Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Ending mini-lawyering ... is it past time for AMA to require members follow the law?

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Ending mini-lawyering ... is it past time for AMA to require members follow the law?

Old 05-28-2020, 06:54 PM
  #176  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Okay, I stand corrected. When I typed R/C, I got everything but planes
I get parts from Amazon, but any plane I've looked to buy (Radian, KA8) I found for less elsewhere.
Old 05-29-2020, 04:55 AM
  #177  
jcmors
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Yankton, SD
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Amazon is seeing dollar signs in commercial drone delivery. They don't care if they lose some tiny number of RC model aircraft sales. Besides, if we are regulated out of existence what are we going to do? Stay home, sit on our couches, go nowhere and do nothing... wait... ummmm... well I mean even AFTER the virus situation... no we will find other interests, other things to do, RC boats or land vehicles perhaps. Whatever it is we find to do with our time in place of RC flying, they will sell so are they really going to lose money or business due to the hobby dieing?

Old 05-29-2020, 05:49 AM
  #178  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 24,157
Received 53 Likes on 43 Posts
Default

I thought I explained this earlier. The companies investing in drone delivery see the hobby as a pipeline for future engineers/pilots

They know that having the FAA regulating it out of existence will hurt them in this respect. It has nothing to do with the infinitesimal sales our hobby represents to their overall bottom line.
Old 05-29-2020, 08:45 AM
  #179  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
I thought I explained this earlier. The companies investing in drone delivery see the hobby as a pipeline for future engineers/pilots
Per FAA, there are 1,563,263 registered with the FAA. Of those, 1,117,900 are recreational (note 1). Per AMA, there are approximately 115,000 paying members. That means that, at BEST, just 7% of all registered sUAS are arguably "traditional hobby flyers." That means that as much as 93% of those flying recreationally arguably had little to do with "traditional hobby" flying.

So claims that "the hobby" acts as a "pipeline for future engineers/pilots" is clearly NOT supported by the data. Not when over 90% of those appear to have nothing to do with the hobby.

AMA needs to stop believing their own rhetoric, namely statements like the "...pipeline..." one above.

Note 1: https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/by_the_numbers/
Old 05-29-2020, 09:11 AM
  #180  
FUTABA-RC
 
FUTABA-RC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 769
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

What types of aircraft do you suppose that 93% of "non-traditional modelers" are flying?
Old 05-29-2020, 10:39 AM
  #181  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,351
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

If they aren't flying traditional aircraft, they have to be flying choppers or drones. I suspect that there are many flying aircraft that aren't members of the AMA but are registered with the FAA.
Old 05-29-2020, 10:56 AM
  #182  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FUTABA-RC View Post
What types of aircraft do you suppose that 93% of "non-traditional modelers" are flying?
Well, let's think about this for a moment. If roughly 1,000,000 non-AMA members were flying "traditional" model aircraft, I'd think we'd see them on virtually every street corner and in every store. But we don't. What we do see is MRs in big box stores and flying around our neighborhoods.

AMA needs to stop believing it's own rhetoric. They are not anywhere close to the pipeline to full scale nor the pipeline to professional MR that they want to think they are.
Old 05-29-2020, 11:06 AM
  #183  
jcmors
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Yankton, SD
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
If they aren't flying traditional aircraft, they have to be flying choppers or drones. I suspect that there are many flying aircraft that aren't members of the AMA but are registered with the FAA.
So from the link given by Franklin, other than part 107, there are 1,117,900 recreational pilots registered with the FAA. If you subtract the AMA membership numbers (and that is generously assuming that every AMA member did register with the FAA which I have my doubts about). You arrive at approximately 1,000,000 recreational fliers that are NOT AMA members. I believe that most of these are multirotor "drones" (opinion based on sales trends). Some are also likely "traditional modelers" that are not AMA members but I'm not sure there are large numbers of such folks represented. Drones (the multirotor kind) are selling. Traditional model aircraft sales are dwindling and RC helicopters are an even smaller number.

