Revoking 336 Hobby Rules

[LuvMyTJ]

So you do recognize the fact that they do not accept us. And we can all recognize the fact that drone drivers don't want to go to a AMA field and fly around in a half circle over their landing strip, with a AMA instructor attached to their hip. So lets just go our separate ways, with the AMA doing what they have always done and admit they want nothing to do with drones or drone drivers. The sooner the AMA admits they don't want us (or our money) to be part of THEIR club, the better of we will all be.
The AMA has been wonderful for the hobby of model aircraft. Drones are not a model of any aircraft. They are a new form of aircraft and are not part of the 'fly in a circle' mentality of the AMA. We do not fit into the AMA mold, and the AMA mold is not going to change (nor should it). Model aviation should stay with the AMA, and drones should be regulated by FAA aviation rules.

That where you're wrong, the AMA embraces multi-rotors. I see stories in the magazine I get from them quite often. There may be a few holdouts who do not like them but the majority do. Things are changing as multi-rotors become more popular.
Now you could go your own way, but doing nothing yields nothing. I choose to support the AMA for the work they do to help the hobby, the included insurance is just a bonus. If a new entity starts that helps the hobby I am happy to support them also.

 

[flockshot]

You may have seen negativity from other flyers but from the AMA proper?

This article seems to be on conflict with your statement....

AMA Asks Public “Not to Jump to Conclusions” About Helicopter Crash

Which part of the article welcomes drone drivers into the fold of the AMA?
Is it the 'track em down and lock em up" part, if they have an encounter with a helicopter, and successfully avoid a collision?
Perhaps it is the part where they describe two types of drone drivers. Those that are licensed and those that are rogue. I wonder which group are the AMA members?
Maybe it is the part where they state the purpose of the statement is to address negative publicity? Is that is their support of drone drivers?
I am still looking. Perhaps I will find that welcome sign as I read it over again.

 

[N017RW]

Which part of the article welcomes drone drivers into the fold of the AMA?
Is it the 'track em down and lock em up" part, if they have an encounter with a helicopter, and successfully avoid a collision?
Perhaps it is the part where they describe two types of drone drivers. Those that are licensed and those that are rogue. I wonder which group are the AMA members?
Maybe it is the part where they state the purpose of the statement is to address negative publicity? Is that is their support of drone drivers?
I am still looking. Perhaps I will find that welcome sign as I read it over again.

I understand your frustration. I mean how do you prove a Negative?

Ya know such as the AMA’s refusal to accept multi-rotors... I can’t either.

But I can show at least one example of them addressing public perception.

Who has done more in your opinion?

 

[flockshot]

I understand your frustration. I mean how do you prove a Negative?

Ya know such as the AMA’s refusal to accept multi-rotors... I can’t either.

But I can show at least one example of them addressing public perception.

Who has done more in your opinion?

I respect your opinion, and appreciate your loyalty to your organization. Perhaps things will change on both sides of the issue, and we can someday get this all worked out so we are all safe and can all have fun. In the mean time I will go the 107 route, and respect the 336 guys as well.
The AMA has done great with model aviation, but drones are a hybrid aircraft with capabilities not addressed in AMA rules. I will continue to have issues with the AMA's (what I consider to be) lip service to drones, without so much as a token gesture to modify their rules to support drones.

 

[N017RW]

In the meanwhile can you substantiate your declaration that the AMA is negative towards multi-rotors?

I really abhor the moving of goalposts mid-discussion.

 

[flockshot]

In the meanwhile can you substantiate your declaration that the AMA is negative towards multi-rotors?

I really abhor the moving of goalposts mid-discussion.

I took my drone to AMA field and was turned away because they don't allow drones. Good enough for me. Does that work for you?

 

[N017RW]

Are you a member?

 

[flockshot]

Are you a member?

I went there to join. Not welcome, like I keep telling you.

 

[N017RW]

Yea some clubs operate on private property and have strict rules. But you don’t join the AMA at a club field. Joining the club is typically secondary.
Good luck to you.

Cheers.

