Ama should have left faa alone!
04-08-2015, 07:49 AM
#126
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-08-2015, 08:25 AM
#128
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-08-2015, 09:32 AM
#131
I just don't think you have thought through the ramifications of applying professional testing, certification, investigation, data-gathering, reporting, analysis and implimentation {sic} to this hobby. The costs in time and money would be prohibitive for the average modeler and at the club level. To do what you want would require a team of pro accident investigators at every flying site. The focus correctly has been, and should be, adhering to a simple, easily understandable set of safety guidelines, and most importantly, operate in a safe environment.
Rules, like standoffs etc. would be developed based on science. For example a 77lb aircraft traveling at 200mph (allowed under AMA LTMA-1 rules) travels over 430 feet in the 1.5 seconds between loss of signal and engine cutoff! And yet AMA 706 allows spectators as close as 255 feet from the flight line (in this example). Oh, and a CD can even waive that to even less. Narrower runway, and most are, then the safety buffer is smaller yet!. It might also interest you to know that the International Council of Airshows requires spectators be at least 500 feet away from RC turbine flight demonstrations at their airshows (my LTMA-1 example above). I calculated 430 feet before cutoff, and they recommend 500 feet minimum. Wow those numbers are surprisingly close, you think theirs might be based on math? I know, what a concept! Oh, and that 77lb airplane at 200 MPH hits with the same energy as an average weight 2015 VW bug at over 30 MPH.
So, with some education and formal training in aviation safety, it took me maybe an hour to come up with these calculations. That hardly sounds prohibitively expensive. All I'm saying is that the AMA should do the same at HQ, draw some vectors on a sample field layout, and decide if their standoffs are sufficient? I don't think they are, but that's based on my training and experience. Then all you do is rewrite a few “guidelines” and turn them into rules with a higher standard for waivers. Draw some diagrams to serve as templates based on aircraft size, type, and speeds.
All the club would need to do is pick the appropriate “template” and then compare it with their field layout. In some cases, it might make sense to apply for a waiver. That waiver would be requested over someone's signature, like a club officer, and then approved by AMA over someone's signature. Again, it's not that difficult.
Similar analysis could be done for LMA's and LTMA's. Looking at the AMA documents, it looks like the majority of this is done already. All I'd recommend adding to that is periodic standardization checks of the evaluators. We want to ensure that what's acceptable to one “inspector” is consistent with another. Again, not difficult nor expensive.
As for accident reporting, don't let your imagination get out of hand. I'm talking a simple members only website reporting system, where the club safety officer regularly reports simple data. Number of fliers over a period of time, approximate number of flights by aircraft size and power type, and number of crashes by size and power type. Any injuries would also be recorded. All it would require is members to keep track of their flights in a simple log and either enter that info themselves or pass to a club safety officer to do. Even all the data required in a log for full scale flights requires SECONDS to record. Are you really saying that's too difficult? When the data collected could help AMA prove we're as safe as we say we are? Really?
Last edited by franklin_m; 04-08-2015 at 09:41 AM.
04-08-2015, 09:49 AM
#132
The full scale was asked to go around well before he was even close. The CD was letting the RC pilot finish his demonstration. The full scale pilot did an aerobatic maneuver (high speed pass) without a waiver and was suspended because of that. He was not landing so he did not have right of way. IMO saying the RC aircraft should give right of way is a term that needs to be changed. The RC plane should always see and avoid full scale at all costs, but it is the full scale that is more capable of getting away so they should do the same.
Last edited by ira d; 04-08-2015 at 09:55 AM.
04-08-2015, 09:53 AM
#133
Feel free to mock, but you can't escape the fact that if something hits a passenger carrying civilian aircraft, and God forbid there's injuries or worse, then there will be a mountain of people digging through the AMA's "programming." And who will be doing it? People who see aviation safety the way I do. I'm not saying nor advocating that we have a safety program to the same level as the military or commercial aviation, but I do think we need components of it. That means rules not guidelines, operating discipline among pilots, accountability (at some level) for when we break our own rules, and data to check ourselves.
04-08-2015, 10:01 AM
#134
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for accident reporting, don't let your imagination get out of hand. I'm talking a simple members only website reporting system, where the club safety officer regularly reports simple data. Number of fliers over a period of time, approximate number of flights by aircraft size and power type, and number of crashes by size and power type. Any injuries would also be recorded. All it would require is members to keep track of their flights in a simple log and either enter that info themselves or pass to a club safety officer to do. Even all the data required in a log for full scale flights requires SECONDS to record. Are you really saying that's too difficult? When the data collected could help AMA prove we're as safe as we say we are? Really?
