franklin_m

"Eighty years and counting" sure sounds a lot like "24 successful missions and counting." Rules and reg changes are great, but only if they're enforced. I can't say that I see AMA enforcing much - heck they won't even enforce crowd standoff distances with an EVP in attendance!

franklin_m

The reason is actually much more simple. There's been two very frightening accidents in the last two years, ones that but for luck should have resulted in serious injuries or worse. In response to those events, I see an organization that all but ignores these leading indicators. That same organization ignored the two prior complete losses of a specially certified plane/pilot combination, only to see a third that could have easily killed an innocent spectator. I firmly believe that it's not a question of "if" this "normalization of deviance" will result in a fatality that fundamentally restricts the hobby forever, it's a matter of when.

Imagine what would happen to the hobby if non-participating spectators were gravely injured by an out of control 100lb AMA certified plane, at an AMA sanctioned event, with AMA EVP in attendance, and with AMA recommended standoff distances waived?

I don't think $2.5 million would even cover lawyer's fees.

I'm actually trying to prevent that.

franklin_m

Sounds exactly like the thinking of those who ignored Roger Boisjoly.

Silent-AV8R

Just a quick aside here. It's a proven fact that trolls die if you stop feeding them.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Here is a couple of simple questions:

Do you think that one can create enough rules to make r/c flying activities completely immune to accidents?

At what point do you consider it, "safe enough"?

For me, the 80-year track record (as well as my first-hand experience of 30 years in the hobby/AMA) proves that the current rules are more than sufficient to reasonably limit tragic accidents in our hobby.

Astro

rcmiket

That's probably the best post of the day.

Mike

franklin_m

I'll answer the first two together since they're related. Of course no amount of rules will make everything safe 100% of the time. It's impossible. But, that said, IMO there's a dangerous mindset developing in our hobby that because we can't make it absolutely safe 100% of the time, then we accept that things "just happen." In doing so, we often blame dangerous failures on radio issues when it's really it's a failure that could have been avoided. But if we're allowed to say "things happen," then those never get identified and fixed. Unfortunately, the next time it fails, someone could easily get hurt.

Our models are rapidly growing in complexity. Airplanes that can be up to 55lbs and travel at speeds of up to 200mph represent substantial kinetic energy and could easily kill someone if they crash into a crowd. Internally generated EMI, high frequency vibration, acoustic induced fatigue failures, antenna blanking, are just some of the technical vulnerabilities. Then add operator induced failures like errors in programming, maintenance neglect, failure to preflight, or the dreaded pilot error, and I think we're pushing the envelope with respect to safety. Yet many want to say that because we've been safe, we'll continue to be safe. I'll point out that same thinking has led to catastrophic events in any number of industries: Challenger, Columbia, Piper Alpha, Texas City, Deepwater Horizon, Three Mile Island, etc. A study in medicine on what are called "routine post surgical infections" found that despite surgeons saying they "always" followed the five basic preventative measures, when actually observed they missed one or more over 75% of the time. And those are highly trained doctors. Are we any less immune? Is a 40% aircraft at an airshow with the public any less serious? I submit no.

Thus I believe we are developing a blind spot that will lead to a major mishap that hurts people. Add to that if there's no enforcement of the rules we do write, like crowd standoff distances, then that allows people at the front lines to make their own decision one what's acceptable risk and what isn't. Case in point, look at the folks on here that are or presumably are AMA members who fly FPV BLOS despite it being banned by AMA and FAA. Yet they do it, because they've convinced themselves it's safe - despite the fact that aviation professionals have decided otherwise. If one of these folks causes a mishap, you can kiss FPV goodbye for hobby flying - everywhere.

I've spent a lifetime managing aviation safety programs, from the squadron level to a major facility. I also have spent the last five years doing operational risk management in the hazardous chemical industry, and I've consulting in mining, medicine, and ship operations. Despite what some might say, I really don't want to destroy the hobby. In fact I'm trying to preserve it - by not succumbing to what I believe is group think with respect to a safety record that is based largely on incomplete data combined with dangerous behaviors and a willingness by some not to confront that there may be some problems lurking.

