AMA/FAA Rules for flying RC aircraft under autopiloted flight?

[mikester222]

Hi,

Any information / help that can be provided regarding the following scenario would be greatly appreciated.

We are using a Piccolo+ autopilot and currently testing it out in a standard Alpha 60 RC Trainer A/C (made by Hangar 9). My question is where do I go to find info on the following info in the numbered questions below based on the following:

************

Assumptions:

a) Aircraft is a proven (i.e. non-experimental) airframe and engine setup weighing under 25 lb. total weight with autopilot hardware installed.

b) Aircraft when flown under autopilot control shall not exceed 400 ft. in altitude.

c) Aircraft when flown under autopilot control shall remain within visual range of the test ground crew at all times (same as during normal RC flight).

d) System shall provide a means for immediate override of the autopilot system with a standard RC Radio Transmitter for the aircraft.

e) Autopiloted RC aircraft flight would not be performed within 3 miles of any local airport flying full sized aircraft.

******

Questions:

1) Does the AMA have any rules governing flight of an RC aircraft under autopilot control? If so, what are they?

2) Can such an aircraft be flown under autopilot control at an AMA sponsered airfield? If yes, are there any special rules / procedures that must be followed when doing so?

3) If answer to (2) is no, where can such an aircraft be flown? Suggestions...?

4) What are the FAA rules governing operation of such an aircraft? Do we need any special coordination, clearances, and/or waivers from the FAA to operate such an aircraft?

Thanks for your assistance.

Mike Dittmer
Highlands Ranch, CO, USA

[CenTexFlyer]

Mike,

There is MUCH for you to learn on the subject! You can visit www.rcapa.net/forums and look at the discussions there. You can also do a little searching here of FAA regulation, but those forums pretty much turned into a hairball after they started. The AMA will not support/endorse/authorize autopiloted R/C vehicles.
The FAA is INDEED about to regulate them.

Join in the fun, the more the merrier!

Gene

[kd7ost]

http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/105.pdf

Those are the current rules in a pdf file. Rule no 9 under "Radio Control" is the one you're looking for.

In a word, No. The AMA doesn't allow our kind to fly at AMA sanctioned fields. So, I say you can do it as long as no non supporting club members are around. You don't want to risk the clubs sanction and it's all a liabilty issue for the AMA. (Don't file any claims and get rid of the complainers;))

There are no current regulations in the FAA that prevent you from doing what you want to if following your description above.

Most of us find remote places that take us away from any fields, crowds etc. Good luck to you it sounds like a neat project.

Dan

[fhhuber506771]

the auto-pilot turns it into a "UAV" experimental aircraft which is outside the AMA's insurance coverage. The AMA has to draw a line somewhare about what will and won't be covered n thie insurance so the underwriters can give them a price for it each year.

The main problem is getting insurance if you need it for such a project. The cheapest insurance for RC aerial photography that I have heard of is $1500 a year.

[Myron]

Hey guys,

You know the funny thing about the AMA.. They dont seem to mind Aircraft that weigh in upwards of 100 LBS,(contrary to theur 55 lb rule) nor do they seem to mind the Giant scale 3D displays on the deck within 30 feet of a huge crowd.. One small malfunction and you could have disasterous results..
For us guys expiramenting with auto pilots, we usually DONT do it with a crowd around and most of our birds fly like big trainers and they are well below all the weight limits yet the AMA shuns us!.. And another thing, were doing it for the betterment of or hobby, technology, and society in general.. Our shunned "expiraments" will one day fill the sky doing good things for the world...

Off My soap box now!

Myron

[fhhuber506771]

The AMA has specific rules regarding the 55+ lb models... which you are free to look up.

I have never seen a demonstration of a large model as close to the crowd as you are saying... the basic safety code rule of keeping the plane on one side of a line and the crowd on another cold be said to allow just 1 inch separation... but all the demonstrations I have seen have had a minimum of 150 ft at the closest the aircraft got to the spectators.

