Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Jets
 Safety Matters >

Safety Matters

Notices
RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

Safety Matters

Old 09-05-2006, 01:36 PM
  #251  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Did not think that it WAS off topic because the thread was renamed Safety Matters and structural integrity IS a safety matter and the thread seemed to have ground to a halt. More later when I have discussed fatigue in metal aerospace structures with a couple of boffins. If is is NOT well understood then a lot of engineers, metalurgists and stressmen have been telling a lot of people a lot of fibs ! I fully accept, of course, its a continuing and developing branch of the industry with much, much more to learn. Composites, now they are a different kettle of fish and a great deal is being learned allowing more composites to be incorporated into large aircraft structures such as the A380 and 787.

Regards,

David Gladwin.
Old 09-05-2006, 02:11 PM
  #252  
 
BaldEagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9,672
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

The thread is named "2death 4 wounded in model etc: if its been renamed so be it, but I am unaware of this, not trying to be inflamatory in any way, stress analysis is a different matter all together if that is what is to be disscussed on the thread so be it. I am a qualified Structural Engineer if I can add anything I would be glad to oblige.

Mike
Old 09-05-2006, 03:06 PM
  #253  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , CA
Posts: 7,964
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash


ORIGINAL: BaldEagel

The thread is named "2death 4 wounded in model etc: if its been renamed so be it, but I am unaware of this, not trying to be inflamatory in any way, stress analysis is a different matter all together if that is what is to be disscussed on the thread so be it. I am a qualified Structural Engineer if I can add anything I would be glad to oblige.

Mike
The title thing is misleading .. the titel shown at the top of THIS page is as you say, but if you go back and look at the title on page 1 (which is what is shown in the main forum), then you will see that it has been renamed as David indicates.

Gordon
Old 09-05-2006, 03:50 PM
  #254  
 
BaldEagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9,672
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Fine no pack drill intended.

Mike
Old 09-05-2006, 04:00 PM
  #255  
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Slidell, LA
Posts: 5,432
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

David, I am saying that it is less understood than static strength. Hence our higher fatigue life factor than our ultimate strength factor. Also, in commercial aviation, they get the airframe back to study flight after flight. We never see the effects of flight on the External Tank as it goes to Davy Jones' locker (after being burnt and melted!).
Old 09-05-2006, 05:12 PM
  #256  
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: nyc, NY
Posts: 7,676
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

On a similar tangent...I was always very concerned about that B-52 that was built in the UK. You know, the 300 pound one. The second one was only 200 pounds. Both were conventional balsa and ply construction. I know they flew, one had some fifty flights on it...but I was really wondering about fatigue life on them. Weighting the wing down to see what it will hold is one thing. Flexing it up and down a few thousand times to see what happens is quite another. I had real doubts about the methodology used in that model. Conventional balsa model, just larger. Not sure if that is really appropriate with a 300 pound model.
On a most basic level...you take a wire coat hanger and bend it 90 degrees, then bend it back. All looks fine. Do it 10 times and you have a broken coat hanger. And I kept thinking that was going to happen with that particular model. All speculative, of course. I thought Eddie Week's glass and foam approach on his DC-10( which was much lighter to begin with) was much more sound. Any thoughts?
Old 09-11-2006, 02:36 PM
  #257  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

I was flying at a really excellent UK meeting this weekend. I was NOT impressed when a "heads up" call came and I looked up to see a jet model passing overhead minus BOTH of its stab . halves and crashed, inverted, on the 'dead" of the airfield, 50 or 75 meters from the pits. Why? The model, a much vaunted ARTF, did not have its load bearing stab. spar installed at the factory, meaning ALL of the stab loads were carried by the skin and a balsa, butt joined, spar which promptly and not surprisingly, failed ! Structural failure because of abysmal QC at the factory. I was shown, and examined in my own hands, the evidence so no excuses. Another lucky escape before the "big one" which, if this nonsense continues, is sure to happen.

Regards,

David Gladwin.

