RE: AMA emails on Drones/Right to Fly
[quote]ORIGINAL: 804 I care less about the issue, whatever the issue du jour seems to be (privacy, terrorism, physical danger), day by day. Mostly what I see is sensationalized over-reaction from the media (and some here and on other forums). Haven't much heard from the public concerning "demand additional restrictions" on drones WRT how that might affect us RC folks. As far as enforcing any laws broken by "drone" flyers, do it just like it is always done. Case-by-case basis. [/quote] Really??????? amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/drone-legislation/
Posted on: 5/15/2013 4:40 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11512594

RE: AMA emails on Drones/Right to Fly
www.clickorlando.com/drones-exploding-in-popularity-but-raising-concerns/-/1637238/20151798/-/rbiycd/-/index.html Ran last night at 11:00 pm on Channel 6 News in Orlando. The public will demand additional restrictions on "drones"............................... they will react with emotion, the big question is how do we protect model aviation? Brad
Posted on: 5/15/2013 6:39 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11512124

RE: AMA emails on Drones/Right to Fly
Another FPV flyer champoining the cause of "I can fly anywhere I want"................................................ research???? /betabeat.com/2013/05/seattle-man-hovers-drone-over-a-familys-house-for-research/ I have alwats wanted to try FPV but am comming around the the idea that the way to solve this is to ban FPV on any airframe that has the ability to "hover in place". That would eliminate the fear of the pervert looking in the bedroom window. Brad
Posted on: 5/15/2013 6:01 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11512099

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
Well the forum is closed................ R.I.P.
Posted on: 9/15/2012 6:45 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229184

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: RCKen [quote]ORIGINAL: bradpaul So Ken , as I was the OP (for what it's worth) kindly ask you to now close this thread and let the AMA Discussions Forum RIP. Brad [/quote] Sorry Brad, but RCU's policy it to try and let a thread run it's course whenever possible. We don't close a thread at the request of anybody in that thread. Ken [/quote] Sure
Posted on: 9/14/2012 10:44 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228243

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
Well it officially closes today ....................... so this thread has run it's course................. it was interesting to see "the usual suspects" carry the discussion from the relavent to the rediculous. Thank goodness it lasted long enough to see the return of KEP ....... it would have been unfair to see iy close without getting a few last words of ????????? from KEP. The Arbo, LCS, FrankP debate was a classic........................ most laughs I have had in awile. So Ken , as I was the OP (for what it's worth) kindly ask you to now close this thread and let the AMA Discussions Forum RIP. Brad
Posted on: 9/14/2012 5:55 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228185

RE: AMA Forums to AMA Blogs
They get what they wanted................ the ability to edit or approve any entries to the blog. All will not be sweetness and light. We should start a poll on wether any blog entry submitted by Hoss ever gets published. Brad
Posted on: 9/8/2012 2:48 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222036

RE: NOTAM from Hell
[quote]ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R [quote]ORIGINAL: MetallicaJunkie not one time has the AMA emailed me to notify us of a NOTAM in our area [/quote] They use the Club's Safety Officer email address. I'd call the AMA Monday and make sure they have the correct information for your club contact. They do not send it to all the officers, etc. [/quote] Odd then that I get NOTAM emails, as I have been in years past the Club Secretary, V.P. and lastly two years ago the President. Today just a regular member. On the last renewal the AMA asked for email addresses and I know many get the "AMA Insider" email newsletter. I hope the AMA doesn't believe it would cost more to send NOTAMS to all email addresses on file and not to just a select few. Brad
Posted on: 9/8/2012 11:57 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221905

RE: NOTAM from Hell
All part of the "wussification" of the citizens of this country. Islamic terriorists fly planes into the World Trade Center and we are told not to fly our toy planes within 30 miles of a politician on a bus. Grandma and 3 year ols todlers get groped by TSA and we all sit back and convince ourselved "this is good the government is protecting me". Just venting........ as the weather looks good to fly tomorrow. Am I better off that the AMA sent me an email about NOTAMS?????????????????????????????? Why does it somehow seem not? The real irony is that that the land we lease has both a flying field area and a shooting range area, so we can't fly toy planes but we can have traget practice at the range. DOH Brad
Posted on: 9/7/2012 4:11 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221133

RE: NOTAM from Hell
[quote]ORIGINAL: Live Wire What are they going to do about LIGHTNING[:D] [/quote] I guess when Obama travels or holds an event the FAA needs to issue a NTGAL (notice to God about lightning) After all they put God back into the platform....... Brad
Posted on: 9/7/2012 11:13 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220797

