init4fun

Honestly Sport it's the rear facing exhaust that causes more of the fitment problems . This is one that I keep as a display engine like my Wankel and my O&R .60 gasoline engine , and my day to day glow engine planes are mostly powered by good ol regular OS 4 strokes like the FS56a on my Escapade . It's nothing against the 2 strokes , I've got a bunch of them as well , it's just that the 4 strokes have less of that chainsaw "ringing" sound that folks don't like to listen to .

Gotta love a 4 stroke powered drone !

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Looks LOUD! Not like a nice quite 70mm ducted fan....

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Interesting point...although both are mutlirotors, one is listed as a "Drone hunting quadcopter" (although it's really a 6 blader), and the other a "drone". One good, one bad? LoL.

http://<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rSgoXRNCEO8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

franklin_m

I would point out that in these events, you see something that doesn't happen in the AMA - people are held accountable. Not just the offenders, but if there was a pattern of prior behavior that was not stopped, then so too are those people held accountable. In fact, if there's a pattern of behavior, the leader can't even say "I didn't know." Why? Because in the military system, it's their job to know.

The parallel in the AMA would be that if there is a mishap or near mishap due to rule violation(s), like a 100# plus aircraft veering hard left on takeoff and nearly crashing into the crowd. Not only is the operator held accountable, but so too would be those who did not enforce other rules, like standoff distances. But again, "AMA" and "holding people accountable" are seldom if ever in the same sentence. Dang, they don't even allow members to see a waiver holder's history - hiding information from a CD - like someone who has a history of rule violations. It's all about sweeping issues out of the way "...there's nothing to see here....move along."

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Well that's curious, because the Navy sure seems to have a huge problem over the past few years with crashes, accident, and it's pilots violating protocol. At what point does the leadership take responsibility for this well established record of reckless behavior (not setting instruments correctly, doing extremely low unauthorized fly-bys?

Not exactly what you would suggest the AMA does about someone having an accident at a fly in? Is there a regulatory/rules enforcement branch of the AMA I'm not aware of that "holds people accountable", the rules police? I'm willing to bet I know someone who would covet that role.

I guess you would expect a CD to be a johnny on the spot judge and jury by looking at someone's "waiver history" and deciding if they should fly or not? I honestly think you've been away from a club scenario, or event events to really understand what goes on there. It seems like you're relying on videos from Youtube to pass judgement. As I've recommended previously, get back into a club, or at least attend some functions in person, then come back to the table to have a meaningful and realistic discussion. Watch what goes on between a CD, a field marshal, a safety officer or aircraft inspector might open your eyes. I've attended 3 events in two months across 2 states....I've yet to see a CD that can predict an accident based on someones past.

As per the usual, you've tried to characterize something you don't like or approve of as "hiding", or "move along, nothing to see". This new tempest in a teapot issue of a CD being able to see a waivers history is yet another in a long line seemingly non issues, and of course presents no workable or reasonable solutions. So CD could see that a guy crashed 4 years ago because of....what? Does the AMA do NTSB level recons now? The CD is suddenly empowered to make instant decisions based on the past? Completely unworkable, and patently unfair too I would add.

Are we still looking for yet another solution, to yet another problem that doesn't really exist?

franklin_m

Well, the current mishap rate, through June, is 0.85/100,000 flight hours. That's on track to be the fourth best year ever. Of the six events you mentioned, the Blue Angel one happened because the pilot apparently failed to properly execute a planned maneuver. The dipping helos and the too low flyby were breaches of flight discipline, the Hornet crash at Fallon and the T-45 crash reasons have yet to be determined, and the E2 event was a material failure - that due to the skill of the crew DID NOT result in a mishap. Oh, speaking of mishap rates, what's the AMA's? Oh, that's right. They don't know because they don't collect data!

(BTW, I did a rough calculation of a jet event based on numbers presented in MA a while back - mishap rate at that event was about ten times higher than the GA mishap rate).

