Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

Hello everybody,

There has been alot of discussion in this forum about the turbine regulations that were recently enacted and then suspended by the AMA EC. Some of the posts have been accurate while some have not. In an effort to present the honest truth of what happened a comprehensive disclosure has been compiled and posted on the Georgia Jets website. You may read about this at:

[link=http://www.gajets.net/Links/FWIW/Turbine_Review/turbine_review.html]Turbine Regulations Saga[/link]

You may access the Georgia Jets website home page at:

http://www.gajets.net.

Thanks,

Gordon

Kevin_W

My Feedback: (1)

Gordon,

Thank you for posting that.
I am glad we are finally able to get the truth out.

rc4mike

My Feedback: (1)

Just finished reading the entire document and history. You TRC guy's did a hell of a good job on this. Don't really have any problems with any of it. Seems like a reasonable plan. DB's response to this, especially the email quoted on this site, shows just how great a leader we have. It's embarasing! He could really mess up this segment of our hobby. Not sure where to go from here. Perhaps a compromise of having speed limiters or thrust to weight language in the rules would make sense...at least until we get rid of him!

Mike Jensen

vinnyjet

My Feedback: (39)

gordon
that summary of the saga is great
and you were there.glad guys like you
and terry were on the panel the jpo
did a great job to work with the ec and don lowe
as for dave brown it is a shame
he was a great pattern flyer at onetime
vinny

wojtek

My Feedback: (73)

its crap like this that makes me want to just get out of the hobby ... im fed up with all the overregulation ... these days seems like you cant do anything without someon breathing down your back .... seems like the AMA is run by the same kind of people as tholse old, 1/2 blind morons who are at the flying field every day, never fly, and complain at everyone not flying a Telemaster or an Avistar ...



Wojtek

realdeal

My Feedback: (45)

I've already sent one e-mail to my AMA VP. I would like to do more. We need to let the EC know how important it is that they LISTEN to those who understand the issue. Dave Brown is obviously a lost cause. We can't do anything about him until the next election, but we can still push the EC to do the right thing. I want to make sure the information I present in my future correspondence is factual and consistent with other communications they are receiving. Since I am new to turbines (I've had a waiver for less than a month) I would like to see the issues presented in sort of a talking points form.

Speed limiter - problems, examples

Thrust - why we need what was presented

Failsafe - I have a bit of a problem here. My instructions (Simjet 1700) actually recommend AGAINST a PCM radio with failsafe. They say that the ECU has a built-in failsafe that kills the engine upon loss of signal and that a radio failsafe may prevent that safety feature from working. I liked the original wording better here but maybe that's just me.


What else needs to be in my communications?

Keith

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

I'm truly fascinated at the childish behaviour displayed by Dave Brown. The EC doesn't vote the way HE likes.. so he's going to throw a tantrum and try to overturn it. Everyone needs to contact their respective EC members and impress upon them what WE want is what matters, not one opinionated fool.

The following is my response:

Dave,

I'm stunned. I sit here thinking that the AMA leadership no longer serves the membership, but seeks to instead have the membership serve the AMA. I have been a member of the AMA since I was 6 years old (AMA 63547), and NEVER have I seen such ridiculous behaviour from the administration. Your actions concerning the new turbine regulations, prepared by the turbine SIG, and the AMA formed safety committee, headed up by former AMA President Don Lowe, are childish, and nothing short of a temper tantrum. To be honest I expected a great deal more maturity from you Dave. I THOUGHT you were someone who could be man enough go with the wishes of the community over your own views.

To quote your own email;
“I intend to put the subject in front of the entire membership, and, I suspect the end result will be to see the turbines rolled back to the original 22 lbs, with reduced weight limits, and speed limiters. The communities insistence on not backing off when they had the chance, and pushing for passage will, probably, come back to haunt them. If they had agreed to keep the speed limiters, and the 35lb limit, they, probably, would not have put me in the position where I feel I need to ask the membership, who, after all, are the ones assuming the liability cost. Our approach to turbines has been ridiculous........�

There are ZERO documented claims against the AMA insurance as a result of turbine related accidents. This has been checked and verified by your own people at AMA headquarters. You simply object to the way the EC has voted, and therefore are pushing forward your own agenda to what I suspect is a largely uninformed membership base, hoping to prey upon their emotion with 'Chicken Little-esque Sky is Falling' nonsense rather than give them straight fact and trusting their intelligence. Something you've so recently proven with the decision of the AMA Executive Council.