NOTAM from Hell
Received notices of NOTAMS from AMA for this weekend in Florida. Obama is having a "bus tour" and it is shutting down RC for about half the state this weekend. I appreciate the AMA letting me know what a PITA this election campaign will be in swing states like Florida. Now just what is the danger of a RC plane to a "bus tour"??????? I know that the AMA cannot help what the FAA issues as NOTAMS just venting. Brad
Posted on: 9/7/2012 9:00 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220704

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: Arbo [quote]ORIGINAL: bradpaul Hey Arbo I just noticed that every new moderator but you had a nice welcome post from Dave on the forum? [/quote] Just because it's not where you can see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Though I wonder how much time you spent looking for something like that to try and make a mountain out of. [/quote] About 10 seconds
Posted on: 8/29/2012 4:37 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11210794

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk [quote]ORIGINAL: bradpaul Good, Bad, Don't care? In any case this is from the minutes of the AMA July EC meeting: [quote] AMA On-line Forum The ED reported the forum was created some time in 2009. It has almost 2700 members and out of that, 2350 have made one post or less; and 90% of those posts come from 10 members. The proposal is to close the AMA forum
Posted on: 8/29/2012 3:39 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11210729

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: ctrout Baaaaaaaaaaaaaad CTrout ~ [/quote] Just what is the connection between a ctrout and a red herring?
Posted on: 8/28/2012 5:59 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11208830

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf [quote]ORIGINAL: bradpaul [quote]ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf To Brad Do you believe there really was a ''group of users'' reporting posts that didn't break rules over there? If so, were you one of the group? [/quote] I think that ctrout has you chassing a ''red herring''. Got to give him credit it sure has got
Posted on: 8/27/2012 10:13 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207745

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf To Brad Do you believe there really was a "group of users" reporting posts that didn't break rules over there? If so, were you one of the group? [/quote] I think that ctrout has you chassing a "red herring". Got to give him credit it sure has got a discussion going................................ The question should be did users over there report posts "THAT DID BREAK THE RULES"? ..... Brad
Posted on: 8/27/2012 9:59 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207725

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
So Arbo since the forum is being shut dow can you share with us who was the most frequent reported of other members posts that did not break any rules? Brad
Posted on: 8/27/2012 8:44 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207631

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
[quote]ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk [quote]ORIGINAL: Arbo LCS and Pfrank, I sent messages on the AMA forum, and posted in the moderator section, WRT my intentions once I saw the 'official' word go out that the forum was 'done'. That was to not let it 'go out' with [b]a bunch of people getting on there and causing trouble[/b]. Nobody said 'no'. And all the AMA employees and officials that check the forum, have read that message frank, all have the ability to 'moderate' anything they do not want there. Take from that whatever you want. [/quote] Paul, This last ticket was not the first of its kind and I've stated on numerous occasions that that is a problem. I have civilly suggested improvements that were met with ridicule and censoring. If you are telling me that you are the only moderator/administrator that can close abuse tickets, including abuse tickets against your own posts I'm not buying it. If half of what you say is true about the administration above you and their lack of management then I feel sorry for you for being used as their scapegoat for the failure of the forum. Time and time again you have had the last word by locking threads with a final post that more often than not broke the same rules you claimed to be enforcing. Your attitude and treatment of “a bunch of people getting on there and causing trouble” was a large part of the problem. Like it or not that “bunch of people” were card carrying members that deserved a voice. Your job should have been to help them keep it civil, not to act as the administrations censor and/or their hatchet man as you claim. I applaud you for wanting to take on the task; however I condemn you for being incapable or unwilling to properly accomplish what could have been a successful forum. I also condemn the administration for letting it happen but maybe that was the intent all along. Regards Frank [/quote] Frank let's explore that........................................ The forum had three sections: AMA Message Board Information General Discussions Publications The main section was of course: General Discussion. Now discussion implies that an idea or concept is explored from all sides, not just the positive. However the AMA forum was overly sensitive to any negative discussion. This IMHO showed the inability (can I say incompetence?) of the EC and AMA Staff to operate a member based communication. Some questions: What was the process to vet a new moderator? Any warm body that volunteers (even if previously banned on the forum?) A review of the candidate’s online posting history to see any obvious biases and ability to moderate effectively? What was the process to review reported posts or to close threads? At moderator discression? A review with staff? What was the process to review and respond to complaints sent to AMA Staff and EC members via “ASK AMA”, phone, email and forum PM’s (yes there were a lot of complaints) Ignore it and label the complainers troublemakers Analyze the complaints to see if action/change is needed I have my opinion on the answers and it leads to some other questions: WHICH IS WORSE? It was all the fault of the moderator and the AMA did nothing about it? The AMA EC and staff knew what was going on and ignored the problem Can an organization that cannot even effectively manage and run a online forum be an effective and competent CBO in the new reality of government overview via the FAA? Brad
Posted on: 8/24/2012 6:38 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11204356