The Blue Angel pilot knew the maneuver was high risk and left little room for error. As he knew departure from the procedure could be fatal, that appears to be pilot error. Nobody said "accidents happen" and just moved along. They did an in depth investigation, and as a risk mitigation will not perform that maneuver again this year. Had he not perished, there would have been consequences, as there have in years past. In fact, two Blue Angels resigned from the team when they breached flight discipline. They held themselves accountable, despite the public embarrassment that would cause them personally. Yet they did the right thing.

For the two flight discipline breaches, the dipping helos and the too low flyby, accountability was swift and decisive. The pilots involved were grounded by their unit commanders, and those groundings made permanent after an investigation. Quite literally, those particular flights were their last in Naval aircraft. Contrast that with AMA who's grappling with flight discipline problems in a high profile community. I've yet to see a single waiver pulled as a result.

When we figure out why the Marine Hornet at Fallon crashed and why the T-45 crashed, there will be action taken. I assure you that nobody is saying "accidents happen" and moving on.

And the material failure with the E2. We had a similar problem with a mishap at my base. We investigated the failure, traced it to a defective lot of purchase cables, and immediately removed all of the remaining members of that lot from supplies world-wide. Again, nobody was satisfied with "accidents happen." We found out why and fixed it.


Hyperbole aside, that's not what I'm saying. Rather, when an individual is known to have a history of performance or flight discipline issues, wouldn't it be prudent to watch them more closely? But AMA prevents that by wiping the slate clean when a waiver is pulled. Thus the CD has no idea that an individual could represent a higher risk than others.[/QUOTE]



Easy to say for someone who can get to three states in one day. I checked the event calendar. There's an event 3 hours one way in Philly the day before I've got a 6AM flight out of town for work, a soaring event in MD (2.5 hours one way), another MD event 3.5 hours one way, and two VA events 5.5 hours one way. I've been to the club about five times since mid summer, yet to see a single person flying. As for visiting other clubs, you seem to be very generous with my time away from home given the distances to get to anything. As I've said multiple times, if that makes me less of a AMA member because I have other hobbies and demands on my time, so be it.


Not what I was saying. I'm saying that if a CD is aware someone has a past history of skill or flight discipline issues, they should probably watch the individual more closely. And that close attention may well prevent a mishap.


Unless I'm mistaken, a CD already has authority to ground someone, so I'm not sure why that's unworkable. Perhaps if that happened more often, particularly in cases where there's a breach of flight discipline, there might be fewer breaches? I know...holding people accountable is a foreign concept, but it really does work.

Yet again, you talk about grounding someone due to past events. Again I say it's not grounding them, but watching them more closely. But AMA prevents that from happening by wiping the slate clean.

Perhaps if having a waiver pulled stayed on ones record for a long time, folks might be less likely to do things that would get it pulled - Oh darn, there I am with that holding people accountable thing again. What a concept.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Easy to say for someone who can get to three states in one day. I checked the event calendar. There's an event 3 hours one way in Philly the day before I've got a 6AM flight out of town for work, a soaring event in MD (2.5 hours one way), another MD event 3.5 hours one way, and two VA events 5.5 hours one way. I've been to the club about five times since mid summer, yet to see a single person flying. As for visiting other clubs, you seem to be very generous with my time away from home given the distances to get to anything. As I've said multiple times, if that makes me less of a AMA member because I have other hobbies and demands on my time, so be it.




Not what I was saying. I'm saying that if a CD is aware someone has a past history of skill or flight discipline issues, they should probably watch the individual more closely. And that close attention may well prevent a mishap.




Unless I'm mistaken, a CD already has authority to ground someone, so I'm not sure why that's unworkable. Perhaps if that happened more often, particularly in cases where there's a breach of flight discipline, there might be fewer breaches? I know...holding people accountable is a foreign concept, but it really does work.

Yet again, you talk about grounding someone due to past events. Again I say it's not grounding them, but watching them more closely. But AMA prevents that from happening by wiping the slate clean. They do nothing.

