Well looks like it's been shot down once again.. Per the UNOFFICIAL minutes of the last AMA EC meeting that were posted on the AMA Web site.

4.) Safety Code RC Item 10 – the committee discussed the practice of one club that was FBV (flying by video). They submitted a set of rules for possible implementation by AMA to allow this type of flying. The individual will be informed that this type of flying is in violation of the Safety Code and that the Safety Committee does not endorse his concept for a set of rules to allow FBV.

Now THAT is stubborn, not even wanting to listen to people who want to cooperate.

OK, unofficial... still means what it means though.

well that spoils my plans to head to the field this weekend :P

AMA needs to get with the times. I'm a member mainly to help support the hobby but I understand while the rc hobby is growing there memberships are dropping and they don't seem to care .

I notice a few people in this forum and elsewhere show video of and talk about flying at a "field".

How many of you fly fpv at an AMA sanctioned field?
Are they "looking the other way" or do they accept it?

Here's how explained my stance on FPV flying to my club president, and he bought off on it.

10. The operator of a radio-controlled model aircraft shall control it during the entire flight, maintaining visual contact without enhancement other than by corrective lenses that are prescribed for the pilot.

I fly FPV with another safety pilot sitting by my side, with his eyes on the plane, ready to take over control of the aircraft in an instant if we have any issues.

This is no different than the technique used to teach a new pilot how to fly without the use of a buddy box.

4.) Safety Code RC Item 10 – the committee discussed the practice of one club that was FBV (flying by video). They submitted a set of rules for possible implementation by AMA to allow this type of flying. The individual will be informed that this type of flying is in violation of the Safety Code and that the Safety Committee does not endorse his concept for a set of rules to allow FBV.

These people have got blinders on to the rest of the people on the planet. Everything in this world is changing, evolving, etc. EXCEPT... the people at AMA.

BTW, I was specifically told NO FPV FLYING at one local field. Wouldn't even buy the buddy box argument either.

yeah, I saw that post earlier.

Well, all I can say is that if the AMA doesn't adapt to new and emerging technology, they are going to become extinct someday.

Originally Posted by twinturbostang

BTW, I was specifically told NO FPV FLYING at one local field. Wouldn't even buy the buddy box argument either.

Yeah funny how that works. I have the same issue down here across the swamp from you.. You go to one local club and they are like das is verboten! You go a few miles up or down the street to another club and they welcome you with open arms and think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

In fact the club I did the presentation for was the club that banned FPV flying. They even called an emergency board meeting the to BLOCK FPV flying at their field.

Guess who's club I didn't rejoin the next calendar year

It's funny, the most interesting thing to come along in model aviation since the rubberband and these guys are too dumb to get it.

The FAA, who could be considered the most dangerous opponent to video flying has not come out and said anything negative except for complaining to the AMA about guys flying in the stratosphere.

As far as I know even Giorgio Azzalin who test flew an RC plane to 33,000 feet in the Jacksonville area made his peace with the FAA and may still have the video on his web site. He was annoyed that he couldn't get clearance to try for a record, but he followed the rules and the FAA didn't hound him out of RC. His flight to 33,000 was on video, and was the only way he could have done it.

I don't understand the AMA position, but I am going to systematically vote for the youngest guys on any slate from now on. I think we are under the thumb of a bunch of old arts, um... tarts? something with an F. Feeble minded @$$ WXXLes.

I don't know what went on between the FAA and Azzalin, but I'd be very curious to know, and I wonder what their position is on video piloting.

The FAA hammered the Aerial Photographers, saying it had to be a hobby endeavor and you can't make money at it, but that was to make a clear distinction between hobby use and outfits selling RC gear for surveillance and claiming they could be flown under the same rules as model aircraft. Tough on the guys picking up a few bucks to support their hobby, but the FAA said nothing about the use of cameras and they have to know that some of those guys are using video to frame shots. They just want to draw a line between professional use and hobby use.

In other words, its our own AMA that is the problem.

