Thread Tools
Oct 08, 2019, 08:04 AM
Registered User
Crashbound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by allanp
Here it is..No hearsay, no rumors, just the "Facts"
Link to the bill,sponsor,and all who co-sponsored (both parties) in the "House"
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...iew=closed&r=3
No one on here is arguing under which congress or administration it passed. I'm just saying it started way before 2017. I'd say a safe bet is that most who signed and voted FOR had little idea what all was in it. Per usual, it was a large piece of legislation that no one can wade through and understand realistically, and especially not zero in on something as insignificant as toy airplanes. THAT is our fault along with the AMA. But the ones responsible are in the FAA who knew darn wall what was in it and why.

edit to add; I've grown increasingly tired of having to engage in political activism just to maintain simple enjoyment out of life. But every where I turn there is a politician, bureaucrat, or special interest ready to cast me under the bus. You get to the point were, like Thermaler, civil disobedience is just easier. Don't worry about it, carry on and let the chips fall where they may. I guess it may eventually come down to someone getting popped by the FAA and we all chip in resources to fight it in court somehow.

Why do I feel like President Coriolanus Snow is watching me and reading our posts? Name: Thg-mockingjay-presidentsnow.jpg
Views: 6
Size: 49.6 KB
Description:
Last edited by Crashbound; Oct 08, 2019 at 08:13 AM.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Oct 08, 2019, 08:29 AM
AECS USN RET. P3 FE
allanp's Avatar
Interesting item:
The bills sponsor in Congress rec'd the following donations from UPS (just the data I checked)
Cycle 2012 $10,000
Cycle 2014 $11,500
Cycle 2016 $10,000
Cycle 2018 $10,000

Career:
United Parcel Service $64,709
Source:
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-...=CAREER&type=C

Not really trying to make this about political parties but more about how money buys influence
Oct 08, 2019, 08:45 AM
2.1.9 Forever
Miami Mike's Avatar
As far as I can see nobody has explained how the government expects us to measure our altitude, how they expect to measure it themselves, or who will be out there doing their measuring. It seems to me that this law remains as unenforceable as it was before.
Oct 08, 2019, 08:48 AM
Registered User
Crashbound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by allanp
Interesting item:
The bills sponsor in Congress rec'd the following donations from UPS (just the data I checked)
Cycle 2012 $10,000
Cycle 2014 $11,500
Cycle 2016 $10,000
Cycle 2018 $10,000

Career:
United Parcel Service $64,709
Source:
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-...=CAREER&type=C

Not really trying to make this about political parties but more about how money buys influence
Oh absolutely, no argument. Same thing, except worse, happened to health care in this nation. As a result, many who were paying their own way for health insurance are now without health insurance, my family being one. So we go without simple diagnostics such as prostrate checks, colonoscopy's, mammograms. Or else we give up something else to pay out of pocket. There is no longer a "co-payer". Go to Urgent Care with head colds and flu. And we will pay up front costs and hope Christian Healthcare Ministry will kick in if something serious comes about.
And yet we were told it was in the public interest. Beating that horse now affects nothing, nor does blaming the previous administration. That's all I'm saying.