04-08-2015, 10:31 AM
#135
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nowhere did I advocate nor imply that you need a team of pro accident investigators. Nowhere did I say that this will be expensive. It's easy to imagine it as such, but it's really a matter of doing some math (and simple math at that – Newtonian physics mostly), some policy rewriting, and some operational risk management decisions being facilitated by some people who know what they're doing.
Rules, like standoffs etc. would be developed based on science. For example a 77lb aircraft traveling at 200mph (allowed under AMA LTMA-1 rules) travels over 430 feet in the 1.5 seconds between loss of signal and engine cutoff! And yet AMA 706 allows spectators as close as 255 feet from the flight line (in this example). Oh, and a CD can even waive that to even less. Narrower runway, and most are, then the safety buffer is smaller yet!. It might also interest you to know that the International Council of Airshows requires spectators be at least 500 feet away from RC turbine flight demonstrations at their airshows (my LTMA-1 example above). I calculated 430 feet before cutoff, and they recommend 500 feet minimum. Wow those numbers are surprisingly close, you think theirs might be based on math? I know, what a concept! Oh, and that 77lb airplane at 200 MPH hits with the same energy as an average weight 2015 VW bug at over 30 MPH.
So, with some education and formal training in aviation safety, it took me maybe an hour to come up with these calculations. That hardly sounds prohibitively expensive. All I'm saying is that the AMA should do the same at HQ, draw some vectors on a sample field layout, and decide if their standoffs are sufficient? I don't think they are, but that's based on my training and experience. Then all you do is rewrite a few “guidelines” and turn them into rules with a higher standard for waivers. Draw some diagrams to serve as templates based on aircraft size, type, and speeds.
All the club would need to do is pick the appropriate “template” and then compare it with their field layout. In some cases, it might make sense to apply for a waiver. That waiver would be requested over someone's signature, like a club officer, and then approved by AMA over someone's signature. Again, it's not that difficult.
Similar analysis could be done for LMA's and LTMA's. Looking at the AMA documents, it looks like the majority of this is done already. All I'd recommend adding to that is periodic standardization checks of the evaluators. We want to ensure that what's acceptable to one “inspector” is consistent with another. Again, not difficult nor expensive.
As for accident reporting, don't let your imagination get out of hand. I'm talking a simple members only website reporting system, where the club safety officer regularly reports simple data. Number of fliers over a period of time, approximate number of flights by aircraft size and power type, and number of crashes by size and power type. Any injuries would also be recorded. All it would require is members to keep track of their flights in a simple log and either enter that info themselves or pass to a club safety officer to do. Even all the data required in a log for full scale flights requires SECONDS to record. Are you really saying that's too difficult? When the data collected could help AMA prove we're as safe as we say we are? Really?
Rules, like standoffs etc. would be developed based on science. For example a 77lb aircraft traveling at 200mph (allowed under AMA LTMA-1 rules) travels over 430 feet in the 1.5 seconds between loss of signal and engine cutoff! And yet AMA 706 allows spectators as close as 255 feet from the flight line (in this example). Oh, and a CD can even waive that to even less. Narrower runway, and most are, then the safety buffer is smaller yet!. It might also interest you to know that the International Council of Airshows requires spectators be at least 500 feet away from RC turbine flight demonstrations at their airshows (my LTMA-1 example above). I calculated 430 feet before cutoff, and they recommend 500 feet minimum. Wow those numbers are surprisingly close, you think theirs might be based on math? I know, what a concept! Oh, and that 77lb airplane at 200 MPH hits with the same energy as an average weight 2015 VW bug at over 30 MPH.
So, with some education and formal training in aviation safety, it took me maybe an hour to come up with these calculations. That hardly sounds prohibitively expensive. All I'm saying is that the AMA should do the same at HQ, draw some vectors on a sample field layout, and decide if their standoffs are sufficient? I don't think they are, but that's based on my training and experience. Then all you do is rewrite a few “guidelines” and turn them into rules with a higher standard for waivers. Draw some diagrams to serve as templates based on aircraft size, type, and speeds.
All the club would need to do is pick the appropriate “template” and then compare it with their field layout. In some cases, it might make sense to apply for a waiver. That waiver would be requested over someone's signature, like a club officer, and then approved by AMA over someone's signature. Again, it's not that difficult.