PS.
All of the BVM ARTFs plus my Bobcat performed flawlessly as well as the Savex's etc.
Old 09-12-2006, 05:59 AM
  #258  
Senior Member
 
Big Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Redditch, , UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

David,

Nice to see you at the said meeting . I was acctually calling for the second best bandit flier in the country (your first geoff) when the call came out and also saw the VERY POORLY built and QC tailplane and stand by you with your comments on this and the other threads this was mentioned on.


All the best David

Ant
Old 09-12-2006, 07:36 AM
  #259  
My Feedback: (73)
 
wojtek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Virgin, UT
Posts: 4,385
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash


ORIGINAL: David Gladwin

I was flying at a really excellent UK meeting this weekend. I was NOT impressed when a "heads up" call came and I looked up to see a jet model passing overhead minus BOTH of its stab . halves and crashed, inverted, on the 'dead" of the airfield, 50 or 75 meters from the pits. Why? The model, a much vaunted ARTF, did not have its load bearing stab. spar installed at the factory, meaning ALL of the stab loads were carried by the skin and a balsa, butt joined, spar which promptly and not surprisingly, failed ! Structural failure because of abysmal QC at the factory. I was shown, and examined in my own hands, the evidence so no excuses. Another lucky escape before the "big one" which, if this nonsense continues, is sure to happen.

Regards,

David Gladwin.

PS.
All of the BVM ARTFs plus my Bobcat performed flawlessly as well as the Savex's etc.
David, I agree, BVM ( I personally do not have experience with Savex) quality is some of the best, but it still does not mean that every ARF will be perfect. Hey , remember the king cat boom issues ? I know of at least 5 cases that were publicly disclosed where the whole tails ripped off in flight ... no matter who you get an ARF from, there is always the possibility of flaws / errors, be it in the design itself, material selection, or the assembly process.

In the spirit of not caring about political correctness I will say that the planes I have seen and hear about failing the most in flight have been those from CompArf. Usually the failures i have seen are due to sloppy assembly where the glue joints are inadequate, or poorly asembled. Also, I have seen these come apart after slight dings and scrapes that the pilot disregarded as minor, which ended up being the root point of failure. I would say the old Cermark kits make a close second for in flight failure rates .. the Viperjets are known for the stab failures .. be it poor materials, or poor design, there are issues .. I have seen several MB339s come apart as well from Cermark ( i will say i was happy with mine however, and it survived my abuse for many flights ) Then there are the old Skymaster kits ( from what i have seen, the new manufacturing process SM uses has improved the quality of these greatly and there is a night and day difference between the ARFs of old and what’s being produced now) .. i have seen the occasionally missed glue joint cause devastating failure in flight, such as a friends elevator ripping off due to missing glue in the stab causing the plane to go into the ground.

Bottom line, if you did not build it yourself, you do not know how well an ARF is assembled beyond where you can get at the glue joints yourself. Its a good idea to go over any ARF as thoroughly as possible ...


Voy
Old 09-13-2006, 02:50 AM
  #260  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Hi Voy,

I totally agree with you. We have a problem in our midst and I dont know the answer to it but I do believe it is an issue which needs serious debate before it bites us hard.

At least BVM is taking production back under his own control which should eliminate the sort of problems such as experienced with KingCat booms. A wise move in my view.

Regards,

David Gladwin.
Old 09-13-2006, 10:18 AM
  #261  
My Feedback: (4)
 
Eddie P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

ORIGINAL: EASYTIGER

On a similar tangent...I was always very concerned about that B-52 that was built in the UK. You know, the 300 pound one. The second one was only 200 pounds. Both were conventional balsa and ply construction. I know they flew, one had some fifty flights on it...but I was really wondering about fatigue life on them. Weighting the wing down to see what it will hold is one thing. Flexing it up and down a few thousand times to see what happens is quite another. I had real doubts about the methodology used in that model. Conventional balsa model, just larger. Not sure if that is really appropriate with a 300 pound model.
On a most basic level...you take a wire coat hanger and bend it 90 degrees, then bend it back. All looks fine. Do it 10 times and you have a broken coat hanger. And I kept thinking that was going to happen with that particular model. All speculative, of course. I thought Eddie Week's glass and foam approach on his DC-10( which was much lighter to begin with) was much more sound. Any thoughts?