You think you are doing it for the betterment of the hobby... but is it really going to improve the public opinion? You are making things that promote the concept of models being easilly weponised. "Walk to the local hobby shop, get a plane with a GPS programmable auto-pilot and add a bomb. You don't even have to learn to fly the thing. Just put it together, download the program into the autopilot and send it on its way." This stuff is already being printed as possible. ( http://www.armscontrol.ru/UAV/clips.htm ) Lets give em more examples of how easy it is to do.

It doesn't have to be practical to do that for it to be in the public perception as being possible... Not all technological advancements are helpful to the hobby.

[kd7ost]

You think you are doing it for the betterment of the hobby... but is it really going to improve the public opinion? You are making things that promote the concept of models being easilly weponised. "Walk to the local hobby shop, get a plane with a GPS programmable auto-pilot and add a bomb. You don't even have to learn to fly the thing. Just put it together, download the program into the autopilot and send it on its way." This stuff is already being printed as possible. ( http://www.armscontrol.ru/UAV/clips.htm ) Lets give em more examples of how easy it is to do.

It doesn't have to be practical to do that for it to be in the public perception as being possible... Not all technological advancements are helpful to the hobby.

fhhuber506771,

I am proud to be AMA member 276090.

I am a UAV advocate that does not have any inclinations that what I am doing is to better the RC hobby or the AMA.

The weapons argument is old and tired. Car bombs, bomb vests and big knives are currently the weapon of choice for terrorists.

More importantly, this forum is for guys to discuss the advancement of the UAV hobby and share idea’s. A few do get their hackles up over the existence of AMA but most do not. They have the right to say things that meet the criteria of posting rules. I don’t see anything bad in this thread until your slightly antagonistic post above.

As a long time member and supporter of AMA, I don't take offense to comments about trying to better the AMA through UAV's. So what if some guys think or want that?

I do take offense however to the insinuation that we are here making devices that promote the concept of potential weapons. UAV’s are used for Aerial photography, Search and Rescue, Remote sensing, Atmospheric soundings, inspection tools for first responders, monitoring progress in land reclamation, monitoring erosion and helping wildland firefighters see what kinds of terrain and fuels they’re facing in forest fires, the list goes on and on. Most here are just doing it as hobby work and are enjoying themselves. There is another tired argument I'll use for my point. Since thousands of people die in car accidents every year, drivers and advocates of car usage may be promoting the concept of killing people with cars. It's all pretty weak don't you think?

I fully support you defending the AMA in the AMA forums. But not attacking UAV guys in the UAV forum. This isn’t the place for that.

Dan

[fhhuber506771]

bash the AMA... I don't care where... and prepare to be bashed right back

[kd7ost]

Only one person on this thread seemed to take a shot across the AMA bow. It would be better if you take it up with that person directly? I for one never said anything bad about the AMA and very few here ever do. Don't attack all of us UAV hobbyists in general because of what one person said. That's neither a fair nor an acceptable practice.

Dan

[LukeZ]

The UAV weapons argument is not only old and tired, it's ridiculous and the people who make it take a rather myopic view of the world. For example, the link fhhuber506771 gave that documents the "terrorist's" use of UAVs was interesting, but did it mention any of them having success with it? No. They were all playing around with toys and most of them crashed. Not only has a terrorist yet to kill anything more than a passing gnat with a UAV or more likely an RC controlled airplane, even the stuff they did use, if it were effective, would not be nearly as damaging as what they can already do just fine with a bit of C4.

The truth is, the only guys who have UAVs that are both effective and deadly are the guys we call Uncle Sam, not Osama. I don't see anyone bitching about our military using UAVs to go around and kill people, which the Predator has done plenty of. Maybe our military shouldn't be researching that since the technology could get in the wrong hands... maybe they shouldn't have been researching the atomic bomb, now there's nuclear weapons all over the world. Here's one, maybe they shouldn't have given weapons to Osama in Afghanistan when he was fighting the Soviets, or chemical weapons to Saddam when he was fighting the Iranians. Pretty poor foresight there, eh? That goes way beyond talking about a hobby in some forum, that's handing the enemy a gun. Still, I don't see anyone getting their feathers ruffled about that. This is my point about myopia.