Similar analysis could be done for LMA's and LTMA's. Looking at the AMA documents, it looks like the majority of this is done already. All I'd recommend adding to that is periodic standardization checks of the evaluators. We want to ensure that what's acceptable to one “inspector” is consistent with another. Again, not difficult nor expensive.
As for accident reporting, don't let your imagination get out of hand. I'm talking a simple members only website reporting system, where the club safety officer regularly reports simple data. Number of fliers over a period of time, approximate number of flights by aircraft size and power type, and number of crashes by size and power type. Any injuries would also be recorded. All it would require is members to keep track of their flights in a simple log and either enter that info themselves or pass to a club safety officer to do. Even all the data required in a log for full scale flights requires SECONDS to record. Are you really saying that's too difficult? When the data collected could help AMA prove we're as safe as we say we are? Really?
Do you enjoy kite-flying?
I hope so because I'm fairly certain, and sincerely hope,
their reply will be to go fly one.
04-08-2015, 10:37 AM
#136
When something serious happens, and I'm convinced it will sooner rather than later, they won't have enough money to pay the claims and it will end our hobby as we know it. Then they'll be all ears, but it'll be too late.
But AMA has nothing to be concerned about right? It's inconceivable that any AMA member would ever hazard a full scale aircraft or people on the ground by violating an AMA guideline. No, that would never happen -- ever.
Last edited by franklin_m; 04-08-2015 at 10:52 AM.
04-08-2015, 10:42 AM
#137
No it's not too difficult but it is wishfull thinking that members will ever do it. Well some will for awile, but most will just ignore it as there is no way to enforce. My SWAG is out of 175,000 members 10% at best would consistently report. Good intentions meet reality that the majority of Americans just don't like to self report anything and will go out of there way to avoid it. Just human nature and by the way any attorney if asked if it is a good idea to self report acidents would advise against it.
But hey, why worry? What we don't know can't hurt us (or our hobby).
Last edited by franklin_m; 04-08-2015 at 10:46 AM.
04-08-2015, 10:50 AM
#138
04-08-2015, 11:10 AM
#139
Originally Posted by franklin_m 
I disagree. AMA has pushed to get themselves recognized as a CBO, and have advocated that their "programming" is part of the safety management system that justifies the FAA allowing them (AMA) to manage safety for model aircraft. So if that "programming" doesn't even check to make sure that sanctioned club fields are not in conflict with full scale aircraft or special use airspace, then I for one question effectiveness of this "programming" in terms of safety. It comes down to AMA trying to play with the big boys, which means they need to start checking things like that (IMHO).
Gotta go Fly but seeing the clock on the VCR guess might just go to Lunch (hope I didn't miss where they are going today for Lunch) LOL
Damrn Spll's chker sitl dead. Any one know how to turn it back on in browser Google Chrome? any constructive help is appreacited.
04-08-2015, 11:47 AM
#140
I'd be all for an alternative CBO. Reading the Congressional conference committee report on PL112-95, they outlined the criteria for what it takes to be a CBO, and the threshold is low, but not overwhelming. I would be willing to do without the magazine, without the insurance, as I spend most of my time flying at a school near my house or on my own land (hopefully have a jet capable runway in the next five years), I'm already assuming the primary liability. Having a bit more secondary insurance from AMA isn't worth it. I'd love to see an alternative CBO - if for no other reason than to inspire a bit of competition for my membership dollars.
04-08-2015, 12:09 PM
#141
Feel free to mock, but you can't escape the fact that if something hits a passenger carrying civilian aircraft, and God forbid there's injuries or worse, then there will be a mountain of people digging through the AMA's "programming." And who will be doing it? People who see aviation safety the way I do. I'm not saying nor advocating that we have a safety program to the same level as the military or commercial aviation, but I do think we need components of it. That means rules not guidelines, operating discipline among pilots, accountability (at some level) for when we break our own rules, and data to check ourselves.
Someone here said that military have small dronesall over the place overseas and have had midairs and yet to have any significant damage, so hopefully we will have the same. But obviously a giant scale at hover can put a huge dent in an aerobatic plane.
04-08-2015, 12:57 PM
#142
04-08-2015, 01:28 PM
#143
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by bradpaul; 04-08-2015 at 01:30 PM.
04-08-2015, 01:43 PM
#144
04-08-2015, 03:33 PM
#145
I don't have a problem with AMA. I do have a problem when they inject themselves as the CBO that you have to go through to get access to certain aspects of the hobby. AMA does many good things, but my personal belief is their spending is too biased toward supporting the facility at Muncie and supporting large competitions that most members will never attend. If their spending priority was much more focused on flying field establishment / protection (helping clubs buy land and/or airspace easements), local flying field improvement, and more projects at the local club level, I'd probably be more willing to support AMA w/o reservation.
I'd be all for an alternative CBO. Reading the Congressional conference committee report on PL112-95, they outlined the criteria for what it takes to be a CBO, and the threshold is low, but not overwhelming. I would be willing to do without the magazine, without the insurance, as I spend most of my time flying at a school near my house or on my own land (hopefully have a jet capable runway in the next five years), I'm already assuming the primary liability. Having a bit more secondary insurance from AMA isn't worth it. I'd love to see an alternative CBO - if for no other reason than to inspire a bit of competition for my membership dollars.
I'd be all for an alternative CBO. Reading the Congressional conference committee report on PL112-95, they outlined the criteria for what it takes to be a CBO, and the threshold is low, but not overwhelming. I would be willing to do without the magazine, without the insurance, as I spend most of my time flying at a school near my house or on my own land (hopefully have a jet capable runway in the next five years), I'm already assuming the primary liability. Having a bit more secondary insurance from AMA isn't worth it. I'd love to see an alternative CBO - if for no other reason than to inspire a bit of competition for my membership dollars.
Frankie: Looks U Boltered Again ... Better Look for the Tanker ... or Splash.
1. Simple U and LCS, SP, ir d, and others that post here start your own CBO. Start by electing your selves to the board of directors and elect a The different officesamoung your selves. Or Run for an Officer Position in ypur/ a Chartered AMA/CBO club. The officers Insurance is now Primary.
2. Ques/Statement: "I spend most of my time flying at a school near my house or on my own land (hopefully have a jet capable runway in the next five years), I'm already assuming the primary liability. Having a bit more secondary insurance from AMA isn't worth it".
2.answer ... Then "Y" wouldYou want to belong to the AMA if U have your own facility and never fly or participate in a Chartered club and any of their functions.U would solve all your above stated problems.
3. Also if U don't like what the AMA/CBO President and the Board of the AMA/CBO
is doing then run for a seat at the table, and change things.
Again JMHO and the darn splls ckrr is brok
04-08-2015, 03:59 PM
#146
- C-130 Cruise speed: 348 knots (400 mph, 643 km/h)
- RQ-7 Cruising speed: 81 mph; 130 km/h (70 kn)
The C-130 Crew Failed to see and avoide Period.
The investigating board determined that the mishap was largely due to poor local air traffic control training and supervision.
RQ-7 Shadow Performance
- Maximum speed: 127 mph; 204 km/h (110 kn)
- Cruising speed: 81 mph; 130 km/h (70 kn)
- Range: 68 mi (59 nmi; 109 km)
- Endurance: 6 h/ 9 h Increased Endurance
- Service ceiling: 15,000 ft (4,572 m) ELOS (Electronic Line Of Sight)
C-130J Performance
- Maximum speed: 362 knots (417 mph, 671 km/h)
- Cruise speed: 348 knots (400 mph, 643 km/h)
- Range: 2,835 nmi (3,262 mi, 5,250 km)
- Service ceiling: 28,000 ft (8,615 m) with 42,000 pounds (19,090 kilograms) payload
- Absolute altitude 40,386 ft (12,310 m)[SUP][102][/SUP]
- Takeoff distance: 3,127 ft (953 m) at 155,000 lb (70,300 kg) gross weight
04-08-2015, 04:08 PM
#147
Look at the Pics again.... "the plane still landed" The only reason the the plane still landed Is the ruptured Fuel Tank did not catch fire or exploed. And Obvouseley the SKILL of the Crew and the "LUCK" of the Irish.
04-08-2015, 05:31 PM
#148
1. Simple U and LCS, SP, ir d, and others that post here start your own CBO..Or Run for an Officer Position in ypur/ a Chartered AMA/CBO club. The officers Insurance is now Primary.
2. Then "Y" wouldYou want to belong to the AMA if U have your own facility and never fly or participate in a Chartered club and any of their functions?
3. Also if U don't like what the AMA/CBO President and the Board of the AMA/CBO is doing then run for a seat at the table, and change things.
2. Then "Y" wouldYou want to belong to the AMA if U have your own facility and never fly or participate in a Chartered club and any of their functions?
3. Also if U don't like what the AMA/CBO President and the Board of the AMA/CBO is doing then run for a seat at the table, and change things.