 

[flockshot]

There is a bill before Congress that may help us all define things. The bill will probably change the definition of "model aircraft", will define a CBO. and a lot of other things. The bill, will fund the FAA for a period of time, and attached to that bill is all the stuff that effects us. jrupprechtlaw.com is my source for the information.

 

[N017RW]

Yes, I’m familiar. But still not addressing the alleged institutional Negativity.

 

[flockshot]

Yes, I’m familiar. But still not addressing the alleged institutional Negativity.

Your inability to grasp the obvious, is of no concern too me.

 

[BigAl07]

I took my drone to AMA field and was turned away because they don't allow drones. Good enough for me. Does that work for you?

That as a single field not the AMA. Our local club not only allows MR's but embraces them and has done so for many years... in fact before they were called "Drones" and before they were self flying. You can't toss out the whole basket over a few bad apples. That's not how it works in the real world and if you do that you're only limiting your own experiences.

Also joining the AMA does not mean "fly around in a half circle over their landing strip, with a AMA instructor attached to their hip" LOL. Several years ago the AMA started a section called "Park Fliers" for those who didn't want to fly at a designated flying field. This opened the door for many of us to get away from the flying field and see/fly other parts of the country. Now the AMA "covers" UAS flights anywhere so long as the flight is done within the AMA Guidelines. That's pretty HUGE if you ask me (which you didn't).

Like many of us Old Timers, the AMA initially resisted and probably resented the "Autonomous Flight Abilities" of MultiRotors because we saw the writing on the wall. Unfortunately it's 100% coming to fruition with new laws and regulations flying around for all UnManned Aircraft Systems (UAS) brought on by our beloved "Drones" flying anywhere, anytime, and any way the untrained operator desires to fly. There has been a significant paradigm shift over the last few years and MR's are not only accepted they are encouraged in the vast majority of clubs.

Then maybe somebody should start a drone Association of some type. Sounds like plenty of people would be on board with that. And yes I have seen the negativity towards drone flyers from the AMA but yet keep my membership there. Again the insurance part is a plus. Most likely and hopefully I will never need to consider using that. But we do need some voice out there representing drones and their pilots to the government..

There are already several groups like this started around the country but in reality they have no traction nor credibility. Several small groups (everyone wants to be THE group) carry no weight what so ever. AMA has a very large membership and a long and strong track record for getting things done and protecting their membership.

So the other point that I'm not seeing represented too much here is the difference in the types of drones out there. The fpv racing drones and the aerial photography type drones are totally two different classes without a doubt. So I believe some of these rules should be divided accordingly for these different types. I can see how they want to control the aerial photography drones like the DJI line that have all this built-in intelligence that makes them a safer craft to begin with but nothing Stops all these other ones from being controlled.

Look how long it took to get sUAS broken down into TWO sections (Hobby and NonHobby). How long do you think it's going to take to get specific categories created?

 

[flockshot]

The AMA has their rules. Some of those rules allow activity that is illegal under part 107 (examples, night flight, no altitude limit, restricted airspace use with notification only). These are all currently legal under the 336 CBO Safety Rules of the AMA, and are objected to by the FAA.
This allows people to hide behind the 336 model aircraft rule whenever they want to violate 107 in those areas that conflict. Not just AMA members, but anyone who claims to be flying under the rules of a CBO.
If Congress is put in a position of having to choose between 336 and the FAA Regulations, I would suggest that the FAA has in inside track.

 

[RunningWithScissors]

That as a single field not the AMA. Our local club not only allows MR's but embraces them and has done so for many years... in fact before they were called "Drones" and before they were self flying. You can't toss out the whole basket over a few bad apples. That's not how it works in the real world and if you do that you're only limiting your own experiences.

It's refreshing to hear that you've got a local club there that's very progressive and open-minded towards "our kind", BigAl. There is at least one AMA affiliated flying club with their own field locally here. I haven't approached them yet but was considering doing that after I join AMA in the next few months. I have been to their field during scheduled hours and seen one lone drone (that's a great handle) op flying what looked to be a smallish drone. All the rest were fixed wings doing their thing. Don't know how/if I'd fit in but it might be worth a formal visit fully outfitted. If it doesn't work out, I've still got my regular locations that are rarely populated.

