Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
05-26-2010, 12:18 PM
#51
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: rbxbear44
It took about 3 weeks for mine to get on there... I faxed the docs in the next day after and called to verify they received it. They told me just to take the papers with me to MS AB and show the Cd the paperwork.
Rex
It took about 3 weeks for mine to get on there... I faxed the docs in the next day after and called to verify they received it. They told me just to take the papers with me to MS AB and show the Cd the paperwork.
Rex
05-26-2010, 12:21 PM
#52
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
Good point Bob
I really think it is the pilots responsibility to have the the signed experimental waiver paperwork in his possession if he intends to fly at a meet.
I feel the same way about the basic turbine waiver too.
I really think it is the pilots responsibility to have the the signed experimental waiver paperwork in his possession if he intends to fly at a meet.
I feel the same way about the basic turbine waiver too.
05-26-2010, 12:22 PM
#53
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
"You have to be a little careful with that list as the Permit to Fly is valid as soon as the inspector gives it to the pilot (signed). It takes a bit for it to get sent to AMA and appear on that list..."
Read more: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_97...#ixzz0p3aw6JlM
Read more: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_97...#ixzz0p3aw6JlM
05-26-2010, 12:37 PM
#55
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: bevar
Listing every jet is a waste of time. I'll bet my house that a Baby Boomer, my Bob Cat, any still surviving Tango ETC are under 55 pounds. Someone with a brain at either the AMA or the JPO need to compile a list of planes that could exceed 55 pounds and need to be inspected...if that's what you desire. That seems much more logical...but then again this is RCU world...so logic does not apply.
What is needed is a list of pilots that should not be have turbine waivers...that would be wiser.
B
Listing every jet is a waste of time. I'll bet my house that a Baby Boomer, my Bob Cat, any still surviving Tango ETC are under 55 pounds. Someone with a brain at either the AMA or the JPO need to compile a list of planes that could exceed 55 pounds and need to be inspected...if that's what you desire. That seems much more logical...but then again this is RCU world...so logic does not apply.
What is needed is a list of pilots that should not be have turbine waivers...that would be wiser.B
ORIGINAL: AndyAndrews
I'll probably get flamed for this, but what if everyone was required to submit a list of their flight worthy jets to AMA along with the weight and class? If a jet isn't on the list it doesn't fly at an event. They list the names of waiver holders already. It wouldn't be that hard to list all flight worthy jets associated with those names. This is something a CD could easily check.
If anything, I just gave you guys more stuff to debate...lol.
I'll probably get flamed for this, but what if everyone was required to submit a list of their flight worthy jets to AMA along with the weight and class? If a jet isn't on the list it doesn't fly at an event. They list the names of waiver holders already. It wouldn't be that hard to list all flight worthy jets associated with those names. This is something a CD could easily check.
If anything, I just gave you guys more stuff to debate...lol.
No, on the contrary, a list of this type is not a good idea. Instead, the waivers should only be revoked based on the documented actions of folks who intentionally break the rules. At any rate, there should be a 3 strikes and your out rule or something. This mob lynching mentally has to end as the ends won't justify the means.
Has anyone actually had a waiver revoked before?
05-26-2010, 12:51 PM
#56
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: bevar
Listing every jet is a waste of time. I'll bet my house that a Baby Boomer, my Bob Cat, any still surviving Tango ETC are under 55 pounds. Someone with a brain at either the AMA or the JPO need to compile a list of planes that could exceed 55 pounds and need to be inspected...if that's what you desire. That seems much more logical...
Listing every jet is a waste of time. I'll bet my house that a Baby Boomer, my Bob Cat, any still surviving Tango ETC are under 55 pounds. Someone with a brain at either the AMA or the JPO need to compile a list of planes that could exceed 55 pounds and need to be inspected...if that's what you desire. That seems much more logical...
All that is needed IMO is for people to start taking responsibility for their own actions instead of expecting the AMA / JPO / anyone other than themselves to do their thinking for them.
Apart from anything else, the weight depends on what equipment you put in the aircraft (what size turbine, what type and size of batteries, etc) and what modifications etc you do to it (adding scale droptanks, missiles, lighting systems, etc)
Let's keep it simple - if you want to fly your new model, you are responsible for knowing whether it meets the regulations.
Gordon
05-26-2010, 01:03 PM
#57
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
So, are you saying a pilot has to intentionally violate the regs 3 times to get suspended. My feeling is that if a pilot willingly and wantonly violated the rules...intentionally ETC...he should get nailed on the first offense. We are adults here...and are expected to act as such. There is no reason for 3 strikes because this is a very elite level we operate at. If you can't hack it...or willingly refuse to comply with our operating specifications you should not be afforded the privilege of having a turbine waiver.
B
B
ORIGINAL: AndyAndrews
No, on the contrary, a list of this type is not a good idea. Instead, the waivers should only be revoked based on the documented actions of folks who intentionally break the rules. At any rate, there should be a 3 strikes and your out rule or something. This mob lynching mentally has to end as the ends won't justify the means.
Has anyone actually had a waiver revoked before?
No, on the contrary, a list of this type is not a good idea. Instead, the waivers should only be revoked based on the documented actions of folks who intentionally break the rules. At any rate, there should be a 3 strikes and your out rule or something. This mob lynching mentally has to end as the ends won't justify the means.
Has anyone actually had a waiver revoked before?
05-26-2010, 02:56 PM
#58
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: bevar
So, are you saying a pilot has to intentionally violate the regs 3 times to get suspended. My feeling is that if a pilot willingly and wantonly violated the rules...intentionally ETC...he should get nailed on the first offense. We are adults here...and are expected to act as such. There is no reason for 3 strikes because this is a very elite level we operate at. If you can't hack it...or willingly refuse to comply with our operating specifications you should not be afforded the privilege of having a turbine waiver.
B
So, are you saying a pilot has to intentionally violate the regs 3 times to get suspended. My feeling is that if a pilot willingly and wantonly violated the rules...intentionally ETC...he should get nailed on the first offense. We are adults here...and are expected to act as such. There is no reason for 3 strikes because this is a very elite level we operate at. If you can't hack it...or willingly refuse to comply with our operating specifications you should not be afforded the privilege of having a turbine waiver.
B
ORIGINAL: AndyAndrews
No, on the contrary, a list of this type is not a good idea. Instead, the waivers should only be revoked based on the documented actions of folks who intentionally break the rules. At any rate, there should be a 3 strikes and your out rule or something. This mob lynching mentally has to end as the ends won't justify the means.
Has anyone actually had a waiver revoked before?
No, on the contrary, a list of this type is not a good idea. Instead, the waivers should only be revoked based on the documented actions of folks who intentionally break the rules. At any rate, there should be a 3 strikes and your out rule or something. This mob lynching mentally has to end as the ends won't justify the means.
Has anyone actually had a waiver revoked before?
Like I said, intentionally break the rules is one thing. But unintentionally, basically, yes, give them a chance to correct their actions. Because bringing someone into complience verses tossing them out on a first time infraction will do nothing but harm the hobby. Would you rather have a bunch of disgruntled jet guys going around flaunting every broken rule until someone gets killed? Or would you rather guide them toward being in complience and have a situation corrected?
Moreover, can you yourself say without a doubt that you have never crossed the 200 mph threshold, albeit accedentally or unknowingly? doubt it.
05-26-2010, 04:13 PM
#59
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
What if AMA instituted a tagging program? Tags could easily be placed on the inside and can only be removed by inspectors. Similar to a fire extinquisher tag. This way a jet that is tagged qualifies for Experimental. No tag-outdated tag-wrong color- no go, unless you have current paperwork in hand. This would be easy enough to verify and no list would have to be checked.
05-26-2010, 04:36 PM
#61
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: R_Belluomini
Andy,
What could be simpler than having the official paper work with you for a given airplane?
Andy,
What could be simpler than having the official paper work with you for a given airplane?
05-26-2010, 04:42 PM
#62
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Collins , CO
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
As evidenced by the recent discussions here, many jet pilots are just now becoming aware of the AMA Experimental Aircraft Program which has has been in place for a number of years. The policies, procedures and processes have worked very well in the past and there is every expectation that this will continue into the future.
I CD Warbirds Over The Rockies which attracts10-12 propeller and turbine driven aircraft in the experimental class. Every pilot brings the current permit to fly which is checked during registration just as are turbine waivers.
I don't see a need develop a new method of identifying aircraft that have current permits to fly. The responsibility lies with the pilot to maintain this info...
Ditto to what Lucky Electro Bob said!!!
I CD Warbirds Over The Rockies which attracts10-12 propeller and turbine driven aircraft in the experimental class. Every pilot brings the current permit to fly which is checked during registration just as are turbine waivers.
I don't see a need develop a new method of identifying aircraft that have current permits to fly. The responsibility lies with the pilot to maintain this info...
Ditto to what Lucky Electro Bob said!!!
05-26-2010, 05:14 PM
#63
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
Andy,
I am talking about intentional rules violations. That is what we have been talking about.
B
PS. My fastest jet can barley hit 185...it has been tested before. My other two are much slower. Can you say the same thing?
I am talking about intentional rules violations. That is what we have been talking about.
B
PS. My fastest jet can barley hit 185...it has been tested before. My other two are much slower. Can you say the same thing?
ORIGINAL: AndyAndrews
Like I said, intentionally break the rules is one thing. But unintentionally, basically, yes, give them a chance to correct their actions. Because bringing someone into complience verses tossing them out on a first time infraction will do nothing but harm the hobby. Would you rather have a bunch of disgruntled jet guys going around flaunting every broken rule until someone gets killed? Or would you rather guide them toward being in complience and have a situation corrected?
Moreover, can you yourself say without a doubt that you have never crossed the 200 mph threshold, albeit accedentally or unknowingly? doubt it.
Like I said, intentionally break the rules is one thing. But unintentionally, basically, yes, give them a chance to correct their actions. Because bringing someone into complience verses tossing them out on a first time infraction will do nothing but harm the hobby. Would you rather have a bunch of disgruntled jet guys going around flaunting every broken rule until someone gets killed? Or would you rather guide them toward being in complience and have a situation corrected?
Moreover, can you yourself say without a doubt that you have never crossed the 200 mph threshold, albeit accedentally or unknowingly? doubt it.
05-26-2010, 05:20 PM
#64
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: bevar
PS. My fastest jet can barley hit 185...it has been tested before. My other two are much slower. Can you say the same thing?
PS. My fastest jet can barley hit 185...it has been tested before. My other two are much slower. Can you say the same thing?
05-26-2010, 05:41 PM
#69
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
Flying Sites (All sites must meet this standard)
The minimum distance between the take-off/landing path and the pilot line shall be 50 feet. All
other flying, including practice flights, shall be performed at a minimum distance of 200 feet to
any spectator, except during sanctioned events flown in accordance with the official AMA
Competition Regulation scale rules. All other scale competition event rules must be submitted to
AMA for approval. Possession of a valid Permit to Fly and completion of the Daily Inspection
List is required in order to fly.
The minimum distance between the take-off/landing path and the pilot line shall be 50 feet. All
other flying, including practice flights, shall be performed at a minimum distance of 200 feet to
any spectator, except during sanctioned events flown in accordance with the official AMA
Competition Regulation scale rules. All other scale competition event rules must be submitted to
AMA for approval. Possession of a valid Permit to Fly and completion of the Daily Inspection
List is required in order to fly.
05-26-2010, 10:08 PM
#71
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
ORIGINAL: quist
Scott,
How many fields do you think meet those measurments? Very few if any.
