

I haven't used Inkscape to generate g-code, but I just downloaded it and imported the PDF and was able select the different elements (and delete everything that I wouldn't want to be part of the gcode, so I suspect it can be done.

That’s what I wanted to know… if I could select the different lines/elements etc… I would be absolutely thrilled if I can still use my foamboard cutter.

 

[w1lp33]

First set of plans is the Simple Stick from last year.

Unless they change their minds, it won’t include any of John Overstreets Master Series designs. (Per Mrs Bixler on Flite Test Facebook from a conversation about a month or so ago.)

So what kinda select plans we talking about here?

I've signed up for the spectator...but I could be easily swayed...

I build more than I fly. I find it helps me concentrate better on lectures when I have something for my hands to do. Besides 24 bucks isn't a drop in the bucket compared to the old days of flying and crashing.

 

[sprzout]

I'm not sure that would be a good move for them. Admittedly, the AMA's strongest selling point was the pay to play model. And since AMA fields were pretty much the only game in town, if you wanted to fly, you had to join. The rise of park flyers and drones have really hurt them I think. If you can be satisfied with flying your small foamy at the local soccer field, then why spend the money to join the AMA?

Ah, therein lies the rub. You'll still be paying to play with FTCA. "Air Crew" is the only membership that offers insurance, and I guarantee in this litigious society that if you are a free FTCA member but not a paying member of the "Air Crew", you will be up a very dirty body of water without a rowing instrument should you hit someone/something.

Plus, not every soccer field/open field area is going to be available for FRIA status. There are some really nice soccer fields and baseball fields in San Diego - but they also happen to be in the landing and takeoff paths of municipal airports or hospitals with helipads. So, not everything is going to be available for FRIA status...

 

[JasonK]

Ah, therein lies the rub. You'll still be paying to play with FTCA. "Air Crew" is the only membership that offers insurance, and I guarantee in this litigious society that if you are a free FTCA member but not a paying member of the "Air Crew", you will be up a very dirty body of water without a rowing instrument should you hit someone/something.

Plus, not every soccer field/open field area is going to be available for FRIA status. There are some really nice soccer fields and baseball fields in San Diego - but they also happen to be in the landing and takeoff paths of municipal airports or hospitals with helipads. So, not everything is going to be available for FRIA status...

That is the question... are people avoiding the AMA to just avoid the fee or avoiding the AMA because the AMA doesn't offer them anything (other then insurance, which if you read the AMA FPV rules, 'no one' flies in a way qualities valid for AMA's requirements - your spotter has to be able to take over flying LOS and have full ortentation on your craft - which for a quad is nearly impossible at any range if your not on the sticks)

 

[FlyingMonkey]

As a valid educational institution (we homeschool), I plan on applying for FRIA status for my house. I don't care if the FAA approves it or not, I'll still fly around my own property. I think it would be interesting if they got thousands of applications from folks in a situation similar to mine. I'll happily make my house a FTCA site as well!

I think in order for that to work, the organization that you use for homeschooling curriculum would have to submit the request on your behalf.

 

[Oldrover TJ]

First set of plans is the Simple Stick from last year.

Unless they change their minds, it won’t include any of John Overstreets Master Series designs. (Per Mrs Bixler on Flite Test Facebook from a conversation about a month or so ago.)

On well... that's too bad. That man is a true artist when it comes to foamboard. Maybe they will continue to offer free plans in the future. I'm not on any social media sites so I wouldn't know about any updates like that. I know that I would absolutely pay $24 to have downloadable plans and access to anything that comes from the Overstreet barn. Even if it's a half finished attempt at something that definitely doesn't fly but looks fun to build lol

As for the AMA, I've been flying for over a decade and I feel about them the way I feel about the NRA...

 

[FlyingMonkey]

There is no benefit to the AMA to allow non-AMA, FTCA only members to fly.

Which is why I cringe when they claim to be defending the hobby. They defend their business interests and even their members sometimes if it aligns.

Nothing against the AMA, but they are not out there to do what's best for the hobby, it wouldn't be so bad if they were more open about it.

 

[sprzout]

That is the question... are people avoiding the AMA to just avoid the fee or avoiding the AMA because the AMA doesn't offer them anything (other then insurance, which if you read the AMA FPV rules, 'no one' flies in a way qualities valid for AMA's requirements - your spotter has to be able to take over flying LOS and have full ortentation on your craft - which for a quad is nearly impossible at any range if your not on the sticks)

That was also written probably 10 years ago when FPV first started coming out, and would still apply for a fixed wing FPV. We have guys at our field that fly their Stukas and P-40s in mock air combat, so that they can have video of it all, looking like a scale dogfight. For that, someone could theoretically take over on the sticks if their video cut out on them, and fly it out.

That said, if you're flying a racing quad in FPV? Absolutely not - no way are you going to be able to take over. But I'll argue that you still need a spotter for Line Of Sight, to be able to tell you that you have a pedestrian coming by, or a car coming into the parking lot you're flying near, or even another RC aircraft coming up. And, of course, having a spotter to be able to tell you, "Hey, you went down in that bush about 150 feet out, just to your left" is invaluable when it goes down.

I get where you're coming from on it, though - and I think the biggest problems are the guys who are flying where you can't see the pilot, and they're flying well beyond LOS, as high up as they can go, as far out as they can go, just to say "I did it!" without regard for aircraft or people below them.

