AMA members got an email from AMA re discussions held at the AMA Convention Center. Little of substance as to what the NRPM regarding small UAS will contain........big hush hush subject until it is released, but not surprisingly the general theme as it pertains to modelers is said to be there will be two paths to regulation of activity, a default path for the hoi polloi and a privileged path for those that sign up for regulation by AMA, aka 'community-based organization.'

Insiders and BFFs of insiders interpret what they are privy to as 'little will change' in our familiar MO regarding model airplane operation as a result of the pending regulation. When they use terms like "our" and "we," be aware they are referring to like minded individuals that are AMA members. They also say that indications are regulation of those on the default path and not of their persuasion will be draconian.

Enuf intro, I expect more info may surface in discussion, so let's start with airing opinions on the subject line, which makes the presumption that FAA will transfer significant regulatory power over our hobby/sport to AMA.

I will not close this thread because you disagree with me, or for any other reason I can imagine.

Good subject for a thread as long as everybody knows it will all be speculation colored by different takes on government regulation and the motivation of the AMA. But let the conversation begin.....

The video of the FAA Discussion/Presentation at the AMA Convention last week in CA can be found here:

http://cl.exct.net/?qs=5c6fefeb31f8a...d5b1f987490f32

Now abel where have I heard this before only to be disappointed???

Originally Posted by abel pranger

I will not close this thread because you disagree with me, or for any other reason I can imagine.

Brad

Thanks for the video link, Brad. Folks with the greatest concern (or would be if they knew what AMA and FAA are up to) are modelers not yet subject to regulation by AMA. Perhaps the video will help in a small way toward their becoming aware of what they should know.

Abel

I thought the presentation was very encouraging until
they got to the part about non AMA can fly under AMA rules, but
have to pay for the use of " AMA intellectual property".
So, you don't have to join, but you gotta pay?
Pay for what, a printed sheet of AMA rules?
An official AMA RC Logbook or some such?
What the heck they talking about?

Dang it HF! It's happy hour here..........I spilled my toddy LOL as images formed in my mind of what the contents of some payment envelopes might be.

Will regulation by AMA be better than FAA’s?

FAA would be far better... Watching that video was surreal to say the least...an amateur hour episode "placating the AMA”... We are in deep and digging in.

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaft

Will regulation by AMA be better than FAA’s?

FAA would be far better... Watching that video was surreal to say the least...an amateur hour episode "placating the AMA”... We are in deep and digging in.

So you would per to fly under the default standards from the FAA ARC Committee rather then the AMA Safety Code?............ as that is the only FAA published standard at this time.

400'
no jets
100 mph

Originally Posted by bradpaul

So you would per to fly under the default standards from the FAA ARC Committee rather then the AMA Safety Code?............ as that is the only FAA published standard at this time.

400'
no jets
100 mph

If AMA hadn’t screwed the pooch there would be no “default” you mention. Most everyone, including the hobby industry just set back and relied on AMA to take care of things...and they did.

Look, we haven’t heard much about the NPRM and what little we have heard has came from the AMA... and that information has been framed to make them appear ever essential...reinforcing how grateful we should be for the “standard” they are.

Having dealt with the FAA since I was 17 years old and their annual check-out flights and flight physicals and "special" doctors and log book requirements and minimim flight hours and certification to fly different aircraft and volume upon volume of regulations for several different flight regimes on and on, ANYTHING would be better than being directly under FAA.

AMA would have done well, very well if they had stayed out of the SUAS mess all together. This will become a nightmare for AMA and the average modeler/fun pilot. The legal and regulatory nightmare that will follow, driven by who is a 'pro' and who is a 'hobbist' will only drive insurance rates up, yearly dues up and work to divide the AMA.

AMA really should have just left their regulatory arena to what it was. Attempting to become the master of all things flying is not a good idea. I believe that AMA needs to back away from the SUAS/UAV/FVP issue and leave it entirely up to the FAA. When a pilot wants to fly UAV, they can go to the FAA.

I'm not so sure that the AMA had a choice as to participate or not in the hearings. I'm of the impression the "invitation" was more a manditory requirement than a voluntary one.

BM

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaft

If AMA hadn’t screwed the pooch there would be no “default” you mention. Most everyone, including the hobby industry just set back and relied on AMA to take care of things...and they did.

Look, we haven’t heard much about the NPRM and what little we have heard has came from the AMA... and that information has been framed to make them appear ever essential...reinforcing how grateful we should be for the “standard” they are.