 

[BigAl07]

It's refreshing to hear that you've got a local club there that's very progressive and open-minded towards "our kind", BigAl. There is at least one AMA affiliated flying club with their own field locally here. I haven't approached them yet but was considering doing that after I join AMA in the next few months. I have been to their field during scheduled hours and seen one lone drone (that's a great handle) op flying what looked to be a smallish drone. All the rest were fixed wings doing their thing. Don't know how/if I'd fit in but it might be worth a formal visit fully outfitted. If it doesn't work out, I've still got my regular locations that are rarely populated.

I'll be the first to admit that "flying at the club field" can be boring in about 90 seconds or less. The only time I fly my MRs at the field is when I fly OVER the field taking pics or video for events and such. I happen to live about 1/2 mile from the current field location and I'll fly over it from my back deck just to see who is there and if I want to go and take some of my other aircraft to fly.

Be warned... flying other R/C aircraft besides GPS/Gyro stabilized MRs is a BLAST and VERY addictive.

 

[RunningWithScissors]

I'll be the first to admit that "flying at the club field" can be boring in about 90 seconds or less. The only time I fly my MRs at the field is when I fly OVER the field taking pics or video for events and such. I happen to live about 1/2 mile from the current field location and I'll fly over it from my back deck just to see who is there and if I want to go and take some of my other aircraft to fly.

I wanted to be kind but, that's pretty much what it looked like. Fixed wings doing out-and-backs and loopty-loops. Everyone got their few minutes in the spotlight and it was all very organized and ....zzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[RunningWithScissors]

Sorry about that. For the fixed-wing folks, it's likely a different mindset and a different experience than it is for drone/UAS pilots. And I get that. The one thing I can tell you is, there were a lot more fixed wing crashes in the 20 minutes while I was watching than I think get posted to this site in an average day. Then again, maybe that isn't typical of fixed-wing flights.

 

[BigAl07]

Sorry about that. For the fixed-wing folks, it's likely a different mindset and a different experience than it is for drone/UAS pilots. And I get that. The one thing I can tell you is, there were a lot more fixed wing crashes in the 20 minutes while I was watching than I think get posted to this site in an average day. Then again, maybe that isn't typical of fixed-wing flights.

Keep in mind that we are all UAS pilots not just the drones/multirotors. Unmanned is unmanned . . . .

"Traditional" R/C flying is a Self Correcting Problem. By that I mean you can't go buy your first aircraft and merely charge & fly. You have to Learn to Fly (at least to some degree) and if you don't take the time/effort you will crash (And occasionally burn). Most beginners don't recover (emotionally) from the first major crash and merely give up unless they've invested time and effort into learning to fly. We used to spend hours upon hours coaching, mentoring, training new pilots to give them the tools they needed to be able to fly SOLO and in a safe and fun manner.

Even after you learn you're still "flying the aircraft" and a bad judgement call or wrong control input will result in the aircraft contacting Terra Firma and usually at a high rate of speed. Without GPS guidance and Gyro Stabilization it's a whole new ball game and that goes for fixed wing and rotorcraft.

I've got some "planks" that have hundreds of hours of flight with no crashes and I've got some that have "crash marks" after just a few hard/rough landings. Either way I'm thrilled because I was flying the aircraft and it's a huge rush to take off from the ground, fly around doing some manual aerobatics, then come in for a squeaky smooth landing and taxi back to your flight station. Night and Day difference from flying a "Flight Controller" type of aircraft.

 

[captainmilehigh]

My local AMA R/C flying club is a private club, and doesn’t allow MR’s even by AMA members. They have a really nice flying field, with their closely mowed grass and their miniature asphalt runway, complete with a cute little wind sock.

But flying in that area is not for me anyway. Too confined a space.

As BigAl has stated numerous times, the AMA is an established CBO, with a positive track record in dealing with the FAA and government regulations. Its’ members have a voice in decisions being made that effect the hobby that will enable it to grow. The CBO guidelines are a positive step in that direction.

Joining the AMA is much more than joining a flying club. I don’t need a club to fly........I need the positive representation AMA provides to keep on flying. Many members...........one voice.