Perhaps if having a waiver pulled stayed on ones record for a long time, folks might be less likely to do things that would get it pulled - Oh darn, there I am with that holding people accountable thing again. What a concept.[/QUOTE]

I agree with Franklin on this issue.
We are talking about the AMA enforcing their own Rules per the Safety Guidelines. I do not agree with Safety Guidelines, reason: either they are rules to be inforced by a field Safety Officer nominated by a club to that job, that is their purpose. The so call GUIDLINeS is a Hoax . A Guideline is a potential ruling, not a Rule of LAW. If someone violates a Safety Guidline the Safety Officer or anybody in attendance can that is a wittness to that, can make a formal complaint to the Safety Officer or any on the Board of Directors of that club for action to be taken against the offender.
The AMA does not enforce their own Guidelines if one does not abide and creates a hazard on a flying field. Will the AMA stand behind them and take action, NO
They will not get involved. Nor will they be involved in any lawsuit if an injury occurs of reckless flying and not abiding by Safety Rules. Not unless someone files a complaint against the AMA, which won't do much good if any, the Homeowners Insurance is then responsible, to take any action or pay for the injury.
That is the problem here and I myself have a problem with that. Why if we pay the AMA for a card , what good does it do us? To me, nothing but giving more money to fatten CEO's pockets for money they do not deserve..
Now, I got this off my chest and welcome arguments. We are talking AMA here, not the Military.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

I do not agree with Safety Guidelines, reason: either they are rules to be inforced by a field Safety Officer nominated by a club to that job, that is their purpose. I have no idea what that means. You don't agree with the safety guidelines because they are guidelines? Either they are rules to be inforced or.....what? Would you feel better if they were called Rules instead of Guidelines? You want them now to be a Law?

If someone violates a Safety Guidline the Safety Officer or anybody in attendance can that is a wittness to that, can make a formal complaint to the Safety Officer or any on the Board of Directors of that club for action to be taken against the offender. Right, exactly, and that is precisely what does happen, and what should happens. Although I see everyone in a club as a safety officer, at events and elsewhere you have a safety officer, field marshal, or a CD at events. That's their job, and given the few incidents we see each year like the one Frankin clings too when discussing safety, it's fair to say the process works. I can tell you first hand this absolutely happens as I've CD'd events, and been at events where safety is the main focus other than flying. I've stopped planes from flying, and I've had my own plane grounded until a problem was fixed.

We are a self policing organization, I guess folks are now calling for more oversight, more involvement, and more regulation from a national organization. I guess that will preclude any further accidents somehow?

The AMA does not enforce their own Guidelines if one does not abide and creates a hazard on a flying field. Will the AMA stand behind them and take action, NO. They will not get involved Have no idea what that means. It appears you expect a national organization to be held accountable for something that happens at a local field, and in all likelihood they know nothing about, seemingly because they won't take some type of enforcement action? Lobbing a generalization out there about what the whole organization will or won't do (AMA does not enforce their own guidelines) is done without any proof. Curiously absent in your statement is what you expect the local club to do, and their board and membership....I guess they get a pass on responsibility? Look to big brother AMA to do something, but not the club and their membership? Sorry, that makes no sense.

Nor will they be involved in any lawsuit if an injury occurs of reckless flying and not abiding by Safety Rules. Not unless someone files a complaint against the AMA, which won't do much good if any, the Homeowners Insurance is then responsible, to take any action or pay for the injury. That is just patently false. I do not think you understand how that process works in general.

Why if we pay the AMA for a card , what good does it do us? To me, nothing but giving more money to fatten CEO's pockets for money they do not deserve.. Only you can answer why you pay for the AMA card. If you don't know why, that's on you. It's your personal choice, you are not forced to do anything. This appears to be another process or situation you are just not fully aware of. Who again is the "CEO" of the AMA? What is his salary again? Do you know how much money the President of the AMA makes? And the DVPs?