Hi ET, my personal view is that a wood wing can have just as long of a life (or more) than a light weight composite wing as long as the engineering is sound. Wood is quite basic but it has a natural shock absorbtion quality and the individual component structural strength is very high in comparison. Of course we all know it as the primary product for boats and airplanes used well into the last century. I've flown a few full scale small airplanes with wood wings (well known for their outstanding flying qualities), even the WWII Mosquito was wood and had an exemplary record. Composites tend to erode/decay over time, especially when exposed to sunlight often. Composites used in modern aircraft are extremely different than those used in model applications - they are made via autoclaving processes and heat treated in kilns like pottery - a very specific, expensive and complex process that yields a completely different product. Wet layups for compoosites, like we use, are pre-historic in comparison. Model airplane composites are prone to delamination, viods and weak spots that are difficult to detect in the primitive model building manufacturing processes we use. Composites are on most boats now for the mere fact that they need almost no maintenance like wood and they are easy to mass produce and cheaper. Long term ownership of a wood product, like 20 years, requires some inspection processes but as long as it isn't exposed to too many outdoor elements it should be fine for a very long time.

Now, what is in my garage? Mostly composites. I have a lot of "plastic planes" becasue they fly great, they are light, easy to work with on scratch builds and they dominate the easy to assemble high performance model airplane offerings. Most of my scratch build airplanes are foam core and wood skinned wings with a fiberglass coat over the wings and stabs with a composite fuse - that's just becasue I'm comfortable with the process. If I could exchange a few of my foam core wings for wood buildups, I would however.
Old 10-08-2006, 08:25 PM
  #262  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

The following ASR is offered in the hope it may help prevent a repetition and someone may learn from my mistake:

Yesterday I damaged my beloved BVM F4 (shredded port wing , some fuselage cracks and tears and bent gear, (it will easily be repaired when BVM builds me a new wing and repairs the gear). The AMTNL Pegasus HPES flamed out during the 3rd point of 4 point roll (when the aerial would have been sheilded by the steel jetpipe, possible cause of a momentary FS signal) and the model was landed downwind and off strip. There was NO air in the header tank and the Pegasus has an impeccable record. Preliminary inspection this morning shows that the controlling channel for the ECU, Aux 2 is set to failsafe in the instant "off" position, and so is aux 3, which is a flap channel., BOTH of these channels should be set to hold and inspection of my backup F4 programme shows that this IS the case. How Aux 2 and a flap came to be set to FS on my operating Tx is simply a mystery, particularly as before the previous outing the failsafe function had been checked meticulously (including a double check with Bennie VdG in Holland) and worked exactly as required. I may have inadvertently hit the FS buttons when moving the gear channel to FS, I'll never know.

Downloading the last run data from the ECU reveals the failsafe.

I had seen the JetCat advisory following Malcom Kay's flameout but I knew in my mind that my Aux channel on Pegasus had been set to hold and HAD been checked prior to the last outing, I should have checked again , I didn't recheck and paid the price.

No doubt, my mistake, pure and simple, but perhaps this note may save someone else's jet.


Regards,

David Gladwin.

PS In similar safety vein, I made refernce to the loss of a stab. on a jet model in the UK, sadly there was fatal accident here in Australia last Thursday when a fullsize Strikemaster crashed having apparently suffered separation of its tailplane.




