image
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 49

Thread: Trappy appeal brief

  1. #31
    Pilot Hockeystud87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    1,224
    So my question is that these regulations and court proceedings have essentially established that The FAA had no regulations in place to stop what trappy was doing, now this incident took place in 2007. Has the FAA changed any laws or rules regarding this? Or are we still free to soar as high and as far as we want since it was established they have no jurisdiction over modeltry aircraft?
    sum ting wong
    WI to low
    BANG DING OW -chatch

    Sounds like a typical RcLab1 maiden flight to me -ssassen

    Whatever. This forum sucks. -SENTRY

  2. #32
    Navigator spiked3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    498
    Did the FAA ever try to regulate how high or far? AC 91-57 clearly urges voluntary compliance, and the FAA abandoned trying to enforce that as law early on.
    The trappy case involves commercial RC with monetary gain, which regardless of FAA outcome is in no uncertain terms illegal use of a HAM license (no FPV OR UHF).
    Unless I missed something somewhere, which I'm sure someone will point out if I did.
    Fly as long and as high as you want, you are only choosing to ignore suggested safety procedures, which is your right (the same an auto racer might chose). Along with it comes financial responsibility.

  3. #33
    FPV FTW!
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    978
    Spiked does bring up a good point, one that I don't think is realized enough: using a HAM license for commercial sUAS use. Has the FCC commented on this aspect of sUAS yet? As far as I've read they haven't yet but that seems to me like something that could happen if the FAA continues to lose fighting sUAS pilots. I could see some sort of memo being sent from the FAA to the FCC giving them the heads up about violations.
    AbsoluteAltitudes: Well, I didn't figure out my ESC issue, but I did figure out how to make my motors play Jingle Bells

  4. #34
    Co-Pilot Rusty105's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Carmel, NY
    Posts
    1,913
    Quote Originally Posted by spiked3 View Post
    Good examples. I'm not going to argue details, I don't need to win. My opinion on Trappy vs the FAA stands, but as I said earlier, I could really care less. It is totally irrelevant, again an opinion not stating as a fact, if you disagree so be it, enjoy it.
    It's not 'irrelevant'. If the only thing that comes out of this is that the FAA is told their 2007 policy in not binding on the public, then I still think it is a win. It reinforces the fact that the FAA needs to follow proper rule making procedures, and it just can't just make 'policy' nilly willy and expect everyone to instantly comply. Bonus would be Trappy not paying the fine, but I am sure there is enough 'private interest' to help with the fines.

    If the FAA loses, you can be sure they will do their best to seal up any holes in the next round of regulations, but I believe they still need to follow the procedure which includes public comment, and wither or not you like Trappy, or even fly FPV, you NEED TO COMMENT when the time comes. This is not an issue to be taking sides on, we NEED a united front. You can be sure the other side will be commenting on how the regs need to be tighter, or not allow any FPV. The AMA better be talking this up!! I seen it happen in the ham community with the HOA and antenna debates, and the Emcomm guys. Every time the FCC had a comment period us hams would fight over what is right, many taking the side that actually hurts the ham community, just because it did not apply to them or they didn't like the cause. United we stand, divided we fall, it's not just a cliché.

    Quote Originally Posted by spiked3 View Post
    ...The trappy case involves commercial RC with monetary gain, which regardless of FAA outcome is in no uncertain terms illegal use of a HAM license (no FPV OR UHF). ...
    Let the FCC handle their own battles, they are more than capable.
    Rusty
    NEFPV^

  5. #35
    Instructor Pilot Channel 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Out in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    4,885
    Quote Originally Posted by Rexnoobs247 View Post
    if the FAA continues to lose fighting sUAS pilots. I could see some sort of memo being sent from the FAA to the FCC giving them the heads up about violations.

    I'll tell you something about the FCC that is relatively unknown outside of the communications world, the FCC doesn't have enough field engineers to chase down serious violators nor less what is in the FAA's opinion few wayward flyers.