Being President means you oversee people you trust and have faith in their decision making ability. You instead seek to rule in almost dictatorship fashion. You have lost my respect. You have lost my support, and I will do everything in my influence to see you are removed from office at the next election.

The AMA membership deserves better.

Doug Cronkhite

D Pippin

I would like to take a minute to say thanks to Steve and also to Gordon and Kevin. You were summoned to make policy for our group and I think you all did a great job. I can also say that I am angry, disgusted, disallusioned (allong with about 10 more adjectives I can't think of at this late hour) by the level of unprofessionalism shown by the AMA leadership. When you were censured by Dave Brown, he put you in a very compromized position. By not allowing you to communicate with your membership, he showed a complete lack of respect for you and your office, us as JPO members and all waivered turbine flyers.

Most of you that read this list don't know me, I hardly ever post but I do read this list everyday and enjoy it. I can tell you that I hold turbineaircraft dear to my heart.

Steve, and future JPO officers, I want you to know that I will not forget this incident(no matter how it finally turns out). I will work for effective change in the AMA.


Sorry for rambling on guys, hope this makes sense!!

David Pippin
AMA53434
JPO1241

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Tony is correct. I should not have said the derogatory (but true) things I said about our president. I posted it late at night when I was mad.

GJr.

My Feedback: (3)

Does Mr. Brown's statement of "taking this item to the membership" mean that we can demand everything we do not like or do not participate in be taken to the membership for voting? He states the membership is assuming liability for turbine flyers, yet turbine flyers assume libility for the actions of several thousand sport flyers that are definite hazards to the hobby of R/C modeling.
These seem to indicate that the motivation is much more personal than factual. It appears he sees no reason to work through the system and does not have to abide by the established procedures. I wonder where some of the "magic numbers" he used in his statement concerning thrust limits and weight limits come from? Obviously he must have some "documented" study supporting these limits. It appears that the AMA presidnt does not see turbine flying as a part of the AMA Vision and AMA Mission statements.
His actions seem to border on "it's my way or the highway" theory of government / ruling. I am not a legal eagle and hate to think about that possible side of this situation, but this has the potential to escalate to that level. Where was he during the previous months of meetings while the proposals were being drawn up and discussed?
This whole thing has more effect than just flying turbines. It has the potential to severely effect many companies and their futures as well as the employees livelihood. What about the financial impact of obsoleting a lot of expensive equipment?
Maybe the most disconcerting aspect of this turn of events is it could set a precedent for the future. Today it is turbine flyers, what group will it be tomorrow? I assure you this is just the tip of the iceberg. It is the handwriting on the wall for many other SIGs. If something is not done to curb this type of behavior, the AMA could become an organization that exists solely for and at the discretion of a select few and their personal feelings.
I have sent emails to both the AMA president and my district VP. But, I do not put much faith in my VP based on his previous actions on other issues. Whether we totally agree or disagree with everything done by the JPO past or present, it looks like they need our input and support. At this time, it appears they are going to be our representatives in trying to come up with something livable while "negotiating" with the EC and its special committee.
I apologize if this rubs anybody the wrong way. I assure you I am not an extremist. I do not have any major issues with the original poposals put forth. I understand life is full of compromises and change. I guess I am very sensitive to this issue and the tactics being used by some of the parties as my current local club leadership is doing some things very similar regarding turbine jet activities. All without the benefit of input from the actual jet flyers. They are trying to use scare tactics and "backdoor" techniques. Maybe I am in the minority, but I see no reason all aspects of flying cannot coexist with very little effort by all parties involved. As a matter of fact, I enjoy several aspects of R/C and hope to expand into new areas in the future. I guess we can no longer sit by passively and assume everything will be done by others according to the rules and all will turn out okay.

diceman

My Feedback: (10)

All waiver holders will receive a letter next week with a brief explanation of what went wrong wit the current process, and it clearly appears to be the process. The news is that nothing will change anytime soon, in any direction. Hopefully the letter will calm the fears and address many of the issues from this and other forums.

Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

Hi John,

IMHO, the decision to not change anything anytime soon is really poor since the new regulations include many requirements that significantly improve safety. For example, consider the fail safe and water based fire extinguisher requirements that are in the new regulations.

It would be terrible if a radio went into failsafe resulting in a crash at full turbine power that subsequently caused a forest fire. Dave Brown essentially has succeeded in suspending regulations that would protect against that type of scenerio. I was amazed at what he was willing to sacrifice in order to get his way.