Old 10-08-2006, 11:25 PM
  #263  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: n/a, AE, US MINOR OUTLYING ISLANDS
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

I hope nobody minds if I ask some safety related questions here... Is it just me or did anyone else seem to think there might have been some safety issues that were overlooked at a certain jet event that finished up this week? After looking at certain pics in the thread for the event coverage and reading some posts about situations that occurred, I really wonder if anyone at the event was noticing things that were questionable (to me anyway) as far as safety.. now I'm just asking so don't unload on me.. ok here's my questions - 1st- is it legal or wise to due maidens at jet events? or maybe- hopefully they were done before or after the crowds were there and the official time of the event had not started or was over for the day.. 2nd- is it legal or wise for groups of toddlers (very small children) to be hanging on the "barrier" fence at the flt line (or side of the runway- it looked like) with jets on final in high crosswinds headed right at them? or maybe that was just one of those tele-photo lens illusions.. 3rd- is it legal or wise to have large groups of none flying spectators congregating along the flt line among the active pilots while they fly? or maybe they were all part of the crews.. I know none of us want any accidents to cause jets bad pr and ama relations.. I've heard that the jpolice are watching out for all of us by informing the ama about anyone they even hear rumors about doing dangerous stuff, but I really wonder if some safety concerns that are looked at by some of our "governing groups" are not looked at as closely because it involves someone or some group or some event that is well known and/or the people in question have been flying jets for a long time and are popular or have a lot of friends in the sport... I'm not trying to start a debate here about this one event's safety level or anything else, but if it saves a life then I'm glad to help by bringing it up and maybe to someones attention that could help stop these kind of situations- if these are bad saftey situations.. If these things are legal and wise plz let me know and I'll try to stay more up to date on the rules and not so over worried about safety.. I was not at this event so I can't say I saw anything, but just from looking at the thread I started to wonder about all jet events and if the safety rules are becoming enforced less? or are the officials and groups that can correct safety problems just turning their heads because of who is involved? OR EVERYONE COULD JUST IGNORE THIS POST AND PRETEND THIS STUFF DOESN'T HAPPEN- TILL SOMEONE IS DEAD.
Old 10-11-2006, 11:09 AM
  #264  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Falmouth, MA, MA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Hey David...always follow your writings...they always seem to be on the mark!

Your ASR above, however: Not sure I understand your thoughts fully, as I'm sure you are aware of US FS requirements....but if I do read correctly, you meant to set up your ECU/engine to 'hold' in the event of ALL FS events. In the US we pretty much subscribe to the thinking that FS' are generally momentary/short term glitches (unless they are truly 'bad', long term events, like a same-channel Tx left on, etc.) and control is restored often w/o the pilot even being aware. 'Hold' is good in that instance/keeps the engine running, but....'hold' also means the engine continues operation in the event of a 'real' FS that would cause an inevitable crash....and likely a turbine-caused fire. (Pretty well accepted after numerous tests and crashes, that if the 'light' is out, even for a second, the turbine cannot be an iginition source.)

Obvious solution seems to be keeping the engine running during short term events but shutting it down for long term....and 'we' 'picked' two seconds as that threshold (thinking that after two-seconds of continuous lost link...it's, indeed, lost!). In fact, it is now codified in our AMA Waiver requirements, '....that turbines must be programed to shut down after two seconds of (continuous) lost link.' Since JR radios have virtually no built in delay, and Futaba only a one-second delay (of lost link before initiating a FS), folks were rightfully loathe to set FS to shut-down w/ either radio system (too many needless deadsticks). So, ECU manufacturers (for US sale, anyway) have programed in a two-second delay if link was not restored on JR systems; one-second for Futaba. Pilots must still program their FS properly...not to 'hold' but to shut-down....and the newer/modified ECUs automagically add that one or two second protection.

This seems to have drastically cut done on burn events when a model is lost due to a lost link, yet enables engine ops after events such as you seemed to experience. (Interestingly, it has also 'trained' pilots of the need to 'flip the switch' just before the inevitable....whatever the cause.) Am I wrong in thinking that's not universally known......or did I just misinterpret your post?

Ray
Old 03-11-2007, 06:12 PM
  #265  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

So, the discussion on the FJ accident has ground to a halt. However the hot topic in this weekend’s Sydney newspapers is air safety following the death of several Australians in a Garuda 737-400 crash in Yogjakarta and the papers are dissecting the crash in detail and there are many conflicting stories.