And yes, it is true that public perception often doesn't coincide with the reality of things. But is that an argument for stopping whatever activity the public doesn't understand? Hardly. If that were the case science and societal progress would be at a standstill. If there's a problem with public perception then the solution is better public education, not the halting of science or experimentation because we don't want to upset Granny in Wyoming watching Fox news.

I'm sorry if I'm a bit harsh, probably fhhuber506771's post alone didn't warrant it - but we get this stuff all the time in here and I'm tired of it.

Luke

[LukeZ]

"Walk to the local hobby shop, get a plane with a GPS programmable auto-pilot and add a bomb. You don't even have to learn to fly the thing. Just put it together, download the program into the autopilot and send it on its way." This stuff is already being printed as possible. ( http://www.armscontrol.ru/UAV/clips.htm ) Lets give em more examples of how easy it is to do.
Frankly, you accuse us of doing something that promotes the concept of UAVs being weaponised - I'd say it's people like you and the comments they make like the one above that promote that view way more than we do. Going around and spreading illogical fear and misinformation is the surest way to promote those views. And yes, your characterization of the problem above is nothing short of misinformation. It's downright ridiculous.

Like I said, the answer is accurate and intelligent public education. Which, I may add, will be necessary more to counteract statements such as yours than to counteract any potential threat these things realistically have in the hands of terrorists.


Luke

[kd7ost]

Frankly, you accuse us of doing something that promotes the concept of UAVs being weaponised - I'd say it's people like you and the comments they make like the one above that promote that view way more than we do. Going around and spreading illogical fear and misinformation is the surest way to promote those views. And yes, your characterization of the problem above is nothing short of misinformation. It's downright ridiculous. Luke

Well said Luke,

Dan

[shedao]

Hey guys,

You know the funny thing about the AMA.. They dont seem to mind Aircraft that weigh in upwards of 100 LBS,(contrary to theur 55 lb rule) nor do they seem to mind the Giant scale 3D displays on the deck within 30 feet of a huge crowd.. One small malfunction and you could have disasterous results..
For us guys expiramenting with auto pilots, we usually DONT do it with a crowd around and most of our birds fly like big trainers and they are well below all the weight limits yet the AMA shuns us!.. And another thing, were doing it for the betterment of or hobby, technology, and society in general.. Our shunned "expiraments" will one day fill the sky doing good things for the world...

Off My soap box now!

Myron



What's also funny is that the pioneers of radio control had to go through the same gauntlet when it was brand new. They were considered mavericks just like us. The AMA needs to recognize this. People are scared of a computer controlled model airplane but yet it's ok to fly it via radio because that's considered safe??

[shedao]

You think you are doing it for the betterment of the hobby... but is it really going to improve the public opinion? You are making things that promote the concept of models being easilly weponised. "Walk to the local hobby shop, get a plane with a GPS programmable auto-pilot and add a bomb. You don't even have to learn to fly the thing. Just put it together, download the program into the autopilot and send it on its way."


Yes but how is this any different from Walk to the local hobby shop, get a plane with radio control and add a bomb? Both are stand off weapons and we know that radio control can go much further than within eye sight using the right technology, add a camera and you've got the same thing.

This "battle" is all about perception.

It would be nice to go to the same airfields provided by the AMA and be covered under the same insurance. UAVs are no more dangerous that R/C models. Our fellow hobbiest know we aren't using this technology for harm and that idea of "what could happen" is totally unfounded.

