You can become a member of the FTCA!

[JasonK]

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.

sure, but if your making rules. "always have a spotter" is better then "always have a spotter with the following exceptions that are so unclear as to be sure to be confusing and prone to issues on both sides"

Even in the woods, you would need to worry about a person walking into the flying area (not to much to worry about regarding manned aircraft... as the trees would be a much bigger issue)

 

[Hai-Lee]

Seriously I am surprised that people can be so insular and divisive when all the aim of the exercise is flying models safely.
This insurance or that insurance with flying field access conditions, often stupid and ill-informed rules are generated and enforced locally such that it is almost impossible to concentrate on the purpose of the exercise, FLYING and ENJOYMENT.

From my experience, it appears that the best of intentions are quickly subverted by the egos of those who attain some degree of power and control. I am suing a local club in the Supreme Court, (at my own expense), simply because their unsafe rules are enforced and actually require members to breach federal regulations just to be able to fly. My first model was a gas powered "Q-Tee" which I built from the plans supplied in a magazine back in 1976, and to date I have been a member of three official clubs in various parts of the country.

If you know the radio technology or even electronics in general to an advanced degree you will experience a great deal of difficulty. I had reason to contact the AMA to request a proper evaluation of the current radio technology's actual safety features, (based upon much research and testing), and their response was for me to contact the Chinese manufacturer, (actually there are many). I am sure a suspicious Chinese manufacturer is going to freely supply I.P. in relation to how their equipment actually functions to a total stranger on the internet, (assuming that they actually know how it really functions). Perhaps the answer actually demonstrated the knowledge vacuum in those who are supposedly responsible for the SAFE administration of the hobby.

Personally I am now flying free of club rules and insurance whilst still following all of the required regulations and by-laws. Insanely my students and a number of other club members now fly with me and at the same location I do, simply because they complain of a lack of knowledge and too many rules being part of the club scene. It is easy to support others in the hobby and it is even easy to educate them BUT when you try to control others problems will ensue. I have always preferred education over domination but then, I do have knowledge, (some don't). Mind you my knowledge is not complete and I research and study almost continuously to be able to assist others, (currently I am working my way through Deviation and Open Tx simply because no one seems to know much about them locally.

I applaud FT's ideas but sadly my experience is that in order to be able to provide the special membership benefits punitive measures and additional rules will result until the focus shifts almost totally to the enforcement of the rules and not the enjoyment of the actual members. Having said that I would gladly part with my dollars if the FT entity was to remain pure to its starting ideals. Also if the insurances had global coverage, (I still encounter those from overseas looking for a fly on their holidays or business trip), a large number of really good, safe and educated flyers would gladly join even without the added special conditions.

I encourage anything that will advance the hobby and the enjoyment of those participating in the hobby but do have grave concerns where controls, (other than actual member and public safety), are concerned, or required. Locally our group is on the verge of forming our own official co-operative association and everyone is expected to bring their planes to fly and to leave their egos at home. Our enjoyment level is at an all time peak with laughter and smiles being very common. Even outside of a formal club structure my number of students is increasing.

Finally clubs are great! They are beneficial to the hobby! Their only problem is that they are controlled by people that have a personal need to control others and it is because or those people, (and their egos), that the clubs are destined, and designed, to inflict pain and suffering upon their membership and the hobby itself.

I wish FT all the best with their venture and I hope it is a real success. If it lasts and provides value I may consider it in the future!

REMEMBER!

Have fun!

 

[Bricks]

To even apply for FRIA status you have to be and prove you are a community based organization which most clubs are. When applying for FRIA status you have to supply them the GPS coordinates of your flying field. Once approved then the transponder rule goes away for flying from that field. FRIA`s will be good for 3 years ( if my memory serves me right ) then need to reapply within 90 days of expiration date..


I had to do the leg work for our club of what it takes to do a FRIA`s. Took a lot of searching to garner the information the exact rules for FRIA`s will not be out until September of 2022 if even then they did not sound real confident about the timeline.

 

[Test Fly RC]

Would you guys please stop? I know. It's free with a free membership. How much does a free membership cost? You know what, I'll SELL you the plans for only $5 US. (plus shipping).

Haha, ok so it was a joke!

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Finally clubs are great! They are beneficial to the hobby! Their only problem is that they are controlled by people that have a personal need to control others and it is because or those people, (and their egos), that the clubs are destined, and designed, to inflict pain and suffering upon their membership and the hobby itself.

I wish FT all the best with their venture and I hope it is a real success. If it lasts and provides value I may consider it in the future!

REMEMBER!

Have fun!

Agreed!

I'd like to see a sort of Yelp app for clubs (and hobby shops) where people can review the experience they have at the site.