RE: AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
All the internet AMA Discussions have their issues with insiders, outsiders, homers, haters, newbies, "experts", and moderation. Posters are banned from AMA, RCG, RCU, RCT and with very limited exceptions the threads turn south fast.................................. who to blame everybody of course. 90% of the posts came from 10 members............................ is it really that different here? OK not perhaps 90% but it would not surprise me that >50% come from 10 members. Is that bad? or are they just interested in improving the AMA from their perspective. BTW HC is it a co-incidence that the AMA Discussion Forum is being killed with the new Foundation" as an issue ? Brad
Posted on: 8/19/2012 2:08 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11198891

AMA to close the AMA Discussions Forum
Good, Bad, Don't care? In any case this is from the minutes of the AMA July EC meeting: [quote]AMA On-line Forum The ED reported the forum was created some time in 2009. It has almost 2700 members and out of that, 2350 have made one post or less; and 90% of those posts come from 10 members. The proposal is to close the AMA forum; it is believed this can be done now because the blog system is now up and running. The blog system is a quicker way to get better information to our members; and eliminates the potential for conversations to get dragged off track. HQ continues to refine the ticket system (Ask AMA) where someone can ask a question and get an answer within 48 hours by a staff person; and creating the knowledge base mentioned earlier that will supplement the Ask AMA system on-line. It was approved by acclamation to shut down the AMA Forum.[/quote] Brad
Posted on: 8/18/2012 11:06 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11197887

RE: AMA dues increase
[quote]ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf [quote]ORIGINAL: cj_rumley He may have -paid for his own membership plus his wife ($88, but might have had a buck credit or discount) -paid for membership plus a PPP membership for someone else ($87.95) -paid for his membership plus extra(s) e.g., FAI stamp, PP mag........ [/quote] Cj, You got me thinking. Although the email didn't [b]detail the proration[/b], I guess it is possible that to [b]renew[/b] through 2013 it would be $87... That makes some sense... But that goes against the theory of the past proration policy....maybe that has changed??? [/quote] If you sign up after July 1, you get membership (new member) for half the $58 annual dues, or $29. $58 + $29 = $87 to be paid up through 2013. Apparently when you checked the AMA site you missed the membership application form: http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/902.pdf where this is pointed out. SO NO DUES INCREASE................................................. Brad
Posted on: 7/15/2012 2:17 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11156304

RE: AMA dues increase
Now LCS, you have always claimed to be an AMA mmmember, so why would you have not gone to the AMA site and reviewed the minutes of the last few EC Meetings to see if a dues increase had been discussed or approved? Of course that would have been less fun then trying to stir something up here on RCU. Brad
Posted on: 7/15/2012 8:27 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11155942

RE: Thanx for getting me junkmail
Do you really believe data mining companies like AXCIOM http://www.acxiom.com dont already have all your email addresses your home address,where you work, how much you make, what car you drive, what you buy, and just about everything else? And they sell the data to marketing companies? Welcome to the 21st century..................... Brad
Posted on: 7/11/2012 8:22 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11151317

RE: RC Car Track In Muncie?
[quote]ORIGINAL: extra-nut Ran across this thread last night. Is AMA really this desperate? http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1//showthread.php?s=19ac6886646e4bcdf983a778eaee1901&t=365387 [/quote] Thanks extra-nut for the link to a nice thread to read.......................... refreshing to see a group of RC's (admitedly car guys) appreciate the AMA and understand how it takes volounteers to make improvements and not depend on somebody else. And after only a short time using the track they already have learned that Joyce is the "go to" person at AMA. Good one for the AMA!!!!!!!! Brad
Posted on: 7/4/2012 8:02 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11142545

RE: FPV SURVEY
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) has released a "Code of Conduct" for UAS operations. http://www.auvsi.org/AUVSI/Home/ http://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AUVSI/958c920a-7f9b-4ad2-9807-f9a4e95d1ef1/UploadedFiles/AUVSI%20UAS%20Operations%20Code%20of%20Conduct%20-%20Final.pdf CBO for FPV? Brad
Posted on: 7/2/2012 12:35 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11140118