[Myron]

Hey Guys,

I know that there are rules reguarding larger than 55lb aircraft.. You gotta get special waivers.. How bout the guy it the UK with that monster B-52 that crashed and burned (unfortunately) That thing hitting a crowd would be devastating.. 3D on the deck.. You must not have ever seen "Airplane Blain" do a show either.. Rolling circles around the runway at many clubs across the south central United States.. He was EASILY within 30 feet of the fence/grandstands whre there was a crown of people... His motor was 26 HP and swinging a huge prop on a 49 lb aircraft.. Certainly more dangerous that a 3 lb foam wing with a 4 oz camera at 400 feet away... I personally watched a B-17 model plow into the parking lot at the largest B-17 gathering in Texas.
The reason I rant about not liking the AMA is simple... I CANT get a waiver to fly a 3lb wing to take pictures from a safe distance of anything yet guys are getting them for flying 95+ Lb 13ft wingspan multi-engine aircraft, 300 MPH jets, 3D Shows, ect CLOSE to a crowd.... Also try making a claim with them and they tell you to try your homeowners first...
Dont get me wrong here.. I LOVE seing these huge high tech models.... I dont like the fact that the AMA supports this but turns their back on a guy that wants to make a few bucks taking pics or doing some air sampling with a sub 10 lb aircraft far away from a crowd....
As for the weaponizing of an aircraft.. Who do you think came up with the concept?..Your free to look that info up as well.. As for it potentially being a weapon, Offensive of Defensive???? I would use it BOTH ways to keep this country free... I am happy that a machine can potentially keep people out of harms way... and for all the bad uses of one I could give you 50 good ones...

Myron

[fhhuber506771]

the title of the thread is a shot at the AMA...

It might be nice for you to get the same inurance... but the insurance carrier thinks it is worth more $$$$ to cover you. The AMA doesn't want to raise dues to $1000 a year.

[Myron]

I wasnt the one that started the thread. I merely voiced my opinion.. The AMA will always be able to offer cheap dues because they dont ever have to pay a claim.. The way I see it, They are very hypocritical in their method of doing business. The only reason I have it is to allow me to fly at sanctioned fields..

The AMA should be promoting all viable uses of model aviation, they should be promoting the advancments in avionics, power plant technology, building materials and composites, ect..ect, AND public perception of all minature things that fly...


Myron

[kd7ost]

the title of the thread is a shot at the AMA...


Title= AMA/FAA Rules for flying RC aircraft under autopiloted flight?

C'mon Fred,

What in that title makes you think the author took a shot at the AMA? Maybe the New Mexico Sun has been real bad this year.

The poor guy who asked a simple question is probably rolling his eye's thinking he just walked into a pre-school and asked his question.

Fact's are....

There are guys who want to fly beyond AMA rules and are going to always hate the AMA for making them leave.

There are guys who fly RC that think any developement beyond what they are interested in has to have some nefarious end.

It would be nice if we could get a new forum started for guys who want to fight issues. Then it could be contended out of here.

Dan

[fhhuber506771]

I wasnt the one that started the thread. I merely voiced my opinion.. The AMA will always be able to offer cheap dues because they dont ever have to pay a claim..

Go to the AMA website.. look up tha annual insurance claims report... they do pay claims.

How many more of your misconceptions need correcting.? (probably a lot)

[birdman11787]

fhhuber506771,


.... UAV’s are used for Aerial photography, Search and Rescue, Remote sensing, Atmospheric soundings, inspection tools for first responders, monitoring progress in land reclamation, monitoring erosion and helping wildland firefighters see what kinds of terrain and fuels they’re facing in forest fires, the list goes on and on. .

Dan

Yes UAV's have a place...... and professionals in that field are making advances.....BUT R/C Hobbiests????? Advancement of R/C flying ? Give me a break....... want to fly by wire ? out of visual range? Get yourself a good flight sim program and knock yourselves out. Its no different and a lot safer. The joy of R/C comes from being able to watch your aircraft fly in realtime, visually. I challenge the uav hobbiests here to explain to me the reason they NEED to fly "out of visual range" .
Seriously, there seems to be way too many amateurs trying to send gps guided "homebuilts" on wayward missions. From what I read, the basic knowledge of structural design and stability and control is less of an issue then "how far away can i be and still get my video downlink" ! sheesh.... the concept of shear webs between spars eludes what seems like 90 % of the audience here...... flame away if you must........ i am just trying to put things in perspective here. (and yes I realize there are a few that are semi-proffessional posting here.....but you are doing the general public a disservice by promoting this as a hobby) Just my opinion....... thats all
john

[Godseykj]

Go to the AMA website.. look up tha annual insurance claims report... they do pay claims.