I hope I'm wrong, genuinely I do. But it's hard to watch video of people diving to the ground to keep from being hit by 100lb airplane that was out of control from the start of its takeoff roll - a situation that started with a mechanical failure that was compounded by pilot error. Yes, if you look closely you can see full right rudder and full right aileron from start of takeoff roll, and the aircraft not responding, and yet the pilot decided NOT to abort. That's an entirely preventable mishap. Yet many are content to say "it was a bad servo wire" and then completely ignore the next level of protection that should have also prevented it - good decision making.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I fail to see how a "failure" can be avoided by any kind of rulemaking.

Again, none of which can be fixed by making more rules.
I repeat, none of these can be "fixed" with more rules either.
NOPE! BUT, you can't legislate or rulemake the human error out of anything. You see, you just proved that you can make rules all day long, but it just won't guarantee safety. How are you going to make a rule that will assure that folks don't make programing errors? We already have a rule that requires a pre-flight.....how many people follow it? Should we make a rule that says we should not neglect maintaining our airplanes? Or are you recommending that we assign an FAA inspector to every field to assure compliance of ALL these rules and perform annuals on each of our planes?
I submit that you have the most severe case of giant-scale jealousy that I have ever seen! Giant-scale planes have pretty much been "mainstream" now for better than a decade, yet there has not been a marked increase in safety-related incidents. I submit that there is plenty of history to prove that a 40% aircraft at an airshow is no more likely to crash than a foamy.

Again, there are already rules in place. Are you really proposing having an FAA "enforcement officer" stationed at every flying field during operational hours, or even 24/7 to make sure nobody is illegally night-flying?

NOT preventable by rules! AGAIN, I ask you, what are you proposing that would have prevented that crash? Mechanical failures will continue to happen DESPITE meticulous maintenance, and bad human judgment (which was the REAL cause of this crash) will be with us to the end of time no matter what we do.
AND.......once again...........I can't wait to hear your solution that will assure 100% good decision making!!

Thank-You. You answered the first question with the only correct answer!

However, you did not answer the, "when is it safe enough?" question. Well, not directly anyway.

Regards,

Astro

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Probably not much What happens when a dragster of funny car ends flying into the stands .same wit a stockar a stock car at a nascar race. What ever happened to the GRAY HOST P-51 when it dug a hole in the tarmac in 2007 at reno .ect ect these are all just accidents Only preventable if all events are cancelled or never allowed. Like the feds are going NUTZ about a few hover boards, Out o Millions, burning up because of the Misuse of the Lithium batteries. Bad Ford electrical systems burned up more houses. How many guys U know missed a trap or smashed into the deck and ended in the brinny?
There are risks that must be taken in every day life but then U will find an excuse why I.m compleatly wrong so let's have it.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Ya...brilliant commentary. Always interesting to watch one person accuse others of doing the exact thing they do themselves.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

No, you're not trying to prevent it, and after a while it almost seems like your fantasizing about something like that happening. Always worst case. Borderline accident/injury porn. As if some kind of record of minor mishaps and accidents codified by some report would prevent that from happening. And I wouldn't fret about attornys fees...those are covered under the terms of the AMA insurance. Plaintiff fees are taken out of settlement proceeds.

But funny you mention attorneys...if I'm not mistaken, you intimated in another thread about gathering this type of data and working in concert with plaintiff attorneys didn't you? I guess if the AMA didn't want your accident data perhaps the personal injury firms would benefit from it? Very helpful indeed.

franklin_m

Well, in the last two years, we've seen the VP of an AMA sanctioned club killed, non-participating spectators diving for their safety at an AMA sanctioned event, and an individual sent to the hospital with burns as a result of a crash. So explain again how the safety record is "impeccable" despite these incidents?

As for settlements, fees, etc. Whatever insurance doesn't pay comes out of the organization. At least based on the IRS 990s, the AMA isn't sitting on a pile of cash, so I wonder how much land in Muncie is worth these days?

franklin_m

NASCAR Changes (among others in prior years): http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...hase/74277492/

Reno Gray Ghost changes: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep...afety-20120911

Why feds going nuts on hoverboard fires 1 : http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...e-mystery.html

Why feds going nuts on hoverboard fires 2 : https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...e-burned-down/

Why feds going nuts on hoverboard fires 3 : http://mashable.com/2015/12/05/hover.../#sGl3zyMi05qo

How many guys I know personnal crashed and ended up in the water? Zero in six deployments

How many guys I know personally crashed and ended up dead due to failure of leaders to enforce rules? four

franklin_m

Enforcing existing rules will prevent mishaps. Implementing additional rules that are in turn enforced will prevent more mishaps. As for preventing bad decision making? Well, sure looks like US part 121 carriers have figured it out. It can be done, but the population must first accept that they can do better.

