SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Jan 09, 2012, 04:06 PM
Hit Me! Please!
jwjohnson's Avatar
Provo, UT
Joined Jan 2005
3,997 Posts
Jon, don't use that as an excuse. You're posts are always ugly.
jwjohnson is offline Find More Posts by jwjohnson
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Jan 09, 2012, 04:17 PM
How do I change this text?
Darth_Elevator's Avatar
The Beautiful Mountains of Utah
Joined Oct 2006
6,232 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by smileyz View Post
Run at Mt. Timp face from 6 miles away. Used just less then 5500mAh for the entire flight. Climbed 7,300 feet above launch for a max altitude of 11,900 feet.
Amazing video, Mike. Well done!
Darth_Elevator is offline Find More Posts by Darth_Elevator
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 08:40 PM
THEY MOSTLY COME OUT AT NIGHT
chimaera's Avatar
Kaysville, Utah
Joined Jul 2005
1,253 Posts
What was your video quality? CP or linear?
chimaera is offline Find More Posts by chimaera
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 08:42 PM
More Combat Please!
Wind_of_Change's Avatar
Utah
Joined Dec 2003
7,926 Posts
Mike & Scott, that was super cool to see that you got that range from the valley. Every time I fly into the foothills, my video goes to crap.
Wind_of_Change is offline Find More Posts by Wind_of_Change
RCG Plus Member
Old Jan 09, 2012, 10:03 PM
Flying Free
erashby's Avatar
Utah
Joined Aug 2001
1,938 Posts
Freedom is not free

This is how the government works. The gov/FAA bureaucrats think it is easier to prohibit an activity than resonably regulate it. They make the group "feel" heard, and then regulate away citizens rights. We have similar unelected bureaucrats regulating every facet of our lives through agencies.

It only makes sense to leave the AMA if it totally weakens the AMAs voice. My recommendation is to not drop your AMA membership, but to join and to be active and change the AMA. They are the defacto experts on RC flying. If we leave the AMA that only makes our voice weaker, while they remain the perceived authority.

[The other AMA (American Medical Association) is a good example. Less than 30% of all doctors belong to it, yet the AMA still speaks and is listened to as if it is the voice for all doctors.] Even if we leave the AMA (RC), they will be percieved as the authority on FPV RC flying.

If FPVers can not convince other RC fliers in the AMA that FPV can be safely and responsibly done, then what chance do we have of convincing FAA or the public of it?
erashby is offline Find More Posts by erashby
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 10:16 PM
FPV junkie
m_beeson's Avatar
United States, UT
Joined Jan 2011
3,409 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by erashby View Post
This is how the government works. The gov/FAA bureaucrats think it is easier to prohibit an activity than resonably regulate it. They make the group "feel" heard, and then regulate away citizens rights. We have similar unelected bureaucrats regulating every facet of our lives through agencies.

It only makes sense to leave the AMA if it totally weakens the AMAs voice. My recommendation is to not drop your AMA membership, but to join and to be active and change the AMA. They are the defacto experts on RC flying. If we leave the AMA that only makes our voice weaker, while they remain the perceived authority.

[The other AMA (American Medical Association) is a good example. Less than 30% of all doctors belong to it, yet the AMA still speaks and is listened to as if it is the voice for all doctors.] Even if we leave the AMA (RC), they will be percieved as the authority on FPV RC flying.

If FPVers can not convince other RC fliers in the AMA that FPV can be safely and responsibly done, then what chance do we have of convincing FAA or the public of it?

Good point,

but

You have to concider the skier /vs snowboarder quarrel that occurred when snowboards first came strong on the scene.

The only thing that made snowboards acceptable on ski resorts, is one resort taking the chance to allow them.

After a few years, the other resorts figured out that they were missing out on the money, and opened their resorts to the snow boards.

However

There are still skiers who absolutely hate snow boards, and wish they would vanish from the face of the earth.


