Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 36,387
Default 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.
  #42   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default 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.
  #43   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 36,387
Default 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.


I understand that but RC planes are to drones as ham radio is to CB
  #44   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,663
Default 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!
  #45   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,663
Default 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!


  #46   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 36,387
Default 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.
  #47   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2014
Posts: 5,832
Default 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+
  #48   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,663
Default 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!
  #49   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2015
Posts: 920
Default 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.

  #50   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default 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.



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
It couldn't happen to a nicer state... X ` Man[_3_] General 4 December 13th 11 12:30 AM
It couldn't happen to a nicer... Secular Humourist General 56 October 2nd 10 01:00 PM
Couldn't happen to a nicer guy! jps General 10 September 9th 10 01:57 PM
Couldn't be happening to a nicer family of trash... H the K (I post with a Mac) General 0 November 30th 09 02:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017