|
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628421)
Well since I am not the public relations officer for any clubs, if you want that answer you should contact the clubs directly.
Don't want to tarnish your #1 AMA fanboi status? LOL |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628421)
Well since I am not the public relations officer for any clubs, if you want that answer you should contact the clubs directly.
I'll ask again.... How many clubs have illegally allowed YOU to fly over 400' since that became law? Astro |
Ask all you want, the answer will be the same.
|
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628388)
No AMA lessons learned from dangerous near misses, and you're getting upset about me saying 35 out of 2000 isn't statistically significant? Outside of the fact that it's a true statement, your emotionalism is getting the best of you yet again.
If AMA were serious about wanting to be viewed as a serious player to the FAA, they'd have many of the things I described. And you know what? What I described above are all components of a ... wait for it ... Safety Management System. Oh, and wasn't it the AMA that told the FAA and others that they had an SMS? We see of course they did not. And do not to this day. Which is precisely one of the major reasons they're not viewed as credible among the other aviation stakeholders - most notably the one writing the regulations. It's just not that hard to be serious about safety. There should have been a major expose on the Fairview Club. So other clubs could avoid making the same mistakes, drawing more unwanted attention, or God forbid prevent a mishap. But no. AMA takes the "If we don't talk about it, it never happened" approach. Same for standing "Mayhem Park." Same for sending the spectators diving for safety as a LMA careens toward them out of control. Same for a number of other events. Or tell you what? How about some no-kidding SCIENTIFIC analysis of things like receiver placement, transmissivity of full tanks vs. unfilled, how antenna placement or number of satellites affects reliability. I'm talking real science, using spectrum analzyers etc. I'd imagine that nearby Ball State has some engineering students that could help. People might actually read that ... instead of YET ANOTHER article about electric motor functionality. Some sort of reporting system is necessary, but even that doesn't need to be difficult. And publish data from time to time ... so again, everyone can learn. So like I said, it's just not that hard to be credible. My piece above talked about several. You were more worried about how many clubs visited than the real issue - one that affects why AMA isn't viewed as credible. In the airline world, SMS is a way of life. However, there are several points to collect data. ASAP reports come from the pilots themselves. FOQA comes from the aircraft's Flight Data Recorders, and is now uploaded directly to company servers via ACARS. There are continual audits of : pilot flight records, aircraft maintenance records, flight release data, as well as input from ATC records, flight training departments, etc. All of that data is then condensed down to training and review modules, which are required viewing and testing points for each active pilot on the property during recurrent ground school. Fail that, you are taken off line and sent to remedial training. Fail that, and you are out of a job. (and as a pilot who used to build the training modules for our recurrent training programs, the SMS/FOQA module was the most difficult because it cures insomnia for about 95% of the pilots on staff) How exactly will the AMA get the average modeler to comply with any of that? Just like with recreation full-scale aviation, there is simply no way to get the average, recreational modeler to voluntarily comply with such a system or program. Even the WINGS program only has about 5-10% participation, and is so cumbersome and unworkable that the FAA is going to restructure it AGAIN. I'm sorry, but SMS for recreational R/C is a pipe dream, and an unrealistic one at that. R_Strowe |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628411)
The reality is that during the majority of my 40+ years in the hobby and having flown at 30+ club sites flying over 400' was legal at the time. They all however had a safety program in place. At events we always have a pilots meeting which includes specific safety rules as they apply to that particular site. I have seen many rules infractions result is suspensions and a few membership terminations. Why is it that the same few of you guys refuse to accept those facts?
