[AlaskaRC] FAA looking at possibly regulating model aircraft

[Patrick Martin]

Tom,   

 

   After looking at the information I found this.

 

 

*************** 
3. Model Aircraft Not Operated in Accordance with 
Accepted Set of Standards ! 
3.1 Applicability ! 
The following general requirements and limitations apply to Model Aircraft which are not 
operated in accordance with an FAA accepted set of standards, but are operated by hobbyists 
for the sole purpose of sport, recreation, and/or competition....... 
*************** 

Above that section is the portion that referrs to the AMA, such as: 
*********** 
2. Model Aircraft Operated in Accordance with 
FAA Accepted Standards 
2.1 Applicability 
Model Aircraft operations that are conducted in accordance with an FAA accepted set of 
standards established and administered by a community based association as discussed in 
Section 2.2, shall otherwise be exempt from the requirements of any Special Federal 
Airworthiness Regulation (SFAR) that results from this recommendation as long as they are 
operated by: 
• Hobbyist for the sole purpose of sport, recreation and/or competition under the 
conditions of such an FAA accepted program 
• Manufacturers which are flight testing aircraft intended to be operated for the sole 
purpose of sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved 
field as defined by and in accordance with an FAA accepted program with the 
approval of the community-based association responsible for the location 
• Educational institutions and/or students for the sole purpose of education or research 
and they are operated at an approved field as defined by and in accordance with an 
FAA accepted program with the approval of the community-based association 
responsible for the location 
• Manufacturers which are flight testing aircraft intended to be operated for other than 
sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved field as 
defined by and in accordance with an FAA accepted program with the approval of the 
community-based association responsible for the location 
RATIONALE: Reflects FAA’s concept of regulating model aviation by 
exempting Model Aircraft from regulation. Under this approach, modelers 
participating within an aeromodeling structure/organization such as the 
Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) may operate their Model Aircraft 
in accordance with an accepted set of standards and operating 
procedures. Based on a more rigorous attention to safety, risk assessment, 
and risk mitigation, the accepted standards may provide greater latitude 
in the Model Aircraft operations. Modelers not participating in the 
additional safety programming established in an accepted set of standards 
shall comply with the requirements of Section 3. 
********** 

Of course, this is my first look at this NPRM, if it is a notice at all. From knowledge of how the FAA writes things, it always says you canNOT do anything unles, "A,B,C.. etc". So in my very quick initial look at this, it may appear that they are saying unless you operate under the guise and rules of the AMA, you may not fly turbines. There are some other little bits of language there that reek of massive regulation and red tape and unsustainable compliance that may threaten all civil model airplane activity. Don't be scared for turbines. No. Be scared for model aviation! We do not want any of this. We've seen before that rules generated, from people with ZERO experience in the area they try to regulate, lead to nothing but disfunctionality. 

I'd love to think the AMA is all over this. It seems they are in some ways, with their name plastered all over this. But I'm certainly 


 
> Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 10:24:38 -0800
> From: president at alaskarc.org
> To: alaskarc at lists.alaskarc.org
> Subject: Re: [AlaskaRC] FAA looking at possibly regulating model aircraft
> 
> On Wed, 13 May 2009 10:02:07 -0800
> Marty Hall <mjhall at alaskarcs.com> wrote:
> 
> > The last time this came up it was because of a model scaring a flight 
> > crew of a 727 going into JFK. The FAA at that time told the AMA they 
> > had the power to regulate RC but chose not to at that time because of 
> > the problems associated in attempting to, but if "we" didn't clean up 
> > our act, they would. That's the root of certain AMA safety rules 
> > concerning flying near airports, etc. In those days there was no 
> > where near the number of UAV's flying as there is today, and the 
> > FAA's problem today has changed. It would be difficult for them (the 
> > FAA) to tell one group (the military) flying an "RC" of one type with 
> > a 3 foot wing span that there was strict rules to comply with, and 
> > tell the other group (us) with a like size "RC" there's no 
> > regulation. We DO need to watch this.
> 
> >From what I've read, you're exactly right Marty. The increase in
> military UAV use is the catalyst here. These UAVs have been operated
> successfully in theatre for years now and the military would like to
> bring some of their capabilities into the US airspace system. The
> challenge is getting the UAV operators and the FAA to mesh - and
> unfortunately the models we fly are bing caught up in the dragnet.
> 
> Here's some good background info:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/16/ntsb.unmanned.vehicles/index.html
> 
> http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6287
> 
> -- 
> Tom
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________
> 
> | , | Tom Simes - President
> ---------(@)--------- Alaska Radio Control Society
> --|-- AMA Chartered Club #1998
> ' president at alaskarc.org
> _______________________________________________
> AlaskaRC mailing list
> AlaskaRC at lists.alaskarc.org
> http://lists.alaskarc.org/mailman/listinfo/alaskarc

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail® goes with you. 
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Mobile1_052009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alaskarc.org/pipermail/alaskarc/attachments/20090513/43737e8a/attachment.html>