RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: Lee Cox

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> RC Jets >> RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 12:12:32 AM

KiwiKid

Posts: 130
Joined: 2/7/2005
From: Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND
Status: offline

This vid was posted in the Video Gallery the other day. Its a bit off topic, but a good reminder of the need for flight line separation from crowds and the fact that there are a number of things can go awry with our models: http://www.tulsarc.com/videos/cat_crashes/2006/3d/340k_tighten_your_props.wmv

< Message edited by KiwiKid -- 5/18/2006 2:35:35 AM >

_____________________________

Regards
KiwiKid

(in reply to David Gladwin)

Post #: 151

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 3:39:28 AM

Silver182

Posts: 959
Joined: 12/6/2001
From: Denver, CO, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EddieWeeks

Attached are two graphs of the Probability of getting hit with an airplane.

There are a few assumptions but all are reasonable.

1) Every flight crashes
2) Each Person is 5 ft^2 and the plane does not have area

More info at
http://www.corpcomp.com/weeks1/Prob/Prob_files/frame.htm
Power Point
http://www.corpcomp.com/weeks1/Prob/Prob.ppt

In the first graph, This is real data collect from a Turbine plane.
The second graph is the same data divided by two. Not a prop plane
(I assumed a prop plane Goes 1/2 as fast and 1/2 as far)

Also in the second graph I calculated the odds with 1681 people standing 30 feet
Behind the pilot. Then I calculated the odds of any one of these people getting
Hit with an out of control plane..

Graph 1:
One Pilot flying a turbine, Odds of getting hit are ~1,000,000 to 1

Graph 2:
1681 people 30 feet from pilot Odds of getting hit are 213 to 1

This Probability calculation may or may not be accurate but its very good at
showing us what is important.

Eddie Weeks

Eddie & all,
Statistics & probabilities really don't mean much to whomever the fickle finger of fate points. In fact they are meaningless! If you or I had been at the controls, or dreadfully in the flight path of this particular tragedy, all the statistics in the world would not mean a thing.

The best any of us can do... is to do everything possible to ensure innocent bystanders remain safe. If full snap roll and engine kill fail-safe capabilities were the airshow standard worldwide the likely hood (Probability) of another tragedy of this sort happening would be greatly reduced.

From what I saw of the video the spectators appeared to be very close to the pilots flight area, possibly within 50 feet. With a safety buffer minimum of 100 feet from the flight line, along with full snap-roll programming / engine kill required the probability of this type of accident happening would have been dramatically reduced or totally eliminated.

It must understood that to actually fly an R/C model with full snap-roll fail-safe settings requires a higher level of R/F link capability, testing and aircraft setup.

In fact this requirement would eliminate about 3/4 of the model aircraft flying today! Yep, that's right most model aircraft / radio systems flying today will not pass the rigor of this standard.

I was very surprised when the AMA eliminated this long-standing requirement last year for the Experimental Class aircraft! My belief is the Safety committee members decided the vast majority of radio systems on the market could not safely meet this standard today. A numbers thing!

In my opinion the default fail-safe HOLD feature of today's PCM radios is for the innocent spectator not good! The half-in-half out of control glitch of the PPM encoding is I believe a little safer! Not safer than PCM fail-safe set to snap roll, but safer than PCM HOlD! It always has amazed me that the radio manufactures would ship their radios with HOLD as the default setting.

I believe the snap-roll engine kill should be a required standard for all R/C model aircraft weighing more than 20lbs. In fact it would be better if that were the standard for all Model Aircraft of any weight. Shew.. Would that upset the manufactures apple cart!

Lee H. DeMary
AMA 36099

(in reply to EddieWeeks)

Post #: 152

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 4:15:25 AM

air mail rcu

Posts: 522
Joined: 8/3/2003
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Status: offline

I see a lot of talk about failsafe. Failsafe is a last ditch effort in my opinion. When failsafe kicks in the plane is not under control of the pilot. Don't get me wrong failsafe is better then nothing. But we should make every effort not to have to use failsafe in the first place.

There was no scanner at this event. And from what info we have a scanner was not used anytime before the show.

I would be very interested in knowing if the Regional Radio Broadcaster in Szekszard did any broadcasting on the days before the RC Air show. I keep reading that this broadcaster suddenly turned on his radio. Does anyone think this was the very first time that this person turned on this radio on channel 62 in the past week. I would think if you are having a large RC show it would be a good idea to monitor (scan) the frequencies that you are going to be using. Not just on the day of the show but the weekend before and during the week before. This should be a minimum standard.

Stefan's dad brought a scanner with him to check the frequencies so it looks like Stefan had access to a scanner and did not bring it with him. Maybe he thought the people having the show would have one. It didn't take Stefan's dad long to find the source of the interference. I find it highly unlikely that this broadcaster didn't transmit before the day of the air show. I think if the frequencies would have been monitored leading up to the show this tragic event might have been averted

_____________________________

Take-offs are optional. Landings are mandatory.

(in reply to Silver182)

Post #: 153

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 4:27:17 AM

EASYTIGER

Posts: 7676
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: nyc, NY, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: air mail rcu

I see a lot of talk about failsafe. Failsafe is a last ditch effort in my opinion. When failsafe kicks in the plane is not under control of the pilot. Don't get me wrong failsafe is better then nothing. But we should make every effort not to have to use failsafe in the first place.

There was no scanner at this event. And from what info we have a scanner was not used anytime before the show.

I would be very interested in knowing if the Regional Radio Broadcaster in Szekszard did any broadcasting on the days before the RC Air show. I keep reading that this broadcaster suddenly turned on his radio. Does anyone think this was the very first time that this person turned on this radio on channel 62 in the past week. I would think if you are having a large RC show it would be a good idea to monitor (scan) the frequencies that you are going to be using. Not just on the day of the show but the weekend before and during the week before. This should be a minimum standard.

Stefan's dad brought a scanner with him to check the frequencies so it looks like Stefan had access to a scanner and did not bring it with him. Maybe he thought the people having the show would have one. It didn't take Stefan's dad long to find the source of the interference. I find it highly unlikely that this broadcaster didn't transmit before the day of the air show. I think if the frequencies would have been monitored leading up to the show this tragic event might have been averted

Yup. And both press releases actually admitted that there was known interference before the flight. So why did he fly anyway?

(in reply to air mail rcu)

Post #: 154

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 8:10:26 AM

Gazzer

Posts: 957
Joined: 4/21/2004
From: Southam, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline

As I said safety is a dynamic consideration.

I am not a radio expert but know that various atmospheric and other conditions can distort and interrupt ariwaves to the point that erroneeous frequencies can be generated, harmonics etc.

So what about this new dual reciever system, never seen a bcak up transmitter in use, cos of course this is an item to potentially fail too.

Then of course there is that requirement to act upon something, safety is YOUR responsibility as the pilot just as in driving the car or full size. Take heed, its a responsible position.......

And whilst a lot has been said about mass and inertia, an airgun can kill just like an AK47 thought I grant an AK47 more likely to do the deed, its not the size, weight and speed that matters its what and how it hits, and the consequences of that collision that causes the tragedy.

So avoid the collision in the first place.

Thinking again about Eddies post, this might provide value in planning out the flight paths and spectators, for instance, it is usually a flat spectator fence, perhaps it should feature shape, where the aircraft turn at the ends of the pattern, perhaps the fence should go back, kind of kidney shaped.......

Gazzer

_____________________________

Good judgement comes from bad experience.... Must be a good judge!

(in reply to EASYTIGER)

Post #: 155

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 12:01:59 PM

Silver182

Posts: 959
Joined: 12/6/2001
From: Denver, CO, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: air mail rcu

I see a lot of talk about failsafe. Failsafe is a last ditch effort in my opinion. When failsafe kicks in the plane is not under control of the pilot. Don't get me wrong failsafe is better then nothing. But we should make every effort not to have to use failsafe in the first place.

There was no scanner at this event. And from what info we have a scanner was not used anytime before the show.

I would be very interested in knowing if the Regional Radio Broadcaster in Szekszard did any broadcasting on the days before the RC Air show. I keep reading that this broadcaster suddenly turned on his radio. Does anyone think this was the very first time that this person turned on this radio on channel 62 in the past week. I would think if you are having a large RC show it would be a good idea to monitor (scan) the frequencies that you are going to be using. Not just on the day of the show but the weekend before and during the week before. This should be a minimum standard.

Stefan's dad brought a scanner with him to check the frequencies so it looks like Stefan had access to a scanner and did not bring it with him. Maybe he thought the people having the show would have one. It didn't take Stefan's dad long to find the source of the interference. I find it highly unlikely that this broadcaster didn't transmit before the day of the air show. I think if the frequencies would have been monitored leading up to the show this tragic event might have been averted

Take my word for it.... if you have full snap-roll fail-safes programming into your radio you will by definition check, and re-check all of the normally over looked or set aside problems you can dream of. I always have a scanner with me. I've got all of our 72 MHz channel frequencies programmed for scan, as well as the Primary 72 MHz frequencies! The thing we don't have absolute control over when all is said and done is a complete R/F link failure! That's why the snap-roll standard should be the standard of the day!

You see the real reason why most of us will never-but-never set the fail-safes to a full snap-roll is because we value our aircraft more than the innocent spectator yep I said it... and most of you know that your R/F link will not stand up to the full fail-safe standard.... don't you?