My point is that the only thing that will change attitudes is financial motivation, and no matter what; There will always be RC flyers who cannot stand the thought of FPV.
m_beeson is offline Find More Posts by m_beeson
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 10:27 PM
More Combat Please!
Wind_of_Change's Avatar
Utah
Joined Dec 2003
7,926 Posts
I agree with both of you. Hopefully as an AMA rep I can have at least a positive effect on the perceptions that the AMA leadership have regarding responsible FPV use. I already had an effect on several people with my first encounter.

But I know for a fact that several of the leadership are fairly hard-nosed about this. It will be difficult to win them over.

The other RC group called RCAPA (Remote Control Aerial Photography Association) is nearly 2000 strong now, but that pales in comparison to the 150,000 membership of AMA.

I'm fairly certain at this point that FPV (at least the way we do it today) will NOT be allowed in the U.S. for much longer.

I met a guy this weekend who is into high altitude rocketry. After 9-11 all amateur rocketry was shut down, and his group of rocket scientists was actually sued by the government for their activities. Their group banded together and counter-sued the government on grounds of abusive control and lack of proof that the hobby was dangerous. They won and eventually were able to resume their hobby, but not after much pain and anguish.

I'll bet the same will be true for FPV. Unless a group organizes and actually fights for the right to fly, it will be taken away completely without so much as a whimper of resistance.
Wind_of_Change is offline Find More Posts by Wind_of_Change
RCG Plus Member
Old Jan 09, 2012, 10:46 PM
Hit Me! Please!
jwjohnson's Avatar
Provo, UT
Joined Jan 2005
3,997 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by m_beeson View Post
There are still skiers who absolutely hate snow boards, and wish they would vanish from the face of the earth.
I don't hate snowboards, I just don't want to share a run with them. That's one reason why I ski at Deer Valley.
Unfortunately, there's only one USA, so that solution doesn't work for FPV.
jwjohnson is offline Find More Posts by jwjohnson
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 10:57 PM
3d NOOBular
3DNater's Avatar
USA, UT, St George
Joined Aug 2010
8,200 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by erashby View Post
This is how the government works. The gov/FAA bureaucrats think it is easier to prohibit an activity than resonably regulate it. They make the group "feel" heard, and then regulate away citizens rights. We have similar unelected bureaucrats regulating every facet of our lives through agencies.

It only makes sense to leave the AMA if it totally weakens the AMAs voice. My recommendation is to not drop your AMA membership, but to join and to be active and change the AMA. They are the defacto experts on RC flying. If we leave the AMA that only makes our voice weaker, while they remain the perceived authority.

[The other AMA (American Medical Association) is a good example. Less than 30% of all doctors belong to it, yet the AMA still speaks and is listened to as if it is the voice for all doctors.] Even if we leave the AMA (RC), they will be percieved as the authority on FPV RC flying.

If FPVers can not convince other RC fliers in the AMA that FPV can be safely and responsibly done, then what chance do we have of convincing FAA or the public of it?
I think this is all very true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m_beeson View Post
Good point,

but

You have to concider the skier /vs snowboarder quarrel that occurred when snowboards first came strong on the scene.

The only thing that made snowboards acceptable on ski resorts, is one resort taking the chance to allow them.

After a few years, the other resorts figured out that they were missing out on the money, and opened their resorts to the snow boards.

However

There are still skiers who absolutely hate snow boards, and wish they would vanish from the face of the earth.


My point is that the only thing that will change attitudes is financial motivation, and no matter what; There will always be RC flyers who cannot stand the thought of FPV.
I also think this is true.
This statement I do not agree with. Any time you say "The only thing..." you are usually wrong. Financial motivation is great, but in this case I think there are more powerful reasons to protect our right to fly.

I think most regulators realize that legislation is a blunt instrument that is not as effective as an organization regulating itself. It is often only after the organization proves that it cannot be trusted to make good moral choices that they feel they have to protect the public from them.

A case in point is the accounting legislation such as Sarbanes-Oxley that stems from the Enron and Arthur-Anderson debacle. When the nation's largest accounting firm proved that it wasn't capable of choosing morality over money and in the process costing innocent citizens billions of dollars they felt they had to step in and actually legislate morality. Nevermind that thousands of firms across the country were complying with the self regulating bodies that had stood for well over a hundred years. When someone makes the profession look like a group of punks that steal from the public Sarbanes-Oxley is what you get.

