Drone VS Aircraft - Mid Air Collisions
07-10-2016, 09:53 AM
#451
With all increases in traffic there will be an increase in incidents , it's the natural cause & effect . When these incidents rise to the level of requiring reporting under 49 USC 830 I should think our fellow flyers would want to follow the law if for no other reason than perhaps the report may help in the formation of safety protocols that could reduce the risk of future similar incidents . How could trends be tracked if there were no reporting of serious incidents ? A past swept under the rug and forgotten is surely not a past anyone's ever gonna learn something from , that's for sure .
No small wonder, when suggestions are made for a science based approach to operational risk of some operations, there are people in leadership positions saying that "we don’t want to call attention to numbers."
07-10-2016, 10:46 AM
#452
Actually, that's a great idea. I'm thinking:
- Letters to my elected representatives
- Hotline email to FAA
- Hotline email to NTSB
Of course all will include citations of these and other incidents that required reporting under the law, yet were not reported. Pointing them where to look for examples of a not so "impeccable" safety record, which will inform their decisions with respect to future legislative, regulatory, and enforcement action.
1,742+ posts over a decade of thinking with zero action and zero results. Include whatever you feel necessary.
I don't know there's a cause and effect, I could certainly never prove it, but I can't help but note that after I asked for copies of the AMA's IRS990's last year (ones that should have been published but were not) under the law / FOIA ... suddenly there's an IRS look at AMA? Things that make you go "hummmmm." But I digress.
Plausible.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore.
Your attempts at intimidation are laughable. Put your actions where your ego is and go for it.
Of course, keep in mind any repercussions would impact your enjoyment of the hobby as well.
That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
The other thing about government agencies, they're not as gullible as you think.
With all your precious resources at your finger tips what's taken so long?
- Letters to my elected representatives
- Hotline email to FAA
- Hotline email to NTSB
Of course all will include citations of these and other incidents that required reporting under the law, yet were not reported. Pointing them where to look for examples of a not so "impeccable" safety record, which will inform their decisions with respect to future legislative, regulatory, and enforcement action.
1,742+ posts over a decade of thinking with zero action and zero results. Include whatever you feel necessary.
I don't know there's a cause and effect, I could certainly never prove it, but I can't help but note that after I asked for copies of the AMA's IRS990's last year (ones that should have been published but were not) under the law / FOIA ... suddenly there's an IRS look at AMA? Things that make you go "hummmmm." But I digress.
Plausible.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore.
Your attempts at intimidation are laughable. Put your actions where your ego is and go for it.
Of course, keep in mind any repercussions would impact your enjoyment of the hobby as well.
That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
The other thing about government agencies, they're not as gullible as you think.
With all your precious resources at your finger tips what's taken so long?
Last edited by Chris P. Bacon; 07-10-2016 at 10:50 AM.
07-10-2016, 10:58 AM
#453
That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
With all your precious resources at your finger tips what's taken so long?
With all your precious resources at your finger tips what's taken so long?
Last edited by franklin_m; 07-10-2016 at 11:01 AM.
07-10-2016, 11:11 AM
#454
Originally Posted by franklin_m 
Actually, that's a great idea. I'm thinking:- Letters to my elected representatives
- Hotline email to FAA
- Hotline email to NTSB
Of course all will include citations of these and other incidents that required reporting under the law, yet were not reported. Pointing them where to look for examples of a not so "impeccable" safety record, which will inform their decisions with respect to future legislative, regulatory, and enforcement action.
1,742+ posts over a decade of thinking with zero action and zero results. Include whatever you feel necessary.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore.
Your attempts at intimidation are laughable. Put your actions where your ego is and go for it.
Of course, keep in mind any repercussions would impact your enjoyment of the hobby as well.
07-10-2016, 11:23 AM
#455
If you need to cheat to win, you've already lost.