. AMA was RC fliers had carte blanche to decide what's "safe", which led to the RC anarchy that forced the FAA to step in. With the FAA able to close down RC fields for any reason, AMA is about to get religion on member behavior at least. |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628431)
Ask all you want, the answer will be the same.
|
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628397)
I would actually agree with you on this. Keep in mind that I'm in no way claiming that problems don't exist. I'm saying that Franklin's apparent claim that ALL AMA clubs have safety issues and/or ignore safety infractions is incorrect.
|
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628446)
Might as well add the helo into the crowd at Taj-Muncie, the Futaba sponsored pylon racer flying circles behind the flight line and over parking lots at a club in CA, the jet crash into the pits in Florida that sent a guy to the hospital w/ burns, and the jet crash into the pits at Buttonwillow ... and I'm not even looking that hard.
Not that those incidents shouldn't be looked at however the percentage of accidents like that are still relitivly small when you figure in how many thousands of flights per week are incident free. I will agree that we should always look for ways to increase safety however a balance needs to be kept. |
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628435)
So how would you suggest implementing an SMS in the recreational R/C world? What are going to be your data collection points? How are you going to get the information out to the pilots?
In the airline world, SMS is a way of life. However, there are several points to collect data. ASAP reports come from the pilots themselves. FOQA comes from the aircraft's Flight Data Recorders, and is now uploaded directly to company servers via ACARS. There are continual audits of : pilot flight records, aircraft maintenance records, flight release data, as well as input from ATC records, flight training departments, etc. All of that data is then condensed down to training and review modules, which are required viewing and testing points for each active pilot on the property during recurrent ground school. Fail that, you are taken off line and sent to remedial training. Fail that, and you are out of a job. (and as a pilot who used to build the training modules for our recurrent training programs, the SMS/FOQA module was the most difficult because it cures insomnia for about 95% of the pilots on staff) How exactly will the AMA get the average modeler to comply with any of that? Just like with recreation full-scale aviation, there is simply no way to get the average, recreational modeler to voluntarily comply with such a system or program. Even the WINGS program only has about 5-10% participation, and is so cumbersome and unworkable that the FAA is going to restructure it AGAIN. I'm sorry, but SMS for recreational R/C is a pipe dream, and an unrealistic one at that. If it was just about collecting data, which it clearly is not, data collection is not so difficult as you lead folks to believe. DJI already collecting data, of course AMA is not. No contrast there for regulators eh? RemoteID will also bring data. Just as spillouts from FRIAs will become another data source, whether from other aircraft, ATC, or reports from neighbors. And there's NOTHING that prevents AMA from telling clubs and members that as a condition of insurance coverage, participation in safety data collection is required. But the more important piece is learning from others mistakes by information sharing. As noted above, it doesn't take a lot of technology to communicate post mortem on the Fairview Club. Or incident reports from clubs or events. AMA send out those garbage email notifications with some regularity, it would be refreshing to see some genuine safety lessons in them ... like those described above. As for the other components, it doesn't take a genius to put together structured risk management process - though that does seem to have eluded the "pretty smart" folks at Taj-Munice. And that leaves just the assurance .. which means checking compliance and holding people accountable. And that too requires no technology - just the EC putting on their big boy pants and actually looking for what's right in front of their eyes - literally in the case of one former EVP. It's just not that hard. |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628448)
Not that those incidents shouldn't be looked at however the percentage of accidents like that are still relitivly small when you figure in how many thousands of flights per week are incident free. I will agree that we should always look for ways to increase safety however a balance needs to be kept.
Oh, and I forgot the fatality in NY, another incident where an out of control jet crashed behind the spectators, and more than a couple mid-airs that sent debris into the crowd. |
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628451)
Oh, and I forgot the fatality in NY, another incident where an out of control jet crashed behind the spectators, |
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628450)
Unfortunately, what you describe above are not components of a Safety Management System. SMS involve structured risk management (decision making), active safety management before failures occur, assurance processes, knowledge sharing, and overall framework and sound culture. None of those require automation. In fact, there was an active SMS in Naval Aviation when I started flying back in '86 .. and we had none of what you described above. Because an SMS isn't about technology.
