The responsibility of ensuring the model aircraft as a whole is flightworthy and safe to operate ultimately rests with the owner - regardless of whether it started out life as scrtach-built, kit, ARF and whether the owner did the building himself or commissioned someone else to build it for him.

I too regret Jim's unfortunate mishap. I don't want to be overly critical on Jim and say that the product manufacturer has absolutely no responsibility to maximize product safety, but Jim made two decisions that, in the final analysis, were the principal causes of the accident:

1. Taching at WOT standing in front of the prop. A BIG NO NO!
2. Installing a G38 gas engine (2.3 cu.in weighing 71 Oz.), when the manufacturer recommends 1.20-1.50 (2-stroke) or 1.20-1.50 (4-stroke), most of which weigh less than 40 Oz.

Would the firewall have fallen off if the engine were a Saito 1.50 burning 30% heli fuel at full song? Perhaps. Nevertheless, going beyond the manufacturer's recommended engine range means that the modeler is responsible for reinforcing the airframe to withstand the added stress. Would you be as critical on the kit manufacturer if the accident occurred similarly with a kit built 1/4 scale Extra? Many of us reinforce the firewall on our kits, and we also do that with our ARFs as we deem prudent.

This isn't a issue of ARFs or instant gratification. Rather, it's an issue of personal responsibility with regard to ALL model aircrafts.