In comments about the FJ accident it is clear that a certain percentage of fliers DON’T want to discuss safety in RCU and there is one comment on R/C Freedom (where other aspects of that accident and the pilot’s history are discussed) that we are “stupid” to do so, fearing the bad publicity. There are also a couple of comments on the FJ threads alluding to the opinion that to discuss safety is to “Spoil” the event and another that we should stop discussion as “Frank has you covered”. However I have had a number of highly supportive PMs and emails following my comments on that thread, so clearly many others DO want to discuss flight safety in an open forum, most of those PMs come from model jet fliers with a fullsize aviation connection who know the safety culture which is an essential and intrinsic part of the industry.

Consider this : Every month / week I read a number of fullsize aviation magazines and ALL have a safety element, some with dedicated sections.. Perhaps the most respected world wide aviation industry magazine is “Flight International” which covers everything from GA, military aviation and air transport. That magazine has been covering safety issues as long as I can remember (at least since 1962 ) and does so in an accurate, unbiased and objective way.
It has an Air Safety editor, David Learmount and as well as its regular air safety reporting it also publishes an annual air safety review and from time to time I have seen airliner wreckage on the front cover picture. It tells it like it is and has world wide respect for doing so.

I very much doubt whether David gets any angst from aviation companies (if he does it does not deter him) when he reports and discusses accidents and incidents to their aircraft or equipment and those companies clearly DON’T pull advertising following such discussion, so if its good enough for Flight to discuss air safety matters in public why should gas turbine modelling be different ?

So I ask, as flight safety is an essential aspect of the operation of any and all aircraft, models included, just where and how should safety issues be discussed ?

Please discuss.

Regards,

David Gladwin.
Old 03-11-2007, 07:42 PM
  #266  
My Feedback: (2)
 
Chris Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Adams TN
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Safety should always be apart of model operations, and therefore part of responsible threads on RCU such as this.

There may be resistance to open discussion for fear of over-reaction or governing body over-regulation. For incidents that aren't serious, there is more risk if the issues are are not discussed or ignored. For accidents that are serious, it won't matter. They will be on the news, and we won't have much control over the reaction anyway. So the smart thing to do is ALWAYS discuss the incidents.

My experience has told me stuff DOES happen no matter how accomplished or carefull we are. But the more aware of the safety we are, the fewer incidents.
After 28 years of military flying, safety is a part of everything I do from using an X-acto knife, drill press, programming and doublechecking my radio, all the way to where I place a high speed pass with my jet model.

Accidents are always the result of a chain of smaller, seemingly minor issues that link together. Any of the minor issues taken seperatly may not result in anything. But link a few together and stand back.[X(]

Some example links :

Poorly engineered model.
poor quality or cheap components
low pilot proficiency
pilot overconfidence
pits too close to flight line
getting in a hurry
weather issues
spouse issues[:-]

The trick to safety is minimizing the conditions that lead to accidents, and then if there is an accident, maybe the results are minor.

Chris
Old 03-12-2007, 07:07 AM
  #267  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: South Plainfield, NJ
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

David,

The problem is the internet can't filter the people who respond. The thread you mention seemed to be started as a jab against the event, not a true safety discussion. We have a lot of, let's call them, strong personalities in this hobby. Many want to minimize bad press caused by people who just like to talk or stir the pot.

I suggested, on the other thread, if people were really concerned they should have started a thread about "preventing wheels from locking" or anything about better control in a cross wind. I didn't see that thread start so I can only gather that thread was never about safety. I applaud your pushing the issue though. Every jet mag should have a column with real world exampes to keep us all honest.

Mark
Old 03-16-2007, 06:07 AM
  #268  
My Feedback: (4)
 
A343's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hoersholm, DENMARK
Posts: 256
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash


ORIGINAL: MMallory

Every jet mag should have a column with real world exampes to keep us all honest.

Mark
ORIGINAL: David Gladwin

Consider this : Every month / week I read a number of fullsize aviation magazines and ALL have a safety element, some with dedicated sections..

Regards,

David Gladwin.
So what are we waiting for? Which Jetmag publisher is first in promoting dedicated safety related articles/columns?

Regarding the incident at FJ this year. To me it´s totally inappropriate "pointing fingers", that is not getting us anywhere safetywise. So far I haven´t read anything from that specific incident that can prevent me, from in the future getting into the same situation as the unlucky pilot behind the controls was at that day! Last year at FJ an F22 veered off the centerline and into/over the fence crashing a few feet away from planes and people, a pretty close call from becoming nasty. What happened? I know, because I got hold of the pilot and we figured out what went wrong. I know how to never get into the same situation (caused by that particular problem) as he did, but do you? I think it's about time we adress safety in a pro-active way, preventing us from doing the same mistakes over-and-over again. I belive we all and our hobby can benefit from that.

Many users of this forum have an enormous experience in completing flights in a safe and toublefree way. Construction of the plane is as important as eg. pre-flight checks. "The chain is not stronger than its weakest link" Pls share your experiences with us.

My 2 cents

Thomas
Old 03-16-2007, 06:07 AM
  #269  
My Feedback: (11)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: tarpon springs, FL
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

What does it take for someone to lose their turbine waiver? To me it seems that there are a few people that fly and crash at every event they enter and even at the home field, but it seems because they are friends or are very well liked they are allowed to keep flying and putting people and property at risk as well as our hobby. I feel that having a turbine waiver is a privlage like having a drivers lic.

just my 2 cents
Old 03-16-2007, 07:20 AM
  #270  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: South Plainfield, NJ
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Thomas,

So.... what happened, let us know.

Jetguy,

The waiver system is just as broken as the US drivers license system from the start. A kid shows some stranger they can drive up the street a few feet and park, then they are given a piece of paper that allows them to drive next to me at highway speeds in any weather condition. So the waiver system, if it works/ when it works, at least requires some experience on the front end but has no bite on the back end. The license system has no bite on the front end but does on the back end (even then - there really isn't a way to stop them until they get caught).

One on the main problems is both systems can be influenced by human emotion and/or friendship. How many times do you see a politician or celebrity get busted for the nth time and still drive away from the court house. The same is true for our models and is even harder to enforce. Society as a whole has a reluctance to get involved "before" anything goes wrong. I'll bet if you go out this weekend and start your turbine without an extinguisher near by, nobody will say anything. But, if you burn down the field people will come out of the woodwork calling for all sorts of new rules.

Next you have to prove someone was negligent before you take away their so-called rights. Do you pull the waiver of someone who is just unlucky? Personally, I think the entire waiver system isn't necessary. People in the US do what they want anyway. There are many people flying turbines without waivers, there are many with waivers who don't have great skills and there are many without waivers who have the skills. If the waivers were gone, I'd bet, nothing would change. I think the impression of elitism would go away and more people would take an interest in turbines. With more people understanding them, by default, you gain a safety edge. At our local fields the non-turbine guys rarely speak up unless they are complaining (many openly say things like "I'm not going over there with those guys").

Add to all of this, look at the demographics of the average turbine owner. These are generally strong self-made people. With strong personalities you will need equally strong enforcers. What do you do with the guy who doesn't listen? What do you do with the guy who doesn't think he has a lot of money in his planes and takes all kinds of chances (remember these jets are not expensive to many of the people involved)? What do you do about manufacturer defects? Most of this comes down to people. If you have people who care, like most of us, the system will mostly work (like the US drivers license). There will always be the odd man out who screws things up.

I suggest we all deal with him/her at the local field level as a start. Stop being so silent until you get online. I've suspended privileges for two people at my field during my tenure as a club president. One left the hobby, which was probably a good thing. I've seen others put on probation at another field. I have also seen guys take a step back to rebuild skills (all of this without anyone saying anything).
Old 03-17-2007, 09:46 AM
  #271  
My Feedback: (4)
 
Eddie P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Safety is a culture. It must be introduced and honed by education form the very start for it to be accepted. In addition, it must be promoted from within, by our own peers, for safety to be embraced.

