[NSRCA-discussion] Matt Finley ( F3A Moving Forward )

[John Fuqua]

Here is some info I got from Tony Stillman at AMA.  I had asked about the hard limit in Class G airspace (unrestricted) which is where my flying field is located.    This is what he replied.     Lets keep positive.

 

As a matter of fact, the FAA told us it could be weeks or even years before the law is enacted.  Our Gov relations team is in DC RIGHT NOW working on this issue with the FAA.  The FAA has the authority to modify this and has told us as well as sent letters to us to say that they have no problem with AMA flying above 400’.  We are very hopeful that they will resolve this issue way before the laws become enacted.

 

So… nothing changes today or even when Pres. Trump signs the bill (probably tomorrow)…. Keep flying like you always have… I know I will!

 

Tony Stillman

Flying Site Assistance Coordinator/Competitions-Technical Director

Academy of Model Aeronautics

 

 

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill Kutchell via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 4:47 PM
To: Vicente Bortone; General pattern discussion
Cc: nsrca-dist4 at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Matt Finley ( F3A Moving Forward )

 

image1.png





I have a question, what is class G in the text above and is there something that we can do to be authorized to fly above 400 feet? Like a certification or license that we can get to be aloud too. 





Just some thoughts maybe you guys have some answers. 





Bill



Sent from my iPhone


On Sep 27, 2018, at 8:01 AM, Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

My interpretation.  If we flight in AMA certified field with spotter we could go over 400’.  I hope I am not wrong.  

 

Vicente “Vince” Bortone 

 

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 4:39 AM Matthew Finley via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

Thinking Ahead...... Worse Case Scenario.......

I always try to stay positive in my attitude, and Outlook in life. With this being said, I highly recommend or hope the following is thought about soon in preparation of let's say a " worse case scenario ".... Maybe it already has ?

I recommend if it has not already been thought about, have the sequence committee or other powers at be start planning for the 400' restriction. I understand this would be a big change, but one that would be necessary if the FAA reauthorization bill comes in effect if it is passed by the senate.. 

Even though this would put a huge impact on large vertical manuvers, tall centered manuvers, or tall  turn-around manuvers, there are as many, or even more sub up to 400' manuvers one could come up with that would still allow us to hone our skills,  continue our passion, and still remain within the 400' cieling. 

Yes...  Manuvers would need to be modified and even quite a few removed completely to stay within the limits. However talking in "future" speak, in my eyes, and opinion, it would be crazy, and yes I will say it ludicrous to just say " With the 400' cieling limit, I guess we can no longer fly Precision Aerobatics "

This subject the past few days ever since learning about this new issue, it has weighed very heavy on my mind, as I'm sure it has all of you, and I know as a group we can come up with a positive outcome from all of this, and continue our passion.



My .02 cents worth..




Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36> 

 

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

-- 

Vicente "Vince" Bortone

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20181003/1f9c9810/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 141279 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20181003/1f9c9810/attachment.png>