I, personally, didn't get the feeling that those large companies pushing for commercial drone delivery were overly concerned with keeping us traditional modelers around to be the pipeline for future engineers and pilots. To be honest, I may have missed comments from Amazon and the like to that effect but I certainly haven't seen any.
Old 05-29-2020, 02:10 PM
  #184  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,613
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jcmors View Post
So from the link given by Franklin, other than part 107, there are 1,117,900 recreational pilots registered with the FAA. If you subtract the AMA membership numbers (and that is generously assuming that every AMA member did register with the FAA which I have my doubts about). You arrive at approximately 1,000,000 recreational fliers that are NOT AMA members. I believe that most of these are multirotor "drones" (opinion based on sales trends). Some are also likely "traditional modelers" that are not AMA members but I'm not sure there are large numbers of such folks represented. Drones (the multirotor kind) are selling. Traditional model aircraft sales are dwindling and RC helicopters are an even smaller number.

I, personally, didn't get the feeling that those large companies pushing for commercial drone delivery were overly concerned with keeping us traditional modelers around to be the pipeline for future engineers and pilots. To be honest, I may have missed comments from Amazon and the like to that effect but I certainly haven't seen any.


1M recreational registered with the FAA non AMA members, where are they?

Mostly Multi rotor buyers, some of which are not active. Gifts that only got used a few times, fad that wore off.

Guys that started the hobby and other things took priority.

Traditional guys Like Hydro that aren't members but still do or still have plans to fly.

Now taking a look at the last segment. Small sample group but Hydro represents approximately 15% of the regular posters in this forum so it would be reasonably safe to say that 150,000 of that 1M are traditional guys flying without AMA membership.
Old 05-29-2020, 03:14 PM
  #185  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
1M recreational registered with the FAA non AMA members, where are they?

Mostly Multi rotor buyers, some of which are not active. Gifts that only got used a few times, fad that wore off.
Based on the regular sightings by manned aircraft being tabulated by the FAA, I don't know that you have a basis to say they're "not active" or they are a fad that "wore off." Because of course, if that was true, there wouldn't be the sightings now would there.

Meanwhile, the number of paying AMA members continues to decline as well.
Old 05-29-2020, 04:17 PM
  #186  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,613
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

Which some of those sightings ended up being false. And did you not see the word " some " in there? Are you so blinded in your need to instantly attempt to prove some of us wrong that you no longer bother to comprehend what was said before going into your act? As for the second statement, has nothing to do with my comment, you are starting to sound like a washed up comedian that hasn't had new material in years. Is that why you keep making up these new threads? Beating the bushes for new material? Did you pay your AMA membership just so you have access to information to gripe about? Is that YOUR sound financial decision?
Old 05-29-2020, 04:20 PM
  #187  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
I thought I explained this earlier. The companies investing in drone delivery see the hobby as a pipeline for future engineers/pilots

They know that having the FAA regulating it out of existence will hurt them in this respect. It has nothing to do with the infinitesimal sales our hobby represents to their overall bottom line.


Google has a financial interest in getting as many USS subscribers a possible, but I don't recall
Amazon ever weighing in on hobby regulations.

I thought maybe I had deleted Amazon's NPRM accidentally, but I think now that I've ever seen it.
Do you have a link to their comment or a PDF?
Old 05-29-2020, 06:19 PM
  #188  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,351
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
1M recreational registered with the FAA non AMA members, where are they?

Mostly Multi rotor buyers, some of which are not active. Gifts that only got used a few times, fad that wore off.

Guys that started the hobby and other things took priority.

Traditional guys Like Hydro that aren't members but still do or still have plans to fly.

Now taking a look at the last segment. Small sample group but Hydro represents approximately 15% of the regular posters in this forum so it would be reasonably safe to say that 150,000 of that 1M are traditional guys flying without AMA membership.
WOW!!!!
Am I being included in a post in a good light or is it the fact I have two trainers and three 50cc aerobatic planes in the pipeline?
Old 05-29-2020, 07:29 PM
  #189  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Does anyone else have a link or PDF of Amazon's NPRM comment?
Old 05-29-2020, 08:04 PM
  #190  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,613
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
WOW!!!!
Am I being included in a post in a good light or is it the fact I have two trainers and three 50cc aerobatic planes in the pipeline?

