Dang the video was deleted. I was going to start the five hundred and first thread on this, because the other 499 posts haven't been enough before this one was started either.

Ya shouldn't have slept in. The early bird gets the worm.

And a whole lot of other annoying sayings!

~ Jim ~ [8D]

Well Bryan, fellow pilot, I got you beat! I have 40 years of General Aviation and 51 years of modeling experience. I also have something no one else has. I was a private investigator for 15 years. I also owned and operated as chief pilot, Island Air Tours. Most of this was bush flying. That is, remote flying with no airports. I had a seaplane.

I'm not measuring anything here, I'm just explaining my back story. I've had first hand experience with the FAA, towered and non-towered airports, grass fields and plenty of lakes and rivers. I go back a long way and I, personally, have had flying incidences.

One of which was not having my gear landing light read green. My gear would not lock, in fact it was loosely swinging. I had lost all the hydraulic fluid in the gear lines.

My tie down was at a major airport. My predicament allowed me to "own" the runway. I had commercial jets in the pattern waiting for me to make my decision. It didn't take long for me to realize, just a couple of passes actually, that there was no place on the grass shoulder for me to make my landing. I departed for a more favorable airport. One with a grass strip. The story is long, but the FAA was understanding, helpful, and kind. They could have made my life miserable. The FAA knew the kind of pilot I was and this makes a difference.

Absolutely not. The pilot, and you don't have to keep saying full scale pilot, there was only one "pilot" involved. The other guy, is just an operator of a R/C model airplane.

The pilot made his intentions clear by making his first pass. He made his second pass because his first pass went unrecognized, the spectators stayed. Also, and without seeing the video, my guess is the pilot didn't make his pass over the runway, but to the side farthest from the spectators. As any trained pilot would do. Hey, I'm not omitting that the pilot may be an idiot, that's possible and remains to be discovered.

Here's how this works. When the tower tells a pilot he has permission to land, "they, the tower ATC," are giving the runway to the pilot. This means, at the pilot's discretion, he can land or change his mind. I've been told I could land but then did a go around. You don't have to explain why. You can do a low fly by and say. "Good by I've changed my mind." Also, no matter where I flew to, I had to take off and return to a large metropolitan airport. The runway was 15,000 ft long! Where do you think I put my airplane down on, the numbers? then do what, taxi 14,500 ft to my tie down. No! I flew the airplane down the runway and landed 3,000 feet from the end. The tower doesn't care if you do a fly by. Hey, my high speed pass/flyby is 147 MPH! That's slow motion compared to their day at the office.

The AMA could get out of this unless they sanctioned the event? Should be something in writing. My guess is there will be a civil lawsuit against the operator of the R/C model, as the defendant, The plaintiff is the pilot. He has damages. Also keep in mind, this is on private property and the pilot lives here and owns the field along with the HOA.

Well, there you go. Ya think?

How long have you been in the hobby? Did you see or read what I said about loosing flying fields because of behavior? "Regulate ourselves adequately." I've seen this, yes, some of us do. But what about that small percentage of individuals that couldn't care less? The small percentage that brings adverse attention to all of us and this great hobby. It only takes a few and ALL Clubs have a few. Correct?

Gee, isn't that what this whole thing is about? Remember the report? "after the pass the R/C operator brought his model back onto the runway and continued to hover." Or something like that. This guy displayed total disregard to the pilot of the aircraft. This you will see in writing and, most probably, the word "disregard" will be used.

The FAA doesn't work like that.

Here's the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiAjN_xtE0s

Russ

Gee,

The camera man and the operator of the R/C model, appear to have no interest in the pilot of the aircraft. To his credit, the camera man spent a moment following the aircraft, but, basicly remained fixed on the operator. Do they realize what just happened? Or do they not care? I would not have been able to do anything till I knew that pilot was safe.

Thanks for that video.

The pilot was to the left of the runway.

I also am a full scale pilot, maybe not nearly as many years as some, but a pilot nonetheless. The term "pilot" is appropriate when used with respect to models. A pilot is any one or thing that guides someone or something else. You can pilot a ship, drill a pilot hole, start a pilot project etc... To be upset with the term being used on individuals that "operate" toys is just a little elitist. Calling R/C'ers pilots in no way detracts from the hard work and money you put in to getting a license to fly full scale aircraft.

