Sean, there's no vengence in mistakenly shoot somebody down. Thanks for showing your true colors.

I've been around sports where rich and poor mix and it's allways the same elitist crap. Wait until you put your $1,000 race car on the same track as somebody's $100,000 race car. Forget even trying to make a legal pass on one of these money machines.

The best arguement you have for not using ham is that someone, someday might possibly show up at your field and not know what frequency he/she is on? And this is believable?

In truth, the best arguement would be tilting the odds in your favor. How many club members do you have that fly on 72 mHz? How many on ham? Which radio system do you think the newbies are going to buy? Your witness, counselor.

Daren

Woketman thinks HAM is just for dinner! Where else can you license YOUR frequency for 10 years at a time. BTW 58 is mine everyone so please stop using it...!!!

The truth is that you chances of being shot down go down- Waaaayyy down- So someone knows a guy who knows a guy who got shot down using HAM. ((Wow)) We all know people who've been shot down on 72mhz..

So choose your poison- But don't cry when it kills you.

I am not trying to argue one way or the other because every circumstance WILL be different and no blanket policy will cover it. I am stating that you have options that can reduce your overall risk (is it not worth it)? Must you put your superTOY on the same freq as a hobbico cheepie. Well if you must I will be there waiting with the video cam (as I always do) because the clock is ticken.

What I don't condone is the elitist attitude of -my plane is more expensive therfore I am always right.

Broken....

Again, don't muddy it up.

The point being made is no matter WHAT frequency you are on you are responsible. I agree you are about 100 times less likely to get shot down on amateur frequencies....but of the question is still....

If you shot down a plane out of pure negligence, would you pay to replace it?

My question is what happens when one of these billion dollar models goes down and the guy flying it accuses some other guy at the field on his freq of turning on his radio- Then he gets two of his buddies to go in front of a judge in an attempt to get the guy to pay up- What proof you say? These two friends (good friends) who will swear that they saw him turn on the radio. Did he do it? Who cares its a replacement right-

Will a judge really believe it? According to my experience watching CSI probably not but who knows...?

Someone said that they know someone who won a judgement? I think we should scrape up these "wins" and attempt to set a precedent based on the facts! A judge won't give you a favorable judgement based on speculation and circumstance- You at least need some proof like a confession or video of the offender turning on his/her radio etc. At least we can set the requirements for liability not just point the blind finger of guilt. and say pay-up.

I fear the man that lies for his own self gain regardless of how it affects others. Not if but when....

OK more mud....

I agree in about 99 out of 100 cases of a shootdown you will not be able to prove it, and I do not know many people that will perjure themselves for something like this, maybe you do.

But in one case in 100 you WILL be able to prove it....multpile independant witnesses that see someone do it, or walk back to the pits and find the TX on with a dozen witnesses...

Like I said I know of one judgement in LA and one insurance company payout after threatening action. In both of these cases, cuplability was proven to a judge and to a claims adjuster.

So assuming you did shot it down out of pure negligence on your part what would you do?

What do you do when a newbie 12 y/o boy drives up with his dad and is playing with his radio in the car while he's pulling up. He doesn't know any better. You gonna sue a 12 y/o kid?

Oh, let me guess, you'd sue his dad because he should have known better.

I wish we could all be politically correct!

I guess my point is that being "shot down" isn't as cut and dry as we might think- People always claim that they are being shot down. Face it crashing is a bit embarrassing and it feels better when you can say it wasn't your fault.

With the statements above being as heated as they are I feel that we could go down the slippery slope of a lawsuit dogpile.

So let me propose a solution: Fields should adopt a no-fault / liability policy outside of bodily injury. Sign the papers or fly somewhere else. Do you think i'm crazy? I think the day is upon us. If you can't squeeze the guy for your 8G's than you could sue the club for frequency negligence etc...

Next up RC Lawyers- I can see the commercials now...


I know I know "more mud" but its a dirty world...

No sweat, Broken, I think we all know what you would do.

The elitist "pay for my expensive toy or else" attitude and obvious intimidation doesn't really make me want to confess. So instead of me doing what I can to pay for at least part or help you rebuild your plane I quietly put my transmitter away before somebody sees me. Oh well.

Edit: Oh yeah, you guys pretty much suck as reps from the ex*****ive jet community. You're fired.

Before any mud gets slung too far, one more question. Has the person who performed the cold solder joint on Kenny's F-18 offered to replace his jet?

Daren

Broken and MikeMc, all I can say is that I sincerely hope that one day, if you were to be shot down and are able to determine who did it, that the person is more inclined to take personal responsibilty than you are, cause it looks like you guys are VERY good at rationalizing why you should not have to pay (even if it is CLEARLY your fault).

There are two issues here- personal morality, which the "chip on shoulder about rich jet pilots" brigade seem a little short on, and the law. Legal liability depends on evidence. It's a lot harder to prove a shoot down than who hit who in car crash. Legally, if the evidence is there and the shooter is negligent, he will have to pay the damages. Maybe the pilot was also negligent. If so, his damages will be reduced accordingly. I guess what most people expect is honesty and for the guilty party to "own up". Wishfull thinking perhaps but perfectly reasonable IMO.