Gordon

TonyF

My Feedback: (92)

I have known Dave Brown since I began pattern competition in 1976. I worked with him when I began working at World Engines in 1978, and I have been on several World Championship teams with Dave. I think I know the person well. I'm going to say a few things, and I suspect after reading many of the responses in this forum, they are going to be unpopular, but I think they need to be said.

Those of you commenting on Dave's drinking and flying 25 to 30 years ago are way off base. That was a different set of conditions and standards then exist today. Everyone, including Dave knows that such actions would not be condoned in today's environment. So, let it rest.

Using the Maynard Hill record flight as anything against Dave is also ridiculous. Dave has his concerns about large numbers of modelers flying aircraft out of their sight by means of autonomous systems. Lots of other people do to, including other government agencies. However, the Maynard Hill flights were highly controlled record attempts, conducted over a rather large body of unpopulated water. I see nothing unsafe about that, and neither did Dave. So, put that one away.

As for Dave calling an emergency meeting of the EC to rethink the turbine regs, it is entirely in his prerogative to do so. There was nothing underhanded about it. Several of the EC members had voiced concerns to Dave that they were rethinking their vote. Dave has a very strong opinion that these new regs were a mistake. Therefore, he exercised his right to call that emergency meeting. In that meeting the EC council changed their mind. It is as simple as that. The fact that the council did change their mind could be seen as a confirmation that Dave was correct.

Over the years, I have learned a few things about Dave Brown. I consider Dave to be an intelligent, experienced man who has been active with many different facets of model aviation. He truly loves the hobby, having made it his life. His actions are based on what he considers best for the sport in the long run. That doesn't mean I think he is without fault. I have had several strong disagreements with Dave. I felt that his handling of the Superman night flight was entirely wrong, and I have told him so several times. He had his reasons, I disagreed with them. But I will tell you this. Nothing you people post here attempting to insult Dave is going to change his position. Posting your derogatory emails that you have sent to Dave is not going to do it either. Go ahead and make the attempts to get someone else elected. I wish you a lot of luck in that, as you will really need it. The process is very much in favor of the incumbent. Just ask Frank.

Frankly, if I had been on the EC council, I would have voted against what was initially passed. IMO, there were several items that just didn't make sense to me. As I understood the proposal, we could have installed up to 45 pounds of thrust in any size model, 50 if it was a twin, without any kind of speed limiting device. The pilot was responsible for keeping the speed below 200 mph, without any means of measuring that speed. Seemed like a recipe for disaster to me. 200 mph was going to be the most any model could fly, despite the fact that there are numerous models that have been demonstrating very high safety over that speed for a very long time. Doesn't make sense to me. In addition, the signatures on the various forms now required were going to have to be notarized. That one really made no sense to me. I got my private pilot license without ever having to get anything "notarized". Why should I need to in order fly my model plane?

I have to make this suggestion. Quit the constant belly aching in this forum. All it is doing is making the jet community look childish. IMO, if it was taken to the majority of the AMA membership, you will not find a lot of support. Right or wrong, most AMA members see turbine modeling as unsafe. In addition, keep in mind, right now nothing has changed. The current regs are in place, no other restrictions have been added. Go fly and have fun. However, for the future good of the jet hobby, the JPO has to somehow make itself into an organization that the majority of jet modelers find worthwhile to join. Currently, for a variety of reasons, that is not the case. Only then will you really be able to draft good regulations and have the support of the majority of the jet community.

diceman

My Feedback: (10)

I agree with you Gordon. I was simply pointing out that they are sending a letter to "quail" all the rumors. The part that seems most disturbing to me is that they could have passed everything except the fuel qty and the speed limiter and addressed that part later.

It's all very curious to me. And, I don't agree with the how AMA is dealing with the whole situation.

Kevin_W

My Feedback: (1)

Tony,
I agree with you on this point, it is in poor taste to bring up events of 30 years ago that have little relativity to the problem at hand.

I disagree with you on this point. The proposal passed the EC on Nov1 with a vote of 8-3 because Steven and Terry were at the meeting to answer questions and present the facts and opinions of the jet community.
IMHO, Dave Brown resented the fact that the TRC was able to come into what he considers his arena (the EC meeting) and get a proposal passed that he does not agree with.
I see "the fact that the council changed their mind" as confirmation that Dave Brown will always get his way when there is nobody present to make a reasonable case for the opposition.
Any AMA member can attend a regularly scheduled EC meeting, this is not true of a "special EC meeting". I believe that Dave Brown called that meeting so that he could exclude the opposition in order to control the EC himself.