RE: This should help bill requiring warrant for drones.
In all the discussion of privacy and police drones in the news, I have never seen anybody acknowledge that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled on this in United States v Causby - 328 US 256 (1946) While is is an old case it is still the precident ruling. [quote]In a 5-2 opinion authored by Justice William O. Douglas, the Court concluded that the ancient common law doctrine "has no place in the modern world." Justice Douglas noted that, were the Court to accept the doctrine as valid, "every transcontinental flight would subject the operator to countless trespass suits. Common sense revolts at the idea." However, while the Court rejected the unlimited reach above and below the earth described in the common law doctrine, it also ruled that, "if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere." Without defining a specific limit, the Court stated that flights over the land could be considered a violation of the Takings Clause if they led to "a direct and immediate interference with the enjoyment and use of the land." Given the damage caused by the particularly low, frequent flights over his farm, the Court determined that the government had violated Causby's rights, and he was entitled to compensation. (Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone died on April 22; Justice Robert H. Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision in the case, leaving the court with 7 members.)[/quote] Subsiquent opinions have generally used a lower limit of 400' as to what constitutes "exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere". As the FAA currently limits police UAV to no higher then 400', it seems to eliminate their use for survalence and still be able to have admittable evidence. I am sure this is a court case waiting to happen, but with the US Supreme Court precident on the side of the landowner having rights under the "Takings Clause" of the 5th Amendment, the government has problems. Brad Brad
Posted on: 6/14/2012 8:04 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11117941

RE: Should the AMA consider changing FPV Ops 550.pdf
[quote]ORIGINAL: JohnShe I thought that "line of sight" applied to the pilot operating the trainer box. He is the pilot in charge who allows the dude with the buddy-box to operate the plane safely as the porotolcl requires. [/quote] Somebody has figured it out !!!!!!!!!!, and that is why the AMA cannot eliminate the 2 pilot buddy box requirement............................ they do not have the authority to do so and still keep the exemption under the bill passed by Congress. Brad
Posted on: 6/10/2012 9:20 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11113240

RE: Should the AMA consider changing FPV Ops 550.pdf
[quote]ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R I suggest that the FPV folks behind this petition read the HR 658 text which exempts models from FAA regulation if operated under a CBO program. One requirement is: "(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft;" So that seems to kill one of their main points right off the bat. The AMA cannot allow operations that violate the law as written. In addition, if they would look at the 2009 ARC memo they would see the BLOS FPV operations will likely not be allowed under the FAA sUAS rules for at least the first 3 tiers of civil/public use operations/aircraft sizes detailed in the memo. They need to grasp that while they enjoy this type of flying, it is laughable to call it the "future of model aviation." So in my mind the AMA should leave the 550 document as is, since they really have no other option. [/quote] Still waiting for someone to explain how a person operating the aircraft can have visual line of sight while wearing FPV goggles................................................ ? Brad
Posted on: 6/9/2012 8:28 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11112848

RE: Should the AMA consider changing FPV Ops 550.pdf
[quote]ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R I suggest that the FPV folks behind this petition read the HR 658 text which exempts models from FAA regulation if operated under a CBO program. One requirement is: "(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft;" So that seems to kill one of their main points right off the bat. The AMA cannot allow operations that violate the law as written. In addition, if they would look at the 2009 ARC memo they would see the BLOS FPV operations will likely not be allowed under the FAA sUAS rules for at least the first 3 tiers of civil/public use operations/aircraft sizes detailed in the memo. They need to grasp that while they enjoy this type of flying, it is laughable to call it the "future of model aviation." So in my mind the AMA should leave the 550 document as is, since they really have no other option. [/quote] Excellent point, and to put it in clear language.......... A CBO (i.e. AMA or any other) has NO AUTHORITY to allow RC model aircraft flight BEYOND VISUAL LINE OF SIGHT (VLOS) either for FPV or non FPV flying. Brad
Posted on: 6/1/2012 6:15 AM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11102291

RE: FPV SURVEY
[quote]ORIGINAL: m1morrow Guys, Do k you now anyone that was killed by a RC airplane? Thats right....No. Fly safe guys[/quote] I know of two and I believe there have been more then that. One was a guy in Texas killed by a RC Heli another was spectators at a RC event in Europe. Brad
Posted on: 5/19/2012 2:21 PM by Author "bradpaul" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11086983