I'm going to put this out there, because even though most AMA RC pilots and builders are complying with the Section 336 rule for model aircraft, there are efforts going on literally behind our backs, to have the 336 abolished. In this particular hearing, the AMA was not present, and possibly wasn't invited.
There is a representative of the FAA in this congressional hearing asking for the abolishment of the 336 rule.

Another major player is the CDA (Commercial Drone Association) who only wants the air space available for commercial use...for example, Amazon deliveries, Dominos Pizza deliveries, medical supply deliveries, etc.

The FAA also alleges that the frequencies used by RC pilots is believed (without proof) to cause autopilot of airplanes to disengage.

I know most of us are law-abiding, responsible AMA members. However, there are STILL forces at work against us.
This won't be over until our government and private corporations have made the entire hobby illegal.
What's bad would be if other countries began to follow the American example.

It might not be enough that you've joined the AMA and lawfully registered with the FAA.

The end of recreational drone and RC model flying in the USA? (27 min 50 sec)

What are the options if they get their way?
1. Build under 250 grams so you're off the radar.
2. Fly illegally way out in the country (not a viable option for many).

Moral of the story, support your AMA. They're the only guys out there fighting for us.

This is how you stifle progress, just look at what the Germans did pre WW2. They were very technically advanced, much of it do to encouraging modelers.

Gene 

Tony, Gene,

Keep in mind that Bruce makes his money by people watching his videos. The more sensational he is, the more views he gets and the more money he makes. Rush Limbaugh was doing this decades ago - it's entertainment, not information. All the major networks are doing the same thing right now, trying to get eyeballs to justify advertising revenue.

The sky is not falling.

But that doesn't mean one should ignore what's going on.

Right here in Central Illinois it's particularly important, as one of the top 20 employers in the county (used to be 2 of the top 20 employers, but we merged, so now we're bumped a good bit up on the list) is directly affected. Our local congressman, Rodney Davis, is a strong supporter of his constituency especially in regard to aviation. Note that he was part of the FAA reauthorization amendment which specifically KEPT 336 - they call it "The Davis Amendment." From https://rules.house.gov/bill/115/hr-4

"160 Version 3 Sanford (SC), Davis, Rodney (IL)
Republican Revised Clarifies and tightens the 336 modelers exemption to ensure that those utilizing the exemption are following an appropriate course of safety, and allows the FAA to create rules for recreational UAS. "

Note: Do not confuse Rodney Davis of Illinois with Susan Davis of California. While she made some positive items, she also made some that would be detrimental to us.

On top of that, there is a very vocal minority of anti-Trump, anti-Republican, anti-conservative folks who are out to get him. They aren't running a stronger candidate, they aren't talking issues, they aren't even talking PRO anything. Their issue is HIM - and their rhetoric is simply "Unseat Rodney Davis." It's not the normal easy re-election that he's facing this year. The very blue cities of Urbana and Champaign are in his district, but the majority of his region is rural and beet red. Should he lose, what is the stance of the successor for aviation (both full-scale and model)? THAT is scary - the possibility of losing one of the very few voices for reason in the FAA debate.

It's something to keep an eye on, but we don't need it sensationalized.

Andy

This is a non issue. AMA sent out a email to all AMA members a few weeks ago about this video.
Let's not put people in a panic with old fake news.

That is not my goal.
I'm not trying to propagate fake news, but I share this concern.

You know what? Andy's comment was fine, but that last comment didn't sit well with me, and it's been on my mind.

I'm going to get this off my chest.
I posted this because I am concerned with further threats to the RC hobby.
NOT because I'm trying to post "fake news".

If it's not what's going on, then please by all means post what you have on the AMA's response, because I must have missed that. I have been looking everywhere for AMA's response and I don't feel it addressed it enough. The response I read from the AMA is that they are further working with congress to preserve section 336.
I also read that because there were other pressing matters of greater importance, Congress did not get to the FAA refunding bill, which means it will continue on a status quo funding until Congress has time to hear all arguments.

In other words, don't get on here and troll me.
If you've got something constructive to say, then please share it.
If it's "fake news", then share what you've got.