If a group (like TBS) takes it upon themselves to show the world how to have fun with fpv by flying in close proximity to dense population, national treasures, and other landmarks without any regard for the potential for harm to people and property in those areas they are showing a disregard for ethics. Admittedly they hadn't broken any laws. That is only because nobody had thought the the exact instance of what they decided to do and actually had the technology and money to do it.

I say, the people who hate fpv and those self-important legislators who really want to make a difference aren't going to be stopped by the majority of fpv flyers simply showing them that it can be done safely. I think this group will only be satisfied with serious sanctions that affect fpv. Maybe a better response is to throw them a bone and give them some ideas as to what exactly ought to be outlawed. Flying over densly populated areas as well as prominent landmarks, rite-of-ways for airports, historical monuments etc. are all up for obvious sanction. Why not just suggest that this be the direction the legislation take rather than setting an arbitrary ceiling on altitude or distance. Then give the law some teeth that will actually deter the reasonable portion of the community from doing the stupid stuff.

-Nate
3DNater is offline Find More Posts by 3DNater
Last edited by 3DNater; Jan 09, 2012 at 11:03 PM. Reason: you can't read yellow ;)
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 09, 2012, 11:45 PM
I shouldn't be flying either!!
Scooter33's Avatar
United States, UT, Pleasant Grove
Joined Mar 2010
235 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wind_of_Change View Post
Mike & Scott, that was super cool to see that you got that range from the valley. Every time I fly into the foothills, my video goes to crap.
My video does the same thing. Is it just our hills or is it something to do with the radio bouncing off the mountain?
Scooter33 is offline Find More Posts by Scooter33
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 12:04 AM
Registered User
dylpickle's Avatar
Riverton, UT
Joined Jun 2008
13 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wind_of_Change View Post
IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING AMA & FAA MEETINGS THIS WEEK IN LOS ANGELES AT THE AMA CONVENTION

I was invited to attend the AMA convention this weekend in L.A., and decided it may be a good idea to go down because the FAA was going to be there to discuss the upcoming ruling on RC flight restrictions......
This is a very informative, albeit grim, update on the state of FPV with the AMA and FAA. If you haven't done so yet, you should post this same summary on the main FPV forum. I'm sure they'd be very interested in reading this.

I agree that the future doesn't look bright. It would be the easiest thing in the world for the FAA to outright ban FPV, unfortunately. I'm just barely getting started, and I don't have high hopes for the future.

The Black Sheep NYC video seems to transcend being just an ill-advised, reckless video, to becoming the most damaging thing that has happened for the future of FPV.
dylpickle is offline Find More Posts by dylpickle
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 12:06 AM
Registered User
monson987's Avatar
United States, IN, Muncie
Joined Jan 2009
779 Posts
My solution for the "line of sight" issue...
monson987 is offline Find More Posts by monson987
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 01:13 AM
FPV junkie
m_beeson's Avatar
United States, UT
Joined Jan 2011
3,409 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brathanke View Post
I think this is all very true.



I also think this is true.
This statement I do not agree with. Any time you say "The only thing..." you are usually wrong. Financial motivation is great, but in this case I think there are more powerful reasons to protect our right to fly.

I think most regulators realize that legislation is a blunt instrument that is not as effective as an organization regulating itself. It is often only after the organization proves that it cannot be trusted to make good moral choices that they feel they have to protect the public from them.

A case in point is the accounting legislation such as Sarbanes-Oxley that stems from the Enron and Arthur-Anderson debacle. When the nation's largest accounting firm proved that it wasn't capable of choosing morality over money and in the process costing innocent citizens billions of dollars they felt they had to step in and actually legislate morality. Nevermind that thousands of firms across the country were complying with the self regulating bodies that had stood for well over a hundred years. When someone makes the profession look like a group of punks that steal from the public Sarbanes-Oxley is what you get.