Rules are unfortunately a necessary evil. Sometimes because the landowner requires it. Sometimes because someone thinks it will prevent something bad from happening. I do like Mike Rowe's philosophy of "Safety Third". Now his is in regards to the workplace, and as I recall, it is summed up with the idea of, if you truly made Safety First, you wouldn't be able to do most jobs. There's some places where risk is just a factor. I think the FT fun first has been a long running theme. It has been pointed out by the safety first types, because FT doesn't always strive to eliminate ALL risk. The build tents at Flite Fest are a perfect example. AMA regulations state that you can not maiden a plane at a flying event. FT says.... yeah, build it, fly it, crash it, do it again, all at the event.

Like you, I hope and expect this to carry over to the community, and the FTCA flying sites. I am sure that negative experiences will be had. But I also hope that FT tries to manage it better than it has been with "other" CBOs. Some of the experiences I have heard about at existing fields certainly explains many people's hesitation to join clubs. The AMA has stated that they have no control over how individual clubs are run. My thoughts are, that those clubs are representing the AMA and should be held accountable, or risk losing the AMA backing. I can't see this as being a philosophy that FT would abide.

 

[PsyBorg]

I wonder when (and you all KNOW this will happen) The Gubment requires all frias to submit members personal information how FT would handle that.

We are seeing it now with drag racing where the Gubment is hammering people for illegal mods for cars that will NEVER see the road. They are mass raiding, seizing, and majorly (100's of thousands of dollars for some) fining these guys out of the blue. Don't think for one second they wont do it to us.

The policy to compromise and comply is a bad strategy. The Gubment has its own agenda and we do not nor will EVER fit into it. They know the snowflake generations panic over everything so they stack the rules to insanity. then they pull back MINOR things that really dont effect their agenda and the snowflakes bow in acceptance saying wow we dodged a bullet there.. Sound familiar from the initial Remote ID proposals?

BTW ALL of them rules are still in play and written they will be implemented as the tech becomes available. Unless we unite in a ZERO regulation stance they will do this. With a ZERO regulations stance and enough people united that body will have the power to dictate terms of how it should work. NOT have it force fed to us in chunks.

I know rules are required and healthy safety attitudes are necessary but in the end the corporate lobbyists will buy what they want and until we are a large enough UNITED faction they will rule the skies and take the hobby from us. Look at that piece of crap race drone DJI put out. That is a test bed to show the Gubment we accept that way of doing things. As the rules were wrote CERTIFIED manufacturing, CERTIFIED repairs ONLY. If you wanna take it in the rear every time you buy, fly, or need repairs go ahead and compromise. Your only cutting your own throats.

The people they say are causing problems will STILL cause problems no matter what. You will just be getting fleeced by the Gubment for being the prefect sheepole they want to control.

 

[sprzout]

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.

Simple answer - they haven't been told that they needed to be part of a CBO before this latest round of FAA rules, or they haven't flown at AMA fields.

Now, however, they're going to be told they have to comply because of a few stupid individuals who want to fly drones over their neighbor's house to spy on girls in bikinis, or fly in national parks where there are "no drones" signs to get that shot of Half Dome/the Rocky Mountains/the bighorn sheep in Joshua Tree/looking down on Old Faithful as it erupts, etc., or fly into a Black Hawk helicopter because they're 2 mi. off the coast and do $500k in damages to the helicopter.

I understand that it's not the majority, it's the minority. But the minority doing dumb things is what's affecting the majority.

 

[JasonK]

Simple answer - they haven't been told that they needed to be part of a CBO before this latest round of FAA rules, or they haven't flown at AMA fields.

That sounds a whole lot like regulatory capture.

 

[Hai-Lee]

Agreed!

I'd like to see a sort of Yelp app for clubs (and hobby shops) where people can review the experience they have at the site.

Rules are unfortunately a necessary evil. Sometimes because the landowner requires it. Sometimes because someone thinks it will prevent something bad from happening. I do like Mike Rowe's philosophy of "Safety Third". Now his is in regards to the workplace, and as I recall, it is summed up with the idea of, if you truly made Safety First, you wouldn't be able to do most jobs. There's some places where risk is just a factor. I think the FT fun first has been a long running theme. It has been pointed out by the safety first types, because FT doesn't always strive to eliminate ALL risk. The build tents at Flite Fest are a perfect example. AMA regulations state that you can not maiden a plane at a flying event. FT says.... yeah, build it, fly it, crash it, do it again, all at the event.

Like you, I hope and expect this to carry over to the community, and the FTCA flying sites. I am sure that negative experiences will be had. But I also hope that FT tries to manage it better than it has been with "other" CBOs. Some of the experiences I have heard about at existing fields certainly explains many people's hesitation to join clubs. The AMA has stated that they have no control over how individual clubs are run. My thoughts are, that those clubs are representing the AMA and should be held accountable, or risk losing the AMA backing. I can't see this as being a philosophy that FT would abide.

