waivers
06-24-2003 | 01:27 AM
#1
Thread Starter
waivers
As for AMA turbine wavers, I think they were put in place to discouraged flyers from obtaining turbines. If safety was the real reason, they were put in place, they why don't the AMA have a study manual and all the infor needed direct from them that you need to know to safety operate the turbine. Instead of sending you chasing all over the country to find someone to sign you off on the different aspects of the waiver process. Actually you have to find various people to sign you off. Why do they prevent you from flying a turbine on the buddy box with a qualified pilot? If safety was the real concern, they should want one to get the most exposure they can to turbine aircrafts and there flying characteristics. In the past, when the turbine were real expensive, their strategies seem to work, but now since prices are coming down on the turbines, and the kits also are becoming available used. So more people will be flying turbines and because AMA makes it more difficult than it should be, to get a waiver, a lot of people will be flying without them. So much for the safety aspect.
06-24-2003 | 01:49 AM
#2
waivers
"So much for the safety aspect."
Yep.
Now why do you think AMA would want to discourage the turbine?
In my mind, I relate it to why airline company management hates the Captains so much. Management hates the Captains and thus the entire pilot groups because once that airplane pushes off the gate, the Captain is the sole COMMANDER (real captains that is) and no one can do anything about it. The company has NO control over him. He is 101% autonomous. He will make more life-decisions in one flight than the company CEO can dream of in a life-time.
That is the answer: CONTROL. AMA wants to establish ultimate CONTROL and of course the script answer is insurance. Bah Humbug. It's CONTROL.
Yep.
Now why do you think AMA would want to discourage the turbine?
In my mind, I relate it to why airline company management hates the Captains so much. Management hates the Captains and thus the entire pilot groups because once that airplane pushes off the gate, the Captain is the sole COMMANDER (real captains that is) and no one can do anything about it. The company has NO control over him. He is 101% autonomous. He will make more life-decisions in one flight than the company CEO can dream of in a life-time.
That is the answer: CONTROL. AMA wants to establish ultimate CONTROL and of course the script answer is insurance. Bah Humbug. It's CONTROL.
06-24-2003 | 02:15 AM
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
waivers
Originally posted by Hossfly
<<<<<<<<<<<
If responding to self is like talking to self, well maybe I am on the verge, however my club has just been given a dose of why the rule of "SEE the AMA CARD" is a TOTAL Necessity. Yet a rule NOT enforced is not a rule.
Person shows up back in Feb. and wants to fly as guest. Person says that he is AMA, but card not yet back. (We took his word -- BAD MISTAKE) Appears to be accomplished RCer and is OK. Person is a very sociable guy that appears to be the kind of person that everyone likes. He even was helpful in mowing field without being on the Mowing-Group. Just great. OTOH our club has a paid mowing-group under contract and he was PAID the contract rate for what he did.
After guest times expire (maybe an extra one or two) person still cannot afford to join club. Keeps hanging around. Due to his spoken words, person believed -- but not proved -- to be flying when field is empty. Person finally told if he wanted to fly, he must join club. Person finally makes application to club. Has a fax from AMA stating May 01 joining. Club President verified with AMA that AMA date was actually May 01. Person was less than truthful.
Bad experience -- Had this guy over to my house end of APR. to give him a prop that he needed without making special 40 mile round trip to LHS. I directly ask him about his AMA. Oh yes he applied some time ago, but card had not arrived. I advised checking with AMA as they never took 3 months to get a card out.
(A direct untruth to my face at the time I was doing him a favor)
Person has accident at field on May 28 with heavy personal injury.
On May 29th, prior to club meeting, Club Treasurer checked Club PO Box and found notification that person's check for club dues had bounced. Needles to say person was not voted into the club at that meeting.
Accident happened while Person was violating a club rule reference engine starting procedures. The individual had previously been spoken to about other violations of club rules which are posted on field at 2 places under the shelter.
WHERE could this all lead to? Had we not been the NICE and Friendly types and had followed the AMA's strictest rules PLUS OUR OWN, then perhaps the injury could have been avoided.
The good news was that the person WAS AMA at the time of the accident.
I should not be too against ALL the rules AMA makes. I hope to do a better job of local club enforcement in the future.