Originally Posted by TestUser01

AMA would have done well, very well if they had stayed out of the SUAS mess all together. This will become a nightmare for AMA and the average modeler/fun pilot. The legal and regulatory nightmare that will follow, driven by who is a 'pro' and who is a 'hobbist' will only drive insurance rates up, yearly dues up and work to divide the AMA.

AMA really should have just left their regulatory arena to what it was. Attempting to become the master of all things flying is not a good idea. I believe that AMA needs to back away from the SUAS/UAV/FVP issue and leave it entirely up to the FAA. When a pilot wants to fly UAV, they can go to the FAA.

A lot of..... coulda, woulda, shouda....... and that helps how?

Brad

IMHO ….. here are my thoughts with no input from AMA:

The AMA will probably be the only CBO for "model aviation" for many years.

WHY???? The AMA thought that becoming a CBO and having the AMA Safety Code" certified as a standard was as simple as submitting the safety code to the FAA. Well the AMA found out that they had to submit in detail documents that would back up each provision of the code, mitigate risks and basically show how through there 75 years of experience how that could implement and administer the standard for their CBO members.

A group within the AMA has been working for a year and a half to make this happen.

Now can say "NEW CBO" copy the AMA Safety Code of course then can.......... but as the AMA found out the “NEW CBO” would have still prove through documentation of how they have the knowledge and experience to implement and administer the standard. Will they be able to?

SO WHAT WILL THIS MEEN?

What if you are a government entity that offers use of public property for model aviation? Will you:

Option 1: allow use by a entity that is not a FAA CBO, without restriction to the default FAA standard
Option 2: allow use by an entity that is not a FAA CBO, requiring adherence to the FAA default standard
Option 3: Charter the field as an AMA field under the AMA CBO standard, require AMA by pilots
Option 4: Charter the field as an AMA field under the AMA CBO standard, not require AMA by pilots

What if you are a private entity that offers use of private property? What if any effect on private non AMA landowner site insurance if you allow use by a non FAA CBO entity and do not require the FAA default standard for flying?

A heck of a lot of un answered questions there...................

So does the "work product" of the AMA's 75+ years of developing standards for safe model aviation have a value? Of course it does and IT IS THE PROPERTY OF THE AMA.

Will the AMA give it away? Don't know.

Will they put a price on it to offer some sort of access and administration fee for Non AMA CBO's? Don't know.

Enough for now.

Brad

I have no idea what restrictions or standards or whatever will come out of this debacle with the FAA. As an AMA member my course has already been charted.
I'm certainly not going to desert the AMA. I believe in what the organization is rying to do for its members and model aviation. I also believe that there are areas within the AMA that need attention. No organization is truly perfect.
But until we have rock solid information of the results of the FAA/AMA deliberations---everything is guess work that by most experience is usually questionable at best.

BM

Originally Posted by bradpaul

IMHO ….. here are my thoughts with no input from AMA:

The AMA will probably be the only CBO for "model aviation" for many years.

WHY???? The AMA thought that becoming a CBO and having the AMA Safety Code" certified as a standard was as simple as submitting the safety code to the FAA. Well the AMA found out that they had to submit in detail documents that would back up each provision of the code, mitigate risks and basically show how through there 75 years of experience how that could implement and administer the standard for their CBO members.

A group within the AMA has been working for a year and a half to make this happen.

Now can say "NEW CBO" copy the AMA Safety Code of course then can.......... but as the AMA found out the “NEW CBO” would have still prove through documentation of how they have the knowledge and experience to implement and administer the standard. Will they be able to?

SO WHAT WILL THIS MEEN?

What if you are a government entity that offers use of public property for model aviation? Will you:

Option 1: allow use by a entity that is not a FAA CBO, without restriction to the default FAA standard
Option 2: allow use by an entity that is not a FAA CBO, requiring adherence to the FAA default standard
Option 3: Charter the field as an AMA field under the AMA CBO standard, require AMA by pilots
Option 4: Charter the field as an AMA field under the AMA CBO standard, not require AMA by pilots

What if you are a private entity that offers use of private property? What if any effect on private non AMA landowner site insurance if you allow use by a non FAA CBO entity and do not require the FAA default standard for flying?

A heck of a lot of un answered questions there...................

So does the "work product" of the AMA's 75+ years of developing standards for safe model aviation have a value? Of course it does and IT IS THE PROPERTY OF THE AMA.

Will the AMA give it away? Don't know.

Will they put a price on it to offer some sort of access and administration fee for Non AMA CBO's? Don't know.

Enough for now.

Brad

Some really excellent questions, Brad. I don't know if AMA has asked them, but I do hope so. <deletion>, I know full well the importance of applying a good measure of program resources to studying the possible adverse consequences of decisions before they are executed.

Abel