Just because we disagree doesn't mean we have to hold low opinions of one another.
Old 05-30-2020, 02:13 AM
  #191  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Which some of those sightings ended up being false. And did you not see the word " some " in there? Are you so blinded in your need to instantly attempt to prove some of us wrong that you no longer bother to comprehend what was said before going into your act? As for the second statement, has nothing to do with my comment, you are starting to sound like a washed up comedian that hasn't had new material in years. Is that why you keep making up these new threads? Beating the bushes for new material? Did you pay your AMA membership just so you have access to information to gripe about? Is that YOUR sound financial decision?
"Some" does not account for the magnitude of the numbers. To the contrary, the continued sightings, support the premise that there are indeed many of them out out there, in large numbers, thus not a "fad" or sitting inactive.

As for the second comment, that AMA paying numbers continue to decline, I'm merely stating fact. And another fact is that they ran a deficit last year. Since they're not a government and can't print money, they either had to take a loan or sell securities to cover spending. Interesting, since hasn't my "material" been lamenting their unwillingness to cut spending? Would have been good had they followed that advice, but alas the "pretty smart guys" did not. So with less in the market earning dividends, that means even less revenue this year. And that's pre-Covid. So their declining members is part of a financial trend that is troublesome at best.

And yet the response to any criticism is "they're the only ones..." or "we can address the management issues later... we have to support them now to fight FAA." Well, at the rate they're going, there may not be a later. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see a future that has them losing, yet again, on RemoteID and the AMA being a shell of it's former self. They could buy time by slashing costs. They could buy time by selling "Taj-Muncie" - they flourished for most of their "80 years" without it. And the money they get for it could extend the time they need to make the radical spending changes to survive.
Old 05-30-2020, 04:10 AM
  #192  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
Actually you're wrong. Amazon, Google Air etc support model aviation, we are the pipeline etc.
Read their comments on the NPRM
After 3 no responses it's safe to say you haven't read Amazon's NPRM comment. I sent out a couple of emails asking
about it an haven't heard back, so I'm not sure now if Amazon even released a comment on the NPRM.

The only thing for sure is both Google and Amazon support drone delivery and remote ID. Google may have a financial
interest as a USS provider in getting more the 1,000,000 RC flyers as subscribers, but neither Google or Amazon could
possibly see model aircraft flyers, with an average age approaching 60, as a "pipeline" for their future engineers and pilots.
Old 05-30-2020, 07:41 AM
  #193  
FUTABA-RC
 
FUTABA-RC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 769
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Actually it was the Department of Homeland Security and other security and law enforcement agencies that are driving remote ID.

Here is the FAA's own summary of the RID NPRM:

This action would require the remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems. The remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems in the airspace of the United States would address safety, national security, and law enforcement concerns regarding the further integration of these aircraft into the airspace of the United States while also enabling greater operational capabilities.


As far as the earlier questions about why Futaba, and others, have not come out with RID solutions while DJI did, this is worth a read:

With the inclusion of Intel, Skyward and T-Mobile, the remote ID cohort is noticeably network-heavy. Many dissenting voices, including drone manufacturing giant DJI, have argued that broadcast alone is sufficient to enable remote ID; the FAA’s choice of three telecom providers and its exclusion of DJI from this cohort indicates proceeding with a primarily network-based solution, perhaps mandating broadcast as well or including it as a backup option.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2020/0...te-id-service/

It appears that the FAA decided that DJI's solution was not the direction the FAA wants to go. So much for jumping the gun.
Old 05-30-2020, 12:39 PM
  #194  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FUTABA-RC View Post
Actually it was the Department of Homeland Security and other security and law enforcement agencies that are driving remote ID.

