Ah, the falicy of arguing such matters on the internet. Paul, perhaps so, but who would hear such an argument? My intuition says that such matters would simply be dismissed as unprovable as it doesn't seem practical to pursue the issue.

Am I making sense. I guess what I'm trying to say is this. We fly model airplanes, and however important the loss of one airplane may be to us, the importance of the loss won't be experienced by an outsider, and having said that, it's important to address this topic from a practical perspective.
Let's not go off on tangents.

I happen to think that Branded's proposed solution is a viable one. It certainly would remove the liability issue, cover the concerns of the majority of fliers at a given field, and let everyone know exactly where they stand in terms of replacement costs, and risks.

I know how many automobile analogies have been offered up, but humor me one more time.

If you driving a NASCAR race car in a race, you accept the possibility that an accidental nudge from behind by another car may put you into the wall, and wreck your race car, completely.

And so, if you fly your expensive airplane on our track, you must accept the possibilty that someone may "put you into the wall" accidentally.

It's just part of the Sport of Radio Control Modeling.