If it was just about collecting data, which it clearly is not, data collection is not so difficult as you lead folks to believe. DJI already collecting data, of course AMA is not. No contrast there for regulators eh? RemoteID will also bring data. Just as spillouts from FRIAs will become another data source, whether from other aircraft, ATC, or reports from neighbors. And there's NOTHING that prevents AMA from telling clubs and members that as a condition of insurance coverage, participation in safety data collection is required. But the more important piece is learning from others mistakes by information sharing. As noted above, it doesn't take a lot of technology to communicate post mortem on the Fairview Club. Or incident reports from clubs or events. AMA send out those garbage email notifications with some regularity, it would be refreshing to see some genuine safety lessons in them ... like those described above. As for the other components, it doesn't take a genius to put together structured risk management process - though that does seem to have eluded the "pretty smart" folks at Taj-Munice. And that leaves just the assurance .. which means checking compliance and holding people accountable. And that too requires no technology - just the EC putting on their big boy pants and actually looking for what's right in front of their eyes - literally in the case of one former EVP. It's just not that hard. And you miss the point entirely regarding an SMS system (by referencing Farview as something that can be dealt with post mortem). The data is essential because it allows for policies and procedures that prevent the event before it occurs. Problem is, the structures needed (standardized flight training, regulatory enforcement, data capture and analysis) do not exist for the R/C community. There is no 'Jeppesen Flight Training Syllabus" for R/C. There is no real standardization. There is no reporting system that people will willingly use. YOU might be fine with filling out flight reports on every flight you conduct. You want to drive people away from this hobby? Make them do paperwork after each flight. I do so at work because it is my job and I get paid to do so. When I used to fly my C310 around, it was a pleasure to just go fly, no paperwork, no filling out of logbooks, not even filing a flight plan half the time. I am fully aware of what it takes to run an SMS system. And I know that any system set up by the AMA or any other CBO would barely meet the requirements, because you are talking about recreational flyers. Take a look at what the WINGS program does for the GA crowd. And look at the participation rates. Recreational flyers (R/C or Full-Scale) won't participate, they frankly have more important things to do. THIS ISN'T THE NAVY, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! R_Strowe |
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628460)
And you miss the point entirely regarding an SMS system (by referencing Farview as something that can be dealt with post mortem). The data is essential because it allows for policies and procedures that prevent the event before it occurs.
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628460)
Problem is, the structures needed (standardized flight training, regulatory enforcement, data capture and analysis) do not exist for the R/C community. There is no 'Jeppesen Flight Training Syllabus" for R/C. There is no real standardization. There is no reporting system that people will willingly use.
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628460)
YOU might be fine with filling out flight reports on every flight you conduct. You want to drive people away from this hobby? Make them do paperwork after each flight. I do so at work because it is my job and I get paid to do so. When I used to fly my C310 around, it was a pleasure to just go fly, no paperwork, no filling out of logbooks, not even filing a flight plan half the time.
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628460)
I am fully aware of what it takes to run an SMS system. And I know that any system set up by the AMA or any other CBO would barely meet the requirements, because you are talking about recreational flyers.
Originally Posted by R_Strowe
(Post 12628460)
THIS ISN'T THE NAVY, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!
|
Originally Posted by FUTABA-RC
(Post 12628457)
Hadn't heard about that one. Can you recall more details??
|
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628470)
In common search engine, enter "rc helicopter fatality".
|
Originally Posted by franklin_m
(Post 12628469)
Never said no data was necessary. I recall mentioning that DJI has already figured it out. If AMA is as good as they say they are, and they're all "pretty smart" as they say they are, I'm sure they can figure a way - especially if it becomes "a condition of insurance coverage." Certainly NOTHING prevented AMA from doing an article detailing the events that led up to the field being closed down -- a "What not to do..." type thing if nothing else.