    Here in Florida like so many parts of the U.S. the FCC is so impotent, licensed broadcasters and other licensed radio users bring in contract engineers, not the foot dragging FCC to locate pirates and other sources of harmful interference and once located those contractors turn the offenders over to the local Sheriff for prosecution under state laws not Federal regulations, the FCC, is for all intents and purposes, useless as an enforcement agency.


    The FAA can huff and puff all they want about sUAV's, but at the end of the day unless someone is interfering with a navaid or air comms, the FCC isn't getting involved.


    Wayne
    Everybody loves a bunny.

  6. #36
    Navigator spiked3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by Rexnoobs247 View Post
    .... I could see some sort of memo being sent from the FAA to the FCC giving them the heads up about violations.
    No slow clap?

    These guys eat lunch together. I'd bet trappies next fine is already written, if needed. And probably for a whole lot more $$.

  7. #37
    FPV FTW!
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    978
    Thats good to know. I doubt if one of these contractors will have the time or motivation to track down somebody flying commercially seeing as we usually fly for less than an hour (15 minutes give or take with multis). Unless I'm missing something, I don't think our freqs interfere with any commercial broadcast operations either.
    AbsoluteAltitudes: Well, I didn't figure out my ESC issue, but I did figure out how to make my motors play Jingle Bells

  8. #38
    FPV FTW!
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by spiked3 View Post
    No slow clap?

    These guys eat lunch together. I'd bet trappies next fine is already written, if needed. And probably for a whole lot more $$.
    Sorry brother, it was too early for the slow clap

    I'm no expert on how these bureaucracies work but based on what Channel1 said, it doesn't sound like the FCC is much of an enforcement agency unless its regarding big commercial broadcast companies. That being said, if the FAA does have enough of a hard on to make an example out of trappy, I don't see why some sort of inter agency partnership couldn't surface as a result. Lets face it, they have the motivation seeing as he's one of the most well known, and arguably more reckless, FPV pilots out there. I'm not hating on trappy, simply stating realities. If they can prosecute him that will give them quite an advantage over the rest of the community, which is why this fight is so important. I think the question comes down to how much time and money the FAA (and maybe the fcc) really wants to spend on this case.
    AbsoluteAltitudes: Well, I didn't figure out my ESC issue, but I did figure out how to make my motors play Jingle Bells

  9. #39
    [Flight Box]Low Class FPV slowjet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middle of massachusetts. somewhere.
    Posts
    5,696
    they dont exactly have any actual evidence that trappy violated FCC regs, nor does he likely have an fcc issued ham (being a foreigner) license so they could not get him using his ham for commercial purpose. Trappy's next move should be a lawsuit for malicious prosecution.
    [Flight Box] - Watch, Cry, Subscribe.
    youtube.com/jnacoustic

    NEFPV^

  10. #40
    GO HAWKS Hucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    3,046
    Slowjet: The video I saw at 0:20 a logo for immersion RC is shown and at 0:24 you see trappy holding a transmitter with an IRC UHF transmitter and an antenna long enough to be a UHF antenna. Perhaps not legal proof like someone with a spectrum analyzer but close enough for everybody at FPVLab to indicate that it is likely he was flying UHF. As for him not holding a US HAM that also is hardly the question. He either holds a license that is valid in the US through reciprocal agreement and is in violation for using a HAM for commercial purposes OR is transmitting illegally on the HAM bands without a license ($5000 fine I think).

    That is neither here nor there. IMO the FAA looks idiotic in their case...embarrassingly idiotic.
    KF7SKL,TechPod/Walrus/250mmQuad/HoneyBadger, EZUHF,SL-AAT, 1G3/2G4/5G8

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trappy/TBS
    By airmikeyy in forum Team-Black Sheep
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 13th May 2014, 07:58 PM
  2. Can drones appeal to the masses?
    By Ian Davidson in forum OFF-TOPIC
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 8th November 2013, 04:05 PM
  3. Thank you Trappy and TBS
    By detonator in forum Team-Black Sheep
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 7th December 2012, 06:10 PM
  4. trappy they are looking for u
    By james sowell in forum Team-Black Sheep
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 8th June 2012, 03:27 AM
  5. Trappy is on TV
    By Mechnan in forum OFF-TOPIC
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 25th November 2011, 08:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •