Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

AMA's Response to the FAA's sUAS NPRM - Please Comment

Discussion in 'News' started by LuvMyTJ, Mar 18, 2015.

  1. LuvMyTJ

    LuvMyTJ ADMINISTRATOR
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2014
    Messages:
    6,811
    Likes Received:
    4,374
    Location:
    Live! From New York!
  2. dirkclod

    dirkclod Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2014
    Messages:
    10,633
    Likes Received:
    5,698
    Location:
    Amory Mississippi
    Done .Thanks for putting this up !
     
  3. capodrone81

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    860
    I am writing in response to the FAA's proposal to regulate small unmanned aircraft systems, including model aircraft. I am a member of the Academy of Model Aeronautics, and have been safely and responsibly flying model aircraft for 5 years. I am also a model aircraft club educator.

    I support the exemption of recreational model aircraft from the regulation of unmanned aircraft systems. As Congress recognized, self-governance under community-based safety guidelines has worked exceptionally well for decades, and should remain in place. However, I have the following concerns about the FAA's proposal:

    The FAA has repeated its June 2014 statement that model aircraft are "aircraft" subject to all existing aviation regulations. The FAA must revise this interpretation so that it is in agreement with what Congress directed in 2012, which is that recreational model aircraft are subject to community-based safety guidelines, not aviation regulations. Similarly, the regulatory proposal excludes ultralight vehicles, moored balloons, kites, amateur rockets, and unmanned free balloons from the FAA's aircraft operating regulations but neglects to expressly exclude model aircraft. The proposed regulation should make it clear that model aircraft meeting the criteria established by Congress are not subject to aviation regulations.

    Also, the proposal leaves out the part of the statute that excludes "an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft" from aviation regulations. This exclusion must be added to the regulations. Companies in the model aircraft industry should not be regulated as if they are aircraft manufacturers.

    The FAA bases its proposal on its June 2014 interpretation of the law concerning model aircraft. There were 33,000 comments submitted last summer concerning that interpretation [including mine]. The future regulations for model aircraft should not be based on incorrect interpretations of what Congress wrote. Some of the interpretations that should be changed to the extent they form the basis for any current or future regulation include:

    • Making model aircraft subject to airspace requirements such as air traffic control clearance, that have never been applicable in the past and with which it is impossible or impractical to comply. Congress indicated the maximum obligation, which is actually stricter than what the FAA's guidance has been for the past 34 years: notifying the airport when operating within five miles. That is the most that model aircraft hobbyists should have to do.
    • Rigidly defining a requirement to operate within visual line of sight and that calls into question the use of a specific technology or equipment, namely first-person view (FPV) goggles. The language of the 2012 statute concerning "within visual line of sight" indicates how far away a person should fly the model aircraft, not what method of control may be used for the recreational experience. The proposal for commercial unmanned aircraft acknowledges that an observer (spotter) can be used to ensure airspace safety, just as the AMA's community-based safety guidelines do.
    • Narrowly interpreting the words "hobby or recreational use." You should not regulate people who are flying model aircraft in connection with the hobby just because they receive payments. For decades, enthusiasts have participated in contests and competitions that have cash prizes, have been paid to instruct others on how to safely fly models, and have received compensation for aerobatic displays. These payments incidental to the hobby do not change the underlying recreational purpose of the activity or make the hobby any less safe, and regulating these activities would be highly disruptive to the hobby without any benefit.

    In closing I believe the hobby I enjoy responsibly should not be regulated by the FAA.
    Thank you.

    Respectfully,
    concerned US citizen..
     
  4. N017RW

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    6,236
    Likes Received:
    1,612
    Location:
    Palm Beach Co.- FL

    Are we supposed to cut/paste this AMA template as well and reply en masse too?
     
  5. capodrone81

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    860
    sure, or type up your own response. but follow the link and comment, we need to protect our hobby NOW..
     
  6. LuvMyTJ

    LuvMyTJ ADMINISTRATOR
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2014
    Messages:
    6,811
    Likes Received:
    4,374
    Location:
    Live! From New York!
    The link has a template ready made to use with instructions.
     
  7. capodrone81

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    860
    PEOPLE WHO COMMENT PLEASE IF USING A TEMPLATE AND COPY AND PASTING WHERE IT SAYS INSERT PERSONAL INFORMATION HERE DELETE AND FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS DONT POST WITHOUT FIRST MODIFYING TEMPLATE!!!

    reading some of the comments on the link above people that are replying aren't even reading what they are posting.. how are we going to be taken seriously if they aren't even reading what they are posting.. so frustrating..

    if you can't read you definitely shouldn't fly!!!! #frustrated!!