[NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active

[James Hiller]

I fly at a full size municipal airport and the FAA is fully aware of who we
are and what we're doing.

The FAA inspector will probably be the last person in the investigative
chain unless there is an incident involving a full size aircraft.

First responders need to be aware that a crash in a public place or a
residential complaint of misuse isn't likely to be instigated by an AMA
member flying from a sectioned flying sight and directing their
investigative efforts there, may be a waste of resources. 

Yes the AMA needs to lead in the education of the general public as well as
those expected to deal with inappropriate use of UAV's, and in my opinion
more than a printed document is needed, requiring face time locally.

At this point I will end my participation in this discussion. I think I've
expressed my thoughts on what we should do going forward. Some see the glass
half empty others may not.

Thanks to the NSRCA for this podium.
Back to the shop:
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Keith Hoard via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:28 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active

I don't think that is a good idea at all.  It may work in the movies, but in
actual practice inviting the FAA to your home turf is like inviting the
police into your own home.  There is no upside to it at all.  Goodwill today
will in no way prevent an enforcement action in the future.  In fact, it may
give them reason to start digging.

Let the AMA and your club leadership handle "educating" and "outreach" to
them.  The FAA is not your friend.

--Keith Hoard
--klhoard at outlook.com

|-----Original Message-----
|From: NSRCA-discussion 
|[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of James 
|Hiller via NSRCA-discussion
|Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:07
|To: 'John FORD' <astropattern at yahoo.com>; NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca- 
|discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
|Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active
|
|My thought was, we'd be better off getting in front of this and
establishing a
|working relationship with those tasked with enforcement.
|
|Early this morning on CNN there was a news release showing a drone 
|narrowly missing skier. The quad copter crashed right behind him. This 
|was what we would refer to as a commercial operator getting video for the
media.
|
|If the operator doesn't come forward; are the investigators aware that 
|they aren't to find the operator at a model flying sight maybe 20+ miles
away.
|
|I think we not only can help but should.
|
|Jim
|
|-----Original Message-----
|From: John FORD [mailto:astropattern at yahoo.com]
|Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 4:15 PM
|To: General pattern discussion; James Hiller
|Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Registration - Pro-Active
|
|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
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion