What do *I* expect is most likely with (as Fred says) this band of crazies? Everyone but the pilot is at fault and should pay. However, that does not really seem to be a reasonable answer and neither is waiting for the manufacturer to decide that there is a real problem they wish to fix. By the way, I have been involved with an ARF with a minor design flaw that resulted in an unexpected crash.

What do you think would happen if one of these ARF's became uncontrollable in the air due to a design flaw and the aircraft hit some uninvolved bystander? I KNOW you and I will pay through our participation in the AMA. I also know the manufacturer may not since a large majority of them are off shore operations with little or no local enforceable liability.

Think about it for a moment, 'Joe' has a factory in XYA that makes, say ARF B-17's under the name of YYT Models. One goes in due to a design flaw and kills or injures a specator who was just there for the show. The legal system grinds up all who were in the 'chain' of that airframe. When they are finished assessing YYT Models their share of the blame and financial responsibility, Joe closes YYT and starts an new operation known as TTY Models using the same factory, and possibly the same design with or without modification. TTY models has to penetrate the supply chain, but that is just a temporary set back. By the way, check out Iron Bay Models who emulate that action even though it probably was not brought about by legal action it WAS done to avoid the transference of liability.

I think 'we' need to look and see if someone can find another solution. In my small mind simply saying #1 is not possible, and #2 and #3 are not acceptable to the RCU community is saying we should all just bend over, hope for the best, and give the barracuda more money. Not my style. <g>