AMA members renewing? Or just joining the FAA

As the article concludes, the FAA has no clue what it's doing, and is making it up as they go. It's all so convoluted, no one can make sense of it yet.
 
Interesting article. It would be nice to know the facts though (as opposed to some guy from Forbes). Perhaps a current AMA member can chime in with the cold, hard facts about how the existing 400' rule works.
 
No. To become a part of their community, you have to join. To join, you have to pay the dues. Good grief, why do so many people here nitpick things down to the ridiculous?!
So you think the FAA has one set of rules for people who pay dues to a private association and another set of rules for those who don't? That doesn't sound like something the FedGov could do. Equal protection of the laws and all that.

I think that's why (according to the quote in the Forbes article is probably what I remember) they say something like you have to follow the rules of the community, rather than saying you have to be a member of the community.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msinger
Can either of you provide a link? All I can find is vague statements like this one:

"the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization"
Had to track it down but here it is on the AMA site...

Q: Am I permitted to fly above 400 feet? What if I had to check a box saying otherwise on the federal registration website?

A: Yes. AMA members who abide by the AMA Safety Code, which permits flights above 400 feet under appropriate circumstances, and are protected by the Special Rule for Model Aircraft under the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act. Checking the box on the federal registration webpage signifies an understanding of the 400 foot guideline. This is an important safety principle that all UAS operators need to be aware of, and is the same guideline established in AC 91-57 published in 1981. However, the placement of this guideline on the FAA website is intended as an educational piece and more specifically intended for those operating outside of AMA’s safey program. We have been in discussions with the FAA about this point and the agency has indicted that it will be updating its website in the next week to make clear that this altitude guideline is not intended to supplant the guidance and safety procedures established in AMA’s safety program.


SOURCE: Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog
 
"under appropriate circumstances"

The AMA must get their wordsmith skills from the FAA. I wonder what this means. Any ideas?
 
Is that the AMA's interpretation? Has the FAA signed off on that?
The AMA's words...

"We have been in discussions with the FAA about this point and the agency has indicted that it will be updating its website in the next week to make clear that this altitude guideline is not intended to supplant the guidance and safety procedures established in AMA’s safety program."
 
The guidance referred to is here: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf

On page 6 one finds the wording they quote, which actually refers to section 336 here: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf

The wording in question is:

"(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization; "

My reading of it is that the flights over 400' must occur in special AMA meets or programs. However it's irrelevant whether one is actually a member of AMA. Being a member won't protect you when flying in your back yard. In fact even if you're at an AMA meet, you might get dinged if you ever fly that aircraft alone in your back yard.
 
The AMA's words...

"We have been in discussions with the FAA about this point and the agency has indicted that it will be updating its website in the next week to make clear that this altitude guideline is not intended to supplant the guidance and safety procedures established in AMA’s safety program."
Oh. Well does the AMA think that its safety rules apply only in AMA events, or are they good general safety rules? The latter I am sure.

Hence one can pitch the FAA's "guideline" and follow the AMA's safety program instead, which one does not have to be an AMA member to do.
 
The wording in question is:

"(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization; "

My reading of it is that the flights over 400' must occur in special AMA meets or programs. However it's irrelevant whether one is actually a member of AMA. Being a member won't protect you when flying in your back yard. In fact even if you're at an AMA meet, you might get dinged if you ever fly that aircraft alone in your back yard.

Are you making your statement solely from the above quote? To me that means as long as your part of the 'community' (AMA) you can do it. Somewhere I saw a video (CES?) where that question was asked and explained... can't find it now. :(
 
Found it. Should start at the relevant part at 3:11.
EDIT: time start never seems to work right, just go to 3:11for the question or watch it all ;)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Is it just me or is this video vague too? Do you know if you must be in an AMA field to fly over 400 feet?
They said right in the video, "could be a field in Iowa". It is a bit murky but they seem to saying if you are an AMA member following AMA rules you are not necessarily limited to 400'. See, clear as mud. :D
 
See, clear as mud.
Yes, sir.

I didn't even know this whole 400 foot rule existed until AMA members made a big deal about having to agree to it when registering with the FAA. If it's really true (that you can fly 400 ft+ outside of AMA fields), then the AMA membership might be at an all-time high in 2016.
 
Yes, sir.

I didn't even know this whole 400 foot rule existed until AMA members made a big deal about having to agree to it when registering with the FAA. If it's really true (that you can fly 400 ft+ outside of AMA fields), then the AMA membership might be at an all-time high in 2016.
That is one of the things the AMA is working with the FAA on. This is why I support them, they are working for hobbyist best interest (and theirs). They have said that while the Feb date may pass they are still fighting it.
 
Debacle aside though, it would still be nice to know the details of the 400 ft rule. The AMA Safety Code only mentions this:
"Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator."
 
I think that if the FAA were to have one set of rules for members of a private association, the AMA, and another set of rules for non-members, that would be a failure to provide equal protection of the laws. It would be unconstitutional in my amateur opinion as a non-lawyer. But do we ever see such an arrangement? I can't think of one.

There are professional licenses (pilot, medical doctor, professional engineer, attorney) and at least the pilot one is I guess national. License holders get certain rights and privileges because they qualified by showing competence. This system protects the public from incompetent practitioners. But no demonstration of competence is needed to join AMA.

Even if the AMA's implied that would happen (an AMA member can exceed 400' flying alone in a cornfield in Iowa, but a non-member lacks the AMA's umbrella assurance of this) the FAA has not said such a thing. And I don't expect they will.

Does anyone wonder if the updated registration rules could become worse? If I register now and the regs become easier, I should get the benefit of that easing. If I register now and the regs become harder, maybe I escape the new rules until renewal time, when I'll be required to agree to the new terms as a part of registration.
 
snerd said:
...... Has the FAA signed off on that?

The AMA's words...

"We have been in discussions with the FAA about this point and the agency has indicted that it will be updating its website in the next week to make clear that this altitude guideline is not intended to supplant the guidance and safety procedures established in AMA’s safety program."
So, that's a no. :D
 
"the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization"

The way i keep reading that it dont sound like its just exclusive to the ama being there are lots of other nationwide community-based organizations. It dont even seem to say any thing about one even having to have any thing to do with flying and just need safety guidelines.

Seems lol even the ymca would be a nationwide community-based organization and they do have safety guidelines just lol not for any thing relating to flying.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers