New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9)  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9)
Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 12:27:21 AM   
jerrysu29



Posts: 261
Joined: 11/23/2002
From: Rapd City, SD, USA
Status: offline 		Well here is what the AMA has added to the 2003 AMA Safety Code. 9) Under no circumstances may a pilot or other person touch a powered model in flight.
So as I understand this rule I can still hand launch my powered aircraft, but can't hand recover from the hover position.
I wonder just how all the TOC guys think of this new rule.
I would like to know who made this decision in the first place because I for one can't remember anyone asking US members about voting or anything else pertaining to this isue at all !!!
I for one do not like to be Dictated to,this is a democracy or is it? For some reason all of us AMA Members Have gotten railroaded on this perticullar Isue, with out any representation!!!!
I will continue hand recovery of my aircraft if I so choose to do so, might not be covered by the AMA insurance but my homeowners policy will, if god forbid I hurt my self in some way!!!
       Post #: 1

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 12:35:31 AM   
P-51B



Posts: 6173
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Status: offline 		This issue has been discussed endlessly in several threads.

Hope your covered if someone else gets hurt!

_____________________________

In order to think "outside the box", one must first accept there IS a box.

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 2

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 1:21:09 AM   
GrnBrt



Posts: 6992
Joined: 12/5/2001
From: Everett, WA, USA
Status: offline 		Well I guess they did it because it's just plain unsafe to walk up to a hovering plane and grab it, and they are trying to stop a bad accident before it happens! It may look way cool to do it but face facts, these planes can glitch at any time, not to mention the pilot goofing for a split second and then you have an out of control plane with a very big spinning steak knife up front looking for something to hack to pieces. If the TOC guys don't like it, well that's just to bad, and if you want to continue to do it then do it at your own risk.


_____________________________

Art Grabow SR
Senior forum Manager

US Army Special forces, mess with the best, die like the rest!

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 3

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 2:35:11 AM   
jerrysu29



Posts: 261
Joined: 11/23/2002
From: Rapd City, SD, USA
Status: offline 		Well GrnBrt I disagree with you .We have been doing this maneuver for the past five years and as of yet I have not heard of anyone getting hurt doing so,or read of anyone having an incident and if there had been in the past we as AMA members would have heard about it. I believe there are more problems and accidents that happen at start up and in the pits with our aircraft cutting people up and taking fingers off etc, and I Challenge you to prove me wrong!!!

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 4

Re: New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 2:41:17 AM   
C_Watkins



Posts: 1069
Joined: 6/22/2002
From: Douglasville, GA, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by jerrysu31
I would like to know who made this decision in the first place because I for one can't remember anyone asking US members about voting or anything else pertaining to this isue at all !!!
[/QUOTE]

Who ever said the AMA was a total democracy?
They've decided the risk is there... or the insurance company decided it FOR them.
NO vote is required, much like your homeowner's insurance company doesn't
consult with you before making rate increases or policy changes either.
They may "inform" you, but they certainly don't need your permission

Like yourself, I'll do as I please. So far, that doesn't run amuck of any of the guidelines.
Whenever it does, that will be my cue to drop the AMA coverage, I suppose...
or at least limit my actions to those times when I'm not at an AMA sanctioned event/field.

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 5

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 3:48:58 AM   
jerrysu29



Posts: 261
Joined: 11/23/2002
From: Rapd City, SD, USA
Status: offline 		C_Watkins I agree with what you are saying. Out here in SD we have an unlimited choice of places where we can fly and if this is how the AMA wants to dictate to there members it's time to do most of the flying that I enjoy most some where other than one of our AMA sanctioned sites. I'm saddened by the way they have handled this matter though.Basically I see it as just another way to get out from under any ins. claim regarding this matter. Instead of taking a stand for their membership they took the easy way out!!!

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 6

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 4:39:48 AM   
GrnBrt



Posts: 6992
Joined: 12/5/2001
From: Everett, WA, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by jerrysu31
Well GrnBrt I disagree with you .We have been doing this maneuver for the past five years and as of yet I have not heard of anyone getting hurt doing so,or read of anyone having an incident and if there had been in the past we as AMA members would have heard about it. I believe there are more problems and accidents that happen at start up and in the pits with our aircraft cutting people up and taking fingers off etc, and I Challenge you to prove me wrong!!! [/QUOTE]

I don't see where I have to prove anything, commen sense will do that. How many fliers out there are capable of doing this manuever versus the total number of fliers out there??? It comes down to time, it will happen and when one tangles with the props on a 40% plane you can bet it will be a mess. It really doesn't take a whole lot of vision to see that this kind of a stunt is an accident just looking for a place to happen. You can disagree with me as that's fine, but I have made it to the age that I am by not tempting fate if at all possible, and messing with a plane that's hovering is in my opinion tempting the Gods of fate!!!!