 

[CappyAmeric]

Joined FTCA as Aircrew. Although I am long-time AMA member, I am very happy someone new is getting into the CBO supporting business. AMA has not been at all sympathetic to the majority of R/C fliers (especially to FPV) in dealing with the FAA. A true non-stuffy, fun loving, love of flying CBO was truly needed!

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Ah, therein lies the rub. You'll still be paying to play with FTCA. "Air Crew" is the only membership that offers insurance, and I guarantee in this litigious society that if you are a free FTCA member but not a paying member of the "Air Crew", you will be up a very dirty body of water without a rowing instrument should you hit someone/something.

Plus, not every soccer field/open field area is going to be available for FRIA status. There are some really nice soccer fields and baseball fields in San Diego - but they also happen to be in the landing and takeoff paths of municipal airports or hospitals with helipads. So, not everything is going to be available for FRIA status...

I'm honestly curious as to how that will work.


If a FTCA "club" manages the FRIA, does the insurance cover the FRIA through the club, or through the individual?

Will you have to be a FTCA member to fly at Edgewater, or will it remain open to all? Will the insurance just require non-insured pilots to fly with an insured pilot present, like a spotter? It will be interesting to find out.

As for the FRIAs themselves, I'm not sure that they'll require insurance, if the landowner doesn't mandate it. Can someone register a flying site in their backyard through FTCA, and then fly without being an Aircrew member?

I don't envy Lee and Josh, they've got a lot of work ahead of themselves getting all of this figured out.

As to all the soccer fields... As I understood it, a CBO or educational institution can submit just about anything as a FRIA. Of course they may not all be approved. But I say let's go for it. Get involved with your county or town officials. We are the FTCA. We will be the ones going out, and teaching the elected officials about the benefits of the hobby and why they should be supportive and not scared. Get them on board with making public spaces FRIAs. Reach out to your local organizations such as the Boys and Girls Clubs and the 4H clubs. Check with your local EAA chapter and see if they have a Young Eagles program, and would they be interested in you helping them learn about RC aviation as a gateway to manned aviation?

And this is a money where my mouth is situation. I've spoken with my county commissioner. I'm in contact with the EAA president. Next week I'm giving a presentation to the local 4H club about "drones". Hopefully soon I'll have some good news about a local flying site as well. Once I do, I'll work to share my information here about what steps I took so it will be easier for others to do the same.

 

[JasonK]

That was also written probably 10 years ago when FPV first started coming out, and would still apply for a fixed wing FPV. We have guys at our field that fly their Stukas and P-40s in mock air combat, so that they can have video of it all, looking like a scale dogfight. For that, someone could theoretically take over on the sticks if their video cut out on them, and fly it out.

That said, if you're flying a racing quad in FPV? Absolutely not - no way are you going to be able to take over. But I'll argue that you still need a spotter for Line Of Sight, to be able to tell you that you have a pedestrian coming by, or a car coming into the parking lot you're flying near, or even another RC aircraft coming up. And, of course, having a spotter to be able to tell you, "Hey, you went down in that bush about 150 feet out, just to your left" is invaluable when it goes down.

Well, if the AMA wants to show that they are actually following the hobby, they should update their rules to make sense (like FTCA's do to me).

I also disagree on the fixed wing FPV, I fly stuff that my oldest most likely wouldn't be able to take over, but he is way more then equipped to spot for me (he flies, just hasn't flown as much as I have) - I have even had my younger kids help out in areas were I want more then 1 set of eyes - A park that is usually clear, but occassionaly has a random person walk into it, so I have kids watching the different areas.

I absolutely see the value in having someone watching for people/cars/planes in the area your flying to make sure it is safe (and am good with this rule), but I would recommend that even when flying LOS because when your flying LOS, your eyes are on the craft, not everywhere else.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

That is the question... are people avoiding the AMA to just avoid the fee or avoiding the AMA because the AMA doesn't offer them anything (other then insurance, which if you read the AMA FPV rules, 'no one' flies in a way qualities valid for AMA's requirements - your spotter has to be able to take over flying LOS and have full orientation on your craft - which for a quad is nearly impossible at any range if your not on the sticks)

Yeah, I see a version of this on the AMA groups every now and again.


AMA members are the absolute worst spokespeople for the AMA. They belittle anyone who isn't a member. They call them cheap. More than once I've seen comments such as "if you're too cheap to spend the cost of a dinner out with the family to join the AMA..."

They call them rule breakers, suggesting that the only reason people don't join the AMA is because they refuse to follow rules. Or dangerous and stupid because they won't get the "cheap" insurance.

They constantly berate, belittle and insult people who dare to suggest they don't see a value in joining the AMA. Which only ends up driving away potential new members. Not just the people they insult directly, but the people witnessing it.

My hope is that the friendly welcoming nature of the FT community proves to be a better strategy in gaining members to the FTCA. The FAA's numbers of about 2,000,000 registered "drone" pilots vs the AMA's 200,000 members just goes to show there's a large number of people out there that have not been sold on the value of the AMA, and you have to ask yourself why. It can't be that all 1,800,000 non AMA members are cheap dangerous and stupid, otherwise there'd be a lot more hobbyist incidents than we've seen.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

I absolutely see the value in having someone watching for people/cars/planes in the area your flying to make sure it is safe (and am good with this rule), but I would recommend that even when flying LOS because when your flying LOS, your eyes are on the craft, not everywhere else.

While I don't disagree, I think it's also not necessary in all applications. One of my favorite places to fly FPV is in the woods. About the only thing at risk of being hit by my quadcopter is a tree.