How many more of your misconceptions need correcting.? (probably a lot)


Do you work for AMA or something? Who cares about AMA's permission to do anything? They have no authority. They just need to take thier projects to the farm fields where you won't kill anyone!

That being said... I don't think anyone should fly beyong normal R/C range unless they coordinate with local authorities. Since I'm on an Army project, I don't have some of the same problems as other people here, but I still coordinate with police, FAA (who opens 'windows' in our class c airspace), and county emergency operations center. I think all should have the same local coop!

Don't think that just because I work for the Army all the cards just fell into place. I went out and met with people, informed them of our project, in some cases I made deals and begged people for things to happen. No one should be going at it alone. Work in groups, project manage and plan things out. If your having to ask the AMA for anything, your probably over your head. You need to be away from those fields anyway.


Just my late-night thought.

By the way, fhhuber506771 reminds me of all the old coots at the airfield that complain anytime somebody flys upside down...lol.

Rules are rules....follow them where they apply!

KJG

[kd7ost]

Yes UAV's have a place...... and professionals in that field are making advances.....BUT R/C Hobbiests????? Advancement of R/C flying ? Give me a break....... want to fly by wire ? out of visual range? Get yourself a good flight sim program and knock yourselves out. Its no different and a lot safer. The joy of R/C comes from being able to watch your aircraft fly in realtime, visually. I challenge the uav hobbiests here to explain to me the reason they NEED to fly "out of visual range" .
Seriously, there seems to be way too many amateurs trying to send gps guided "homebuilts" on wayward missions. From what I read, the basic knowledge of structural design and stability and control is less of an issue then "how far away can i be and still get my video downlink" ! sheesh.... the concept of shear webs between spars eludes what seems like 90 % of the audience here...... flame away if you must........ i am just trying to put things in perspective here. (and yes I realize there are a few that are semi-proffessional posting here.....but you are doing the general public a disservice by promoting this as a hobby) Just my opinion....... thats all
john

Hey John,

I'm not advancing the RC hobby. Never said I was. Frankly I don't care to. But you guys aren't reading all that's been posted in this thread have you? I fly RC and enjoy that thrill immensely. But RC flying isn't the end of my road. I will continue to do what I do with UAV's because I can and because I want to. Thats all the reason I need and you will just have to live with that even if you don't like it. I draw a distinction from hobby recreation flying and doing my UAV work. The hobby RC part is just for my selfish enjoyment. I do love that but I don't limit myself to that.

I dream of UAV systems that are small, light and affordable. Systems that can do a job saving lives or property and be affordable. Not something from General Dynamics or Boeing. Not every user need out there should have to have 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars in order to use the technology. There's nothing at all wrong with me and hundreds of other guys trying to do that very thing outside of the hobby based AMA. We don't chose to limit our flying to little more than satiating our own RC pleasure. But we don't care if you do.

All that said, guys doing this just for the fun of it have that right too. Go get a simulator and knock ourselves out? Nice John. You don't belong in this thread or area. It is for UAV's. Being a malcontent in a room of contents won't get you very far.

Dan

[typicalaimster]

Go to the AMA website.. look up tha annual insurance claims report... they do pay claims.

How many more of your misconceptions need correcting.? (probably a lot)

Per the AMA...

Model Aviation Safety

Facts:

1.There are an estimated 35 million model aircraft
flights by Academy of Model Aeronautics members each
year.

2.During 2004 there were 127 claims filed for property
damage and medical/injury.

3.That translates to 3.6 claims per million flights.

