Originally Posted by F106A

Originally Posted by franklin_m

Copy all. I went searching on the web and in about 5 minutes of searching, found video from cockpit showing one of these waiver holders flying over occupied buildings, over roads with cars, etc. And of course there's any number of them in these pages joking about never exceeding 199.99999MPH. There's a reason the AMA has a radar gun they offer to CDs. There's a reason well respected guys like BV are writing to members asking them to not violate the rules. If it wasn't happening, he wouldn't write those letters.

Even discussions of recommending flight below 400' but tolerating it above that when "necessary" and when "safe." We've already seen from these videos there is not a consistent level of risk tolerance, and I'd argue what is "necessary" to one is not "necessary" to others. If there was to be some more precise definitions in this respect, my comfort level would go up.

But I'm not comfortable letting someone who jokes about the speed limit being the one who decides what's "safe" and what's not.

Originally Posted by HoundDog

O Heck here is the FAR pertaining to Your Over 55 lb experimental.



[HR][/HR]§91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
]

Originally Posted by TTRotary

. I suspect half the offenders in here are desk internet jockeys anyway - some of the claims around doing aerobatic routines at 200mph would suggest they don't even understand the basic physics of flying a heavily wing-loaded model.
.

Originally Posted by HoundDog

Originally Posted by RCFlyerDan

TT, you seem to be the "desk Internet jockeys", with some of your comments. Your favorite radio is a DX7 and a Gee Bee R3. Do you even fly jets? Or just here to argue with everyone? You made Mr Matt speechless after your comment!!
I am a retired Jet Capt, and totally understand flying jets. Can I still learn something, yes, but I haven't seen anything that you have added to my forum as informational and contribute to a good conversation.
As far as making claims at doing aerobatic with a heavy wing loaded jet wing at 200 mph, I can claim it for truth. I have videos of my F-18 and CARF Flash, of which both jets were capable of over 200mph, doing large loops, humpty bumps, Immelmann's, and other large maneuvers. This is why I posted the forum, is that it is impossible to do those maneuvers with a heavy wing loaded jet at 150-200mph and stay under 400'.
Time to take your arguments to another forum. Dan

Originally Posted by invertmast

You truely know nothing.

Ever heard of crop dusting, aerial mosquito control, medevac chopper flights? All of these operate safely at 500' AGL and below daily all around the country/world. These guys (im one of them for my profession) operate with the HIGHEST level of proffessionalism and cognisance because WE HAVE TO! If we arent "eyes on a swivel" there are tons of things out there that could potentially kill us.

You sir need to step back into your computer warrior cave. Those comments are flat out moronic and insulting. They show your true character and morals bu wishing death upon hundreds of proffessionals across the world who risk their lives to make YOURS better/safer.

I have ~1000hrs of operation at 500' agl and below. 75% of which is at 300' AT NIGHT. 100% of these operations are performed Legally with FAA approval over congestes areas (houston, miami, columbia, dallas, sacramento, salt lake city, new orleans, orlando, daytona beach, virginia beach, WASHINGTON DC).

Just bc you think you know something about aviation means nothing. The FAA issues special waivers every year for odd operations that you guys would never even think you would do in an airplane.

Originally Posted by TTRotary

And while we're poking fun at each other's flying abilities, I will remind you that you claim to be a CD but somehow forgot key parts of the AMA's Turbine safety guidelines, which include a rule (not a suggestion) that the model shall not exceed 200MPH.

You also got kicked off one field, wonder why cops are watching you fly, and have been ramped in your full scale career for god-knows-what.

How about a little test Dan: assuming you have executed a level pass at 199.99MPH and 100feet, and have just pulled elevator to execute a constant-radius loop which you will exit at 199.99MPH and 900AGL, how many G's are you pulling at 500feet?

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey

I suspect there will be a lot of 54 pound models about

Originally Posted by franklin_m

I differ. AMA registered pilots do not fly at just AMA fields.

Just on the subject of MTRs, I just downloaded the publication that defines the US VR, IR, and SR routes in the US. roughly 495 pages of them (https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/tw4/vt27/docs/ap1b.pdf). Having flown many myself in the 20 years I was on active duty, I can say that there's one that starts at the Astoria Washington bridge (hardly a remote area), another that flies down the Columbia river gorge past many camping areas, boat launches, etc. (hardly remote areas), another that flies through Lake Chelan in eastern Washington, again past and over camping areas, boat launches, etc. (remote areas). On the east coast, they're all over Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. While we have to avoid charted airfields, we frequently fly over or near small towns, over farms, etc.

AMA only recently identified and confirmed all of their fields near full scale airfields, what do you think the odds are that for each of their fields, they went through this entire publication, charted the route widths, and checked? About zero. Many general aviation, who have regular proficiency tests, aren't aware of MTRs, so I don't have a lot of confidence that AMA members are more aware of them then GA pilots.

