United States Amateur Model Fpv Safety Code (Including AMA Code 550) - Page 6

Gary Evans · Sep 07, 2009, 04:26 PM

See post# 1 for our FPV SAFETY CODE guidelines. You are not required to be an AMA member and these are suggested guidelines not rules or regulations.

outngo · Sep 07, 2009, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary Evans

See post# 1 for our FPV SAFETY CODE guidelines. You are not required to be an AMA member and these are suggested guidelines not rules or regulations.

I suppose if you are not an AMA member then the AMA FPV rules don't apply to you. But the FAA rules on fpv does? Makes sense.

nerys · Sep 08, 2009, 12:03 AM

I don't understand the 400ft agl limit. I don't ever want to be below 400ft except when taking off and landing so I would simply not fly under these rules.

IE why can I fly to 5000ft if I can see it but 400ft remotely? is the FAA guideline just that a guideline or am I breaking some actual law if I go over 400ft?

seems dangerous to me. I tend to prefer staying high where I can't run into anything :-)

nerys · Sep 08, 2009, 01:04 AM

I don't like words like "regulated" and "authorized" I see your from brazil so I have no idea what the laws are like there but here in the US anything not explicitly laid out for the feds and the states falls to the people IE government but out.

The NAR (not NRA) and tripoli just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and 9 years to fight and finally DEFEAT the BATF and get APCP off the explosives list.

Someone at the ATF got a "hard on" about rockets and wanted them regulated. Even though if you hovered Marine One over our field and we launched 100 rockets I don't think a single one would hit it. and a black market RPG is a lot cheaper than a level 2 or level 3 model rocket which has NO guidance at all.

Same here. The last thing we need is some dimwit getting a hard on about fpv and wanting to REGULATE REGULATE REGULATE.

I do not want nor do I need "authorization" or "regulation"

Insurance is nice. Usually they weight "actual" risk and not perceived risk.

Safety is paramount! I am all for safety. The buddy box is a bit much for me (hey its there ball game though) but I absolutely agree with the SPOTTER being on hand. If that video signal drops your in deep doo doo

I think Under 400ft no populated areas if your ALONE visual limits if your have a spotter would be just fine. Bring a pair of binocs and you have an effective range of several miles IE more than your radio gear can handle :-)

Turbines and FPV? Ouch thats really asking for trouble :-) hehe

Gary Evans · Sep 08, 2009, 07:27 AM

Too much has occurred to restate al of the history so this is the short version. All of the relevant facts can be found by searching the threads here.

By early 08 the handwriting was on the wall regarding legal FPV in the U.S..
AMA had excluding it via rule # 10 and FAA was in the process of regulating all small UAV's in which licensing and aircraft certification was expected.

Out FPV Safety Code was written to show responsibility and try to have a positive effect on both governing bodies. We were successful with AMA, which now allows FPV with a buddy box and hopefully in time may relax that requirement. We had no such luck with FAA and they are moving ahead full speed drafting regulations. Best guess is that they will publish in 2010-2012 and will effectively disallow amateur FPV by the limitations and cost involved. If this occurs only AMA sanctioned FPV will remain. The current FAA plan is to let AMA manage amateur model aircraft and everything else will fall under full sized aircraft type rules.

Right now there are no laws or regulations in effect. FAA guideline (recommendation) AC 91-57 calls for a 400ft AGL limit and they have made it clear that flights should be VLOS.

JustinONE · Sep 08, 2009, 11:08 AM

well I don't expect this Hobby to last very long, be it in the USA or Europe. seems the government is very concerned about us.

I'm thinking about purchasing atleast a dozen or more video tx's on 900 and 2.4. as our governments will be putting a lock down on anyone who's importing over 10mw transmitters...get them now while they are still cheap.

Tarro · Oct 23, 2009, 08:51 AM

I used to think that and care about what the Gov't was going to do but I am no longer worried about it. I only fly about 3000 to 4000 feet out and that is VLOS to me and I really don't think they can out law that. As far as the equipment becoming hard to get, none of the things we use are exclusive to FPV except maybe the OSD.

fritzdecat · Oct 23, 2009, 09:38 AM

I wonder what percentage of FPV flyers have taken passed the Technician grade ham license test?

patrickegan · Oct 27, 2009, 11:56 AM

Let's see what they do to balloon boys dad!?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Poll US Amateur Fpv Guidelines	Gary Evans	Video Piloting (FPV/RPV)	272	Aug 20, 2008 11:55 AM
Changes to AMA Safety Code	Jim Branaum	AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics)	2	Nov 06, 2003 12:07 AM
AMA Safety code change	ED B	Foamies (Kits)	7	Jul 02, 2002 05:44 PM
AMA safety code change	ED B	Slope	1	Jul 01, 2002 10:40 PM
AMA safety code change	ED B	Electric Plane Talk	0	Jul 01, 2002 10:23 PM

Sep 07, 2009, 04:26 PM	#76
Gary Evans Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mesa, Arizona Posts: 992	See post# 1 for our FPV SAFETY CODE guidelines. You are not required to be an AMA member and these are suggested guidelines not rules or regulations.