Pete the grouch

Pete

It's the privilege of each club to accept FPV flyer or not. I never felt welcome when I was going at my local club, but very welcome everywhere else ???. I think some peoples supposely very skilled had tried before me and fail, they said it's impossible to do securely, so they never let me my chance... It was 6 years ago, lot of things have change since then

I write many e-mail last autumn with the ancient president of MAAC (Canadian AMA), he was in direct contact with actual president and all others security members. They assure me I'm welcome into any clubs cover by MAAC in Canada. The only rule they asked me to follow is to have someone on my side for all the flight (Spotter), to assure the planes stay in normal flying limits, and to help to retake visual contact more rapidly if failure happens.
I will try it this year, I will fly only my electric planes, Easystar most of the time. This plane here is not really consider like a real planes... I will show them what he can do... like flying where they never think even possible

Originally Posted by VRflyer

It's the privilege of each club to accept FPV flyer or not. I never felt welcome when I was going at my local club, but very welcome everywhere else ???. I think some peoples supposely very skilled had tried before me and fail, they said it's impossible to do securely, so they never let me my chance... It was 6 years ago, lot of things have change since then

I think you hit the nail on the head right there. Given the skill level of some clubs and acceptance of technology due to personal values plays a huge role. I'll leave it with that politically correct statement. If I don't ya'll will need another moderator

I respect clubs that do not want FPV flyers. I call them "Classic clubs". Most of the clubs will be happy to see us. If we fly with light electric planes, we will not represent a big risk, it should help to integrate our way of flying.

Originally Posted by typicalaimster

I think you hit the nail on the head right there. Given the skill level of some clubs and acceptance of technology due to personal values plays a huge role.

I think that's pretty much universal. Here also, as long as you go to a club where the majority of the people have been there for 25 years, you'll never feel well and accepted.
The other day I was with a friend of mine, who has been a member of his club for 8 years now. He's not been flying there very often, but still didn't quit and thus has pretty much offered the fees for not even using the field. I had a plane with me too, and one of the guys there wouldn't let me fly it. He tried backing that with security reasons, because he supposedly couldn't know if i was insured. Showed him my insurance card. So he went on with some BS telling that if someone flies there they will then come here alone out of the opening hours etc. As if preventing someone to fly when they are here would prevent that. He told that the rules had changed too since my friend became a member, and now all new members need to find someone backing them, and for 1 year (!) they would only be able to fly if that person or someone from the club's board is there. But the funny thing is that being a bit confused he let something go that he certainly hadn't intended to say, and we could understand that this had absolutely nothing to do with security measures, but simply that the long-time guys are happy together and don't want more people to crowd the field so that they have to wait to fly themselves.

There was pretty much the same sort of ambience in my club, to which I'm not going anymore either because I simply don't enjoy myself there.

Now on the other hand, drive 10km and go to another one, where most of the members are <35, and really get involved in their stuff. I've been there quite a few times, and instantly got to know most of the frequent flyers, directly feeling integrated. My friend too. We're participating in the organization of an event there in 2 weeks. And that without either of us being a member. We both decided to quit our clubs and asked the president there for an application form. "Don't bother with that, you know you're welcome here anyway".

Definitely impressive to see how people can be wide open or shut and locked... the latter unfortunately being more usual.

My own club is pretty strict about non members.

You have to be a guest, and as a guest you fly in lieu of the host member. If nobody is flying then nobody cares, but if there is a normal weekend crowd this rule is followed. The host must stay with the guest while they fly.

If you are being sponsored for membership you can only fly if one of your sponsors is present, but they can fly also if they like.

I don't mind the rules being tight. I am a relatively new member and I had no trouble being accepted. The rules are tight because places to fly are very scarce around here. Most of them are public places and the rules are even tighter since the clubs are worried about losing their field. My club owns it's field and still worries about being shut down.

I guess if we were in a truly rural area things would be more relaxed, but now the suburbs run all the way out here about seventy miles from NYC and people who just spent a fortune for their house "away from it all" don't seem to like planes flying within earshot.

Funny, I drive 200 miles to visit a friend in Vermont and up there I am welcome where ever I go. The only problem was when a park ranger insisted that we have life jackets in the canoe we brought along for emergency use if I landed in the water. He didn't look twice at the airplane or the video gear.

I don't think my club dislikes strangers, but the whole area is a bit afraid of losing the use of their fields so rules are followed closely. Our roster is limited to sixty, but new members old or young are welcomed with open arms.

Pete