Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R

AMA is basically telling everyone to pretend this new law is not real.

Our representative at the Drone Advisory Committee did not ask a question nor make a comment during any of the discussions.

Originally Posted by Ray93J

Our representative at the Drone Advisory Committee did not ask a question nor make a comment during any of the discussions.

Well, at least not on the single video we've seen. We have no idea what was said in other sessions. In addition, we have no idea what was said during any other meetings AMA may have had outside the structure of the DAC.

Open government.
NOT!
When governments keep secrets, there is tyranny.
Of course you won't know until you've broken any one of the more than 3500 federal laws that you have committed in your daily life.
"Three felonies A Day"/ Harvey Silverglate.

Originally Posted by exf3bguy

I wonder where some guys get their knowledge on what they present as " Going to happen "?

If I remember correctly, one guy here has said he has friends-a couple old navy flying buddies-in FAA.

Originally Posted by hondaflyer

If I remember correctly, one guy here has said he has friends-a couple old navy flying buddies-in FAA.

That doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot. That's like hearing someone lives in Chicago so you ask them if they know so and so because so and so live in Chicago as well.

Originally Posted by nybbler

The poll was taken near the end of last year. It resulted in Section 349.

Just a rider snuck into a big bill.

Hidden until a couple days ago:

In the November 2016, message exchange, 737 chief test pilot Mark Forkner — Boeing describes him as a "former employee" — writes that MCAS is "running rampant in the sim on me," a reference to a flight simulator in which it was being tested at the time. "I am levelling off at like 4000 feet, 230 knots and the plane is trimming itself like crazy. I'm like, WHAT?" he said.
He quipped, "granted, I suck at flying, but even this was egregious."

But think of the cost savings - outsourcing to $9 per hour programmers from India
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/70002628.cms
So where was the FAA?????

Originally Posted by kallend

Just think how many lives would have been saved if FAA had spent more time and effort with Boeing's 737 MAX and less time worrying about model airplanes flying above 400ft.

But Amazon's and UPS's money talks, of course, and they want that airspace.

This is absolutely correct. The only thing missing is Verizon's involvement as well. All ready to provide the software to access LAANC, and I have no doubt the coming RID requirements and filing of real time flight plans within class E airspace for recreational UAS as well. I'm told the FAA is discouraging some freeware like Kittyhawk and possibly Altitude Angel which has been successfully operating for a year now with LAANC for Pro Drone Operators, too as having "accuracy issues".

The tutorial I watched at the FAA's site did mention a 7 to 1200AGL Class G limit and while didn't specify the nature, they did infer it was the case.

I fly in G regularly but my concern is the new limits for classes E and lower effecting legacy club fields that have had no record of incidences in some cases 7 or more decades operating in congested airspace. It's obvious if this "No Exceptions" is to put in effect many will be forced to move or disband. Two fields I often attend FFs at have had their ceilings reduced to 200AGL one having just put thousands of dollars into paving their runway. They are just two of many I suspect. If you would like to see if your clubs field is in effected airspace here is a map: https://faa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/web...06ebf6a06754ad

The AMA should have created a legal fund way back even before registration and hired a top DC law firm and some K Street lobbyists just as soon as it was apparent after John Taylor's court victory that they intended to slip some legislation by to remedy their mistakes. You don't talk to those people. You "INFLUENCE" them with whatever it takes just like the NRA or GOA. Instead just like with registration the AMA demonstrated either incompetence or collusion. I'll still give them the benefit of the doubt as being Incompetent. I hope I'm right.

I forgot to include Google in my last post. Alphabet, Google’s parent company just coincidently received the go ahead for commercial drone deliveries concurrently with these coming edicts.

Originally Posted by rcgroupie

Just a rider snuck into a big bill.

336 was that rider. 349 is the response after Congress got wise to it.

Originally Posted by abel pranger

336 was that rider. 349 is the response after Congress got wise to it.

If anyone really thinks Congress came up with 349 all by itself, without FAA's ghost writing, I have a nice bridge for sale, cheap.

This is ALL about an airspace grab and money.

Originally Posted by kallend

If anyone really thinks Congress came up with 349 all by itself, without FAA's ghost writing, I have a nice bridge for sale, cheap.

This is ALL about an airspace grab and money.

The legislation is ghost written by lobbyists and handed off to bought off legislators for campaign contributions.

That is what the AMA is up against and talking will get us nowhere!

Originally Posted by QueeQueg

The legislation is ghost written by lobbyists and handed off to bought off legislators for campaign contributions.

That is what the AMA is up against and talking will get us nowhere!

Agree 100%

Originally Posted by abel pranger

336 was that rider. 349 is the response after Congress got wise to it.

336 was a temporary thing to get the AMA out of Congress's hair while they worked on the big thing, drone laws that became Part 107. After all of this happened, if you listened to what the administrator of the FAA had to say and others like the Helicopter Association International were saying, you knew 336 was on the chopping block.

I watched the opening remarks of the Helicopter group several years ago. The first thing the guy say was the hobby people are the big problem in the NAS because they do not have to take a test. I sent that video link off to Chad of the AMA. His reaction was just like a deer in the headlights. Funny, this same guy was sitting next to Rick Hanson at the DAC meeting last week.

When the FAA administrator defended registration, he said it was required to educate the recreational flyers. I don't know what peopled learned by sending in $5.

It did not take much skill to read the tea leaves, we have been in the cross hairs for many years. Oct 2018, was the date they pulled the trigger and it all changed.

Originally Posted by kallend

If anyone really thinks Congress came up with 349 all by itself, without FAA's ghost writing, I have a nice bridge for sale, cheap.

This is ALL about an airspace grab and money.

You think it was inappropriate for Congress to consult with their own cognizant agency?