Hey guys,

A month or so ago JPO place a Safety Pamphlet on the JPO web site that was
intended to help educate new comers to the safety concerns of turbine
operations and provide, by study, the material to help answer the questions
on the turbine waiver application. The AMA has informed me that some pilots
have been simply coping sections of the pamphlet on to their applications.
This does not prove that you know the subject. JPO will be pulling the
pamphlet from the web site while we work with the AMA to find a better way
to disseminate this information. Also if you have copied the information
verbatim, the AMA has stated that they will reject your application. So, if
you have done this, and not sent it in yet, go back and make sure you put
the answers in your own words and demonstrate that you understand the
subject.

Best Regards,

Steven Ellzey
President, Jet Pilot's Organization

Guys JPO is trying real hard to help the newcomer in turbines, trying to help educate them/you and the AMA keeps kicking all of us in the teeth. How is the newbie supposed to learn about the effects of throttle lag, or the safety responsibilities of Turbine operation without some more experienced modelers educating them about it.

David Reid
JPO Webmaster

Isn't there any way to salvage the material (information) that was put out without having to go back to the drawing board? It's a shame that a few have to ruin it for the rest.....................

The information is still on the site, but there is not a link to the turbine awareness page anymore. I can assure you it will go back on there in some form it would just be a good idea if people would at least put it into their own words and not copy it word for word from the website. But........ just how many different ways are there to describe throttle lag.....or residual thrust?

Oh shoot, now I have to change all my answers?? man thats not fair!

hehe

After reading this post regarding the "coping" of the JPO pamphlet data to achieve an AMA Turbine Waiver, I must say I'm not surprised and that will buy the waiver applicant NOTHING.

All the "copied" answers on this planet will not save anyone from "reality" when it comes time to perform the flight review and sign-off of their abilities.

This type of conduct only serves to feed those needs of the individule's that are empowered to put "more" controls on the sport of Turbine power modeling. This is something we do not want or need.

All CD/ Waiver holder's, must focus is on demonstration of "capability and konwledge" which will surley surface when the flight review is peformed.

It is therefore of the utmost importance that those CD's performing the flight review program for the Turbine Waiver applicant, share in the responsabilty to insure that the capabilites of the applicant meet the intent of the Turbine Waiver requirements. While this is not a cure all for the fore-mentioned activities by some, it does provide a stop gap and safety net if properly and FAIRLY executed.

I feel that the pamphlet should remain on the JPO site as there are ample proceedures in place at this time if properly utilized as intended, will serve to denie those who circumvent the intent of the Turbine Waiver Program.

It just requires enforcement of the guidelines and proceedures already in place.

Kerry J. Sterner (Vampire)
AMA 38019 (Scientific / Leader Member)
CD/ Waiver holder

Personally, I "paraphrased" mine directly from the JPO site. I DO understand the need for truly understanding the concepts, but if AMA, JPO, and Bob Violett continue with these impractical regulation efforts, they get what they deserve - bizarre behavior!

Why aren't there waivers and written "tests" for Giant Scale, helicopters, pylon racing, 1/12 scale, et al? I have never feared being at a field that had a turbine jet in the air. I HAVE been fearful watching inexperienced people start helicopters / giant scale planes, 1/12 scale planes and then proceed to fly them in an unsafe manner because the pilots weren't ready / capable to perform some of the maneuvers with them!

I just don't think the argument that turbines (and their pilots) are inherently more unsafe then other RC aircraft especially if you take into account the number of turbines versus all other RC aircraft (for you insurance buffs).

Until there is parity across all types of RC aircraft (in terms of waivers), you will continue to see this type of behavior.

Just my 2 cents!

Hi,
AMA doesn't care what any of us think. The jet segment is too small to be able to change anything by standing up to DB and/or the EC and they know it. So, the reality is they can make whatever rules they want and you either obey them or you're not covered by AMA insurance.
Did anyone notice Joyce Habar's statement in the last MA "We are a service organization. We are here to help not hinder."
Huh?
Jon

Nick wrote

<Personally, I "paraphrased" mine directly from the JPO site. I DO understand the need for truly understanding the concepts, but if AMA, JPO, and Bob Violett continue with these impractical regulation efforts, they get what they deserve - bizarre behavior>

Nick,

Jpo did that document to help new Turbine owners understand the forces behind Turbines. It sole purpose was to teach and help other pilots. The AMA has taken offense to this for some reason, they seems to think that we are all born with Turbine knowledge. They wrote a letter yesterday and requested that the document be pulled from our web site immediately and also told us that any future applications that came with it's info would be rejected. We had to pull it while we plead all of ours case.