Yes flying sites can have special requirements as can local government and state government authorities. These regulations are generally safety and public image related and so are common no matter where you fly, (unless you own the site).

The real focus of clubs and even national associations should be to make the hobby MORE enjoyable and SAFER.

My most recent student restarted to learn, (with me this time), after he had left the local club. He approached me and the group to see if anyone wanted to buy his planes as he was quitting the hobby. He had just lost interest in all of the BS. On the same visit he was encouraged to fly one of the stabilised Eachine micro planes of one of my more advanced students and he suddenly found that he could fly and land without crashing. He told us that it was the best days flying he had ever had, and he really enjoyed himself.

Last I had heard he had raced home and purchased one of the same models and now he will be advancing his skill under the tutelage of the association membership. After a little more airtime and with a little education we will assist him with the proper setting up of his larger models and expanding his flying experience. He had been a member of the local club for 2 years without any improvement or real assistance.

Sadly he was asked, (by us), to renew his local club membership purely for the insurance coverage and the larger sized models he wishes to fly eventually. Actually all of those under instruction or who fly larger models are required to obtain insurance and that means joining the local club, (at this time), which is a national association requirement even though the students do not wish to fly at the club fields.

This person's original decision to leave the hobby, (and to possibly become a permanent critic opposing the flying of RC models and drones), is not unique and his experience is sad testimony in relation to those who run and control the clubs and national associations. As for the CLUBS they are way overdue for a full overhaul. Too many Neanderthals in control who simply do not understand much of anything and they are making rules based upon that lack of knowledge. Often the rules are to suppress that which they do not know or understand. They are the radio control versions of the Flat Earth Society. Actually I can provide evidence of club rules and common practices actually causing model crashes and personal injuries but the national association does not care as long as the affiliated club membership is paid.

As I said before I wish FT well but I will remain wary and a sceptic until it has some positive history or demonstrated benefits.

Please remember we fly for only one reason, to

Have fun!

 

[sprzout]

That sounds a whole lot like regulatory capture.

So go extreme and ignore everything, I guess...And I mean EVERYTHING.

 

[PsyBorg]

Simple answer - they haven't been told that they needed to be part of a CBO before this latest round of FAA rules, or they haven't flown at AMA fields.

Now, however, they're going to be told they have to comply because of a few stupid individuals who want to fly drones over their neighbor's house to spy on girls in bikinis, or fly in national parks where there are "no drones" signs to get that shot of Half Dome/the Rocky Mountains/the bighorn sheep in Joshua Tree/looking down on Old Faithful as it erupts, etc., or fly into a Black Hawk helicopter because they're 2 mi. off the coast and do $500k in damages to the helicopter.

I understand that it's not the majority, it's the minority. But the minority doing dumb things is what's affecting the majority.

And no matter how much regulation they write those same dumb#$@ will still be engaging in Darwinian antics.

 

[JasonK]

So go extreme and ignore everything, I guess...And I mean EVERYTHING.

My experience with the AMA has been 'you must have AMA membership to fly here,' and haven't seen a whole lot come out of the AMA that shows much value to me beyond that.

What I saw of the AMA when the initial stuff came down related to remote ID, the AMA seemed mostly/only interested in getting CBO status and keeping their airfields 'useful'. Does that mean that they are hoping that remote ID makes them more members? no idea. Does remote ID look like it could do so? yes. With AMA having the only current airfields (and at least initially with how it was setup to not allow new ones after x date), the AMA would have basically become the de-facto 'you can fly here' CBO.

I really wish that the AMA did a better job of selling it self and supporting the hobby, I think all of us would be in a better spot if that was the case.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

I really wish that the AMA did a better job of selling it self and supporting the hobby, I think all of us would be in a better spot if that was the case.

Here's our chance to "do better". Let's make sure that we don't repeat the same mistakes. I'm guilty of my share of complaints, but the existing model isn't all bad. We have an opportunity to go a different direction than others on the same path have taken. Hopefully it leads to a better experience for our fellow hobbyists.

 

[PsyBorg]

Just to be clear.. There are STILL no certified CBO's. The AMA is currently nothing but open fields charging people a grass tax.

As for insurances.. These are NOT real policies. they are supplemental. They cover exactly squat until all other avenues have been exhausted. Like any person or homeowners policies people have. After that gets exhausted then the AMA insurance may or may not kick in as with ALL insurances they will spend more money denying your claim then paying it.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Simple answer - they haven't been told that they needed to be part of a CBO before this latest round of FAA rules, or they haven't flown at AMA fields.