4.Most claims are for less than $2000.

5.Most injuries are self-inflected.

Conclusions:

1.Model aviation is a very safe sport/hobby.
2.Most accidents are minimal, and self inflected.


Why have Academy of Model Aeronautics insurance?

1.For the same reason most people have homeowners
insurance -- to cover unlikely catastrophes.

2.Insurance requires safety rules and enforcement
thereof, thereby assuring continued safe flight
operations.

3.The safety record supports the positive results that
have been achieved.

Only reason why I have this information on hand is because our club is looking for a new field.

[birdman11787]

Hey John,

Nice John. You don't belong in this thread or area. It is for UAV's. Being a malcontent in a room of contents won't get you very far.

Dan

You're probably right ...... i don't belong here. I'll still visit, but I'll keep my opinions to myself since I'm a "malcontent". Thanks for pointing that out kd.

[kd7ost]

No problems. ;)

Dan

[Myron]

As Scott pointed out.. NOT TO MANY CLAIMS... Now of those claims, How many did the AMA say "sorry, try you homeowners".. As I found out the hard way, AMA is only suplimental insurance... Pretty handy for them to pass the buck dont you think? Oh, just so you dont think that I am a careless modeler, my claim was because some crackhead stole all my stuff....

How many members does AMA have? X 58.00 bones a year, adds up.. and dont try to tell me that they pay for the magazine either.. I have been in that business and the advertisers pay for it..

Want a reason to fly beyond visible range?.. This one requires alot of thought..NOT.. We are on call with a local fire department... Were pretty rural so sometimes it is tough to locate the exact local of a fire and the best way to get to it... There may also not be an easy way to get close to the fire with a vehicle...

If the state of California flew routine UAV flights over rural areas, there would be alot less acreage being consumed by fire...

Any questions??

Myron

[fhhuber506771]

The AMA alway says file with homeowners (if you have it) first... if you READ the stuff.. AMA insurance is SECONDARY. Thats one reason that its not 5 times as expensive.

But then... this is bringing reality into the picture... and you don't want to see reality.

[Myron]

Like I said PASS THE BUCK!!! Are you denying that is what they do? And if you READ the above post you would see that I already stated that it was suplimental ins.. Reality is this... AMA ins is a waste of money, well its only good for getting you "legal" to fly at a sanctioned field... Look at the rules that they are talking about for "new" modelers that are thinking of getting into the hobby.. What do they want you to do?? BUY INSURANCE before you go to a sanctioned field and get you hands on the sticks..

Myron

[LukeZ]

I challenge the uav hobbiests here to explain to me the reason they NEED to fly "out of visual range" .
Jon, I challenge YOU to explain to me the reason you NEED to fly R/C at all.


Luke

[kd7ost]

Nicely put Luke,

I was going to say something about that comment but figured I owed him no explanation at all. Your question puts it well.

Dan

[starcad]

the auto-pilot turns it into a "UAV" experimental aircraft which is outside the AMA's insurance coverage. The AMA has to draw a line somewhare about what will and won't be covered n thie insurance so the underwriters can give them a price for it each year.

The main problem is getting insurance if you need it for such a project. The cheapest insurance for RC aerial photography that I have heard of is $1500 a year.

I really hate to say what I'm about to say. AMA will not insure a UAV which is under some kind of control, however they insure Free Flight models which are totally out of any control. Who's right, Who's wrong? I think the jury is still out and having a bad day over this one. Please don't take this as bashing the AMA as it isn't meant to do that, just that it is strange that the rules for UAV development are different than those for others involved in model flying.

