|
What could be nicer...
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H.
wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. |
What could be nicer...
On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. |
What could be nicer...
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. What he said. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
What could be nicer...
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:52:28 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB Say what? -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
What could be nicer...
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:15:01 -0500, John H.
wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:52:28 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB Say what? One is a well disciplined group and the other is a rabble. |
What could be nicer...
wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:15:01 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:52:28 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB Say what? One is a well disciplined group and the other is a rabble. Is that on the latest SAT? -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
What could be nicer...
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:29:09 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:15:01 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:52:28 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB Say what? One is a well disciplined group and the other is a rabble. No, there are well-disciplined fliers of both airplanes and multi-rotors in the RC groups around here. And, there are those as described above around here. To fly a first person view multirotor in the clubs here, there must be an observer whose eyes are on the aircraft. However, as no runway is required for a multirotor, any asshole can launch the thing from his palm and see where he's flying even though a couple miles away. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
What could be nicer...
wrote:
On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. Drones are not military killing machines, been lots of drones over the years. Lots were used as targets by military gunners and pilots. |
What could be nicer...
On 11/9/2015 4:51 PM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:29:09 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:15:01 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:52:28 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:09:33 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote: On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote: OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it to myself if you like flying them ;-) We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)! If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby machines, get ready for much more regulation. There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills. The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage. Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists. I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB Say what? One is a well disciplined group and the other is a rabble. No, there are well-disciplined fliers of both airplanes and multi-rotors in the RC groups around here. And, there are those as described above around here. To fly a first person view multirotor in the clubs here, there must be an observer whose eyes are on the aircraft. However, as no runway is required for a multirotor, any asshole can launch the thing from his palm and see where he's flying even though a couple miles away. Don't you agree that in the case of cheap quadcopters technology has outpaced reasonable laws or regulations? Much of the FAA rules that govern hobbyist RC aircraft were written decades ago, well before battery and the control technology for cheap quadcopters existed and certainly well before the days that any Yahoo with a credit card could order one on Amazon. They are actually pretty boring to fly, IMO. What has made them so popular are the lightweight digital cameras that can be attached to them, introducing a host of *new* issues involving rights to privacy. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view) new regulations and/or laws are going to have to be written and applied to their use. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com