I just listened again...and I heard it again. The pilot was on the left side of the runway because the AirBoss told the pilot to break left AFTER he had the RC flyer hover to the left of the runway. I also caught something else this time, and that was that after breaking left and finding out he'd been directed right in to the RC plane, the Biplane ROLLED hard right and then corrected just in time to avoid the runway, which he very nearly hit with his RIGHT wing from the roll. There was pretty much no reason other than pure luck that he and his passenger lived through that. It was a screw-up of monumental proportions. Probably from all directions.

And I agree, maybe a slap on the wrist, maybe a fine, maybe somebody will pay for damages. But that Pilot won't have his ticket pulled by the FAA when there was such a monumental lapse of all communications, and especially when the AirBoss directed him to break left (and into the RC plane). The guy did what he was told, when he was told to. As did the RC flyer. If he'd stayed straight down the center of the runway he'd have flown past the RC plane. It all still comes down to the AirBoss being an incompetent.

The other thing I caught...and I'm pleased by it...is that the first words out of the RC flyer's mouth was "Nobody said anything. I could have killed that pilot!" That came before he started b*tching about losing all the money he had in his plane, which we all would have done after a few minutes.

What a fiasco.

~ Jim ~ [X(]

cfircav8r

I understand what your saying.

You said, and I quote.

Are you assuming something here? It appears so. "Upset." Where does this come from? Are you upset?

We're talking about a Pilot and an operator of a radio controled model. Not two individual pilots flying R/C models. Toys? Why do you think these models are toys? I certainly don't.

The investigators will not talk about or refer to two pilots. One is an operator the other is a pilot. This has to be defined and made clear. early on in fact. As seen through the eyes of experienced investigators. Let's hope at least one is a modeler.

No disrespect is intended by me.

Hey! I'm an R/C pilot. I'm a CL pilot also. Not a good one, but none the less a pilot. Only 51 years of modeling, mostly scratch building. Yea, I have ARF's and they are great fun, but my background was building and it still is. I would rather build than fly. Do you build?

This incident is very serious and should not to be taken lightly. We'll have to see where the outcome goes?

On a light note. Before anyone can receive their AMA card, it should be required, that the individual pass a test. Part of that test requirement should be the complete scratch building and flying of a model airplane.

Agree or disagree?

Scratch building? God no. Kit building? I could go for that. In fact, you and I both DID, I'm sure. I think many of the problems in our hobby today come from the lack of emotional investment and dedication to history, planes, and flight. I won't say that NO ARF flyers could possibly come from the kind of passion for planes and flying that I came from. But at most, there are very, very few.

I remembering struggling to scratch together enough spare money to buy a .40-sized glow motor (K+B was the cheapest dependable one then) for my newly-built Kadet Senior, which had already tapped me out for finishing materials. I remember my wife trying not to kill me for spending those few dollars. I'd spent the two years prior to that saving and doing extra work to buy a radio (I'm thinking Futaba FG but it might have been before that...), and I remember I flew my first radio for ten, maybe twelve years before I could afford to upgrade it to a narrower band, and then another 5 or 7 years before I bought a ...JR? Circus?

Then my business took off and I could afford anything I liked, but I have always felt that the years I struggled to stay in the hobby were my happiest. I see the attitudes now and I want to move to the north pole. But I do like some of the ARFs.

~ Jim ~ [sm=49_49.gif]

Yes it does "upset" me when people, that represent a portion of my life that I love to share with others, starts making statements that minimizes others. As far as being "toys", if the only purpose of the item is personal enjoyment, then yes they are toys. Very expensive and complex toys, and that in no way minimizes them as many full scale aircraft are also toys. I have seen the "R/C'ers are not pilots" on numerous posts, and they do "seem" to have strong feelings on the subject. You did, however, say "The pilot, and you don't have to keep saying full scale pilot, there was only one "pilot" involved. The other guy, is just an operator of a R/C model airplane." Yet now you are saying modelers are pilots. I understand that the investigation may not state that the modeler was a pilot, but we are not the investigators or laypersons here. The fact that you felt the need to correct the others shows you do have feelings on the subject. Is it only OK to call us pilots as long as full scale is not in the conversation? It would be helpful to know the rules so as not to keep making the same mistakes.

Have you seen the building or changes these ARF guys make to their models. Some of it puts my work to shame.

I still have that problem.

Can you afford to give me a job?

I've thought of moving also, but not to the north pole.

Tex,

You build models on U-Tube, right?

Wanna do an easy build for me?

