Rules and Regs
 

If the field you fly at dos not met the AMA criteria, for example the flight line is not 25’ from center of the run way can this cause a problem with AMA covering an unforeseen accident

RE: Rules and Regs
 

I guess it depends on how good the respective lawyers are. I wouldn't want to test it. I would not be all that happy with someone trying to land 25 ft (or less) from where my plane or I might be. [:o]

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Your question does not have enough information in it.

From other posts you have made, you fly helis. There is a safety code rule that requires that no flying take place within 25 ft of people. If the centerline of the runway is only 25 ft away, it would appear that you are in violation of that rule from the get go. If what you are talking about is a field where IC engines are being used in planks, I have to wonder why you might describe an accident as unforseen.

On the other hand, if this is a field being used for only 8 oz park flyers, you may get other answers.

If your question is serious, call Carl Maroney at AMA HQ and ask his opinion.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

First of all I do fly helis but not exclusively. And yes it is a serous question. The filed is being used for planks using .30 to big gassers.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

J_R gave you a good answer, but this is what I expect you will find. The field has been in operation for some time and will still be covered. However, you DO have a problem with a NEW Safety Code rule that basically closes your field.

Call Carl, write and call your DVP right after your conversation. I seriously doubt anyone on the EC had a clue of THAT unintended consequence!

RE: Rules and Regs
 

JB-
Remember the field at Roswell? Would you consider THAT an unsafe condition? I don't, certainly. Yet the pit line is less than 30 ' from the pilot stations (Actually, measured 20', IIRC), and the runway is right n the other side op pilot stations. Excellent flying field, too! Many on this forum would be appaled!

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Of course I remember that field! I had lots of fun there. Somehow I though the distances were larger than that. Guess when it is 4000 feet long, it is easy to ignore the width!

Roger, *I* did not and do not consider that to be an unsafe condition, nor did I intend to imply that. However the question is what do the current AMA RULES say.

This is one of those gottcha's where all the good intentions of trying to protect me from Harry Hoverfortypercenter STILL nuke the average guy. I happen to think that needs to be looked at more carefully and maybe even reworded so that any manuevers EXCEPT take off and landings must occur some distance away. Consider how unclean it would have been if that Cub had been over the centerline.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Sorry, Jim--I didn't think that you would consider it dangerous, either---yet many here would, simply because they have the "One size fits all" mind-set. when you have 40 bazillion square miles to run away into, it ain't all that bad. If you're surrounded by trees, claustrophobia sets in, and anything is too close...
The amount of "risk" one is willing to accept is a personal thing--I cannot make it for you, nor you for me. Yet there are many who have no problem deciding from their Eastern armchair or California beach just what risk is acceptable for you and me...
The rocket thing is another symptom of this (see the thread elsewhere on this forum). In Roswell, I'd have no problem with it, assuming that the correct wadding was used, and you had the blame thing pointed towards Ruidoso or Artesia when you launched.
I still recall the safety officer, late one day, when only a couple of us were around, playing Limbo using the sun shelter as the stick. What is there to hurt?
It's all a matter of common sense. No way he'd have done that on Sunday or Saturday morning. Friday evening? Why not?

Roger

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Roger,

Not a problem, as I did understand where you were pointing. Besides I have thick hide - really. <g>

The problem is the beach combers and arm chair pilots never have a real clue as to what the unintended consequences of their decisions might really be.

BTW, I like the idea of pointing rockets at Ruidoso!

RE: Rules and Regs
 

So, what's to stop Harry from hovering his aircraft down to a landing ? Your suggested wording change may actually make things LESS safe, as those who want to hover up close would be encouraged to add a tailwheel-first landing or touch-n-go to their hover maneuver in order to make it "legit". Those who are least capable would be adding complexity and therefore danger to the maneuver just to observe the rule.

Gordon

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Gordon,
I am impressed that you are so very wrong while being somewhat right. *M*Y* wording is not what you should be complaining about, even if your complaint has merit. What you complain about was suggested by others months ago when discussing the infamous Rule #9.

Your point of view seems to imply that we should be closing down club flying sites that are unable to meet the specific wording of Rule #9. I am sure that will sing well in the halls of the clubs who are unable to find better flying sites - NOT-! I guess the other way to look at your latest post is to simoly outlaw hovering.

Which is it?

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Not even close on either count.