07-10-2016, 12:48 PM
#457
And,just to be clear burns are categorized as follows:
1st Degree-burns that redden the skin but don't damage the tissue
2nd Degree-burns that cause blistering of the skin
3rd Degree-burns that destroy tissue
And now, since the injured person was reported to have been taken to the hospital with 2nd degree burns, that meant he had to have reddened skin with blistering. A first year medical student could have diagnosed that one
1st Degree-burns that redden the skin but don't damage the tissue
2nd Degree-burns that cause blistering of the skin
3rd Degree-burns that destroy tissue
And now, since the injured person was reported to have been taken to the hospital with 2nd degree burns, that meant he had to have reddened skin with blistering. A first year medical student could have diagnosed that one
07-10-2016, 01:32 PM
#458
And,just to be clear burns are categorized as follows:
1st Degree-burns that redden the skin but don't damage the tissue
2nd Degree-burns that cause blistering of the skin
3rd Degree-burns that destroy tissue
And now, since the injured person was reported to have been taken to the hospital with 2nd degree burns, that meant he had to have reddened skin with blistering. A first year medical student could have diagnosed that one
1st Degree-burns that redden the skin but don't damage the tissue
2nd Degree-burns that cause blistering of the skin
3rd Degree-burns that destroy tissue
And now, since the injured person was reported to have been taken to the hospital with 2nd degree burns, that meant he had to have reddened skin with blistering. A first year medical student could have diagnosed that one
07-10-2016, 01:51 PM
#459
Franklin, would doing so lower you to the level of the "Three Amigos"? If you think it does, don't do so. The only one that would take damage to their rep is you
07-10-2016, 03:10 PM
#460
I'll probably just go the official route through channels just like any other taxpayer. My record is pretty good though. Out of the thousands of comments the FAA received on registration, one of my comments was cited by FAA word for word "...registration is an inherently governmental function that should not be ceded to any dues collecting organization. This commenter pointed out that neither the Experimental Aircraft Association nor the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association register manned aircraft." Two others were paraphrased elsewhere. All were used in sections where FAA was justifying opposition to AMA proposals.
Perhaps I'll give this one a shot as well - should be a slam dunk, requiring non-commercial sUAS to comply with the law with respect to reporting of mishaps to NTSB. I actually think there's probably fines associated with failure to report. I'll look that up later, I'd be shocked if there isn't.
07-10-2016, 03:29 PM
#461
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
More off topic personal attacks, par for the course. I guess you weren't around when there was a group of 4 or 5 guys that would routinely launch the same attacks at those who didn't agree with them, funny how you and the other one didn't say a peep then. And you'll notice, it's not me or anyone else attacking people, rather we're debating the issue. Oddly enough Franklin continues to discuss the issues for the most part, and doesn't take the bait thrown at him. Have you not noticed that yet? We may not always agree on every issue, even this one, but we don't sink to the level seen recently by others.
07-10-2016, 03:33 PM
#462
More off topic personal attacks, par for the course. I guess you weren't around when there was a group of 4 or 5 guys that would routinely launch the same attacks at those who didn't agree with them, funny how you and the other one didn't say a peep then. And you'll notice, it's not me or anyone else attacking people, rather we're debating the issue. Oddly enough Franklin continues to discuss the issues for the most part, and doesn't take the bait thrown at him. Have you not noticed that yet? We may not always agree on every issue, even this one, but we don't sink to the level seen recently by others.
If so, and I want to do my "civic duty" and make sure AMA is aware of that requirement, whom should I contact?
07-10-2016, 04:24 PM
#463
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Ok, so if now make it that one cannot focus on "one offs," and one cannot "aggregate incidents," that sure looks like you're trying to set up a framework that makes it nearly impossible to use quantitative and documented data. Perhaps that is the ultimate goal, for the data demonstrates that the "impeccable record" narrative forwarded by the AMA is not nearly so "impeccable" based on the definition of the word.
To your second point, that there's nothing I could suggest as an affirmative and proactive measure. It must have slipped your mind in the heat of the moment, but I actually have made a suggestion. In fact, you critized me for it. It was the reporting of incidents and near misses. I'd note that this suggestion has the virtue of being the very same one that's been a critical component of what has lowered mishaps in manned aircraft.
You took issue with the type of sUAS events that I would like to see reported, and there's room for intelligent people to disagree. That's fair. Then perhaps you'd agree that we should at least be reporting what is required to be reported under the law? As established earlier, 49 USC 830 requires a report to the NTSB of an accident or incident involving a civil unmanned aircraft when there is a second degree burn. At an AMA sanctioned event last year, there was a well publicized crash of a civil unmanned aircraft that resulted in a second degree burn.
A report was required. And pursuant to the requirements in 49 USC 830, it appears many injury incidents involving sUAS operations, AMA or not, require reporting. Maybe the AMA should just start with telling its members that they expect them to comply with the law on NTSB reporting? Let that run for a while and let's both see what the data shows.
To your second point, that there's nothing I could suggest as an affirmative and proactive measure. It must have slipped your mind in the heat of the moment, but I actually have made a suggestion. In fact, you critized me for it. It was the reporting of incidents and near misses. I'd note that this suggestion has the virtue of being the very same one that's been a critical component of what has lowered mishaps in manned aircraft.
You took issue with the type of sUAS events that I would like to see reported, and there's room for intelligent people to disagree. That's fair. Then perhaps you'd agree that we should at least be reporting what is required to be reported under the law? As established earlier, 49 USC 830 requires a report to the NTSB of an accident or incident involving a civil unmanned aircraft when there is a second degree burn. At an AMA sanctioned event last year, there was a well publicized crash of a civil unmanned aircraft that resulted in a second degree burn.
A report was required. And pursuant to the requirements in 49 USC 830, it appears many injury incidents involving sUAS operations, AMA or not, require reporting. Maybe the AMA should just start with telling its members that they expect them to comply with the law on NTSB reporting? Let that run for a while and let's both see what the data shows.
There were lots of suggestions and reports and protocols you have suggested over the years, so forgive me if I don't recall each of them. At the end of the day, I seem to recall feeling like the reports you suggested (let's take this one for example) weren't being done to help improve safety, or usher in new protocols etc, rather they felt like they were being done to back into an already preconceived notion held by you that there were massive gaps in safety at AMA events. This was almost a solitary position by the way. As much as the others who have such a deep seeded mistrust and disdain for the AMA, I don't think I saw anyone else making any suggestions even close to yours, it was all you.
So ya, a report to log in every finger nick, airplane crash, near miss etc to me was and is completely useless. Even more so when the information is weaponized. Ya, weaponized. The one thing I do specifically recall you mentioning is the work you would do either with or on behalf of personal injury attorneys. Now, that might have been a heat of the moment comment from you coming off the heals of being ignored by the AMA on your report suggestion. Is that still something you are looking to do?
As for complying with legal rules and regs on reporting, sure, it makes sense that any org should be compliant in this regard (if they are required to by existing law). If they aren't, then why would someone take steps to make that organization responsible for that? More layers of bureaucracy, more layers of rules and regs and money spent on keeping track of it.
When I see people push for this kind of oversight and mind numbing bureaucratic process, I can only think this is being done to exert power that they don't already have. More control, more oversight, more more more. And with some of your suggestions, they feel punitive, a way to make things more difficult for the AMA. And it just so happens if they don't take a suggestion, it's more fodder to complain about them. I'm sorry, but I have far more confidence in the folks at AMA and their underwriters and lawyers to decide what is, and what is not needed, then I do one or two people on these boards. As I have always said, if the ideas are that great, and that much of a game changer, then anyone who feels this strongly should get more involved with the AMA and fight to make those changes. If all of the suggestions and ideas are getting nowhere, then I think that is sending a message, one that needs to be realized for what it is.
So that was my recollection of disagreeing with your suggested reports.