Scott,
How many fields do you think meet those measurments? Very few if any.
05-27-2010, 08:17 AM
#72
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
So...here is what we are seeing so far...by in large, there is a lack of compliance by way of not reading the rules and/or knowing them. I cannot believe a club would "intend" to form itself or hold events that cause rule violations. When the club is unaware...it will trickle down through it's members..by way of lacking education OR...causing members to take a lax'd attitude towards rules too...if even basic, no brainer stuff is not bring followed.
I believe a club ought to have a broad spectrum of their leaders that "major" in specific areas...i.e, if tutbine planes are flown at that club...there ought to be someone assigned to educate, coordinate and verify all it's operations and rule compliance. If it's a huge club...have several assigned.
More list!!! IMO, the club just needs to take it on and it will trickle through the whole waiver holder community
Rex
05-27-2010, 09:27 AM
#74
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
Dr. Boli,
That could be the case BUT those kind of folks can't be those kind of people for long if there is uniform enforcement AND adherance from the get go...when they fly at their clubs!
A flip attitude may come into the hobby, but it can't last if they are dealt with at their clubs and events too. If I have been a member of my club for 7 years and have broken rules continually without being dealt with...it feeds the monster of being above the law, so to speak.
What about all the call outs from the crowd at jet events..."LOWER"...or "FASTER"?
I had one guy tell me, "Rules...geeez, no one follows them because they see all the name brand guys in the hobby break them at every event....even manufacturers reps don;t give a crap about the rules"
Now...still not an excuse to break a rule but it sure does say something about the "attitude towards people they consider leadership".
Hmmm...
Rex
That could be the case BUT those kind of folks can't be those kind of people for long if there is uniform enforcement AND adherance from the get go...when they fly at their clubs!
A flip attitude may come into the hobby, but it can't last if they are dealt with at their clubs and events too. If I have been a member of my club for 7 years and have broken rules continually without being dealt with...it feeds the monster of being above the law, so to speak.
What about all the call outs from the crowd at jet events..."LOWER"...or "FASTER"?
I had one guy tell me, "Rules...geeez, no one follows them because they see all the name brand guys in the hobby break them at every event....even manufacturers reps don;t give a crap about the rules"
Now...still not an excuse to break a rule but it sure does say something about the "attitude towards people they consider leadership".
Hmmm...
Rex
05-27-2010, 09:36 AM
#75
RE: Experimental Permit and Jets Discussion
Also, in dealing with the AMA on several "member violations and issues" over the years, EVERY TIME...it was sent back to us as "...you guys do what you think is best...they are a member of your club and it is your role and responsibility to enforce whatever you feel necessary." The AMA has the rules and lends their support in whatever way they can BUT...ultimately, the club has it on their shoulders.
I wonder if a person would show up at an event with an over 55lb. jet if his/her club would not allow him to fly it at their field? And, I wonder if he/she would bring it and try to fly it if he knew the 55lb weight limit was being fully adhered to EVERYWHERE in the US?
What about events like Joe Nall...do they enforce the 55lb weight rule? If not, then someone that flies their over 55lb plane will think, "it's just a rule...no one takes it seriously."
My point...if it is a rule...it must be carried out uniformely at the club level and SEEN at the event level too, with the name brand pilots being the first to stay on it...NO EXCEPTIONS!
Rex
I wonder if a person would show up at an event with an over 55lb. jet if his/her club would not allow him to fly it at their field? And, I wonder if he/she would bring it and try to fly it if he knew the 55lb weight limit was being fully adhered to EVERYWHERE in the US?
What about events like Joe Nall...do they enforce the 55lb weight rule? If not, then someone that flies their over 55lb plane will think, "it's just a rule...no one takes it seriously."
My point...if it is a rule...it must be carried out uniformely at the club level and SEEN at the event level too, with the name brand pilots being the first to stay on it...NO EXCEPTIONS!
Rex