I really recommend that you get to know our local AMA Dist. VP and vent your frustrations to him / her. I agree that there are other parts of this hobby that are dangerous and certainly not under the same controls. I agree that singling us out is wrong, but I have not figured out a way to change it yet. We tried to elect a new Jet friendly President but unfortunately that failed.

Again this document was intended to help and it appears you used it so I guess it did.

Dawn
JPO Dist. VIII Rep.

Nick,

If you only knew the whole picture. JPO has acted not to try and increase regulation but to help and eleviate some of it. We realize that Turbine aircraft have slightly different safety concerns than the Giant scale, 1/12 scale, helis, pylon racers, etc.... and are trying to educate the AMA to that. Fact is that the document was placed on the JPO site as the beginings of a much larger document that WILL be put on the JPO site to act as a definitive manual to follow to suceed with turbines. Issues such as proper control surface hinging and rigging. Safety concerns, proper fire fighting techniques, radio essentials, and the list goes on. To say that JPO, and Bob Violett are trying to regulate you further is nonsense. You obviously are just entering into this phase of the hobby, and have not been to the evnets over the past few years. Efforts by Jet modellers to raise the level of awareness of safety and to increase the level of safety with these turbines has been phenomenal. We are seeing a whole lot less crashes, then several years ago. As a newbie to turbines you should realize that even though you may have a lot of experience with models in general you are not an expereienced turbine pilot and as such can learn something from guys with a lot more experience. The JPO waiver proposal that was sent up to AMA headquarters last year was written by several modelers with a tremendous amount of turbine experience and jet expereience period. Give JPO a break we are trying very hard to improve things with the AMA but it is not an instant process.

David Reid

Remember when RC was a hobby and flying was fun

Ken,

You obviously were not in Texas with me last weekend, or are not in Mississippi this weekend. This IS still a hobby and IS still fun. I flew many flights on my Bobcat last weekend, all of which were done with an AMA "legal" airplane and in a safe and FUN way. Anyone that was there can attest I had a great time. Even left with an award. Why do I mention this you ask? I do this as a hobby to relax from the stresses of the everyday reality of owning and operating a buisness. I feel like it is important enough to me to try and make a difference at the AMA level. I spend a lot of my free time that I could spend otherwise building, or flying and update, and modify the JPO website. I believe that JPO serves a purpose and that it does it rather well for an orginization that is made up of volunteers that for the most part just get griped at when something does not go to suit some modeller (red Nick's post above) I know that the group of officers that are currently in place ALL have a tremendous amount of jet experience and all of them LOVE this hobby.

I know David: I meant nothing bad. Just a darn shame it has gotten this far. So many passioned people on both sides of the fence over these issues. And I DO look at the JPO as the good guys.
Ken

Truth is IMHO that the clubs, their members, etc. Handle these things better then any other system and they handle it in real time.

David,
With all this effort towards safety, etc, how come AMA refuses to listen or take notice?
Jon

Jon,

You tell me? It is my opinion that the AMA re-insurance provider is looking at high risk profiles and jets fit that profile. The insurance industry as a whole has increased rates, and dropped coverage on various groups. Even though the loss history for turbines is very small the ratio of turbine pilots to claims filed could be high even with only one or two incidents. (This is speculation on my part and not actual facts of course) I think at first the AMA did not have any idea of how to deal with turbines, add to the fact that they were extremely expensive I am sure they did not anticipate the popularity to explode like it has. Now they feel like they have a problem. Enter more rules and restrictions. Fact is the waiver process is flawed, and they don't know how to fix it. My feeling is that we need to continue to promote jet modelling, JPO does that, we need to become better educated as a group, JPO is working to help do that. You want less rules and less restrictions on what you fly, support JPO.

BTW I do think that AMA listens..... I just think they have a problem comprehending!

David then I will ask the question. How do WE best support the JPO? All of your thoughts. It's time to do something besides talk about it.
Respect: Ken

You are correct, David. I am new to turbines. I do see a need for the JPO "mission". I believe it has and will help turbine jet fliers, but not by just agreeing to help "my" AMA with whatever whimsical thought crosses their mind. When AMA comes up with a re-certification waiver (every x years), will JPO resist that or just help AMA implement their new policy?

I am NOT new to RC though! So when I speak about other types of RC aircraft that I have flown and observe others flying, I do know what I'm talking about.

Why didn't JPO more vigorously protest this regulation rather than just do what AMA requested?

Since I fly helicopters, should I contact IRCHA and urge them to create a helicopter proficiency test to send to the AMA?

I also fly Giant Scale planes. Should I contact IMAA and urge them to create a Giant Scale 3D proficiency test to send to the AMA?

