I'd like to know how Dave would handle potential legislation from the FAA in a form of an altitude restriction. We are not there yet, but I see the writing on the wall for this one.

Ryan Woebkenberg AMA 544846 CD

Originally Posted by rdwoebke

I'd like to know how Dave would handle potential legislation from the FAA in a form of an altitude restriction. We are not there yet, but I see the writing on the wall for this one.

Ryan Woebkenberg AMA 544846 CD

Hi Ryan,
Well, today we have a pretty good working relationship with the FAA. I think it's important that we continue to build that relationship.

I think it's pretty common knowledge that the FAA is considering regulations for UAVs. I also think that the FAA is more concerned about UAVs that are commercial or military in nature more so than what we do as model aviation enthusiasts. Assuming this is correct I think AMA needs to continue to, I suppose you could use the word "educate" those in the FAA that are considering these regulations that what we do is "different" from their primary concern. We also need to show these folks that, for the most part, modelers are a safe, responsible group. If we can do that, and then back it up with our actions, I think we'll be OK.

Of course, nobody can rule out the possibility that the FAA could impose some altitude restriction, by regulation, on the type of flying that we do. Depending on the limit, this could have a negative impact on us. If we have been successful in developing the relationship I mentioned above then I would think that our input would be sought as valuable and given due consideration in drafting this regulation. I think we'd be much better off if we were involved in drafting such a regulation (if this ever were to happen) and arguing our case then, then try to fight any regulation once it's been created.
Dave

Dave Mathewson
www.mathewson4pres.com

Dave,

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I fly a lot of RC sailplanes and we often thermal our models quite high. We have done so safely for many decades. My fear is that some day an altitude restriction may be proposed or put in place that would not hugely effect the general RC population but would negativly hinder RC sailplanes.

I'm glad we have a good relationship with the FAA and they seem quite reasonable folks to me (I fly rockets and we also have a relationship with the FAA). Hopefully this will be a moot question. But I have a nagging fear it won't be.

Ryan

Dave, As I understand it using an unmanned aircraft in the national airspace system for profit is prohibited except under very stringent certifictaions. How can our hobby suppliers like BVM or anyone who has a factory pilot continue to pay/compensate these people. You may correctly assume that I have been in the Aerial photography end of this hobby and made a little money at it. The large corporate entities involved in UAV's will almost surely want ALL the avaiable airspace for themselves. I think this will lead to stricter regulation on the hobby itself not to mention people like me where show-up and shoot is the norm. I can envision us (me and you as modelers) becoming restricted to areas/flying fields so that the big boys can program their GPS systems to fly around us. I would like the AMA's help as it would help prevent more restrictions on us as modelers as well as me as a fly-and -shoot AP guy. Doing AP I'm still safer than most park flyer guys! Have to be my cheaper cameras could pay for several foamies.
Alan Ramsdell. Sanford, Maine. AMA 838673

Dave,
Do you believe a slow stick with a point and shoot camera is a UAS and shoud be treated just like a full sized millitary preditor UAV when you take a picture of a field for a farmer and get paid for it?

There is quite a few modelers that take pictures and downlink video from their planes that have been left out in the cold by AMA and are now having to deal directly with the FAA and their DC way of thinking. Most of these modelers are using small foamies and park flyers but are made out to be a big danger even tho most injuries are not from this segment of the hobby, but from "regular" activites at sanctioned fields and sanctioned events (even then, serious injury is almost non-existant!).
Do you think a plane or heli 3D performance with 300 spectators nearby has less or more risk of bodily harm than a foam easystar being flown in an unpopulated area by an operator wearing video goggles?
Thanks,
Mike

As a licensed pilot (not current) and certified A&P mechanic (not active), I've learned a few things about dealing with the FAA over the years. Chief among them is they don't respond well to brute-force tactics. Protests, threats, and legal action rarely have the desired effect.

What does work is suggestion and cooperation. Dave's observation (that helping draft rather than opposing any future FAA regulation of our hobby is the AMA's best course of action) is correct. The AMA needs to remain on friendly terms with the FAA or our we could all end up playing with R/C cars.

Pete
Member: Harbor Soaring Society (AMA charter #128)

Let's not forget that most of us who do AP with a plane or a heli also are active modelers. I am an AMA member. For the most part when I fly it is in airspace that any other modeler could be flying in. The only difference is charging money. If I'm going to be regulated by someone then they are going to regulate you eventually. I think it's better to cut this cancer out now because it' only going to be next to impossible to get it back if it is taken.