<<<<<<<<<<<
If responding to self is like talking to self, well maybe I am on the verge, however my club has just been given a dose of why the rule of "SEE the AMA CARD" is a TOTAL Necessity. Yet a rule NOT enforced is not a rule.
Person shows up back in Feb. and wants to fly as guest. Person says that he is AMA, but card not yet back. (We took his word -- BAD MISTAKE) Appears to be accomplished RCer and is OK. Person is a very sociable guy that appears to be the kind of person that everyone likes. He even was helpful in mowing field without being on the Mowing-Group. Just great. OTOH our club has a paid mowing-group under contract and he was PAID the contract rate for what he did.
After guest times expire (maybe an extra one or two) person still cannot afford to join club. Keeps hanging around. Due to his spoken words, person believed -- but not proved -- to be flying when field is empty. Person finally told if he wanted to fly, he must join club. Person finally makes application to club. Has a fax from AMA stating May 01 joining. Club President verified with AMA that AMA date was actually May 01. Person was less than truthful.
Bad experience -- Had this guy over to my house end of APR. to give him a prop that he needed without making special 40 mile round trip to LHS. I directly ask him about his AMA. Oh yes he applied some time ago, but card had not arrived. I advised checking with AMA as they never took 3 months to get a card out.
(A direct untruth to my face at the time I was doing him a favor)
Person has accident at field on May 28 with heavy personal injury.
On May 29th, prior to club meeting, Club Treasurer checked Club PO Box and found notification that person's check for club dues had bounced. Needles to say person was not voted into the club at that meeting.
Accident happened while Person was violating a club rule reference engine starting procedures. The individual had previously been spoken to about other violations of club rules which are posted on field at 2 places under the shelter.
WHERE could this all lead to? Had we not been the NICE and Friendly types and had followed the AMA's strictest rules PLUS OUR OWN, then perhaps the injury could have been avoided.
The good news was that the person WAS AMA at the time of the accident.
I should not be too against ALL the rules AMA makes. I hope to do a better job of local club enforcement in the future.
JR
06-24-2003 | 02:41 AM
#4
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: St Augustine, FL,
waivers
JR-
I'm not confused by this part, nor do I think Carl Maroney will be:
"Accident happened while Person was violating a club rule reference engine starting procedures. The individual had previously been spoken
to about other violations of club rules which are posted on field at 2 places under the shelter."
Person was in violation of Rule 3 of AMA Safety Code. Person's insurance coverage is voided by exclusion of activities in violation of club rules.
HC's comments were better left not said.
Abel
I'm not confused by this part, nor do I think Carl Maroney will be:
"Accident happened while Person was violating a club rule reference engine starting procedures. The individual had previously been spoken
to about other violations of club rules which are posted on field at 2 places under the shelter."
Person was in violation of Rule 3 of AMA Safety Code. Person's insurance coverage is voided by exclusion of activities in violation of club rules.
HC's comments were better left not said.
Abel
06-24-2003 | 03:59 AM
#5
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
waivers
ira d
There is no question that jets will become a larger part of the AMA and its member's interest. I will assume from your location that you were at Prado a few weeks for the jet event held there. The event where there were three crashes, one of them in the pits.
Nothing in the waiver process prevents you from seeking out a mentor after you have your waiver. If you want to spend time on a buddy box, which sounds like a wise plan, nothing prohibits you from doing so.
Perhaps these words make a case better than I can:
"There simply must be some correlation between pilot experience and proficiency and the performance capability of the model he/she intends to operate.
Commercial and military aviation have found this necessary and it makes sense that we should show responsibility in this regard as well. It is also interesting that their efforts to prevent a fire-upon-crash have produced little results. Pilot/maintenance training and proficiency checks are the answers to minimizing operational losses in the real aviation world.
Model flying proficiency must also be coupled with radio controlled model building experience to safely operate a high performance jet. When this combination is limited, so to should be the performance potential of the vehicle. This concept makes sense to most of us but, unfortunately, to some unaware "newbies," the connection is not made and the results can be threatening.
This hobby is very important to those of us who have made the "investment," so hopefully, we can work through our Jet Pilot's Organization to guide the AMA toward addressing the real issue and come up with a realistic solution. A simple "walk before you run" and a training syllabus program would accomplish the goal of minimizing the crashes.
Manufacturers and distributors of turbojet equipment should also be involved in disseminating the safety message."
These are the words of Bob Violet, taken from his website.
JR
There is no question that jets will become a larger part of the AMA and its member's interest. I will assume from your location that you were at Prado a few weeks for the jet event held there. The event where there were three crashes, one of them in the pits.
Nothing in the waiver process prevents you from seeking out a mentor after you have your waiver. If you want to spend time on a buddy box, which sounds like a wise plan, nothing prohibits you from doing so.
Perhaps these words make a case better than I can:
"There simply must be some correlation between pilot experience and proficiency and the performance capability of the model he/she intends to operate.
Commercial and military aviation have found this necessary and it makes sense that we should show responsibility in this regard as well. It is also interesting that their efforts to prevent a fire-upon-crash have produced little results. Pilot/maintenance training and proficiency checks are the answers to minimizing operational losses in the real aviation world.
Model flying proficiency must also be coupled with radio controlled model building experience to safely operate a high performance jet. When this combination is limited, so to should be the performance potential of the vehicle. This concept makes sense to most of us but, unfortunately, to some unaware "newbies," the connection is not made and the results can be threatening.
This hobby is very important to those of us who have made the "investment," so hopefully, we can work through our Jet Pilot's Organization to guide the AMA toward addressing the real issue and come up with a realistic solution. A simple "walk before you run" and a training syllabus program would accomplish the goal of minimizing the crashes.
Manufacturers and distributors of turbojet equipment should also be involved in disseminating the safety message."
These are the words of Bob Violet, taken from his website.
JR
06-24-2003 | 12:30 PM
#7
My Feedback: (2)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Clifton,
NJ
waivers
JR,
Bob keeps confusing the AMA with the FAA. He's been trying for years to get different "classes" of license. I have a copy of his original letter to AMA where you have to be a TOC competitor to meet his flight requirements for all but the basic rating. Don't fly pattern-sorry, you just aren't good enough, according to Bob. He wants pilots to keep log books, have a minimum number of flights/ month, be subject to unannounced check flights, etc. The AMA has no legislative or regulatory powers, other than to deny insurance coverage. If you/Bob want the AMA to turn into the FAA, fine-I don't.
You keep brining up the jet that crashed in the pits to show how inherently dangerous jets are and the need for the waiver system. I've seen plenty of prop planes crash in/near the pits and there were no waivers at all. The waiver doesn't guarantee that a waiver holder will never crash or do anything stupid, it just establishes a minimum competency level that the AMA has determined is necessary for insurance coverage.
The point ira D was making about the buddy box is that no one can fly a turbine powered model, even on a buddy box, until he has a wavier. It would seem to make more sense to allow a waiver applicant to get some turbine experience on the buddy box BEFORE he gets his waiver. Oh Well....
I'm pretty sure that there are forces working behind the scenes to implement the type of "ratings" Bob so desperately wants, and not just for turbines, but AMA wide. All this is going to do is set up a "class" system within AMA that will do model aviation and modeling no good.
Regards,
Jon
Bob keeps confusing the AMA with the FAA. He's been trying for years to get different "classes" of license. I have a copy of his original letter to AMA where you have to be a TOC competitor to meet his flight requirements for all but the basic rating. Don't fly pattern-sorry, you just aren't good enough, according to Bob. He wants pilots to keep log books, have a minimum number of flights/ month, be subject to unannounced check flights, etc. The AMA has no legislative or regulatory powers, other than to deny insurance coverage. If you/Bob want the AMA to turn into the FAA, fine-I don't.
You keep brining up the jet that crashed in the pits to show how inherently dangerous jets are and the need for the waiver system. I've seen plenty of prop planes crash in/near the pits and there were no waivers at all. The waiver doesn't guarantee that a waiver holder will never crash or do anything stupid, it just establishes a minimum competency level that the AMA has determined is necessary for insurance coverage.
The point ira D was making about the buddy box is that no one can fly a turbine powered model, even on a buddy box, until he has a wavier. It would seem to make more sense to allow a waiver applicant to get some turbine experience on the buddy box BEFORE he gets his waiver. Oh Well....
I'm pretty sure that there are forces working behind the scenes to implement the type of "ratings" Bob so desperately wants, and not just for turbines, but AMA wide. All this is going to do is set up a "class" system within AMA that will do model aviation and modeling no good.
Regards,
Jon
06-24-2003 | 01:12 PM
#8
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
waivers
Jon
The only reason that I bring Bob Violet up is that he, to a large extent, represents jets, to many of us. He is certainly not against them. The point I was trying to make is that jets ARE different. I have not heard or seen anything that should lead anyone to believe that the AMA wants more classes within the jet community. On the other hand, they would like to see some training before just anyone can jump in.
As you will recall, when the waivers started out, there was virtually no one that had one. Flying on a buddy box with the initial people that could certify pilots would have been a bigger road block than it is now. A requirement to do so for X number of hours would have slowed the waiver process, not helped it. In many parts of the country, I am sure that is still the case. With only about 700 current waiver holders, I am sure that some potential jet pilots are still not near a waiver holder.
When it comes to accidents, I think the jet pilots need to be more open and discuss problems. As soon as you see jet and crash in the same sentence, the jet guys panic. I don't think anyone is looking for a reason to eliminate jets. I do think that open and honest communication will lead to a better system to train pilots. Probably one that is less restrictive.
JR
The only reason that I bring Bob Violet up is that he, to a large extent, represents jets, to many of us. He is certainly not against them. The point I was trying to make is that jets ARE different. I have not heard or seen anything that should lead anyone to believe that the AMA wants more classes within the jet community. On the other hand, they would like to see some training before just anyone can jump in.
As you will recall, when the waivers started out, there was virtually no one that had one. Flying on a buddy box with the initial people that could certify pilots would have been a bigger road block than it is now. A requirement to do so for X number of hours would have slowed the waiver process, not helped it. In many parts of the country, I am sure that is still the case. With only about 700 current waiver holders, I am sure that some potential jet pilots are still not near a waiver holder.
When it comes to accidents, I think the jet pilots need to be more open and discuss problems. As soon as you see jet and crash in the same sentence, the jet guys panic. I don't think anyone is looking for a reason to eliminate jets. I do think that open and honest communication will lead to a better system to train pilots. Probably one that is less restrictive.
JR
06-24-2003 | 08:29 PM
#9
Junior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Sun City,
CA
AMA Waivers
Hi,
RIGHT ON Ira. AMA's present reqiirements to obtain waivers, i.e. permission to fly turbines, is illogical, unsafe, complicated, costly,
and totally absurd. To disallow buddy box instruction, as they do,
contributes to reckless endangerment, is utterly outrageous. Whoever proposed that, and approved that, should be fired or forced to leave AMA.
Bob
RIGHT ON Ira. AMA's present reqiirements to obtain waivers, i.e. permission to fly turbines, is illogical, unsafe, complicated, costly,
and totally absurd. To disallow buddy box instruction, as they do,
contributes to reckless endangerment, is utterly outrageous. Whoever proposed that, and approved that, should be fired or forced to leave AMA.
Bob
06-25-2003 | 04:41 AM
#10
Thread Starter
waivers
Jr
yes i was at prado best in the west 2003 only saw one crash
it was caused by a defective kit the wing came off a cermark
arf . as for the buddy box there is no reason the ama should ban
the use of one to fly with even if you dont have a waiver .
the more experience and exposure one can get can only help.
i would bet if buddy box flying was allowed there be a lot of
turbine flight schools out there and saffety training too.
one could make money just trainning new people then if they
decided to go on and get a jet they would most likely be a better
and safer jet modeler all around you can fly full scale planes
with out a pilot license with a pilot on board .
ira d
yes i was at prado best in the west 2003 only saw one crash
it was caused by a defective kit the wing came off a cermark
arf . as for the buddy box there is no reason the ama should ban
the use of one to fly with even if you dont have a waiver .
the more experience and exposure one can get can only help.
i would bet if buddy box flying was allowed there be a lot of
turbine flight schools out there and saffety training too.
one could make money just trainning new people then if they
decided to go on and get a jet they would most likely be a better
and safer jet modeler all around you can fly full scale planes
with out a pilot license with a pilot on board .
ira d
06-25-2003 | 05:06 AM
#11
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
waivers
ira d
The way the AMA insurance is set up currently, a school would have to be at a site other than a chartered club if they were to charge to learn to fly. That means some substantial expenses; little things like the lease of land or it's purchase might just drive the price up beyond reason.
In another thread the subject of insurance for commercial ventures at chartered clubs has been raised.
As the number of waiver holder's becomes larger, it makes sense to allow buddy box training; even a requirement. When no one had a waiver, it would have been counter-productive.
If you feel strongly about your opinions, send them to Rich Hanson, the Dist X VP. He is a pretty reasonable guy.
JR
The way the AMA insurance is set up currently, a school would have to be at a site other than a chartered club if they were to charge to learn to fly. That means some substantial expenses; little things like the lease of land or it's purchase might just drive the price up beyond reason.
In another thread the subject of insurance for commercial ventures at chartered clubs has been raised.
As the number of waiver holder's becomes larger, it makes sense to allow buddy box training; even a requirement. When no one had a waiver, it would have been counter-productive.
If you feel strongly about your opinions, send them to Rich Hanson, the Dist X VP. He is a pretty reasonable guy.
JR
06-25-2003 | 09:33 PM
#13
waivers
>>>>>>>
The way the AMA insurance is set up currently, a school would have to be at a site other than a chartered club if they were to charge to learn to fly. That means some substantial expenses; little things like the lease of land or it's purchase might just drive the price up beyond reason.
<<<<<<<<
Most are aware of the AMA NOW! It's the AMA tomorrow that I am concerned about. Many changes are needed.
In rider scale, the Instructor Pilot is always in command, so the student is NOT responsible. Same should apply to RC.
As an Instructor Pilot in the military, I was in command regardless of the rank of another pilot. When 2 IPs were together, the commander was whomever signed the flight plan.
Making changes that benefit more members should not be such a problem at the AMA EC level. Of course the voters could do that if they really wanted to.
Yesterday, some things happened that made me much more confident for the Paid Instructor at the Charter Club level without any cost to the non-involved AMA member.
In any case what is "...price up beyond reason?" Far too many people worry about other's finances. If one cannot afford something, then one pursues less expensive things. I don't race at Reno. I do RC. I wish my club had some paid instructors. I wouldn't have been instructing both Sun. and today.
So my point is: Make the changes that benefit those willing to pay for the benefits, changes that help some but don't hurt others, and let those willing to pay determine what is within THEIR reason. AMA for Tomorrow not yesterday!!!
The way the AMA insurance is set up currently, a school would have to be at a site other than a chartered club if they were to charge to learn to fly. That means some substantial expenses; little things like the lease of land or it's purchase might just drive the price up beyond reason.
<<<<<<<<
Most are aware of the AMA NOW! It's the AMA tomorrow that I am concerned about. Many changes are needed.
In rider scale, the Instructor Pilot is always in command, so the student is NOT responsible. Same should apply to RC.
As an Instructor Pilot in the military, I was in command regardless of the rank of another pilot. When 2 IPs were together, the commander was whomever signed the flight plan.
Making changes that benefit more members should not be such a problem at the AMA EC level. Of course the voters could do that if they really wanted to.
Yesterday, some things happened that made me much more confident for the Paid Instructor at the Charter Club level without any cost to the non-involved AMA member.
In any case what is "...price up beyond reason?" Far too many people worry about other's finances. If one cannot afford something, then one pursues less expensive things. I don't race at Reno. I do RC. I wish my club had some paid instructors. I wouldn't have been instructing both Sun. and today.
So my point is: Make the changes that benefit those willing to pay for the benefits, changes that help some but don't hurt others, and let those willing to pay determine what is within THEIR reason. AMA for Tomorrow not yesterday!!!
06-25-2003 | 11:35 PM
#14
Thread Starter
waivers
Right on Hosfly i totaly agree , what JR says abount insuarnce
i didnt know but im sure he is right but it is not inforced a lot
of people help people in this hobby for a fee. ama requirs a
turbine ground school most likely at a ama field after you buy
the engine . im sure if you didnot by from the rep on site there
would be a charge. BVM jets will send a rep out to your field
for a fee
i didnt know but im sure he is right but it is not inforced a lot
of people help people in this hobby for a fee. ama requirs a
turbine ground school most likely at a ama field after you buy
the engine . im sure if you didnot by from the rep on site there
would be a charge. BVM jets will send a rep out to your field
for a fee