0.0. That's how much. Not exactly fat pockets are they?

Do you belong to a club? Are you a CD or safety officer? Have you ever CD'd an event, or served as an aircraft inspector at an event?

rcmiket

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/trevor-...173855417.html

Mike

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

A CD needs to make sure that the pilot and his aircraft are fit to fly, period. A safety officer or field marshal can help as well, but it's the CD's ultimate responsibility if/when they let a person fly. I don't think someone crashing in the past is something to hang over them, unless it's constant and repeated. Folks that fly at that level (turbine specifically) should be able to self regulate. If not, then something more formal needs to happen. That you don't know if that happens or not, doesn't mean it hasn't happened.



Easy to say for someone who can get to three states in one day. I checked the event calendar. There's an event 3 hours one way in Philly the day before I've got a 6AM flight out of town for work, a soaring event in MD (2.5 hours one way), another MD event 3.5 hours one way, and two VA events 5.5 hours one way. I've been to the club about five times since mid summer, yet to see a single person flying. As for visiting other clubs, you seem to be very generous with my time away from home given the distances to get to anything. As I've said multiple times, if that makes me less of a AMA member because I have other hobbies and demands on my time, so be it.

It's a matter of personal choice. I've driven 4 hours to get to an event in Maine. If you want to be part of a process you can be, it's a simple as that. You chose to disengage from the club process because of money and personality issues with others (club politics I guess). Don't know how many different ways to say it, but I'll say it again...join a club. If you don't like the current dynamic, change it. If I could do it, you can do it. Become a CD or safety officer and make your mark there. I think once you are actually involved in a process rather than reading about it second hand, I think you will be more aware of what goes on at the local level.

Not what I was saying. I'm saying that if a CD is aware someone has a past history of skill or flight discipline issues, they should probably watch the individual more closely. And that close attention may well prevent a mishap.

Again, stigmatizing someone for past issues doesn't seem fair to me. When I'm CD'ing, everyone gets the same level of attention. The guy flying the $15,000 turbine, and the guy flying the dreaded foamy arf go through the same process.

Unless I'm mistaken, a CD already has authority to ground someone, so I'm not sure why that's unworkable. Perhaps if that happened more often, particularly in cases where there's a breach of flight discipline, there might be fewer breaches? I know...holding people accountable is a foreign concept, but it really does work.

When was the last time you flew at an event that had a CD? If you decide to fly in a field by yourself and not participate in actual events, I understand why you would wonder what goes on. I can tell you what happens because I'm a CD, and also a participant in other events. The CD does have the ability to ground someone, and I can tell you through actual experience it happens.

Yet again, you talk about grounding someone due to past events. Again I say it's not grounding them, but watching them more closely. But AMA prevents that from happening by wiping the slate clean.

You have no idea that this is what is happening, this is yet another complaint against the AMA. You offer no realistic solution other than to "brand" someone so they are "watched" more closely. You don't even note how this would happen procedurally. Should the wear a scarlet letter too? As if "watching" someone closely is going to stop them from crashing?

Perhaps if having a waiver pulled stayed on ones record for a long time, folks might be less likely to do things that would get it pulled - Oh darn, there I am with that holding people accountable thing again. What a concept.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like a good plan. Have a demerit on one's "record" for a long time, that will surely stop all accidents in the future. How exactly do you suggest all CD's are going to verify and validate this information again?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...lins/91076824/



http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/16/us/dennis-byrd-death/

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

I do belong to a Club, and not active right now right now. Yes I was a Safety Officer a long time ago. I tried to do that job the best I could, then I stepped down after a few years.

franklin_m

Turbine operator self regulation must be enough of an issue that it came up at the last EC meeting. Not to mention, the language directed at RK seemed rather pointed. So unless the EC makes such an issue of trivial matters, then by your own admission it does appear that “...something more formal needs to happen.” The question is will the EC take action?



If you have the time to drive four hours (presumably one way) to get to an event, great. Good for you. Glad you have that kind of time. I don’t. Doesn’t make me less of a member. Not sure it’s a good long term plan to assume that everyone has that kind of time. Hence my push for better facilities closer to where members actually live..



Not once have I said there were personality issues at the local club, so please don’t intimate that I did. What I have repeatedly told you is that it was an issue of cost / benefit with respect to facilities.