Sounds like exactly what a group billing itself as a CBO should be doing? ESPECIALLY when that group is representing to the FAA that they indeed HAVE a SMS. Are you saying they misrepresented themselves to FAA? If so, look no further for reasons why FAA doesn't take AMA seriously! But again, if it's a matter of losing the hobby or not, maybe the entry of some data goes up a tad in importance? Especially for a want to be CBO telling the FAA they have an SMS system when they know they don't have an SMS system. And you know what? I am fine with it. Do it now for my 107 flying, and it's just not that difficult. Oh. I have to write in a book with at pen. Takes 30-45 seconds per flight at most. Such a burden. Uhm.... it's a program they should already have in place ... as AMA told the FAA they have one. Or, once again, did AMA misrepresent themselves to FAA? Never said it was. Nor did I say they needed fully integrated automatic data collection systems that record throttle position, altitude, engine speed, etc. etc. Again, I record info every 107 flight. Takes 45 seconds at the most. Just not that hard. Thank God this is not the Navy, seems they are riddled with crime. Yet Franklin chooses to go after a toy airplane CBO. The thing that sticks out the most in this report is over 1,000 sexual abuse reports in 2018 that our tax dollars paid for the investigations. Hmm Didn't Franklin suggest how appalled we should be had the AMA used member funds to settle such a case? https://www.ncis.navy.mil/Portals/25...-05-100008-573 |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628474)
Thank God this is not the Navy, seems they are riddled with crime. Yet Franklin chooses to go after a toy airplane CBO. The thing that sticks out the most in this report is over 1,000 sexual abuse reports in 2018 that our tax dollars paid for the investigations. Hmm Didn't Franklin suggest how appalled we should be had the AMA used member funds to settle such a case?
https://www.ncis.navy.mil/Portals/25...-05-100008-573 Better yet, just stay home, you are keeping the rest of the class from progressing.... Astro |
Originally Posted by astrohog
(Post 12628488)
More of your blather.....One has nothing to do with the other. Try to keep up with the rest of the class....
Better yet, just stay home, you are keeping the rest of the class from progressing.... Astro |
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628474)
Thank God this is not the Navy, seems they are riddled with crime. Yet Franklin chooses to go after a toy airplane CBO. The thing that sticks out the most in this report is over 1,000 sexual abuse reports in 2018 that our tax dollars paid for the investigations.
By contrast, AMA has no such processes.
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie
(Post 12628474)
Hmm Didn't Franklin suggest how appalled we should be had the AMA used member funds to settle such a case?
AMA told the FAA they had a SMS program, when it's clear they did not. AMA chose not to hold members accountable. AMA chose not to even enforce its own rules at an event attended by the AMA EVP. AMA chooses to not cut staff when it's clear membership revenue is plumeting AMA chooses to continue funding magazines and staff that lose MORE money every time they're printed AMA chooses to continue obfuscating the true status by referring to membership "numbers" when they should be discussing "revenue" |
Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey
(Post 12628472)
That wasn't a jet that crashed into the crowd or bystander, that was someone that hit himself with his own helicopter as he was out on a flight station.
2016: AMA sanctions event at Taj-Munice, where similarly sized helos are flying in similar manner Helo goes out of control in manner not unlike the fatal event, landing in the spectators. So please point out where AMA learned anything from the 2013 event and show us the mitigations they put in place to learn from the earlier event? Oh that's right. AMA's safety system is predicated on "If we don't talk about it or do anything about it, then it never happened." |
Originally Posted by Propworn
(Post 12628502)
Progressing ??????? How?????? I see no progress just the same dozen or so on the same forum ranting on, never bothering to actually do anything to effect change.
|
@speedracertrixie, What brand of epoxies and resins do you use?
|
AMA received approval for Part 135 drone delivery today.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/31/amaz...-approval.html |
Originally Posted by ECHO24
(Post 12628619)
AMA received approval for Part 135 drone delivery today.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/31/amaz...-approval.html |
Originally Posted by astrohog
(Post 12628623)
LOL. I think you meant Amazon, not AMA.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:31 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.