HoundDog, fair questions. Answers:
1. Start CBO: An corporate attorney friend and I are looking into doing just that. Our plan is very low cost membership fee, majority of money goes toward insurance, and geared toward people that want access to ability to fly models >55lbs w/o wanting to mess with AMA. Safety rules (vice guidelines) developed by aviation safety professionals. No magazine, no HQ flying site, no expensive PR firm, and staff is volunteer or get paid $1 per year.
2. Why AMA member? I've been a member for several years because I needed it to access flying sites. If I don't go to the AMA field this season, it'll be my second season in a row and I'll cancel both AMA and local club membership. It's dominated by 3D flying, and honestly I'm tired having large high powered airplanes flying straight at the flight line.
3. Why not run for office in AMA? Well, quite honestly, given the complaining and gnashing of teeth in these forums at even the thought of “rules” that might have to be followed, I'm not convinced there's any desire to avoid future problems. I'm a consultant who makes a living by improving organizations management, operations, and safety. Honestly, it would be skills they'd likely find valuable, as I guarantee they couldn't afford even half my normal day rate. However, because my time is very valuable, I have a simple rule for taking on something like changing the AMA: They have to want to get better. I've offered help (pro bono) to the AMA, and didn't even get the professional courtesy of a response. Also, I see no interest from AMA about making systemic improvements to safety. Lastly, when they don't even have the integrity to answer someone like Bob Violett (see link below), that tells me a lot about their character.
That also tells me my time is better spent elsewhere.
(http://www.bvmjets.com/pages/Safety/safety.htm)
Last edited by franklin_m; 04-08-2015 at 05:54 PM. Reason: Fix gooned up quote HTML
04-08-2015, 06:37 PM
#149
HoundDog, fair questions. Answers:
1. Start CBO: An corporate attorney friend and I are looking into doing just that. Our plan is very low cost membership fee, majority of money goes toward insurance, and geared toward people that want access to ability to fly models >55lbs w/o wanting to mess with AMA. Safety rules (vice guidelines) developed by aviation safety professionals. No magazine, no HQ flying site, no expensive PR firm, and staff is volunteer or get paid $1 per year.
2
(http://www.bvmjets.com/pages/Safety/safety.htm)
a model over 55 lb's where would you fly at? I think that at least 90 to 95% of flying sites in usa are AMA chartered.
I know a few may have their own property that may be suitable for large models and a few have excess to large open lots but in those cases nobody will be checking if you have a
waiver anyway.
04-08-2015, 07:23 PM
#150
HoundDog, fair questions. Answers:
1. Start CBO: An corporate attorney friend and I are looking into doing just that. Our plan is very low cost membership fee, majority of money goes toward insurance, and geared toward people that want access to ability to fly models >55lbs w/o wanting to mess with AMA. Safety rules (vice guidelines) developed by aviation safety professionals. No magazine, no HQ flying site, no expensive PR firm, and staff is volunteer or get paid $1 per year.
2. Why AMA member? I've been a member for several years because I needed it to access flying sites. If I don't go to the AMA field this season, it'll be my second season in a row and I'll cancel both AMA and local club membership. It's dominated by 3D flying, and honestly I'm tired having large high powered airplanes flying straight at the flight line.
3. Why not run for office in AMA? Well, quite honestly, given the complaining and gnashing of teeth in these forums at even the thought of “rules” that might have to be followed, I'm not convinced there's any desire to avoid future problems. I'm a consultant who makes a living by improving organizations management, operations, and safety. Honestly, it would be skills they'd likely find valuable, as I guarantee they couldn't afford even half my normal day rate. However, because my time is very valuable, I have a simple rule for taking on something like changing the AMA: They have to want to get better. I've offered help (pro bono) to the AMA, and didn't even get the professional courtesy of a response. Also, I see no interest from AMA about making systemic improvements to safety. Lastly, when they don't even have the integrity to answer someone like Bob Violett (see link below), that tells me a lot about their character.
That also tells me my time is better spent elsewhere.
(http://www.bvmjets.com/pages/Safety/safety.htm)
Frank surlly U Jest with out rules the world would in to kasus. No way would I/anybody in there right to fly our TOY Airplanes with ou some sort of RULEs to maintain some sort of conformety and a safe place to fly. I can understand if One has their own fling site on there own Property large enough to accomidate the type of flying being attempted.
Safty is my main concern and with out rules Safety is non existant and leads to Kasus and Meham.
JMHO And the darmn sell'n ckkr it's stilll Ka-Put's