But what I've noticed is, at the Nats, at the Midsouth and a myriad of other club flying and contest venues, guys meet up and have a great time because of a common interest. Politics aren't discussed. Healthcare isn't discussed. Trump, Obama isn't discussed. Airplanes, and soaring is discussed. Unfortunately this IS a political issue but it spans at least two administrations and congresses . But we need to stand together and leave personal biases based on party loyalties out of the mix. Difficult I acknowledge but how we got here and who's at fault isn't nearly as useful as how we band together and try to get ourselves out of this somehow.
Oct 08, 2019, 08:54 AM
Registered User
Crashbound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Mike
As far as I can see nobody has explained how the government expects us to measure our altitude, how they expect to measure it themselves, or who will be out there doing their measuring. It seems to me that this law remains as unenforceable as it was before.
Looking at that link that gliderjim posted on page 2, apparently only IF something happens is there any FAA involvement. And according to the article, mostly for stupid violations like flying over sports stadiums, restricted air (Washington DC) and other stupid stunts from, you guessed it, drone operators. Yep, some of the very ones that raised the interest in the first place. I figure some in the FAA saw an opportunity to throw in model airplanes by classification of 'drone' language to be all encompassing.
Oct 08, 2019, 09:26 AM
The Mr. Rogers of RC soaring
rdwoebke's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashbound
Difficult I acknowledge but how we got here and who's at fault isn't nearly as useful as how we band together and try to get ourselves out of this somehow.
I hope we all continue to work on this angle. I just wrote an email to my 3 congresspersons. Will do some more social media later.

Ryan
Latest blog entry: Supergee wing mount pylons
Oct 08, 2019, 09:55 AM
Registered User
GliderJim's Avatar
I'm not too worried about my ability to go to a field somewhere and fly. I'm more concerned about this killing contests. Will the AMA host the LSF Nat's next year? Will clubs still hold contests? If you organize an event, and a participant violates an FAA rule, are the event organizers liable? I realize that if nothing bad happens then there's not much to be liable for. I'm guessing for a little contest like my club holds with 10 attendees in the middle of nowhere it's not going to be much of an issue. I'm sort of rambling here, but I'm at work and don't have time to do my usual 10 go throughs.
Oct 08, 2019, 09:58 AM
Barney Fife, Vigilante
tom43004's Avatar
Oct 08, 2019, 10:06 AM
The Mr. Rogers of RC soaring
rdwoebke's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by GliderJim
Will the AMA host the LSF Nat's next year?
I asked Chad B this question (and several other questions) and suggested that if there are answers to add them to the FAQ on the government relations blog page. I will post here what he responds with.

Ryan
Latest blog entry: Supergee wing mount pylons
Oct 08, 2019, 10:17 AM
Everything's A Composite
Knoll53's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GliderJim
If you organize an event, and a participant violates an FAA rule, are the event organizers liable?
Whether the organizers are liable or not is unimportant. The government has already won by injecting fear into the RC community. That community will self regulate out of fear. That's how the IRS does it. It is fear that the government will throw you in a cage that gets you to "voluntarily" submit every detail of your life to them.
Oct 08, 2019, 11:13 AM
Registered User
I followed this link that was listed on the expanded letter from AMA:
https://faa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/web...06ebf6a06754ad

It's the FAA UAS map showing areas with the 400' ceiling. It generally remains the 5 mile radius around controlled airports.

I spoke with Crystal at AMA for some time. She confirmed that the airspace outside of the marks on the FAA UAS map are still open to flying as we have for decades. It's possible that those unmarked air spaces will eventually have some ceiling, you may have seen numbers like 700 to 1200 ft, nothing firm on this yet. Reading through posts it seems that some of us have the notion that the 400 ft ceiling is for all airspace, not so. It might be worth starting to consider what might be a workable ceiling in uncontrolled airspace if it comes to that. Can we live a 1500' ceiling for example? It might be a good idea to communicate that to AMA. I fly with telemetry so I know my AGL altitude, it's sure hard to guess though.

Having said that, it is important that we make contact with members of congress to have our concerns heard and passed on to the FAA. I am not at all convinced given the current climate in Washington, that the concerns of model aviation will get much traction. I think the boiler plate letter AMA put together is well thought out and represents the concerns of modelers well. Maybe some in congress will be happy to have a good guy bipartisan effort to get behind.... hey one can hope.

It looks like AMA headquarters is just outside the Muncie controlled airspace. Crystal indicated that over 300 club sites are effected nationally, so we do need to push. She did give me the strong sense that AMA is hard at work on this and were blindsided by the FAA recent position. She said it is AMA's top priority and they are on it daily.

