[NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active

Wed Dec 23 03:58:24 AKST 2015

I guess AMA was right in suggesting we delay signing up-

http://www.aero-news.net/annticker.cfm?do=main.textpost
<http://www.aero-news.net/annticker.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=2249c729-9188-4f
0a-9268-ff0fcbddc6bf> &id=2249c729-9188-4f0a-9268-ff0fcbddc6bf

must have hired the same company as obamacare

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Ron Hansen via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 6:50 AM
To: 'Joe Lachowski'; 'General pattern discussion'; 'David Cook'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active

I'm an environmental consultant with 25 years of air permitting experience.
When I first started, CO2 was a good pollutant because it meant your
combustion source was operating efficiently (i.e., not producing CO and
unburnt hydrocarbons).   Now it supposedly causes global warming.  The point
is, it is likely too late.  Baring a successful lawsuit staying or
altogether prohibiting the regulation of model aircraft the cat is out of
the bag.  Now that the executive branch of government can adopt new rules
without congressional oversight this is a boulder rolling downhill.  Next
up, limitations on flying above the 400 ft or worse prohibition on the sale
and manufacture of drones in the US.  If they think they can limit guns and
ammo sales without congressional approval they can certainly regulate our
little hobby.

The video was unclear to me.  Is there already a limitation to 400 ft?  This
will do nothing to educate those who don't want to be educated.  Hell, there
are AMA members in my club that refuse to abide by the AMA and club safety
rules.

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Lachowski via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 8:30 PM
To: David Cook; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active

Did everyone view the recent video posted on the AMA site? It does make the
situation a little clearer in my mind. 

 The big takeaway is that the situation is still fluid and that what is
going on is still in the interim status and that there is opportunity to
provide comments to the FAA.

I think we have beat this to death already and frankly I'm starting to just
delete these emails and not bother reading them anymore.

  _____  

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> on behalf
of David Cook via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 4:32 PM
To: John FORD; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active 

If the FAA and the police show up you will have a cease and desist order and
you will be arrested for exceeding 400'.

This new FAA law doesn't have much wiggle room.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 7:15 PM, John FORD via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

I agree about education.
In the event that FAA or local law enforcement shows up at the field, (and
after they have seen everybody's registration), there may be an opportunity
to explain the concept of the club's over flight boundaries, separation of
heli and fixed wing zones, and the additional concept of the pattern box.

Eventually, we can create an image of self-imposed OCD of boundaries, zones,
and boxes...

They will eventually stop wasting their time with us.

J

On Dec 22, 2015 12:41 PM, James Hiller via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
> Scott, I almost responded to your previous post on the NSRCA list on the
16th about putting together a paper pointing out the facts, got me thinking
about how to deal with registration going forward.
>
> Registration isn't going away and there is no substitute for knowledge.
>
> There are many knowledgeable and concerned individuals monitoring this
list, so I'll put this out for serious discussion, if that's possible here.
>
> Responsibility for a compatible environment goes beyond AMA / FAA
negations.
>
> WE, the modeling community need to be Pro-Active.
>
> We have an understanding of the equipment we use and its evolution and we
are everywhere.
>
> The responsibility for educating first responders and the general public
falls on US. We probably need more than an educational document focused on
the registration rule that can be used to inform first responders, mainly
firefighters and frontline police officers.
>
> They will be the first people to deal with an incident involving injury,
property damage, complaints and or violation of the national airspace.
>
> I believe we local modelers need to develop a working relationship with
first responders in an instructional capacity by offering an informative and
on sight presentation highlighting the equipment, capabilities, differences
and how to safely deal with it.
>
> I don't know how much of this information they already have or how up to
date it is but I believe our participation would be appreciated.
>
> The AMA should oversee the development of presentation material and
instructor guidelines in an effort to maintain national continuity. A power
point presentation by involved users is likely to be more effective than
just sending a document without an opportunity for discussion.
>
> The downside is keeping up with RPV development and their capabilities and
the need for ongoing informative seminars.
>
> Hopefully first responders with prior knowledge would help direct
investigation beyond a visit to approved model flying sights.
>
> Jim Hiller  

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 12763 (20151222) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 12763 (20151222) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 12766 (20151223) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 12766 (20151223) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20151223/fea27ddc/attachment.html>