There is a simple answer to the FAA doing that, and actually the answer is a question; HOW? They cannot set an arbitrary un determinable limit. You can neither prove you're in compliance they cannot prove you are in violation.

very interested to hear the response to the AP question from others above.....hmmmm

Why does Dave not answer?

Originally Posted by lvspark

Dave,
Do you believe a slow stick with a point and shoot camera is a UAS and shoud be treated just like a full sized millitary preditor UAV when you take a picture of a field for a farmer and get paid for it?

There is quite a few modelers that take pictures and downlink video from their planes that have been left out in the cold by AMA and are now having to deal directly with the FAA and their DC way of thinking. Most of these modelers are using small foamies and park flyers but are made out to be a big danger even tho most injuries are not from this segment of the hobby, but from "regular" activites at sanctioned fields and sanctioned events (even then, serious injury is almost non-existant!).
Do you think a plane or heli 3D performance with 300 spectators nearby has less or more risk of bodily harm than a foam easystar being flown in an unpopulated area by an operator wearing video goggles?
Thanks,
Mike

Hi Mike,

It might help me, if someone posts a specific question to me and doesn’t get a reply in a few days, maybe a bit longer on weekends, that the poster send me a PM that says, “Hey, did you see this? And reference the post.”

No, I don’t believe a slow stick with a P&S camera should be treated like a Predator when someone uses it to take a picture of a farmer’s field and gets a few bucks for doing it. On the other hand, a couple of weeks ago I read an article about a guy in Chicago who modified a common model heli to shoot video and stills of inner city high rises and real estate. He has about 50k invested in each unit and contracts his services out for several thousands of dollars a day. I don’t think that is a model aircraft nor is what he’s doing something we do as model aviation enthusiasts. I not sure what the FAA is thinking and that’s part of the problem with all of this.

I know there’s a fair amount of downlink/still shooting taking place using a model airplane. If I had my druthers, I’d rather be working together with the guys that are participating in these activities as opposed to not. I think, if nothing else, it would give us a better understanding of the concept.

As you know this is a touchy issue for everyone. It gets compounded when you have irresponsible reporting going on with the intent of sensationalizing the news instead of reporting it like the CBS story that aired in NYC a month or so ago. As you might expect there’s a story behind that piece and this isn’t the first time the woman who produced that segment has been involved in something similar.

I’m not sure the issue is really about safety. It’s about creating a black line between what we do as modelers and the commercial and military type UAVs that I think the FAA is really interested in and wants to (and will) regulate. I really don’t believe the FAA wants to get involved in creating serious regulations for model aircraft. On the other hand, that’s simply my opinion. What I do know is that we can’t afford to make a mistake here.

All that said, I still think there’d be a value in working with the folks that participate in these activities to see if we can find some common ground to help each other.

Dave

Thank you for your response.
Mike

Originally Posted by Dave Mathewson

All that said, I still think there’d be a value in working with the folks that participate in these activities to see if we can find some common ground to help each other.

Hey Dave,
I'm actually the moderator of the FPV (First Person View) or Fly By Video as the AMA Safety council called it. Many of us have tried contacting the AMA regarding FPV and modifications to the safety code. This included some best practices and guidelines for newcomers. I'd be more than happy to drive up to New York from the DC area and work with you on some common ground. Please feel free to stop by the forum and take a look. I believe most of us in the forum are voting for a change this year.

--Scott

Originally Posted by typicalaimster

Hey Dave,
I'm actually the moderator of the FPV (First Person View) or Fly By Video as the AMA Safety council called it. Many of us have tried contacting the AMA regarding FPV and modifications to the safety code. This included some best practices and guidelines for newcomers. I'd be more than happy to drive up to New York from the DC area and work with you on some common ground. Please feel free to stop by the forum and take a look. I believe most of us in the forum are voting for a change this year.

--Scott

Hi Scott,
Thanks for the link to your forum. I'll make it a point to get over there and do some reading. Give me a couple of days to spend some time there looking around.
Dave

I fly a lot of RC sailplanes and we often thermal our models quite high. We have done so safely for many decades.

Ryan, since the FAA keeps meticulous stats on on mishaps they can be used to support your safety claim.

--Bill