As for the AG pilots, again, AMA members are not required to fly only from AMA fields, so there's no guarantee they won't take a plane out and fly over farm fields.

Lastly, as for hearing, I watched an AMA member, and major retailer sponsored pilot fly his entire flight wearing headphones and listening to music. Exactly how is he to hear the approach of an aircraft? Secondly, have you ever seen the Blue Angels/Thunderbirds show? They do a demonstration how a subsonic airplane can sneak up on you at low altitude. Audible warning time is seconds - think about an AMA member flying his plane while camping out along one of those MTRs I described - hardly enough for a pilot to get a plane out of the way

Lastly, there's no hearing test required of AMA members, thus no guarantee they can indeed hear. Even those who can, there's other airplanes in the pits running up engines - easily louder than an airplane approaching at low altitude and high speed. There may be other activities that result in something called "cognitive distraction" - example is people doing two things...reading a text and walking...right into a fountain. Are you saying a casual AMA member, struggling with a slightly unstable new airplane, with noise in the nearby pits, or other aircraft in flight is going to have the situational awareness? I argue unlikely.

Originally Posted by HoundDog

Read my Post again I said nothing about PROFESSIONALS. I'm speaking of the PPP Piss Poor Pilots that don't have the common sense to keep from playing fighter pilot down LOW.


Congratulation on still being alive. Tell me Just how many R/C model airplanes have U seen in the Thousands of hours U have been doing "operation at 500' agl and below. 75% of which is at 300' AT NIGHT" How many of these R/C Model planes U have seen Below 500' have considered as a "NEAR MISS" Then just how many R/C Models have U even seen in your thousands of hours of professional flying below 300' AT NIGHT.

I'd bet that If U have seen any R/C Models none have been anywhere close to being a danger. How many of the thousands of Professional do U know that have been endangered or even seen an R/C model airplane near enough to be of any concern.

Now if U R speaking of DRONES Quads Multi-Rotors or what ever than I might agree with U But not Traditional R/C TOY Model Airplanes or Helios especially anything starting at 40 size and up.

The Only Place the problem of R/C TOYs (QUADs/MR's/DRONES) being of any Problem is near Large airports in Class B airspace. Just for reference here is a URL to all the Class B air space in the USA. 29 VFR Class B Enhancement Graphics


https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flig...s/vfr_class_b/

Originally Posted by RCFlyerDan

As a CD, yes I know that the speed limit is 200mph.

Originally Posted by TTRotary

Since Dan apparently can't formulate an answer (despite claiming to be a seasoned full scale pilot), we have...drumroll... nearly 7Gs. On Dan's 33lb F-18, that would be nearly 250lb of force acting on those little 6.5sq ft wings. Wing loading would approach 615oz/sq foot, which means the wing would stall at that angle of attack and velocity, assuming it could survive structural loads it was never designed for. The loop cannot be completed, and the plane has most likely disintegrated mid-air. So much for Dan's 200MPH aerobatic program.

Originally Posted by junkjet

So have we figured out if 400 feet is death to jets yet.....

Originally Posted by Rob2160

I admit to being confused by the wording of your original question also but reverse engineering your (almost 7G) answer I assume you meant to say...

Constant Speed - Constant Radius loop - starting at 200 mph - exiting at 200 mph - starting at 100 feet, topping at 900 feet (800 feet diameter)

Given those parameters - 6.72 G.

Stall speed is 259% of the 1 G stall speed.

What is the stall speed of your jets?

I don't think it was fair to berate Dan for not answering that quickly, I know many very experienced flight instructors, airline and corporate pilots who could not answer that question off the top of their head.

Originally Posted by mackeyjones

Yes you argue a lot....and all you really convince me is that you like to argue a point beyond reason and what logic dictates, and is less likely to happen than the odds of winning lotto.

Originally Posted by RCFlyerDan

Yes, I think we have all debated this issue to death of the forum. We have figured out that we have to register, no matter what if we are going to fly our models, we have figured out that the wording on the registration form has a lot to be desired, and that we agree on a Federal Form that we fly below 400', and yet still allowed to fly above 400', so in denial there, as our AMA community has been in denial for the past too many years. And, to practice our utmost in safety flying our expensive toys. So, it isn't the death of the hobby, unless it becomes more serious.

Thank you Rob for reverse engineering the problem. Even if I did do a loop at 100 feet at 200 mph, I wouldn't be stupid enough to only make it tight enough to a 900' top of a loop, it would have been double that altitude.

I am asking everyone to let this forum die. It has been interesting, educational, and a lot of fun for those who like to argue for arguments sake. There seems to be about 4 or 5 of you that are experts on every forum that I have seen about 400' or jets. So, get a life, build some planes and go fly! Peace out! Dan

Originally Posted by junkjet

So have we figured out if 400 feet is death to jets yet.....

Originally Posted by HoundDog