ORIGINAL: Thomas B
ORIGINAL: P-51B
I think he was trying to say that a 2lb 60mph can't hurt anyone and should be exempt from rule 4.
Nope...did not say that, or imply that. Here were my exact words:
1. I feel that AMA park type models flown at fly in type events should not be subject to rule 4 as currently written, given the inherent low risk of 2 lb models flying at less than 60 mph.
My position is that since Parkflyer models to the AMA standard have already been accepted as safer by the AMA, they should be considered for possible exemption from rule 4 due to the much reduced risk in parkflyer model operations over normal model operations.
1. You are now trying to play lawyer, or are you saying that the small plane can hurt someone but it should be exempt anyway. As far as a 2lb model traveling at 60 mph not being a risk, I'll go back to the baseball analogy.
2. Lets take this statement to its its logical conclusion based on the logic presented in the statement:
Known: The AMA requires special inspections of models over 55 lbs.
Known: The AMA requires a waiver for turbine powered models.
Application of logic presented above: Since all models that are not powered by turbines or are less than 55 lbs have been accepted as safer by the AMA (since they require not special inspections or waivers), then they should be considered for possible exemption from rule 4 due to the much reduced risk compared to those models.
The way I see it, the rule exists. If you choose not to follow it and an incident occurs the AMA should not back you up. If a CD knowlingly lets someone break the rule I would think he puts himself at risk from a liability standpoint.
Just my 2 cents...which in today's ecomnomy is worth about $0.000000000000000000000000000001
