AndyAndrews

Regardless of how people believe, one way or the other, this thread has increased awareness regarding these issues. Especially as it relates to CD's Some are thinking about this in depth for the first time. If this is all that was accomplished then it's a positive for the hobby.

Thanks RCU contributors for sharing all of your opinions. I think the debate will continue on how best to handle these issues.

rcjetsaok

My Feedback: (7)

[QUOTE=kochj;11626091
If you want to do the RIGHT thing and protect your club,,,,,,EVERYONE that enters your property....Has to sign a waiver.... that discloses all claims from death or injury bodily harm...and at your OWN risk!...
That is the PROPER way to do things....
.[/QUOTE]

Those documents are not worth the paper they are written on. You cannot release or reassign liability. Period. It leads people into believing that they have released liability, but get a good lawyer and it don't mean kaka.. Airlines, cruise lines, amusement parks, you name it pay 100's of millions of dollars to settlements because they are liable. 9 out of 10 people who signed such form and gets hurt will not pursue litigation simply because they THINK they have signed it away.. Reminds me of years ago when you went into a diner or such and they had a sign on the door that said Microwave Oven in use. First of all, a microwave oven cannot affect a pacemaker, but if someone fell over dead with a heart attack and had a pacemaker, they had been warned at the door... It's all perception...

Dan

warbird_1

My Feedback: (61)

Andy , i don't know if your a CD or not but a CD assume's all liability when they sign on the line for a sanction . this problem would only pile on more liability to the CD if AMA asked them to be responsible for more. I think it would be better served if a petition was started asking AMA investigate these concerns and offer a solution . you'd be pretty mad if you showed up at an event only to be told you can't fly that here because one person thought is to risky to fly your ship there. after all he didn't build it so why would he take the risk at an event he"CD" was running? Just like AMA doesn't get involved with internal club issue , they won't get into disputes over design and construction.

Tarasdad

There is one agency with the power to do something...but it's not really one we want to get involved. It's called the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the federal agency charged "to protect the public against unreasonable risks of injuries and deaths associated with consumer products." They have the authority to regulate, set safety standards and ban any consumer good bought or sold in the US except those that fall under the specific jurisdiction of another federal agency. If one of these jets causes a death or serious injury it may not cause them to act - but the second might, and a third most likely would. Once they start looking our direction they could easily decide to keep looking.

It is in our best interests if these problems are handled without getting a federal agency (or rather another, since we still don't know what the FAA is planning) involved in our hobby. This can best be done by identifying problem models and not buying them, not flying them or allowing them to be flown at events, banning them from our club fields and not doing business with vendors who continue to sell them. Do enough of that and vendors and manufacturers will get the idea that we won't accept defective crap just because its cheap. There are plenty of other good, reliable models we can spend our money on.