_____________________________

Art Grabow SR
Senior forum Manager

US Army Special forces, mess with the best, die like the rest!

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 7

Hovering - 12/3/2002 6:02:23 AM   
Bill Vargas



Posts: 1570
Joined: 1/6/2002
From: Team Coldies, CA, USA
Status: offline 		It looks like a cool stunt,,, but the Risk Management is way OUT There above the [COLOR=red]Red[/COLOR] Zone.

I feel sorry for the family member that has to go to the Coroners office,,, after the fact.

Just fly the plane like it was intended for and be safe

BV

_____________________________

If it ain't leaking oil, then something's wrong,,, USMC, RETIRED!

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 8

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 6:13:41 AM   
Live Wire


 

Posts: 3842
Joined: 11/20/2002
From: Sterling , CO, USA
Status: offline 		Watch who screams the loadest when some one gets nailed

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 9

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 6:14:54 AM   
jerrysu29



Posts: 261
Joined: 11/23/2002
From: Rapd City, SD, USA
Status: offline 		Hey GrnBrt you are right about common sense probably telling you through your abillity this is dangers, but don't judge me, or others by your abillities!!! and by the way I did not say anything about 40% planes most all 3d hovering practice is done with the small profile aircraft up to 80" and as far as it goes I've seen more pilots tempting the gods of fate just landing there aircraft. then I have with pilots that know what they are doing, as an AMA Safety Officer I have had more problems with people that have been flying for years and think they know it all and never do a preflight or have ever heard of doing so. and have gotten mad at me for not letting them fly until I do a preflight on their plane. this is my opinion and you have your's

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 10

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 6:15:53 AM   
Flyfalcons



Posts: 6129
Joined: 7/27/2002
From: Bonney Lake, WA, USA
Status: online 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by jerrysu31
.Basically I see it as just another way to get out from under any ins. claim regarding this matter. Instead of taking a stand for their membership they took the easy way out!!! [/QUOTE]

Versus the hard way of having to explain to the public/families/insurance company why they endorsed a stunt that ended up getting someone killed.

_____________________________

Ryan Winslow

Cub flying - the new EXTREME SPORT!!! (evarrr)

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 11

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 6:28:10 AM   
Live Wire


 

Posts: 3842
Joined: 11/20/2002
From: Sterling , CO, USA
Status: offline 		Jerry
Ability to fly and how long you have flown does make a difference. Glitches ,Batteries !!!!!!!!!!!!! Switches closing prematurely by vibration and distractions of all kinds can lead to problems

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 12

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 6:53:12 AM   
jerrysu29



Posts: 261
Joined: 11/23/2002
From: Rapd City, SD, USA
Status: offline 		RC OUTLAW this is exactly my point all these factors and many more can happen, and it has nothing to do with, where the pilot is or how close the people are to the aircraft, or where the flight line is or what attitude the plane or helicopter is in. Accidents can and will happen, such as the person that was killed at a pylon race while what AMA thought was safe sitting in a cage under one of the pylons got hit by an out of control 1/4 scale racer. What should't happen WILL!!! The next Thing I see happening is that will be able to take Our aircraft to the field and just look at them because their to dangerous to start and fly!!!!!!! IMO

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 13

New AMA 2003 Safety Code (rule#9) - 12/3/2002 7:33:49 AM   
Roby


 

Posts: 981
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: AMESBURY, MA,
Status: offline 		Well ,it was bound to happen ,someone must have
caught me in the act. Sorry guys.

If I read the above rule as it written here , does this mean
that I can no longer catch my park flier ?

I understand what the intent is, I just hope it's stated in
better fashion.


Regards
Roby

(in reply to jerrysu29)
       Post #: 14

Catching Park Flier - 12/3/2002 8:02:43 AM   
Hossfly



Posts: 3927
Joined: 12/3/2001
From: New Caney, TX, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Roby
Well ,it was bound to happen ,someone must have
caught me in the act. Sorry guys.

If I read the above rule as it written here , does this mean
that I can no longer catch my park flier ?

I understand what the intent is, I just hope it's stated in
better fashion.


Regards
Roby [/QUOTE]


If you are fly