RunRyder RC
WATCH
 31 pages [ <<    <     28      29     ( 30 )     31     NEXT    >> ] 27142 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › Lawsuits filed challenging stricter FAA Rules
10-22-2014 03:29 PM  3 years agoPost 581
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

elected officials
Congress made the Public Law section 333 & 336, FAA only follows the rules & doing its job

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2014 03:39 PM  3 years agoPost 582
rexxigpilot

rrProfessor

Florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Congress made the Public Law section 333 & 336, FAA only follows the rules & doing its job
You need to understand the difference between laws or Acts of Congress and implementation of laws. Code of Federal Regulations or CFRs are the regulations used to implement Congressional Acts. Here is where the FAA's interpretation gets out of sync with the intentions of Congress.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2014 03:47 PM  3 years agoPost 583
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

intentions of Congress.
AMA LoL ~ Litany of Lamenting

when FAA refers to 'Congress intention' is not OK, but when AMA does the same then it's fine

"This again misstates Congress’ intent and implies that the freestanding definition of “model aircraft” provided in Section 336 is intended to reference the definition of aircraft in 49 U.S.C. 40102; 14 CFR 1.1. It also twists the meaning of the word “regarding” so as to purportedly allow the FAA to actually
regulate model aircraft as long as the words “model aircraft” do not appear specifically in new rules and regulations. That contradicts the clear intent of Congress, which passed Section 336 specifically to exempt aeromodeling from new rules and regulations.
~
Throughout the Interpretive Rule, the agency takes great latitude in determining Congress’ intentions and in placing tightly worded restrictions through its “plain-language” interpretation of the text. In this case the definition of model aircraft in the Act requires that, “model aircraft be flown within visual line
of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” From a safety perspective this means that the model aircraft must remain in visual range of the operating station so that the operator can maintain situational awareness, control the aircraft, and “see & avoid” other aircraft and obstacles. Congress did not intend
this as a prescribed means of operating the aircraft, but rather the manner in which model aircraft are to be flown. It limits the distance from the operator that the model aircraft can be flown “within visual line of sight.” There is no ambiguity in the language provided by Congress and no need for interpretation.
~
The Interpretive Rule uses the plain language doctrine to create a regulatory prohibition of the use of a specific type of technology: first-person view goggles. In this regard, the rule states, “The aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator” and “An operator could not rely on another person to satisfy the visual line of sight requirement.” This is well outside of the congressional intent and is inconsistent
with current and acceptable two-pilot manned aircraft operations."
-

note; 336 (c)(2)“model aircraft be flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” does not mention 2nd operator~r/c pilot

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2014 04:20 PM  3 years agoPost 584
Heli_Splatter

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Spending money on lobbyists is an extreme waste of AMA funds. You cannot buy anything in Washington. Someone always has more money than you do.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2014 05:38 PM  3 years agoPost 585
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

waste of AMA funds
funny that AMA is against FAR applied to r/c pilots when disregarding section 336, but brings up general aviation full-scale rules when referring to FPV

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2014 01:10 AM  3 years agoPost 586
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Oh really?

Then why are there so many?

Ever heard of Abramoff?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2014 01:11 AM  3 years agoPost 587
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

funny that AMA is against FAR applied to r/c pilots when disregarding section 336, but brings up general aviation full-scale rules when referring to FPV
Are you even an AMA member?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2014 01:32 AM  3 years agoPost 588
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

AMA member?
yes, and really don't care about AMA FAA dispute, just making notes about unfair statements of modelaircraft.org

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-30-2014 06:54 PM  3 years agoPost 589
rexxigpilot

rrProfessor

Florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

http://news.yahoo.com/crews-respond...-152038929.html

I think the FAA should spend more time making full scale aircraft safer and more reliable than worrying about models. As I've said many times, airports should be placed at least 15 to 20 miles away from large populations. In high growth areas more separation distance may be required.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-30-2014 08:51 PM  3 years agoPost 590
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

~
The Interpretive Rule states: “… the rulemaking prohibition would not apply in the case of general rules that the FAA may issue or modify that apply to all aircraft.”
This again misstates Congress’ intent and implies that the freestanding definition of “model aircraft” provided in Section 336 is intended to reference the definition of aircraft in 49 U.S.C. 40102; 14 CFR
1.1. It also twists the meaning of the word “regarding” so as to purportedly allow the FAA to actually regulate model aircraft as long as the words “model aircraft” do not appear specifically in new rules and regulations. That contradicts the clear intent of Congress, which passed Section 336 specifically to exempt aeromodeling from new rules and regulations.
The Act does allow that, “nothing in (the Act) shall be construed to limit the authority of the (FAA) to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the safety of the national airspace system (NAS).”
The Academy of Model Aeronautics does not condone the operation of a model aircraft in a manner that endangers persons or property. The AMA further believes that current statutory provisions are adequate to address aberrant activity that endangers the safety of the NAS. Congress by no means intended to grant a free pass for individuals who operate their model aircraft in a manner that
intentionally places manned aircraft in imminent peril. However, it clearly intended to leave risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines for the operation of model aircraft devices themselves to the nationwide community-based organization.
~
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/am...ney-properties/

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 01:36 AM  3 years agoPost 591
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Now I understand....

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 01:47 AM  3 years agoPost 592
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 01:49 AM  3 years agoPost 593
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

???

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 01:51 AM  3 years agoPost 594
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

???
which part ain't clear? AMA [flying-center] or FAA [country-wide]

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:02 AM  3 years agoPost 595
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm running as fast as I can...

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:05 AM  3 years agoPost 596
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

This is akin to a multi-person filibuster....

Can I post the AMA rules?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:19 AM  3 years agoPost 597
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

filibuster

The new flight restrictions permanently prohibit the operation of radio control model aircraft at any time within 3 nm (3.5 statute miles) of both the Disneyland and Disney World theme parks, and for a period of 1 hr before and 1 hr after major sporting events.
AMA rules
only club related

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:24 AM  3 years agoPost 598
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

And did you realize when the president comes to town, the TFR is 30 nautical miles in radius?

That's nearly 3750 square miles.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:26 AM  3 years agoPost 599
LaDon

rrVeteran

Fort Dodge .Ia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

God this is the most worthless thread I ever seen. Talk about yapping with nothing important coming out.

Team Jr

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-31-2014 02:31 AM  3 years agoPost 600
EEngineer

rrProfessor

TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

God this is the most worthless thread I ever seen. Talk about yapping with nothing important coming out.
It's a multi-person filibuster.

Feel free to join in.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 31 pages [ <<    <     28      29     ( 30 )     31     NEXT    >> ] 27142 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › Lawsuits filed challenging stricter FAA Rules
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 27  Topic Subscribe

Saturday, August 18 - 7:35 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online