How many of you will this weekend take your highest dollar aircraft... set full snap-roll fail-safes and confidently go fly it... hummm? Seriously go do it.. and tell me you don't check and re-check every possible issue that has been discussed in this thread...and even more.. before you fly.
Lee H. DeMary
AMA 36099

(in reply to air mail rcu)

Post #: 156

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 12:20:46 PM

David Gladwin

Posts: 1943
Joined: 2/5/2002
From: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline

Whatever this accident has proven, and it certainly has rung the alarm bells, it is now totally obvious that a scanner IS a neccessity at ALL flying sites and I recommend an Icom IC R5 as I described in the last RCJI. It is a professional unit which works extremely well. Available in UK now for around £130 as advertised on the back page of the last "Pilot" magazine, by Harry Medehlson, probably less in the US. Mine has already earned its keep, detecting a Tx. splattering onto my frequency at my field. And as I mentioned in that article we absolutely MUST have some form of protocol when changeing frequencies on PLL radios, and soon. Why the delay, complacency ?

Regards,

David Gladwn

(in reply to Silver182)

Post #: 157

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/18/2006 12:34:22 PM

Gazzer

Posts: 957
Joined: 4/21/2004
From: Southam, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline

It's not just the scanner, its someone using it proactively with enough "teeth" to call a halt to flying.

In a way its like sharing air space with full size, if they're up, you come down, if your frequency gets compromised, your down, but that demands someone looking at the machine and providing the order. Should not be a problem in shows/events with spectators, might be harder at club level.

Before every event every transmitter/reciever/airframe in combination should be scrutinised, checked electronically that it is performing to specification, on start up a final "all clear check" before taxi. Requires some effort and organisation but nothing strenuous.

David,

I take it your not in Oz by the timings on your posts, else your up early/late!!!!

Gazzer

_____________________________

Good judgement comes from bad experience.... Must be a good judge!

(in reply to David Gladwin)

Post #: 158

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/19/2006 2:51:18 AM

air mail rcu

Posts: 522
Joined: 8/3/2003
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Status: offline

I don't think at the club level you need to be as strict. Most people in a RC club always keep it in the back of their minds that a plane can go out of control at any time. Wouldn't be a bad idea to use a scanner. I have one built into my radio. I will be using it a lot more.

When you are dealing with the general public most have no idea the dangers of this hobby/sport. A scanner needs to be mandatory.

_____________________________

Take-offs are optional. Landings are mandatory.

(in reply to Gazzer)

Post #: 159

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/19/2006 3:14:07 AM

David Gladwin

Posts: 1943
Joined: 2/5/2002
From: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline

Gazzer, Airmail, If I may say so it looks like my recommendation in RCJI last issue (use of Icoms scanner) was right on and its difficult to believe that anyone at a public display was not using one, but perhaps its too easy to be critical with hindsight.

I am still at home in Sydney and working late on copy for next RCJI which is highly relevant to this thread and that is a detailed description of the new Weatronics Dual Receiver system. Its a single frequency unit (but synthesised) but the electronics associated with the two receivers will allow us to make an accurate analysis of just how our radio equipment is working IN THE AIR, no more guesswork. After this accident my guess is that there will be enormous interest in this unit and in fact the first batch to reach Australia, due very soon, is already sold out. As soon as my unit arrives, due two weeks ago , it will be in the air and the following edition of RCJI will have more info based on flight test. If it delivers all it promises, and I think it will, this unit will be standard fit in my large jets such as all three Hawks and Mig 29.

The manual, 40 pages long, is hard going, this is a complex unit, but I have spent several days with the manual and a couple of days trying to condense the system description to make it easier and quicker to assimilate.

May I wish you all a good weekends flying, we have the Sydney scale rally on Sunday and the two models I will be flying, the Savex L39 and BVM F4, are getting the most thorough prep., not least the failsafe operation.

Regards,

David Gladwin.

(in reply to air mail rcu)

Post #: 160

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/19/2006 4:28:26 AM

air mail rcu

Posts: 522
Joined: 8/3/2003
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Status: offline

David, I will be looking forward to your review of the Weatronics Dual Reciever system.

Good luck on your Rally.

I hope you have clear skys and clean frequencies.

Terry

_____________________________

Take-offs are optional. Landings are mandatory.

(in reply to David Gladwin)

Post #: 161

RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash - 5/19/2006 6:30:46 AM

EddieWeeks

Posts: 1131
Joined: 12/27/2001
From: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Silver182

Eddie & all,
Statistics & probabilities really don't mean much to whomever the fickle finger of fate points. In fact they are meaningless! If you or I had been at the controls, or dreadfully in the flight path of this particular tragedy, all the statistics in the world would not mean a thing.

Lee H. DeMary
AMA 36099

If you don't understand the way the probabilities were calculated, that's fine, but you are way wrong
in saying they are meaning less. In the absence of any real data, (i.e. how often planes crash),
the next best tool for making, one aspect of this Hobby safer is Probabilities. If the work I have done
convinces the planers of an RC flight demo, to move the planes further away from the crowd and
a plane crashes where people would have been standing without my work. I would feel like I contributed
something. Unlike your most excellent post on fate, witch btw is not a word the scientific community acknowledges.

The rusults of work show, every time you double the distance from a person to a flying plane, that
person is 4 times less likely to get hit by that plane... 4 times less likely... This is far more important
than PCM hold settings.

Eddie Weeks

(in reply to Silver182)

Post #: 162