When is safe enough? How many fatalities are you willing to accept each year? How many times each year is it OK with you for spectators (non-participants) to dive for their safety? How many people are you willing to send to the hospital with burns from crashes each year?

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Soooo....One dead, one burned. In two years. You are a data guy, one fatality, one injury in HOW MANY tens of thousands of flight hours? OR, maybe it would be best to quantify it by total hours spent at flying fields (hours exposed to potential danger, since you included innocent bystanders in your examples). So let's see.......180,000 members at....let's say...100 hrs. avg. time spent at the field per year (TOTALLY pulled that figure from my southern posterior!) times 2 years....equals .....36,000,000 hrs.

ONE fatality, one burn in 36 MILLION exposure/hrs.!!!!!!!!!

I would call that impeccable.

Regards,

Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Sounds like you'll not be getting out of bed in the morning (although 327 people die from accidental suffocation and strangulation in bed each year). Certainly you won't be using any stairs (1,300 stair fatalities annually), I could go on and on, but I am sure you get the jist.

To answer your question, though, I am willing to accept EVERY fatality, injury and diving spectator (LOL). I can only control MY actions and by doing so, I can virtually eliminate ANY chance of myself dying or being injured (although I MAY end up having to dive for safety because I can only do my own due diligence, I cannot do it for others).

Astro

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

..

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

But the feed is cheap and the entertainment value is high. Pull up a chair and have a beer.

franklin_m

Of course the numbers are big if you assume every one of the 180,000 members flies that much, but I think we can agree they don't. Secondly, it's not just about actual injuries, it's about dangerous near misses like planes crashing into buildings, off field, etc. Also, those were just the most obvious events that came to mind of the top of my head. I think there was a gal injured by an MR at a parade in the northeast, I also seem to recall a small girl hurt pretty badly by a heli at a park not too long ago. Also, I didn't include the number of AMA injury claims (which per MA mag they say are going up). Counting member time at events really isn't valid, one could argue we're "participants."

I personally don't think that the general public gives a rat's you know what if we hurt ourselves. What the public cares about, is when our crashes start fires (some have), land off the field (which some do), crash into stuff and damage it (which they have), hurt non-participants (which they have), invade privacy (which some have), and when they hazard manned aircraft (which they do, to the tune of some 100 a month).

I've seen impeccable records, and that sure doesn't look like it to me.

franklin_m

Well, tough to quantify. But considering that the average age of all the people on a carrier flight deck is 20.1 years, and most if not all perform safety critical jobs, I figure that to train any individual to operate safely in that environment isn't as difficult as you might think.

The reality is that it begins with an intolerance of mistakes and a compliance based culture - and those don't cost a dime. A culture that doesn't think it can get better surely will not. A culture that does not tolerate mishaps will always strive to be better.

I don't expect someone to commit to that to fly a foamy, but I do expect it to fly a 55lb 200mph missile.

franklin_m

There we agree.

franklin_m

That'll look good in the aftermath of an incident..."AMA member was heard to say that he's willing to accept every fatality, injury, and diving spectator."

I deliberately didn't use the full quote, because that's exactly how I contend that any major mishap / event will be characterized in the press against us, which is why I think we need to be a lot more serious about preventing them from happening in the first place.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

The real question is is this all a problem of PEE-NUS envy.

Chris P. Bacon

My Feedback: (4)

Obviously, the support staff contributes to the success of the operation, but I was referring to total training and total costs thus pilots + support staff.

franklin_m

My point is that we train 18 year olds to perform their jobs safety, reliably, and consistently on the flight deck or in the maintenance department without spending very much money, and many tasks they perform are at least as complicated as flying model planes. But it all starts with leadership establishing that all mishaps are preventable and then the culture adopting that belief. Both of which cost zero. But one has to be willing to set the expectation....