If a group (like TBS) takes it upon themselves to show the world how to have fun with fpv by flying in close proximity to dense population, national treasures, and other landmarks without any regard for the potential for harm to people and property in those areas they are showing a disregard for ethics. Admittedly they hadn't broken any laws. That is only because nobody had thought the the exact instance of what they decided to do and actually had the technology and money to do it.

I say, the people who hate fpv and those self-important legislators who really want to make a difference aren't going to be stopped by the majority of fpv flyers simply showing them that it can be done safely. I think this group will only be satisfied with serious sanctions that affect fpv. Maybe a better response is to throw them a bone and give them some ideas as to what exactly ought to be outlawed. Flying over densly populated areas as well as prominent landmarks, rite-of-ways for airports, historical monuments etc. are all up for obvious sanction. Why not just suggest that this be the direction the legislation take rather than setting an arbitrary ceiling on altitude or distance. Then give the law some teeth that will actually deter the reasonable portion of the community from doing the stupid stuff.

-Nate


You're right nate. financial gain isn't the only thing that changes people who are completely against something, but that is a whole other discussion.

There are probably a lot of rc fliers, and interrested people who would like to get into FPV; It would be nice if they/we could make a difference.


I also agree that some rules need to be placed on the fpv comunity, but that can be dangerous as well.

You don't need to look any further than the situation with hunting, snowmobiling, dirtbiking, and any other outdoor activity that extreme activists deem a worthy cause of shutting down.


So I can see where people need to be told to stay away from landmarks and densely populated areas, and where fpv would scare the heck out of the Homeland security, but at the same time I hate to see the activists get their claws into regulations. "They" sometimes don't know a reasonable stopping point.
m_beeson is offline Find More Posts by m_beeson
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 01:17 AM
FPV junkie
m_beeson's Avatar
United States, UT
Joined Jan 2011
3,409 Posts
Or this time next year the world will end...
m_beeson is offline Find More Posts by m_beeson
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2012, 09:21 AM
3d NOOBular
3DNater's Avatar
USA, UT, St George
Joined Aug 2010
8,200 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by m_beeson View Post
You're right nate. financial gain isn't the only thing that changes people who are completely against something, but that is a whole other discussion.

There are probably a lot of rc fliers, and interrested people who would like to get into FPV; It would be nice if they/we could make a difference.


I also agree that some rules need to be placed on the fpv comunity, but that can be dangerous as well.

You don't need to look any further than the situation with hunting, snowmobiling, dirtbiking, and any other outdoor activity that extreme activists deem a worthy cause of shutting down.


So I can see where people need to be told to stay away from landmarks and densely populated areas, and where fpv would scare the heck out of the Homeland security, but at the same time I hate to see the activists get their claws into regulations. "They" sometimes don't know a reasonable stopping point.
Mike I totally agree with you and share the same concern about activists wanting to go too far. However, we have to keep things in perspective. FPV could easily be considered to be "extreme" since it is a pretty big departure from the rc community at large. The majority of rc fliers would sacrifice fpv in a heart-beat to protect their favorite aspect of the hobby. The last thing you want is for the FPV community to be labeled as a bunch of extreme wacko's who arrogantly go about causing trouble and resisting reasonable rules. Unfortunately we have some people who have already gone a long way towards doing exactly that. I think those inside the community who really want to step up and make a difference need to be a voice of reason and humility. I think there are lessons to be learned from the NRA or other organizations that have been fighting off activists for years. Unfortunately, without a lot of research I don't know what their strategies have been or why they have been successful. I just think that reasonable rules that come from the members of the community will be much more favorable than those imposed by outsiders who don't know much about fpv.
3DNater is offline Find More Posts by 3DNater
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Digital cameraes used for aerial photography JensJakob Electric Plane Talk 22 Jan 22, 2014 10:41 AM
Best Camera for aerial photography? BillH Electric Plane Talk 26 Dec 11, 2010 08:14 AM
Aerial Photography dstout Parkflyers 10 May 13, 2002 04:15 PM
Best plane for aerial photography dgtaylor Electric Plane Talk 18 Oct 01, 2001 03:21 AM
Aerial photography - first attempts leccyflyer Electric Plane Talk 11 Jul 29, 2001 04:20 PM