FYI, the requirement for the first years renewals to be notarized was the EC's idea, it was not in our original proposal.

Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Tony,

I hope that you see the irony of your message. You ended your post with pot shots aimed at the JPO within the same paragraph where you suggest for the belly aching to end.

Why did you decide to launch the salvo at the JPO? The Turbine Review Committee was formed by the AMA and reported to the AMA. It was not a JPO committee. I don't mind any legitimate criticism of what we did, however, please do not direct that criticism at the JPO.

Your opinion of the JPO notwithstanding; I believe that the JPO's stature in the eyes of the turbine community is at an all time high.

Gordon

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

I agree wholeheartedly, Gordon. I would like to thank you and Kevin. I would ask that you pass my sincere gratitude on to the other members of the TRC.

I also agree with many of the things Tony has said. The AMA is a political organization, and we need to recognize that. I fear that deriding Dave Brown on this forum will be counterproductive, but of course we have our rights to assemble and have a rationale discourse.

It is unfortunate but I understand that Dave Brown has an intense distaste for the internet, specifically RCUniverse. I know other very influential members of the sport that feel the same way. The best I can figure is that they somehow see the venue as one they cannot participate in to their satisfaction, or one they cannot control like a personal conversation or a meeting, and they are uncomfortable with it.

I have been in turbines for awhile, and it seems that every time these rules changes are designed, proposed and eventually enacted, there is a real battle. No one agrees with all of the changes and never has. That is part of the process. I for one think the way the process was handled this time was the best I have seen, due in no small measure to those members of the JPO and AMA that took their personal time and effort to get this through the EC.

I hope we learn a bit more, and do not become bitter, so that we can apply what we have learned the next time we present something to the EC. Understanding how Dave Brown chooses to exercise his responsibility as president of the AMA is just as crucial to getting what we want as anything else. That is reality.

TonyF

My Feedback: (92)

Gordon,

I took no shots at the JPO. You interpreted them that way. Here are the facts as I know them, please correct them if they are wrong. JPO membership is around 250 to 300 total. Turbine waiver holders are around 750. Therefore, JPO does not represent the majority of jet modelers. There must be a reason for that and JPO should attempt to address those reasons. Until the JPO can go to the AMA and factually state they have the majority of jet modellers, they will have limited authority with the AMA. This can be noted by the fact that only 1/2 of the TRC was selected by the JPO. If they represented the majority of the jet community that would have been unnecessary.

I respect the work of those JPO members who put these proposals together.

Kevin,

You may have opinions about what Dave "resents" or feels, but nevertheless the calling of the special EC meeting is well within his jurisdiction. Nothing was done outside the way the AMA can operate. I can understand you being disappointed with this final outcome, but insults and innuendo will not be productive. Matt is dead on correct with his last paragraph. Read it over and over and memorize it.

Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Tony,

I would agree that the JPO was struggling a bit around two years ago, however, things have improved alot. Contrails has been published regularly and the JPO and AMA have been actively engaging each other. I truly believe that we have made a great deal of progress.

The fact that only 1/2 of the TRC was selected by the JPO didn't have anything to do with the AMA's perception of the JPO. Don Lowe wanted the members of the turbine safety sub-committee to be on the TRC (Joe Amato, Jim Hiller and Terry Nitsch) and he thought that it was also important to have JPO participation. That was the theory on which the six TRC members were chosen. Don Lowe was a genuine pleasure with which to work and he obviously had alot of respect for the JPO.

Gordon

pilott28

My Feedback: (27)

I'm going to try to redirect this post back to the subject of turbine regulations and away from Dave Brown. Gordon, I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following. Maybe it has already been discussed at the TRC level and rejected for some reason.

I don't think the speed issue is going to go away, so we have to find a way to address it. Speed limiters probably aren't a good solution as they add another point of failure, require different manufacturer mix/match combos in some cases which adds risk and while I'm no expert, I would guess someone could get around them if they wanted to without a lot of effort.

Has anyone thought about asking the manufacturers to certify certain model/thrust configurations that won't exceed 200 in level flight? For example, if BVM puts a 28 pound thrust engine in a King Cat and flies it at rated RPM and the clocked speed is 182, that model/thrust combination becomes "approved" without a speed limiter. If someone wants to put a 35 pound thrust engine in the Cat, and that is known to exceed the speed limit, a limiter or dialed down RPM setting is required. Easy to check. Kits without some type of validated manufacturer certification would require limiters.