Here is the FAA's own summary of the RID NPRM:

Quote:
This action would require the remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems. The remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems in
the airspace of the United States would address safety, national security, and law enforcement concerns regarding the further
integration of these aircraft into the airspace of the United States while also enabling greater operational capabilities.


As far as the earlier questions about why Futaba, and others, have not come out with RID solutions while DJI did, this is worth a read:

Quote:
With the inclusion of Intel, Skyward and T-Mobile, the remote ID cohort is noticeably network-heavy. Many dissenting voices, including
drone manufacturing giant DJI
, have argued that broadcast alone is sufficient to enable remote ID; the FAA’s choice of three telecom
providers and its exclusion of DJI from this cohort indicates proceeding with a primarily network-based solution, perhaps mandating
broadcast as well or including it as a backup option.


https://www.aviationtoday.com/2020/0...te-id-service/

It appears that the FAA decided that DJI's solution was not the direction the FAA wants to go. So much for jumping the gun.
DJI didn't jump the gun, the NPRM requires broadcast and network remote ID and DJI drones comply with both.

As for the NPRM, you're reading the executive summary wrong. Read down further where the FAA clarifies the intent
of the proposed rule. National security and law enforcement are only a part not the "driving force".

"IV. Need for Remote Identification of UAS Operating in the Airspace of the United States"

A. Maintaining the Safety and Efficiency of the Airspace of the United States
B. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management (UTM)
C. Facilitating Beyond Visual Line of Sight Operations
D. National Security and Law Enforcement Efforts"


Remote ID is required by law as the result of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2016, passed nearly 4years
ago to bring drones into the US airspace system for commerce, not for the benefit of law enforcement.

SEC. 2105. IDENTIFICATION STANDARDS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, in collaboration with the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, the ...
President of RTCA, Inc., and the Administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration,
shall convene industry stakeholders to facilitate the development of consensus standards for remotely
identifying operators and owners of unmanned aircraft systems and associated unmanned aircraft."


"Industry stakeholders", i.e., commercial entities. You're trying to read in your own opinion.

Old 05-30-2020, 02:16 PM
  #195  
FUTABA-RC
 
FUTABA-RC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 769
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

This forum needs to be renamed. I suggest the "Argument for the Sake of Arguing Forum".

Allow me to suggest the next controversial subject - The Sun Rises in the East.

And Go................
Old 05-30-2020, 02:35 PM
  #196  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,351
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

Now that's not true, it SETS in the WEST!!!!!!!!!!!
Old 05-30-2020, 03:02 PM
  #197  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FUTABA-RC View Post
This forum needs to be renamed. I suggest the "Argument for the Sake of Arguing Forum".

Allow me to suggest the next controversial subject - The Sun Rises in the East.

And Go................
Allow me to suggest the solution, read what you're commenting on beforehand.
Old 05-30-2020, 03:51 PM
  #198  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,613
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FUTABA-RC View Post
This forum needs to be renamed. I suggest the "Argument for the Sake of Arguing Forum".

Allow me to suggest the next controversial subject - The Sun Rises in the East.

And Go................
All we have to do is look at who posts in forums other then the AMA forum to understand that.
Old 05-30-2020, 04:30 PM
  #199  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,351
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 22 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
All we have to do is look at who posts in forums other then the AMA forum to understand that.
Could you clarify that a little? I do post all over this and another forum and the other one isn't the one that several here are members of
Old 05-30-2020, 04:40 PM
  #200  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 2,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
All we have to do is look at who posts in forums other then the AMA forum to understand that.
Has no bearing on anything whatsoever.
I post here because it is (well, it used to be anyway) the best place to discuss the AMA. The RCU forums for the other RC disciplines I am interested and active in are not that great (with the exception of the warbird forum), so I participate elsewhere.

It is no wonder we can't have cordial dicussions here when every single one of your posts cast disparaging remarks at the other members here. THAT is far more the reason for the discourse here, than what other threads on RCU one may or may not post in.

Nice try, just doesn't hold any water.....

Astro

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.