Not to put too fine a point on it, but how many times do I need to remind you that it was the combination of cost vs. facilities that influenced my decision. If neither has changed, why would I suddenly join?



Wow! I guess we better put out a news flash to the whole insurance industry - who knew that they’ve been doing it wrong all these years! Stigmatizing of people who have history of moving violations (in the form of higher rates). And while we’re at it, we better let DMV’s around the country that they too have been doing it wrong, stigmatizing people by keeping moving violations on their records for years after fines paid and/or driving privileges restored.

Your point is of course redicululous. Both insurance and DMVs “stigmatize” by keeping records because it works. People tend to be less likely to commit new offenses if they know that their prior record could weigh on how new issues are handled. AMA would be wise to adopt this – but then there’s that reluctance to hold accountable again.



One represents a much larger risk to people on the ground than does the other (due to energy if nothing else), and treating them the same - as you say you do - completely ignores the concept of risk management. One is markedly higher and thus the whole reason for the waiver process.



Since I’m not a CD, I guess I’ll just have to kneel at the alter of the all-knowledgeable experts of experts like you. I'm sure you know much more about what makes safety management systems effective than do us lowly non-CDs.



Again, I guess the insurance industry, DMVs, court system, and parole system have been doing it wrong all these years. By your logic, parole makes no sense, “as if watching someone closely is going to stop them from….” ___________ (fill in the blank). Insurance companies, DMVs, the courts, and other industries weigh past behavior when considering current actions for a simple reason – it works. For some, it deters future bad acts. But you’re saying there’s something magical about model aviation that prevents that same concept from working? Wow.

franklin_m

Mishap rates are quantified in the number of mishaps per 100,000 flight hours. Last number I found for general aviation was 3.67, and I already quoted above that the Navy's through June is 0.85.

For your comparison, fortunately the math is relatively easy, I'm sure you can follow along. In fact, let's look at a very simple example, say a really big jet event (200 pilots), where each flies 6 flights per day, and each flight is 20 minutes long. That would be some event eh? And let's say there's just one mishap per day (pretty good event with that many sorties).

200 pilots x 10 flights per day per pilot x 20 minutes per flight per pilot = 666 flight hours. With just 1 mishap, the rate is 1 per 666 flight hours, or 150 mishaps per 100,000 flight hours. That is 40.9 times the general aviation mishap rate and 176.5 times the current US Navy mishap rate.

So even if we postulate just one single mishap; at an event with many more pilots, many more flights per pilot per day, and much longer flights than take place at actual events; then the rate is an order of magnitude higher than GA, and two orders of magnitude higher than Navy.

And yet we know a typical actual jet event has fewer pilots, fewer flights per day per pilot, shorter flights, and more mishaps. So the rate can only be worse than the example above.

init4fun

Model plane crashes where there is no injury are a pretty untrackable event since if no one was injured , where would the "paper trail" record begin ? Sure if someone's injured there is medical treatment and thus physical evidence of a mishap , but what of the thousands of no injury crashes , I highly doubt anyone who slams their .40 or .60 sized sport flyer into a tree is gonna report themselves for further scrutiny if there is no other proof beyond some shredded balsa and maybe a tree full of birds laughing their fool heads off at watching what the big ol dumb loud bird just did .

I posted this to ask , how would such a database be compiled when no one would ever report anything that didn't cause a paper trail ?

franklin_m

To me there's a nexus of issues around:
- size and speed of the aircraft
- location of crash WRT people
- location of crash WRT flying site property
- any injury
- any damage to cars, buildings, etc.

Large and fast aircraft represent considerable kinetic energy and thus pose significant risk if they crash into people and/or property. Turbines also carry a significant risk of starting wildfires. I'm baffled as to why we're not collecting data to find out just how often they crash.

As for location, I think in light of the aircraft going into/over crowds (WOD B29, IRCHA heli into crowd this year, B2 jet crash into pits not long ago), we would be wise to capture these as well. Given proximity to people, we should probably record info about distance of flight line from people, whether recommended distances were waived, etc. Ideas is to figure out if current standoff distances are appropriate.