Sep 08, 2009, 12:03 AM	#78
nerys Grrr :-) Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Levittown PA 19057 Posts: 136	I don't understand the 400ft agl limit. I don't ever want to be below 400ft except when taking off and landing so I would simply not fly under these rules. IE why can I fly to 5000ft if I can see it but 400ft remotely? is the FAA guideline just that a guideline or am I breaking some actual law if I go over 400ft? seems dangerous to me. I tend to prefer staying high where I can't run into anything :-)

Sep 08, 2009, 01:04 AM	#79
nerys Grrr :-) Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Levittown PA 19057 Posts: 136	I don't like words like "regulated" and "authorized" I see your from brazil so I have no idea what the laws are like there but here in the US anything not explicitly laid out for the feds and the states falls to the people IE government but out. The NAR (not NRA) and tripoli just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and 9 years to fight and finally DEFEAT the BATF and get APCP off the explosives list. Someone at the ATF got a "hard on" about rockets and wanted them regulated. Even though if you hovered Marine One over our field and we launched 100 rockets I don't think a single one would hit it. and a black market RPG is a lot cheaper than a level 2 or level 3 model rocket which has NO guidance at all. Same here. The last thing we need is some dimwit getting a hard on about fpv and wanting to REGULATE REGULATE REGULATE. I do not want nor do I need "authorization" or "regulation" Insurance is nice. Usually they weight "actual" risk and not perceived risk. Safety is paramount! I am all for safety. The buddy box is a bit much for me (hey its there ball game though) but I absolutely agree with the SPOTTER being on hand. If that video signal drops your in deep doo doo I think Under 400ft no populated areas if your ALONE visual limits if your have a spotter would be just fine. Bring a pair of binocs and you have an effective range of several miles IE more than your radio gear can handle :-) Turbines and FPV? Ouch thats really asking for trouble :-) hehe

Sep 08, 2009, 07:27 AM	#80
Gary Evans Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mesa, Arizona Posts: 992	Too much has occurred to restate al of the history so this is the short version. All of the relevant facts can be found by searching the threads here. By early 08 the handwriting was on the wall regarding legal FPV in the U.S.. AMA had excluding it via rule # 10 and FAA was in the process of regulating all small UAV's in which licensing and aircraft certification was expected. Out FPV Safety Code was written to show responsibility and try to have a positive effect on both governing bodies. We were successful with AMA, which now allows FPV with a buddy box and hopefully in time may relax that requirement. We had no such luck with FAA and they are moving ahead full speed drafting regulations. Best guess is that they will publish in 2010-2012 and will effectively disallow amateur FPV by the limitations and cost involved. If this occurs only AMA sanctioned FPV will remain. The current FAA plan is to let AMA manage amateur model aircraft and everything else will fall under full sized aircraft type rules. Right now there are no laws or regulations in effect. FAA guideline (recommendation) AC 91-57 calls for a 400ft AGL limit and they have made it clear that flights should be VLOS.

Sep 08, 2009, 11:08 AM	#81
JustinONE Registered User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Torrance Posts: 1,215	well I don't expect this Hobby to last very long, be it in the USA or Europe. seems the government is very concerned about us. I'm thinking about purchasing atleast a dozen or more video tx's on 900 and 2.4. as our governments will be putting a lock down on anyone who's importing over 10mw transmitters...get them now while they are still cheap.

Oct 23, 2009, 08:51 AM	#82
Tarro Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Long Island, New York Posts: 1,145	I used to think that and care about what the Gov't was going to do but I am no longer worried about it. I only fly about 3000 to 4000 feet out and that is VLOS to me and I really don't think they can out law that. As far as the equipment becoming hard to get, none of the things we use are exclusive to FPV except maybe the OSD.

Oct 23, 2009, 09:38 AM	#83
fritzdecat Registered User Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Cedar Grove North Carolina Posts: 406	I wonder what percentage of FPV flyers have taken passed the Technician grade ham license test?

Oct 27, 2009, 11:56 AM	#84
patrickegan SlowStick Test Pilot Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Sacramento RCAPA.NET Posts: 3,652	Let's see what they do to balloon boys dad!?