This may not be the best solution, but I do believe we need to step up as a jet community and find some acceptable answers. I think the TRC did a great job, but it sounds like DB's feelings around the speed issue may have caught you a bit by surprise and still needs to be resolved to come to some type of agreement with the AMA and/or it's liability carriers. I think finding a very reasonable way to limit speed would be in our best interest as well.

Keith

jetflyr

Gordon, first of all many thanks to you, Kevin and the others on the TRC for all the work you did.
However, I have to agree with Tony, that in the eyes of most jet modelers, the JPO is not their first choice. (Simple math: 500+ turbine waver holder's don't belong, and for years, many have pleaded for all to join do to strength in numbers. etc (yes that quote was one of mine....)
Here we are, many years later, still making the same pleas.
There are several issues that I think affect this:
1) The feeling that only Texans, Californians, and some weird group of guys from Mississippi (Ya'll are too small and quiet of a group
have the weather, the proximity to many events, and numbers of pilots to belong to "the fraternity".
2) The feeling that JPO has nothing to offer them for their $25.00.....Hey! That's 2-3 more gallons of Kero! attitude.
3) A feeling that if they don't agree with the JPO "at-large" that David will jump down their throats.
Right, or wrong I've heard all of the above, and being one of the members who have to drive a minimum of 600 miles for all but one event, and shut down my practice while I go, I can empathize.
While I feel Dave Brown can act like a kindergartner....like many members of these forums....I think it behooves us as members of a SIG to get our act together and find away to appeal to the remaining 2/3's of the jet community to find away to become a united front.
There is a saying about lemons and lemonade and something or another......but either we find a way to become united, and turn this setback/desirable reassesment/well deserved halt to bad regulations... to our united advantage, or we will all have to go back to DF. (Yes grammar police, I used united TWICE in that sentence.)
Three times reviewed, and flack sheilds up, just my 2-cents worth.

Greg

DavidR

My Feedback: (1)

Greg,

While the opinion may be that I am jumping down peoples throats that don't agree with JPO "at large" as you put it, that is not my intention. JPO has been highly criticised in the past (and present) and it has been my feeling that most of that has been unjustified. I have been a strong advocate of JPO for a while now mainly because I belieive in one united voice and JPO is the ONLY jet orginization that has SIG status with the AMA. IF any other orginization were to have that status I would be as vocal and passionate about that orginization as well. Besides.....I can't help it if I have a big mouth.....I don't apologize for it either.

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

Hi,
Anyone heard what BV's reaction is to all of this?
If Dave Brown get's what he's after; smaller engines, airframes, etc I think that this will have a direct, adverse effect on his, and other jet related businesses.
Jon

Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

I have discussed this with BV and he is opposed to having any AMA regulation tied to manufacturer recommended airspeeds. He doesn't want to take on the liability inherent in that approach.

The extent to which Dave Brown and the AMA folks embraced the speed limiter issue was a surprise. Personally, I have the JetCat speed limiter on all of my airplanes and it can be useful, however, it can also be a nuisance. IMHO requiring them on airplanes is onerous, inappropriate and unnecessary. It might be different if there were four or five speed sensor vendors from which to choose and if they were considered to be acceptable add-on hardware by the majority of jet pilots, however, neither is the case.

The TRC focused on what we thought was the biggest single issue: pilot compentency. That is, if you only have qualified and competent pilots making quality decisions then most all of the other problems take care of themselves. Why not keep the 200 mph limit (to be controlled by the pilot) and lets police ourselves. Lets encourage swift and strict disciplinary action, including the suspension and/or revocation of the offending pilot’s turbine waiver, for any pilot that flies a turbine model in an unsafe manner. The new regulations specified a maximum speed of 200 mph (to be controlled by the pilot). Any pilot that is obviously violating this rule should be properly reprimanded and we really don't need speed limiters to do that.

Gordon

Gordon_Dickens

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Greg,

There really isn't an alternative to the JPO since it is the only jet SIG recognized by the AMA. So, while you say that the JPO isn't the first choice for most jet modelers, I don't understand what their other choices are other than choose not to affiliate with any AMA jet SIG. Doing something constructive is alot better than doing nothing.

Why not join the JPO and become part of the process to make it better instead of standing on the sidelines? I invite each and every jet pilot out there that are not JPO members to join the JPO and help make a difference.

Gordon