ORIGINAL: jhelps
ORIGINAL: adaptabl
The problem is we all have the same insurance. An accident at any of our clubs could cost us all our insurance(another accident or two and no carrier will take us on). Some of the rules may not seem like a good idea to some menbers, but we all have to go the extra mile to keep our fields safe. Extra fences and new rules benefit everyone.
General rules may be fine for you. Your club may be safer than the rules require. The problem is the club in the next city may not be safe and we will all suffer.
If you truely believe that
one more accident will cancel our coverage then you should hang up your planes now and sell all your kit before it becomes valueless because we are going to have another accident !!! The law of averages dictates it. The barriers are not going to prevent a run away aircraft in flight from seeking out a target nearby (house , car, etc anything within a 1/4 mile or more) and eventually random chance is going to result in a bad event. Even Ronnie's description was not "No one panicked and the barrier did its job" It was " a Large plane got loose at the NATS after landing and went right into a pilot stand,missing the adjoining pilot and scattering some judges ". Sounds more like luck than good design, but perhaps it is simply Ron's brief description of the event that makes it seem that way. Do not misinterpret what I am saying, I am not advocating do nothing, I am advocating reasonable rules with value added.
JH
Exactly Jeff....the fence may never stop all planes that are uncontrolled from hitting anyone, but it lessened the ODDS of MAAC making another claim to the insurer, for an errant gasser with a broken tailwheel running 1/3 throttle with a 20 inch carbon fibre blade heading at 5 people was quite unpredictable, the barrier absolutely did it's job.
As for Sharpies comment, I agree with Jim...there was no attempt to circumvent any rules, sometimes given the circumstances, some inane rules that have been created may not apply to everyone due to field layouts or other restricted reasons. For a person to pack up and quit a club because they can't deal with the new rules is silly, especially when flying sites are getting rarer to find. At our club, we had some adamant non-conforms that eventually got used to it, and the most staunch critics have actually become to like it. Taxiing is restricted to the ends of the field...there is no CUTTING through between stations because we have two end stations with barriers for takeoffs and landings only...eliminating having to CARRY a plane running.
I whole-hearted agree with Jeff and Jimmy....reasonable rules make for a safer and happier R/C community. At no point would I advocate not following the important basic rules ( and I don't have to explain those to anyone), rather, make sure that your field cuts down the ODDS of something happening by attempting to follow as many as possible.
If you don't like the rules as they are written, go to your Zone meeting or the AGM and have them altered. Forums don't change the rules, but it lets people know what's working at certain fields and what isn't.
As for the dome....I wouldnt be caught dead in a dome after Palmer or Dennis has just gone to an ALL-YOU-CAN EAT dinner and then went flying at the station next to me.