Hehehe,

I do some building, mostly tips and fun little things to help others enjoy building RC. Sometimes it addresses shortcomings on models. Mostly I just share what I know. It amazes me how much I've learned and forgotten over the years. It's fun to stir the embers and see what's below the surface.

I've got a long-awaited Super Stearman waiting for me to start on her out there, but I've also got a novel that has been 'marinating' since I finished the first draft a few months back. I made those videos while I was waiting to start back in on it for the 2nd draft/editing stage and finishing it, and that time has come. As of tomorrow morning, I'm back to being an author full-time until I finish this book. Actually, it was this morning, since it was all clouded over and didn't look like a good day to fly. Anyway, as I get deeper and deeper back into it I'll be mostly a no-show in the fields, forums and videos for a few months.

I know lots of people who do lots of things, from manufacturing to who-knows-what. Tell me what you do and what you know, and who knows what will happen?

~ Jim ~ [8D]

I guess he is going to write the AMA to get Muncie to stop making that same 'pilot' mistake?
Or is it ok when Muncie calls toy plane flyers 'pilots',
but he sees a need to ~correct~ folks here that do.

Avaio,
you wanna correct the members of AMA calling rc flyers 'pilots'
then correct Muncie and the members will follow suit

Let people say what they want. I'm a pilot who can fly full-size and RC, and nobody (whether they think they can or not) will be giving me permission to call myself a pilot, or taking it away for that matter. On YouTube I'm rcskypilot, as I am in my email, and in here I'm TexasSkyPilot, and I can fly the p**p out of a plane, whatever size it is. That makes me a pilot, no matter who is charging people fees to give them a piece of paper that says so.

Arrogance. Putting on airs. Nobody can make you less than you are without your permission. When somebody tries to imply that I'm less than I am, they instantly become nothing to me, because they're trash. That's not really fair to trash, since some is worthy of recycling, but there are words I am not allowed to use in here.

~ Jim ~ [8D]

I wonder if the RC pilot learned anything, or if he'll continue to hover his gigantic models center stage so close to himself that he's completely oblivious to approaching planes, nuclear bombs, earthquakes, tidal waves, etc.??

If the incident took place between two R/C pilots, one could refer to them as R/C pilot #1 and R/C pilot #2. They could decide who would be R/C pilot #2.

If it was an R/C pilot and a model boater, what would you call the boater. Is he piloting his boat?

I think to much is made about what individuals are and are not.

I know I'm a pilot. I worked hard at getting my five ratings and worked hard for Island Air Tours. My general aviation years were an adventure to say the least.

Sure, guys like me couldn't care less if I'm called an R/C pilot or not. I know the difference. Am I an R/C pilot? I already answered that.

I'm also a CL pilot.

I'm not a boat pilot. [sm=bananahead.gif]

This incident is like the VW that stalls on the railroad tracks by accident.

Right or wrong......the train always wins.


But in this incident it would be considered intentional because the RC pilot knew where he was flying by standing next to an active airport runway. Makes no difference whether he could hear or was distracted.

See Dick?
See Dick being stupid?
Don't be a Dick!!!!

Sorry guys......just the way I see it and this is the way it will go down. Just glad no one was injured. ( This time!!)

Ok guys, time for me to step in. It was pointed out to me by another member that this issue is now dragging back over the same ground as when the initial incident happened. This thread should be more about the incident report that the AMA put out and not rehashing all the details of the accident. That has been discussed in multiple threads on RCU in other forums. So let's drop the discussion here unless it applies to the AMA's involvement in the incident or the announcement made about the incident.

Ken

How many times do we need to read this. There were a few dummies there that day so let it go. Leave the models home when going to a real air show. That will eliminate all the problems. Hot dogging and showing off always leads to problems. Big deal, you can hover your plane. I can't hover mine and hae no intentions on doing so. All well and good if you want to do 3D. Do it at your flying site.

Where may I read this "announcement?"

This was the whole basis for this thread, thearticle put out by Rich Hanson. Sorryif Iconfusedanybody with the term "announcement",Iwas referring to this article.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/Bipe_RC-Summary.pdf

Ken

The best advice in that report was to recommend against concurrent RC and full-scale operations.
Same day, same location, different times, problem solved.

Hed's talking about Post #1 in this thread. That should clear it up.

~ Jim ~ [8D]

If you stop and think about it they were not doing concurrent operations at this event either, The rc plane was in the air with full permission of the airport and the
full scale arrived after he was in the air and invaded the rc planes air space.

So about how long do FAA investigations take?