Thanks.
(Grumble)...

Originally Posted by AndyKunz

On top of that, there is a very vocal minority of anti-Trump, anti-Republican, anti-conservative folks who are out to get him. They aren't running a stronger candidate, they aren't talking issues, they aren't even talking PRO anything. Their issue is HIM - and their rhetoric is simply "Unseat Rodney Davis." It's not the normal easy re-election that he's facing this year. The very blue cities of Urbana and Champaign are in his district, but the majority of his region is rural and beet red. Should he lose, what is the stance of the successor for aviation (both full-scale and model)? THAT is scary - the possibility of losing one of the very few voices for reason in the FAA debate.

Andy

Thank you Andy.
This phenomenon is happening all over the U.S. right now.
This same minority is definitely the most vocal; but they fail to realize it's the fact that they are the minority right now that is the reason they are (thankfully) not in power. Radical anything is not good.

The FAA's attention in our hobby has not been a problem before the Obama administration, to my knowledge.
Now I'm not trying to politicize this issue, but I am pointing out the possibility that this whole issue may in fact be political in nature.
One side likes lots of government to control the people; the other side doesn't.
But that's all I'm going to say on that subject. (Further discussions of a political nature may need to go off-line, since they can quickly become off-topic).

I appreciate your thoughtful response.

My concern is all the state rules that are popping up. We really need a national standard so that you don't run the risk of violating some obscure state law as you travel.

Does anyone see a solution to that. With 336 the FAA has no authority over our hobby so by default the states do.

.

Originally Posted by builderdude

I also read that because there were other pressing matters of greater importance, Congress did not get to the FAA refunding bill, which means it will continue on a status quo funding until Congress has time to hear all arguments.

It passed several months ago.

Andy

Originally Posted by RC Man

My concern is all the state rules that are popping up. We really need a national standard so that you don't run the risk of violating some obscure state law as you travel.

Does anyone see a solution to that. With 336 the FAA has no authority over our hobby so by default the states do.

It depends on how they approach it at the local levels.

They can make rules about park use. That's fine.

They can't make rules that interfere with the FAA Primacy.

The AMA is very good about pointing that out to local/state governments when they try to do something, but they have to be told. The state governments don't tell the AMA they're about to make a law that will shut down a corner of the sky.

Andy

Well, it does appear that the AMA is reaching out to its membership to urge our congressmen and senators to reject the new FAA refunding bill, which has some issues with the exception for model aircraft.

Anyone have any opinions on that?
(And don't tell me it's fake news. That's a cop out. This is a discussion, not a political volleyball).

Also, I have a question.
So we're not going to be allowed to fly 400 ft above the ground.
What if you're slope soaring, or dynamic soaring? You're standing on a mountain or a ridge, at least a thousand feet up. Would it be 400 ft above that mountain or ridge you are standing on? Or 400 ft above that valley or beach you are flying over while soaring?

It occurs to me that this rule for model aircraft is very anti-sailplane.

400 AGL. 400 MSL is 350 feet below me right now.

It'a also anti-turbine, anti-Pattern, anti-Classic Pattern, and anti-Sport Flying.

Andy

Rush Limbaugh was doing this decades ago - it's entertainment, not information.

You would be surprised the information you can obtain by simply listening to Rush.

Rush is a Conservative who exposes Liberals for what they are. Tells it exactly like it is.

I know all about Liberals and Liberalism, have for almost 40 years.

Like the hobby, Liberals and Liberalism have changed.

Charles

I am in complete agreement with you, Charles.
But I am trying to keep this out of politics, even though I happen to theorize that this whole FAA thing started under the previous administration, and there is still some old leadership there.

But that is just a theory...

Anyway, so Andy, it appears that it makes most of the hobby illegal then?
Except for perhaps, park flyers...

Originally Posted by AndyKunz

400 AGL. 400 MSL is 350 feet below me right now.

It'a also anti-turbine, anti-Pattern, anti-Classic Pattern, and anti-Sport Flying.

Andy

Maybe the FAA will give exemptions to airplane flyers that are AMA members. The Turbine guys are really gong to need that.


.