RCU Forums - View Single Post - GSP ARFs- Whose Responsible
View Single Post
Old 03-19-2004 | 12:09 AM
  #42  
RCAddiction's Avatar
RCAddiction
My Feedback: (87)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Sarasota FL
Default RE: GSP ARFs- Whose Responsible

Diablo, possibly for a newbie. However, the GSP plane in question was definitely not a 2nd plane, and in fact was the 3rd advanced plane from the same company. It is intended as a plane for experienced pilots/builders who are moving up to a larger aerobat. You are right on newbies. And that's probably why certain brand trainers, like the SIG Kadet LT40, as well as several other popular ones, tend to be highly recommended by experience pilots and instructors. The mfrs of those have typically done a good job to help avoid issues for newbies who may have very limited experience.

Skribnod - it's always convenient to place the blame elsewhere. Maybe it's even human nature sometimes. However, the Great Planes comment does not hold water. This is especially the case from my personal experience in relation to ensuring things are installed properly and reinforced well. GP is typically very, very supportive and takes good care of their customers in general. I'm certain that the response you quoted from Mr. Baxter was not to be taken unilaterally, but was case-specific to a particular untested modification someone made and did not refer to reinforcing a servo rail.

Great Planes repeatedly has had users modify their planes to address design or assembly issues, notably the 1/3 scale Pitts that had wing securement problems. They went to the extent that the user was asked to peel back covering, check glue joints, repair if necessary, and recover.

IMHO, this was a common sense item, as Diablo said. But heck, that's only my opinion. I don't care for ambulance-chasing lawyers and I try to take responsibility for my own actions and instill this in my kids. Of course GSP should have built it right, but often they are not. It's our job to check when we build, as we are putting a powerful spinning prop into the air, and putting others potentially at risk.

On the other hand, if the wing had folded in flight, while using an engine in the recommended range, and had been properly assembled, that would be a whole different story.

I'm begging out of this "contest" of opinions. These are only our collective opinions anyhow and none of them will address the unfortunate incident that occurred to the thread starter. With every crash, I've tried to learn something. Hopefully others might learn from this incident as well to check their servo mounting.