Jim Branaum - The link to the review is in post #47 on page 2 of this thread. Since you obviously have not been following this thread until now, here's another link to the review http://www.flyingcirkus.com/forum/Fl...m_96209/tm.htm

I strongly believe that people are more at risk from those who simply charge their batteries and don't check to see if the charger actually was working by using a good voltmeter before every flight, or those that connect their ailerons backwards, or those that don't do a simple pre-flight of their aircraft that's been in storage for a couple months, etc. Further, I'll bet that less than half the flyers at any field have done a correct range check of their current radio and plane combination, or if they did it was so long ago as to be meaningless.

I believe that the tone of your post reflects what many on this thread have said about folks that are resistant to change. Some of their comments - such as "If any "old geezers" give you any flack when trying to operate an SS radio on their field, I would bring this article along.", “I mentioned these were out now at a meeting today at the field and the "old gezzers" had a fit that the ama hadnt told them anything about them and wanted to out law them unless I could find something that says the AMA ok'ed them” and “I've got a "geezer" in my club trying to stir up a fuss about these systems too. WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY???? What possible motivation could these people possibly have to object to the biggest advancement in R/C radio systems in nearly thirty years?” – while not too politically correct, accurately reflect the feelings toward those who take shots at something new just because they aren’t familiar with it and much of this is that they haven’t taken the initiative to learn about the new idea or product.