Last edited by porcia83; 07-10-2016 at 04:44 PM. Reason: added comments in bold to clarify
07-10-2016, 04:26 PM
#464
Perhaps I'll give this one a shot as well - should be a slam dunk, requiring non-commercial sUAS to comply with the law with respect to reporting of mishaps to NTSB. I actually think there's probably fines associated with failure to report. I'll look that up later, I'd be shocked if there isn't.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore. That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
07-10-2016, 04:38 PM
#465
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
But ya, I think you've dug up a perfectly applicable ruling that the AMA should force upon it's members, absolutely on point. No doubt it would improve things, in fact it might actually do away with every possible problem ever known to the AMA. The next time someone crashes a 2 pound T-28 foamy they should treat it the same way a full scale crash should be treated. Preserve the evidence, call the NTSB, etc etc.
As for AMA contacts, you prior comments here seem to indicate you've spoken with a whole host of folks from the AMA. Rarely however have I seen you reach out to local AMA folks, you go right to the top. I guess if that has been working out for you so far, keep going in that direction. Get a certified return receipt or a read receipt e-mail so you can confirm your civic duty has been met, officially. Now keep in mind, your suggestion might not be embraced. Don't be shocked when they AMA says "thanks for the suggestion, we'll take it from here", and then it over to the decision makers. The ones elected to make decisions.
07-10-2016, 04:52 PM
#466
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Actually, that's a great idea. I'm thinking:
- Letters to my elected representatives
- Hotline email to FAA
- Hotline email to NTSB
Of course all will include citations of these and other incidents that required reporting under the law, yet were not reported. Pointing them where to look for examples of a not so "impeccable" safety record, which will inform their decisions with respect to future legislative, regulatory, and enforcement action.
I don't know there's a cause and effect, I could certainly never prove it, but I can't help but note that after I asked for copies of the AMA's IRS990's last year (ones that should have been published but were not) under the law / FOIA ... suddenly there's an IRS look at AMA? Things that make you go "hummmmm." But I digress.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore. That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
- Letters to my elected representatives
- Hotline email to FAA
- Hotline email to NTSB
Of course all will include citations of these and other incidents that required reporting under the law, yet were not reported. Pointing them where to look for examples of a not so "impeccable" safety record, which will inform their decisions with respect to future legislative, regulatory, and enforcement action.
I don't know there's a cause and effect, I could certainly never prove it, but I can't help but note that after I asked for copies of the AMA's IRS990's last year (ones that should have been published but were not) under the law / FOIA ... suddenly there's an IRS look at AMA? Things that make you go "hummmmm." But I digress.
So, be careful what you ask for Crispy....I'm just the guy who knows not just who and where to send these, but how to frame it in a way that makes it tough for regulators to ignore. That's the thing about government agencies, when you make it easy for them by telling them exactly where to look, and provide proof of clear and documented violation of law, policy, or regulation, they're more than happy to go look (even more so when you have friends that work there).
It's good that it's been memorized and quoted by others. To me, it's so disappointingly transparent as to what this is all about now. I thought the comment about gathering data for personal injury attorneys gave a good glimpse into motive, that pales compared to this. Nothing more than a personal axe to grind against either a person or an organization. So dishonorable and disingenuous in it's genesis, and for me one of the most reprehensible things I've seen on this site. Hard to tell if the recent supporters would glom on to this as a good idea just because, or if they really understand what it's all about.
If this is where you feel your time should be spent, by all means have at it. I've seen folks here and elsewhere motivated by some bizarre things, but this takes the cake. Unbelievable really.
07-10-2016, 06:02 PM
#467
That said, I'll admit some of the frustration and mention of injury attorneys was in the heat of the moment out of exasperation with some individuals that just refuse to accept that the view that "accidents happen" and there's nothing that can be done is outdated. I maintain that luck remains a major reason why there's not been a serious injury. With more of these large and fast ARF / near ARF turbines out there, we're rolling those dice more often. I also know that just because nothing bad has happened the last 100 times does not mean nothing catastrophic won't happen on the 101st.