To Jon's point, neither of those two organizations nor their members would stand for that kind of regulation.

In the hands of an inexperienced pilot, both of those are as dangerous or more dangerous once in the air.

As I stated, I have not once come close to being struck by a DF or turbine jet. Two of us WERE almost struck in the head by a Lazy Bee a few years ago by an inexperienced pilot. It is almost laughable if wasn't so serious. We could have been killed just as easily as if we were stuck by a turbine jet.

Again, my point is parity.

Respectfully submitted,

To all of you bashing AMA - I was one of those suggesting to AMA to do something about the posting. If the document was intended to "educate" the new turbine flier, how are we supposed to know what the newbie actually knows? Does he know what the info is telling him, or does he merely know how to push buttons on his computer to cut and paste? The last I checked, cut and paste wasn't part of operating a turbine.

To David Reid, no, AMA isn't "kicking all of us in the teeth"! Again, learning has nothing to do with the ability to cut and paste, but with insuring that these "newbies" aren't a risk to the rest of us when operating their turbines.

To Nick Yuhasz, I see absolutely NO connection between those promoting safety (AMA, JPO, Bob Violett, etc) and those with "bizarre behavior". If this is your way of conducting yourself, I hope you don't have a waiver! Your statement is indicative of the problem.

Those of you making all of these ignorant accusations that AMA refuses to listen have no clue. When Vernon Montgomery was President of JPO, and I was acting as liaison, AMA listened to JPO with great interest. JPO was working with AMA, not against it. Since Vernon has stepped down as president and the new heirachy has taken over, all I have heard from JPO is complaining. Starting way back when turbines were in their infancy and Del Ellis was the AMA liaison, and on through my term as liaison, both he and I strived to keep the two parties open to "meaningful, positive" dialogue, and both sides respected each other, and believe it or not, we DID get a lot accomplished - with the RESPECT aspect at the top of the list. JPO had truly caught the ear of AMA, and wanted to hear more. Not more belly-aching, but more of JPO's ideas on keeping the turbines safe yet still "relaxing" things a little. Those of you who continue to be renegades and show a total disregard of the regulations are the ones who are going to screw things for the rest of us.

Those of you stating that AMA has "taken offense" to the idea of helping the new turbine pilot, it is exactly the opposite. The intent of the document was, as stated, to teach the uninformed about turbine principles and operation. I know, because I was in attendance at the meeting when the whole idea of this "document" was put together. It was not - nor should not have been - intended to be copied ver batim to the pilot's questionnaire. Again, if you want to know what the individual truly knows about operating a turbine, what does copying show?

And finally, saying AMA doesn't care what we think again have no clue. AMA does want to hear from the jet community. However, when so many whiny, cry-baby, uninformed of you attack them no matter what they do (because you want it YOUR way no matter what), what do you expect? Don Lowe, chairman of the AMA Safety Committee has expressed the desire to "lighten up" on the turbine regs, not to add more, because of their excellent safety record. While discussing accident claims at a Safety Committee meeting a year ago, it was stated that (paraphrased) "the turbines have shown themselves to be one of the safest, if not THE safest, facet of the hobby". Does this sound like an organization that is opposed to turbines? By accepting home-built engines and kits, does that sound anti-turbine (and after all the moaning and groaning over home-builts AMA has a whopping TWO approved waivers for homebuilts!)?

A favorite radio personality of mine has a saying, "don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion!"

Do I sound peeved - you bet. These posts make the turbine fliers sound like a bunch of spoiled-ass little brats who don't get their way instead of the class of the hobby that most of us truly are.

Joe Amato
AMA Turbine Committee Coordinator
EX- JPO liaison
EX-JPO

Ken,

You support JPO by becoming a member of the orginization. Go to the JPO website and download the form and send in your money. There is power in numbers.

Look at it this way the JPO is trying to promote safety, and has in the past suggested some rules that help towards that end. The AMA claims that the waiver process is in an attempt to insure safety, yet the education of turbine pilots is causing a problem with some people "cheating" on their waiver questionaire. Yet we are trying to educate newbies to operate safely, to give them/you/us knowledge about the engines we operate. The JPO is not just taking this lying down. JPO is not just "accepting" this whim of the AMA. Stay tuned......it is the ongoing saga of the turbine waiver.

Respectfully as well!
David Reid

No one is disagreeing that safety is not extremely important, just that you can't "regulate / guarantee" safety by adding another requirement or by making it unnecessarily difficult to achieve. By requesting the removal the JPO Turbine FAQ, all the AMA is doing is making it more difficult for its members to comply. Apparently, prospective applicants will need to gather the "correct" answers by word of mouth, or go to the library (which won't have up to date materials about miniature turbines), or get an engineering degree like me.