Now, however, they're going to be told they have to comply because of a few stupid individuals who want to fly drones over their neighbor's house to spy on girls in bikinis, or fly in national parks where there are "no drones" signs to get that shot of Half Dome/the Rocky Mountains/the bighorn sheep in Joshua Tree/looking down on Old Faithful as it erupts, etc., or fly into a Black Hawk helicopter because they're 2 mi. off the coast and do $500k in damages to the helicopter.

I understand that it's not the majority, it's the minority. But the minority doing dumb things is what's affecting the majority.

Those aren't the reasons for all of this. Those are the excuses. If that was what they were worried about, club fields would never have even been looked at. None of those situations are related to fixed flying sites. The original NPRM suggested a time limit on the FRIA exemption, and that at a future time even club flights would require remote ID.

 

[JasonK]

Here's our chance to "do better". Let's make sure that we don't repeat the same mistakes. I'm guilty of my share of complaints, but the existing model isn't all bad. We have an opportunity to go a different direction than others on the same path have taken. Hopefully it leads to a better experience for our fellow hobbyists.

Absolutely, we all need to find ways to bring the hobby together instead of pushing it apart.

 

[Hai-Lee]

The remote ID is just a blame allocating device, A bit like the number plates on your car.
If someone uses false number plates or a hacked ID device that happens to be tied to you personally you are guilty of the offence until you can prove otherwise. Not a fair system by any measure!

RC radio equipment is easy to hack and for a hundred dollars or so I could obtain the ability to hack and take over control almost any drone or model aircraft. There is no encryption, the Transmitter and receiver ID numbers are broadcast in the clear. A high power amplifier is readily available to swamp any RC transmitter signal and it becomes easy to use the collision avoidance requirements of FCC part 15C as applied to all RC equipment to cause the original transmitter to effectively cease transmitting altogether.

As I mentioned earlier the National associations do not know enough to support the best interests of their members and sadly do not seem to be able or willing to keep up with technological changes. As the RC equipment is a primary factor in safe and responsible operation surely the national associations should up their game and provide something to their members for the funds they extort.

Sadly the real value of national associations is the insurance they can provide BUT they fail to ensure that the members are informed of the actual safety measures the technology can provide. I have not treed, crashed, or lost control of a model in about 2 years and have not had a single safety incident since I left the self generated interference of the local club.

The technology is changing at an increasing rate and yet the associations are unable to be able to inform their members of what is actually safe and what is not! If the associations were commercial businesses selling product they would go broke and be subject to much court action.
If you doubt their ignorance just ask them to describe how the radio works and its safest operating method and then test the information you receive. The result will surprise you. No wonder they seem powerless to properly represent the interests of the sport/hobby!

Have fun!

 

[Rasterize]

Happy July 4th Weekend! Spread the word!

 

[Intashu]

Reading all this.. It's way over my head half the time. I found a small local field near me that's part disk golf course but mostly open field. which occasionally is used for events. When there's no events going on, why fly at the field...

Found out that TECHNICALLY that field isn't zoned for flying due to it's proximity to a nearby river.

Local police regularly drive through that park and have even stopped to watch and/or ask us about the planes. Nobody's ever told us otherwise but my dad and I agreed should someone say something we'd just stop flying there.

we're both signed up with the FAA regulation numbering thing where you gotta write your numbers on all your birds.

All the excess regulations and rules I've seen are kind of a tossup... I absolutely see why they feel the need to have them, there are too many bad faith actors out there. But In our case it also feels like a situation where, so long as nothing happens, nobody is being harassed, or flying close to people, animals, roads, ect. and staying under ~200 feet.. the rules are not being enforced as there's no real issue. The moment there IS an issue, at least there is a legal ruling on the issue.

I joined the FTCA thing because FliteTest really got me into the hobby. And I want to support it going forward Hoping for the best outcome of the Hobby. The volume of complexity into the AMA is way beyond me, And I doubt I'll ever end up joining any local clubs, to which I know at least a couple exist, because I like my quiet field flying... Making the hobby complicated ruins my personal experience.

I am curious to watch and see how all this stuff progresses going forward. I can't imagine how the hobby will grow at all if there isn't major changes, both in making sure new pilots are responsible, and in making sure that the rules don't choke out potential new pilots from wanting to join the hobby!

 

[GrizWiz]

General rule of thumb for me is to check the FAA Flight zone app before flying and stay out of politics. Not saying I don't have a opinion on these matters but I will say the AMA is holding some things back. They are not doing this for the hobby as much as they are doing this for their business. FliteTest is doing this for multiple reasons some being for their business and most for the hobby. FT needed a way to release plans without having other companies make their business of of them.