I'm going flying Thursday and certainly will bust 400'.
Last edited by Barry Andersen; Oct 08, 2019 at 11:19 AM.
Oct 08, 2019, 11:43 AM
2.1.9 Forever
Miami Mike's Avatar
There are many who assume the height restriction is due to the advent of commercial delivery drones, which would presumably be unrelated to proximity to airports.
Oct 08, 2019, 12:07 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Mike
There are many who assume the height restriction is due to the advent of commercial delivery drones, which would presumably be unrelated to proximity to airports.
Completely agree, it is not a coincidence that recent permissions granted for delivery drones aligns with the hardening of restrictions. Nevertheless, at this point, we can still use the FAA UAS map to fly. It seems though that now is time for serious pushback on drones pushing us out of airspace we have used for decades. No question that money and influence are pushing this.
Oct 08, 2019, 12:49 PM
Registered User
Crashbound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Andersen
I followed this link that was listed on the expanded letter from AMA:
https://faa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/web...06ebf6a06754ad

It's the FAA UAS map showing areas with the 400' ceiling. It generally remains the 5 mile radius around controlled airports.

I spoke with Crystal at AMA for some time. She confirmed that the airspace outside of the marks on the FAA UAS map are still open to flying as we have for decades.
It's possible that those unmarked air spaces will eventually have some ceiling,


Crystal indicated that over 300 club sites are effected nationally, so we do need to push. She did give me the strong sense that AMA is hard at work on this and were blindsided by the FAA recent position. She said it is AMA's top priority and they are on it daily.
There's no way to say this without sounding like a smart aleck and that isn't my intent. But frankly I'm sick to death of hearing this^. Crystal at the AMA has no authority, nor does anyone else at the AMA to "confirm" something contrary to law. The FAA has made very clear the 400' limit applies to uncontrolled Class G airspace as well. Apparently this week, the FAA "appears" to have passed on to those "hard at work" and "on it daily" within the AMA that it has every intention of keeping that 400' rule.
That's what all this hooplah is about after all.
I appreciate the work and top priority of the AMA in all this but the AMA has no business informing people to fly above 400', at this point I think that is irresponsible. Go fly to 1000, 2000, 3000 feet if you wish but don't do that because you think the AMA has declared that it's okay to do so.
Oct 08, 2019, 12:55 PM
Dark Side of the Red Merle
Curtis Suter's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashbound
There's no way to say this without sounding like a smart aleck and that isn't my intent. But frankly I'm sick to death of hearing this^. Crystal at the AMA has no authority, nor does anyone else at the AMA to "confirm" something contrary to law. The FAA has made very clear the 400' limit applies to uncontrolled Class G airspace as well. Apparently this week, the FAA "appears" to have passed on to those "hard at work" and "on it daily" within the AMA that it has every intention of keeping that 400' rule.
That's what all this hooplah is about after all.
I appreciate the work and top priority of the AMA in all this but the AMA has no business informing people to fly above 400', at this point I think that is irresponsible. Go fly to 1000, 2000, 3000 feet if you wish but don't do that because you think the AMA has declared that it's okay to do so.
That's my gut feeling too. The AMA is cashing checks they can't back and they have little to no voice. Hope I'm wrong.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion 400 foot rule RBMartin Sailplane Talk 11 Jun 29, 2016 04:37 PM
Discussion 400 foot FAA max is now 200 feet? pcm2a Multirotor Drone Talk 14 Feb 01, 2016 09:14 PM
Discussion DJI Phantom 2, 400 foot max range horizontally? pcm2a Beginner Multirotor Drones 8 Jan 29, 2016 03:57 PM
Discussion FAA and 400 foot height/ big scale Gliders ? dankar04 Scale Sailplanes 55 Jan 11, 2016 11:46 PM
Discussion 400 AGL foot rule? Scott C Model Aircraft & Drone Advocacy 5 Dec 18, 2015 08:59 AM