My point AGAIN is that if safety continues to be a priority for the AMA, they need to look EQUALLY at the other aspects of the hobby (those areas who won't just accept an arbitrary decision proposed by a few in the minority). What study did AMA do to determine that turbine jets in the air were inherently more dangerous than any other type of RC aircraft, thus warranting this type of attention (or did they just take the word of "certain individuals")?

I know AMA doesn't like constructive criticism, but until they truly understand their membership's needs they will never fully represent the best interest of their membership.

Hi Joe,
I'm a little peeved too! I would like to know why AMA feels that it can dictate the content of another organization's web site. There was nothing in the document that was negative, libelous, inflammatory, etc toward the AMA, yet the JPO was "strongly urged" to remove it. If the AMA wants to deny a waiver to anyone copying the info, fine, but that doesn't give them the right to tell JPO to take the document out because some people are dumb enough to copy it verbatim on their exam. One of the most precious rights we have is that of free speech, and I think AMA was way out of bounds on this.
Also, if there is some positive sentiment about the jet community within AMA, publicize it! These guys at JPO are getting it from both sides! DB has no problem putting negative items in his column, why not at least once acknowledge the positive side of jets and the JPO's continuing efforts to make jets safe.
Jon

No, Nick, the applicants won't have to gather info by "word of mouth" - another statement without merit. The necessary info can be found in the AMA document #513 - Safety Regulations for Model Aircraft Gas Turbines, or SHOULD BE LEARNED DURING GROUND SCHOOLING.

FWIW, AMA DOES WANT TO INCLUDE THE JPO DOCUMENT IN ITS PACKAGE FOR TURBINE APPLICANTS - FOR INFORMATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. I GUESS IT'S OK TO GET THE SCISSORS OUT AND DO THE OLD FASHIONED CUT AND PASTE?

JA

Jon -
AMA did not dictate anything to JPO. Steve was asked to remove it until it was decided how to resolve AMA's concerns. If you must, here is Steve's reply to AMA:

Dear Carl,

Concerning the JPO Turbine Safety Pamphlet; I will be asking our Web Master to pull the pamphlet for now. I must admit I am some what dismayed by the out come of these events. Safety is at the forefront of my efforts as the President of JPO, and I believe that education is the best avenue to that goal. The intent of the pamphlet was to provide the answer, by study, to the questionnaire, plus more information that many pilots may not receive. It is unfortunate that some choose to simply copy answers rather than put it in their own words and prove their understanding of the subject.

I still believe that the AMA should adopt the pamphlet, and include it with the application, and that the instructions for the application should state that the applicant must state the answers in their own words so as to prove they understand the subject. The current method used by some to answer the questions is unacceptable to me; go find the minimum information to satisfy the questionnaire. There are far more lessons learned that we are trying to pass on than are tested for on the questionnaire.

JA

Joe,
So what if the they cut and paste the safety answers off the JPO web site? At least we know the answers were read. Besides the actual learning is done on the flight line. I have seen a number of prospective turbine waiver holders fill out the app while one of us in the know recited it chapter and verse. The person builds experience by doing, the reading makes them aware.

I believe the AMA looks bad by doing things like this.

If the AMA is aware of our safety record why don't we get them to post it on the JPO web site. Give the jet guys direct feedback from the powers that be in the AMA. Let them address us directly through the JPO website.

Why shouldn't we have our way? Who knows best how to train future turbine drivers the present turbine drivers!

Paul Bageman
Dist X JPO

Here is my "first hand" experience with an AMA employee regarding Turbine Waivers:

While at the Toledo Show this April, I stopped by the AMA booth and talked to Carl Maroney (AMA Special Services Director). I let him know that I was a proud AMA member and expressed my thanks for AMA's contribution to the hobby in the past.

I then expressed my dislike of the "growing" Turbine Waiver regulation. I told him it appeared every time I visited the AMA web site there was another document with new regulations regarding turbines.

I told him that AMA should not just single out turbine jets for increased safety regulations and that there should be a waiver and proficiency test for helicopters and that they were just as inherently dangerous in the air as turbine jets. He (Carl) answered that they were "considering that". I was shocked by his answer! AMA was going to consider a waiver and proficiency test for ALL helicopter pilots (glow, gasoline, and turbine powered)? It was obvious as we talked further that he was referring ONLY to TURBINE HELICOPTERS!

I think this is indicative of the "tunnel vision" of some AMA officials (both paid and unpaid) regarding their thought process. You can draw your own conclusions.