MR Matt - Woketman READ what I am saying- You have somehow labeled me as someone who will switch on my radio and then run away as you approach!

I simply can't believe someone would invest that much money/time into a model and stay on the general use frequency band. When your radio is the weakest link in the chain don't you think you should offset the danger a bit. I have not stated one way or the other on the issue of "who must pay" because every situation WILL be different. Sometimes payment will be justified and sometimes it won't.
You make it out to be a criminal offense against you (automatically)

This hobby has people of all ages in it- some with a terrific amount of experience and some with none at all... Mistakes are the only guarantee. I fly at a crowded field and I am switching to Amateur Radio freq for my safety and the safety of poeple arround me. I look forward to flying on "MY" frequency.

The biggest question is WHY would you stay on 72. with EVERYONE else?

Anyone can make mistakes, so a guy flying a 8kdollars plane could be shot down by accident by a modeller that simply cannot afford the expense... I guess that the guy that flys a expensive airplane should be ready to lose his investment at any time, by any means,
interference, mid-air, mechanical problems or plain pilot error. If he is "lucky" to be shot down by a person who can afford the mistake, i am sure that this person will pay happily ... but if the guy is poor on money or poor in honesty... well , there is nothing much to do.

Fortunately this kind of accidents are uncommon, and we better should focus in the main causes of r/c accidents like lack of pilot knowledge or mechanical issues.

Just my thoughts, Enrique

Since Matt won't answer my question, I'll ask you. Did the guy who performed the cold solder joint on Kenny's F-18 offer to replace his jet? I read Kenny's thread and didn't see anyone owning up to it.

Daren

BTW I have been shot down! I know who did it / It cost me about $300 ish / I didn't ask him to pay / We are now really good friends...

My current models average about $900 to $1000 build projects (I know small change to turbine flight) But I will NEVER sue someone for accidentally damaging one my toys. If they offer to pay fine- If not fine. However, we may have a "little" chat on safety and field procedures-

You can really make a difference depending on how you approach your "plane's killer" If you know who it is- Start with an introduction and a friendly handshake- Show some real character and poise. Your end result will be much more positive. I got a good friend who also assisted in the build of a later project- The time invested by him in helping me build has been worth thousands to me....

53 MHz band (Aircraft/Car/Boat) FCC Amateur
license required. 2 and 3 channels not produced
on these freqs.

Note: Although the frequency list for the 53Mhz portion of the 6 Meter band is correct, the governing body for this group of frequencies, The American Radio Relay League, has dropped the 53 MHz portion for R/C use as there are hi powered repeaters operating in that portion of the band. It would be advisable if you are a Ham radio operator to use the 50MHz frequencies for R/C . They recommended migrating to 50Mhz about 5 years ago and no longer list 53 MHz in the band plan.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/comp/Fr...20Dan-ver3.htm

Good read from the AMA

WOW I thought was a sick joke...I tell you what, why don't you go over to the jet list and ask Kenny? I have no idea who soldered what and I doubt Mark knows either.

Wouldn’t it be better to fix the problem rather than fix the result of the problem?

I am in favor of asking the radio manufacturers to start designing for safer and more secure radio systems that cannot be shot down. The technology exists to design equipment that is immune to frequency conflicts. And yes it will take a few years for the changes to become commonplace.

Debating who should pay for a lost airplane is an exercise in futility. The human frailty built into the current Pin Box methodology cannot be fixed and accidents will continue to happen. The fundamental frequency pin concept was OK thirty years ago. The frequency pin concept is obsolete and flawed in today’s technology.

Great info. We have had some minor issues at our local club on channels 28 (72.35 MHz) and 56 (72.91MHz). We have had a few crashes lately, but most were due to discharged TX or RX batteries, one bad switch, and two... well, let's just say that the individual had problems that day, crashing three (one definately a bad TX battery) aircraft then went home. On that day, two other pilots crashed, but both were due to problems other than inteference issues.

Thanks again for posting that AMA report. I will put it in our club newsletter.

Dick.

Hello Enrique,

This is not completely true......

i know 2 guys at my field were shot down, the person was not willing to pay......now one was paid by the guilty party's insurance, the other one has a judgement against him (collects some each month)

You see, I actually understand the mindset on here....I just like to show my fellow jet modellers who we are flying with......for those who might not have had the pleasure of seeing it written out so clearly.

Litigious ba$tard$!!!

Those who read Shashdot will get this- Others sould not give it much thought...

Yes they do. http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...ndplan.html#6m
Although, I would be suspect about using the 53.5-53.8 MHz channels since they might be shared with the repeaters.

Minor correction: The ARRL is *not* the governing body for any frequencies. The FCC is. The ARRL is a national organization of amateur radio operators. They do publish a "band plan" designed to minimize interference and foster good operating practices among amateurs but it is voluntary. The ARRL will be the first to tell you they have no legal enforcement powers.

Glen, NK1N
ARRL Life Member