Yes, I have advocated a variety of reporting systems, some more detailed and data intensive than others, all with the intent of taking a more professional view of safety practices to meet a changing operational environment. I don't think I advocated every hobby knife cut though. Aligning reporting with existing standards perhaps, OSHA recordables for example, for the reason that there's a large body of writing out there to help with deciding what is and isn't reportable.
On the subject of lawyers, I know from personal experience that sometimes even large organizations aren't fully aware of requirements. For example, in Verizon Wireless' legal department was unaware of their obligation under California law to provide victims of identity theft unredacted copies of all records for accounts obtained in the ID theft victim's name. After providing copies of the statute, they sent me a nice letter thanking me along with a couple hundred pages of data. So I never assume that lawyers know it all. Especially when the lawyer is not an aviation law specialist.
So, back to the data. Hey, I'm a believer in shoot for the moon but be prepared to accept less. As I intimated above, I'd be happy to see AMA issue a statement much like the one AOPA issued - that they expect their members to report per 49 USC 830 - nothing more and nothing less. Now, if AMA decides that this code does not apply to their members, ok, but then so state. But you're a smart guy. I challenge you to read the statute and convince me why it does not apply.
As to any signals sent by AMA. Yep, I'm pretty much convinced they have no interest in hearing from me, at least on any issue that approaches the delicate subject of a safety record. I also see that this unwillingness to consider other perspectives applies even when an idea is forwarded by another EC member (see minutes from last meeting, search "energy" and read the concern of one member part). As a safety professional, that troubles me. It usually represents a blind spot, meaning the organization is hoping that by ignoring an issue it will magically go away. The energy and destructive potential from some types of AMA sanctioned operations continues to concern me. More so when I see that some folks want to suppress ideas out of a desire to avoid unintended consequences.
For the record, as I outlined above, I'm going to send formal written and signed letters to a couple regulatory agencies and see if I can get a definitive answers on a few specific questions. I'll be happy to share the answers here when I get them.
07-10-2016, 06:35 PM
#468
I seem to recall "accidents happen and there's nothing that can be done" being the answer provided in response to wildlife strikes that are increasing annually at alarming rates and posing a far greater risk to the safety of manned aircraft than non-commercial sUAS operations.
07-10-2016, 06:45 PM
#469
More off topic personal attacks, par for the course. I guess you weren't around when there was a group of 4 or 5 guys that would routinely launch the same attacks at those who didn't agree with them, funny how you and the other one didn't say a peep then. And you'll notice, it's not me or anyone else attacking people, rather we're debating the issue. Oddly enough Franklin continues to discuss the issues for the most part, and doesn't take the bait thrown at him. Have you not noticed that yet? We may not always agree on every issue, even this one, but we don't sink to the level seen recently by others.
07-10-2016, 06:50 PM
#470
Where was the personal attack? You three are the ones that have belittled anything referencing documents coming from a government or college source, claiming they are all putting out lies to get funding. If you would like, I can go back and find some of the post numbers and add them to a future post. My comment was to Franklin to use caution in how he approached his "contacts in high places", no more and no less, based on the posts you three are known for. If you don't like my post, you are more than welcome to contact the admins and complain though, for some reason, I doubt it will get very far.
07-10-2016, 08:18 PM
#472
Are you now resorting to alleging that the following is false?
"The other injured man, Mike Lee, 36, of Davenport, was driven to Lakeland Regional Health Medical Center with a second-degree burn to his arm."
http://www.theledger.com/article/201...NEWS/150309544
"The other injured man, Mike Lee, 36, of Davenport, was driven to Lakeland Regional Health Medical Center with a second-degree burn to his arm."
http://www.theledger.com/article/201...NEWS/150309544
07-10-2016, 08:20 PM
#473
07-10-2016, 08:49 PM
#474
Being serious or not wasn't the point. The point was he was hurt by an R/C airplane, went to the hospital for treatment and it should have been reported, end of story
07-10-2016, 09:07 PM
#475