[starcad]

Yes UAV's have a place...... and professionals in that field are making advances.....BUT R/C Hobbiests????? Advancement of R/C flying ? Give me a break....... want to fly by wire ? out of visual range? Get yourself a good flight sim program and knock yourselves out. Its no different and a lot safer. The joy of R/C comes from being able to watch your aircraft fly in realtime, visually. I challenge the uav hobbiests here to explain to me the reason they NEED to fly "out of visual range" .
Seriously, there seems to be way too many amateurs trying to send gps guided "homebuilts" on wayward missions. From what I read, the basic knowledge of structural design and stability and control is less of an issue then "how far away can i be and still get my video downlink" ! sheesh.... the concept of shear webs between spars eludes what seems like 90 % of the audience here...... flame away if you must........ i am just trying to put things in perspective here. (and yes I realize there are a few that are semi-proffessional posting here.....but you are doing the general public a disservice by promoting this as a hobby) Just my opinion....... thats all
john

Not a flame John just a question. Have you ever wanted to sit behind the controls of your model and fly it from the inside? With VR gooles it is a blast just like flying a real plane. Hold the nose on the horizon and make a turn. Max takeoffs are hoot and landings are a real blast. Just some of the things that the UAV guys are doing and thus providing more enjoyment to the hobby.

[fhhuber506771]

you want to fly UAV's... do it... but don't complain that the AMA rules say the AMA isn't going to insure you and then complain that you don't like the AMA insurance.

If you want the AMA insurance, that means you think its got some value.

The AMA has its rules... if you want to fly at an AMA field... follow the rules. If you don't like the rules... go away.

[shedao]

Well some of us are AMA members so we would like to be heard. We think the rules need to be changed. We pay our dues just like the others and we are hobbiest just like anyone else. We deserve a platform to speak about the rules just like anyone else. You can tell us to go away until you face is red, but it's not gonna happen. UAV hobbiest are here to stay and we wish to be recognized.

[Myron]

Quote
"If you want the AMA insurance, that means you think its got some value."
Your not reading again... I dont "want" it, I am forced to have it... It is only good to get you into a sanctioned AMA field.. When I fly at a club, I do obey the rules.

FHhuber, Do you own a park flyer? If so where do you fly it? Many people get into flying park fliers because its fun, and you dont have to go to an overcrowded field and wait forever to get a freq pin, and you dont have to spend money on insurance that is of no real value... If your "in the know" with the AMA then you would know that they are trying to figure out a way to get everyone with park flyers to join a club and buy their insurance.

Myron

[starcad]

you want to fly UAV's... do it... but don't complain that the AMA rules say the AMA isn't going to insure you and then complain that you don't like the AMA insurance.

If you want the AMA insurance, that means you think its got some value.

The AMA has its rules... if you want to fly at an AMA field... follow the rules. If you don't like the rules... go away.

Wow! Dude I can't even begin to believe you just said that. :eek:

[Jeff85]

Everybody just Chill Out! :p

Didn't we all get into this hobby just to have FUN?

I've been flying for over 40 years off and on and I'm over here to learn about UAV's from you guys, not to read about all this up tightness.

Check out my build thead post# 248-257, please. I'll be asking questions later.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=394769&page=17&pp=15

In it for the fun,
Respecfully, Jeff Wilson Sr.

Oh Yeah, AMA member since 1998 #618428 :)

[mikester222]

Thank you to everyone for all the info and data. Much appreciated!!! :D

I'll have to go read through all of this and see what I'm up against.


thx again,

Mike

[Myron]

Mike,

Your up against alot! If you want to delve into UAV territory or even just do AP for hire.. There are lots of things in the works as far as this goes.. In short, The AMA does not and will not cover any "commercial" use of a model aircraft. They only cover recreational flying at a sanctioned field.. When I say "cover" that means if you have a claim they tell you to try your homeowners insurance first. Now the FAA. They are planning on lumping all model aircraft that are used commercially into a sub 55lb class of UAV.. So technically, if you have a slowstick or a gentle lady with a camera and you get paid for you photos, you are now operating a UAV.. The FAA is currently working on alot of regulations and certifications that these aircraft and pilots have to meet.. There are several SIG's(special interest groups) out there that are working with the FAA to try to get the regs written so that we dont have to totally jump through hoops and spend alot of money to "certified"...

Myron