RunRyder RC
 5  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 2 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2     NEXT    >> ] 1475 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterAerial Photography and Video › RCAPA Testing?
03-11-2006 05:01 PM  11 years agoPost 1
lowandslow

rrKey Veteran

Spring Hill, TN

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I noticed that RCAPA is in the beginning stages of instituting written and flight examinations. Just curious what you all think and if you will participate?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2006 11:30 PM  11 years agoPost 2
Torsten

rrKey Veteran

Germany

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

i missed the AR in the flight test.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-12-2006 05:44 AM  11 years agoPost 3
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

what you all think ?

Ive not seen a more idiotic waste of time by anyone in AP yet.
Not a wonder everyone ignores it, and the rest of the RCAPA drivel.
They should take up finger painting.

Anyone that thinks they can regulate an aircraft you can carry in your suitcase or car trunk, and can land or take off from anywhere, is deranged or monumentaly detached from reality.

My advice is if the enemy gets away with having AP regulated, just ignore it and the FAA.
They can do nothing and prove nothing.

CASA cant regulate them here in Aus and there is only 20 mill of us here.
They wouldnt know who was operating or where and even if I rung them and told them where and when, they'd still be stuffed trying to prove it I was getting paid to fly.

Besides, I dont get paid, the camera man gets paid.
I dont get paid to fly before I fly so when I operate it is not for payment.
And thats not counting all the images I take on my own time that I later sell.

CASA and FAA can regulate us till their head falls off, but it will be all to no avail and will not give them anymore control over RC AP than they have now, which is all but none, if they want to waste their funding on it, be my guest I say.

They dont have much money either of them and are currently fosicking down the back of the couch for spare change to stay financially afloat.

Should serve as a good lesson to them not to extend themselves into idiotic and absurd proposals to regulate that which is impossible to regulate.
They have already invested time and money to create RC aircraft regs that need no ammendment or change to faciltate RC AP.
And are to date enforced on a purely voluntary basis and the FAA knows it.
To think they can have compliance other than voluntary is just blinkered stupidity.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-12-2006 06:02 AM  11 years agoPost 4
lowandslow

rrKey Veteran

Spring Hill, TN

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Damn MPA, don't hold back I want to hear what you really think!

I agree completely though. I looked at the written exam RCAPA proposes and is was a joke IMO. Personally I think the FAA has bigger fish to fry and no money to do it with and they know it. Radio controlled models I'm sure are not very high on their list of problems to deal with.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-12-2006 08:36 AM  11 years agoPost 5
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

lowandslow

Glad to see your commonsense prevail.

This new idea of exams has just taken the sillyness to new level.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 07:03 AM  11 years agoPost 6
lvspark

rrApprentice

Walla Walla

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I have taken the RCAPA general written test. It's not a big deal. If it gets crazy in the future, I'll deal with it then, but for now they are attempting to show that modelers are capable taking care of themselves rather than having all the rules made at the federal level and shoved down our throats.

I voluntarily comply with FAA advisories and plan to comply with possible future regulations rather than run around and "just ignore it and the FAA.". I occasionally work with law enforcement and fire departments, and they do care that when they hire me, that everything is legal.

RCAPA did not just come up with this stuff for fun. They have been monitoring the "impending regulations" for a long time. They have been in the ASTM and RTCA SC-203 meetings and are doing everything they can to minimize the impact on RC AP operators.

The RCAPA guidelines are much less restrictive than FAA part 61 and part 91 type regulations that others are pushing at ASTM.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 11:50 AM  11 years agoPost 7
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

write up a storm of regs, who cares.
Doubt itll do you much good.

Just a pity you dont act for the interests of Helicams operators by putting your efforts in to showing the FAA there is no need for further regulation.

Clearly reading RCAPA the intent is certainly not to avoid furhter regulations, or even try to.

You might think it, but you just dont practice it.

By your own narration of events in that forum, you applied the regulations you already have, and it served suitably to notify all those relevant to the activity.

The alleged impending bag of regulations is now just a convienient excuse to not bother trying to avoid any, and just accepting defeat before anything has begun.
Dont expect a big pat on the back for that anytime soon.

And so you dont ignore the regulations that work, so what,
we didnt ignore the regulations we had here, until they got so bizarre as common sense would tell anyone with a clue, to ignore them.

We still dont ignore the regulations as they are written.
They are the same RC craft regs we had, and the new regs tell us in writing to continue using them.
But the verbal position of anyone at CASA invloved is contrary to the written regulations.
Which is what we ignore here.

Simply, if the regulations where sensible enough they would be complied with by anyone.
If regs are senseless they will be ignored and compliance will be zilch.
A turn of events that will at least kill off anything that could have been called an industry even if the new regs are ignore by many..

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 05:04 PM  11 years agoPost 8
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Guy’s,
I‘ve been hearing this same old story (how RCAPA.net is doing wrong)for over a year and wonder when you guy’s are going to share info/contacts that you have within the FAA, DHS or DOD? You have to know something, it can’t be the same old conjecture, so what do you have that’s definitive?
P.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 06:19 PM  11 years agoPost 9
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Let me put it this way.

Here is what you can expect under regulations

Our national joke
The "Australian UAV Significant Interest Group."