My point is rather simple ... given all of the complaints that have been made recently about unintended side effects of the way that rules are worded, anyone who seeks to "correct" the wording should ensure that they are not committing the exact same mistakes as those who wrote the rule up in the first place. If you're gonna reword the rules, make sure the new version is in fact better.

Gordon

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Just to be clear, this is directly from the AMA Safety Code:

8) With the exception of events flown under AMA Competition rules, after launch, except for
pilots or helpers being used, no powered model may be flown closer than 25 feet to any
person.

Notice that it does not exclude pilots or their helpers from being closer than 25 feet.

Also, All AMA insurance requires is that you are following the Safety Code. The guidelines for field layout is just that, a guideline. In addition, there is no such thing as an AMA sanctioned field. AMA Charters clubs and sanctions contests, but they do nothing with respect to the flying site beyond giving some general guidelines.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

so the filed can be set up any way we want?

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Pretty much.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Since most of the folks who were talking about it before the last change suggested EXACTLY what YOU said they would do, I fail to see a problem. I don't disagree with your observation that tail wheels might encourage the incompetent to try hovering to landing, but I fail to see how mere words are going to control the actions of those who decide to be unsafe at any speed, altitude, weight, or power.


Lets do this another way. Instead of you throwing rocks, why don't YOU write a better rule and let others here poke at it.

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Well I think I can... Read The following carefully:




That was easy...next

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Writing a rule properly involves doing a lot of homework, and I'll be happy to do that whe I find a badly worded rule that I care enough about.

Until then, there is absolutely nothing wrong in pointing out the weakspots in others' suggested wording ... unless of course one is more concerned about protecting misplaced egos than in ensuring that the new wording is better than the old.

Gordon

RE: Rules and Regs
 

So I guess if your runway edge is 25 feet from the runway you are OK? What if a strong crosswind push's the plane off the edge and you fail to correct? What if the same plane does this on takeoff and it hits someone in the pit. So I guess you are not covered because you violated the 25 foot rule?

Not being smart, just how do you know it is intentional or not?

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Hi Gordon

Couple of things. When I saw the rewrite of the safety code, I felt many items were still ambigious. My suggestion was to take the safety code, and someone who really and truly knows the intent of the rules, and send them over to the English dept at Ball State for the re-write.

The other thing is, I guess, slightly off topic. mongo made a nice post about failsafes here
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_21...anchor/tm.htm#
You have the knowledge and ability to write an article on how to set a failsafe correctly. Why not write one and submit it to Model Aviation? (Absolutely meant as a compliment to you).

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Nothing wrong with that. Find the people that are intended to be affected by the rule, and ask them to participate in rewordng it - pointing out to them that it's better for them to help address the issue, than to have something imposed by someone else who knows nothing about the discipline(s) involved. Then take those suggestions public on a forum such as this and ask for any & all input. Use this as a way of trying to catch situations that your original group did not think about, including unintended side-effects, and rework the rule as necesary. The key point at that stage is to be open minded enough to take constructive criticism and understand that people pointing out holes in your argument are in fact doing you / us a favor by helping to fix "bugs" in the rule, rather than taking such input as a personal slight.


I'll think about it.

Anyway - you guys have fun with the rest of this dicussion... I'm getting ready to head off to the Reno Air Races, so will be spending the next few days fixing whatever my pilot decides to break, rather than being able to join in on the discussions in here. Have fun.

Gordon

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Make sure he has the failsafe set ;)

RE: Rules and Regs
 

That looks like a good rule to me! Hard to confuse and simple enough for most of us!

RE: Rules and Regs
 

Again, these are guidlines, not cast-in-concrete regulations.
Even if the CL of the runway is 1/2 a mile from the pilot stations, many pilots will land a LOT closer than that, and a few will try to land in the pits.
The mere fact that you have sufficient distance for everyone to feel comfortable does not mean that everyone--or even anyone--will make use of it....

RE: Rules and Regs
 

We went through this twice in an 8 year period. Once when we reoriented our old field, and once when we were forced to find a new field. What we were told by the AMA in both instances is that the AMA is only a suggestion and that the layout has to be tailored to meet the available space. They know that today's fields are getting tighter and that some compromises have to be made. A previous AMA associate VP visited our old field shortly before we lost it, and thought we did a fantastic job, even though we had to cut some of the suggested dimensions short