With respect to injury reporting, I think it would be wise to collect info on events that cause anything more than minor injury. Some will ask "what's minor?" Fortunately, there's some good references out there, for example the OSHA recordable reporting criteria. Not say that's the one to use, but it's one that could be used. Anything that would be an OSHA recordable must be reported to AMA, otherwise not.

Damage? First, it would be damage other than the aircraft itself. Why not just use the same criteria already in use for part 107?

Last, how do you ensure reports get made? Well, that's tough and there's no easy answer. To make it work, there must be some consequence for not reporting (and getting caught), that is far worse than the embarrassment of reporting. I've got ideas, but it would start a royal firestorm here, so I'll hold off.

init4fun

Ok , that was one point I was wondering about . As it stands now , if you turn your plane into a smoking hole in the ground with no injuries and no property damage , you don't have to report it . But isn't that the greatest majority of incidents by far , the smashed plane with no people or property damage ? And also , once it rises to the level of hurt people or damaged property the insurance claims filed for the payment of such incidents already constitute one form of report , why not just condense the data from the insurance claims to track possible trends ? Anyway yes I agree with you that an incident resulting in severe personal injury or extensive property damage should be of course examined to see if any future operational changes may be needed , like spectators moved a bit further away or that sort of thing . This month in M.A.'s safety article (page 79) it's mentioned that propbite is the most common injury , maybe the insurance company(s) that are paying out the Dr.'s bills VIA insurance claims are keeping score of what causes the most injuries ?

franklin_m

I argue that if a plane crashes into people, even if there isn't an injury, those should be reported. Why? It wouldn't take much to change that into an injury. What if it's a small kid that gets hit instead of an adult? What if it hits someone in the eye next time? Slightly bigger aircraft? Slightly faster? Different angle? Small change in conditions take a non-event to a newsworthy injury. How often our planes are crashing into people would seem to be something of interest - since in theory it should NEVER happen.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

LoL....so easy us simple folk can follow along. There's some postulating going on there.....for sure.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

So you say this:

To me, nothing but giving more money to fatten CEO's pockets for money they do not deserve..

Clearly thinking there is a CEO of the AMA, which there isn't, and clearly thinking they get paid, which they don't. But in the next breath you say it's none of your business how much they make.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Wow indeed. It just seems all so simple and easy for the AMA...why haven't they figured it all out yet?

franklin_m

Like postulating that there would be only one mishap in 2000 sorties?

franklin_m

That's a good question. Of course, they do appear to be struggling with compliance issues in the turbine community. So maybe the question is why haven't they tried something different?

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Ok guys, I am going to step in here for a bit. I want to remind you guys of the RCU Community Rules and what they say about the topics of a thread:

If you pay attention to what I have highlighted you will notice that is says that each thread has a topic and that thread needs to stay on that topic. Now I've been moderating RCU long enough to know that some leeway needs to be given, and I do give leeway to threads such as these..... especially here in the AMA forum where a discussion can sometimes get very heated. Often times a thread can get off topic when the members get into the heat of the discussion, but a gentle nudge from me will usually get that thread back on topic and will usually require no further actions from myself. However, this thread has gone completely off the rails and now is nothing more than just a knock down drag out between a few members and it resembles nothing at all of the original topic that started off. I received a report ticket that brought this thread to my attention and the person that reported the suggested that I close the thread since it was so far off topic. I would prefer to not do that if I can avoid doing that. So guys let's stop the petty bickering and let the thread get back to the topic at hand. And if the there is nothing left to discuss of the original topic then the thread will simply slip down the forum list as I prefer to allow threads to do as they age normally over the course of time. Now if you guys can't find a way to stop your petty bickering I can stop it for you, trust me on that one.

Ken

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

http://www.geekwire.com/2016/alexa-d...trolled-voice/

An interesting use of drone technology. Even more interesting is who filed for a patent on it...probably the biggest "commercial" player, Amazon! They are often times very much ahead of the game from a technology standpoint.