"Significant interest" being the joke.

http://www.aeromech.usyd.edu.au/cgi...ums.cgi?forum=3

Dont blink or you'll miss the content.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 06:42 PM  11 years agoPost 10
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Looks like the Gov put the damper on any UAV advancements/use coming out of OZ!

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 06:49 PM  11 years agoPost 11
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Not the govt.
Just some public servants in CASA who went a bit feral.
The regs allow us to operate without certification.
But CASA claims otherwise contrary to the regs the govt passed into law.
Its all bluff but its been enough to kill off any expansions of an industry.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 08:17 PM  11 years agoPost 12
lvspark

rrApprentice

Walla Walla

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

RCAPA is not pushing regulations, but publishing guidelines for safe operation. The AMA has the same thing, but the AMA only supports hobby or recreational use. With guidelines in place that are accepted by FAA, we won't have to operate in this "state of limbo" and insurance companies might be more likely to offer affordable insurace for commercial RC AP operations.

IMO, The reason there is no "law" up to this point for models, is because the FAA was happy with AMA guidelines and allowed them to be self regulated.. Now you have this whole group of flyers that are not included in the AMA guidelines. If you expect the US GOV to allow models with cameras to be flying around with no guidelines or regulation at all you are very very wrong. It does not help that people post the "look how high I flew" threads with pictures and video to prove it. That is one of the biggest things that "woke the sleeping giant" on the need to include model aircraft in UAV regs.

What is going to discourage the average joe from hovering over the crowd at a high school football game? Don't ya think there needs to be source of information and guidelines that encourages and helps people understand safe operation?


RCAPA totally supports helicams and has gone out of their way and made special provisions to make sure helicams are fully supported.
RCAPA has respected helicam operators directly involved in the process to protect the interest of helicam specific operations.

RCAPA is not some college group with UAV dreams like what happened to you in AU..
We want to fly today, tomarrow, and years into the future without having to be bogged down with regs that are overkill for model aircraft with cameras, flown within visual range. RCAPA is guys just like you, except we are attempting to find a common sense "middle ground" with the FAA instead of just fighting them tooth and nail then thumbing your nose at them when the hammer drops.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-19-2006 09:10 PM  11 years agoPost 13
bleesweb

rrApprentice

Dutchess County, NY

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm with you MPA

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-20-2006 02:58 AM  11 years agoPost 14
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Lvspark,
Next month something will be coming out in the federal registry about AC 91-57, not the changes to be made but plans to change them. Until then you’ll be battling it out with the head in the sand gang! Oh you’ll hear how you’re a meanie and if you just let the sleeping dog’s lie every things gonna be okay. Ask me how I know P

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-20-2006 04:20 AM  11 years agoPost 15
Dakine

rrElite Veteran

OC, Commifornia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Since RCAPA.NET is concerned with safety, perhaps RCAPA.NET could also find insurance companies to provide insurance coverage for the AP community as well?

Protect people first, then execute the FAA mumble jumble later.

Walk the talk.

I can see it now, little Johnny with a micro heli decides to strap a little camera for down link. He now has to report to the FAA. It's he same principle but relative in size.

All in all, you've got our support if you could provide us with insurance contacts for coverage.

I hope the 'insurance availability is coming' is this month? Next month?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-20-2006 04:54 AM  11 years agoPost 16
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

No time to worry about the mumbo jumbo later. We are either onboard now or we let some suggest we sign up for part’s 61, part 91 (FAA.gov) and a commercial license. Or we let the AMA who wants nothing to do with this figure things out for us. You guy’s don’t mind getting commercial licenses to fly for money do you?

We have been looking for almost a year and a half! Every lead, everyone that’s said they have insurance, have only some dodgy coverage at best. It’s hard to insure something that has no regulations or guidelines to follow. We have one underwriter that likes the test and guidelines, hopefully we can get something off the pad. P

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-20-2006 05:39 AM  11 years agoPost 17
Dakine

rrElite Veteran

OC, Commifornia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm ready to pay for a policy to show my commitment as a responsible person. This is my first priority over any other initiatives.

We're open to those who want to 'control', but at the same time, we would also ask them to provide solutions as opposed to simply dictate. A fundamental solution is, help to provide coverage for the community.

Laying down laws without providing solutions to insurance coverage doesn't benefit the true initiative. Anything short of this is smoking mirrors.....pretty book cover with no substance.

We truly hope you could help us.

I'm ready to pay to get coverage.

Thanks

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-20-2006 06:16 AM  11 years agoPost 18
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Thanks Tony,
We’ve been working on it, dead end after dead end!

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-22-2006 03:09 PM  11 years agoPost 19
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

RE: insurance
We are close! A member of the RCAPA board and a representative from with the underwriter will be meeting at the end of the month (They say it’s a go). Part of the comfort level for underwriting is that RCAPA has safety guidelines and a rudimentary test as part of it’s professional membership criteria.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-22-2006 11:28 PM  11 years agoPost 20
bleesweb

rrApprentice

Dutchess County, NY

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Well that would be a different story if they offered insurance coverage.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 2 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2     NEXT    >> ] 1475 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterAerial Photography and Video › RCAPA Testing?
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 5  Topic Subscribe

Monday, October 23 - 12:27 pm - Copyright © 2000-2017 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online