Like some here I've been in full scale fast jet aviation for many years as my profession. I obtained a university degree in aerospace safety, accident investigation and program management and have been fortunate enough to manage safety programs for flight operations with as few as four pilots to as many as several thousands of pilots while still maintaining full flight status as captain, check airman, etc. My colleagues have safety in the blood becasue if they do not their "safetyless" blood will be in the ground, along with innocent people - it is as simple, and unacceptable, as that. In addition, full scale aviation has a very strong peer pressure system where if one guy falls out of the safety ranks there is hell to pay amongs peers even before it goes to management wherre there is a zero tolerance policy. Not to mention there are very heavy handed safety regulatory agencies that will not hesitate to end a person's career based on safety infractions.

In my opinion it is very difficult and nearly futile to directly compare a safety effort in RC jet flying to full scale aviation.

For one, we look at full scale aviation safety culture as a highly adapted, nearly "finished" product. It is like a piece of nice furniture with a well polished lacqured finish, that is 20 layers deep. It is nearly transparent, so it looks simpler than it is. But the tones, texture and "look" took much effort to hone. With RC we are dealing with, to stay with the example, an unsanded block of wood that needs completing and finishing still. We can't simply lop on a heavy coat of varnish and expect the solution to be acceptable. Full scale aviation is a culture that took many years, many deaths and many many people's entire professional lives to get where it is today.

We are also in a hobby playing among folks from all walks of life - it is going to be very challenging to get a safety mindset to permiate within the ranks unless it starts from humble beginnings. RC Jet flying is a hobby - there will be strong resitance to anything that smacks of "work" or regulation. We (those interested in this subject at least) know however, that safety is the barrier between us and outside regulation. So we DO need to embark on an education effort - not a finger wagging campaign. I believe the education system can be done via internet based systems and a certain level could be required as a pre-req. to turbine waivers. At least all in the jet ranks could have a knowledge base enough to know that safety is a system, a culture - and that accidents just don't "happen" like some have said, who in my opinion, should know better than that.

We have the cause and the will among some of us to create a safety culture in RC jets and RC flying in general. But, IMHO, this is going to take time and will have to be applied in "layers" like varnish on a fine piece of furniture. Only when we have an educated population of RC jet pilots can we then introduce internal safety programs where mentoring and remedial education can be used as risk management tools amongst our ranks to some level of effectivness. Enforcement? That has to still be considered but it will be almost completely ineffective compared to the education and internal (peer) monitoring we should be striving for.
Old 03-17-2007, 10:50 AM
  #272  
My Feedback: (4)
 
Eddie P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Another thought - I don't want to suggest we in RC Jet flying have anywhere near the same risks as full scale - it's a whole different ballgame of course. I do believe we can benefit from the same ideas, the same sort of processes tailored for our specific area of the hobby. We still have to have an environment where we feel we have freedom to have fun and get that adrenalyn rush. We can have that and play smart too. The key is to have a system that works for US. We do not want to make a system that WE have to work for, otherwise it will be a really devisive and dysfunctional mess.
Old 03-17-2007, 05:09 PM
  #273  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,927
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Really excellent posts, gentlemen, and at least we are now discussing the issue sensibly and with maturity. Just one point. I entirely agree that we cannot compare the risks and it is almost impossible to create the same culture in model aviation but at least we can TRY and pass on SOME of our culture evolved over many years of fullsize jet ops. to the operation of model jets as a lot of procedures and techniques ARE directly transferrable. I think any and all effort is worthwhile.

Many thanks for your first class contributions.

Regards,

David Gladwin.
Old 03-17-2007, 05:26 PM
  #274  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CanberraACT, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Hi Guys,

Here's are some questions I am interested in at the moment as a result of planning under way to significantly revamp my club facilities:

- What do people consider the minimum safe separation from the pilot's box to the edge of the runway?
- How high and how far in each direction should the barrier between the pilot's box and runway extend?
- What is the minimum safe separation between the strip and the pits and how can the pits be protected from a model that veers off on either take-off or landing?

Any thoughts appreciated as we are looking to invest a fair amount of money in these works and I am keen to ensure that safety is factored into the design as much as a great strip.

Regards,
Garrett
Old 03-17-2007, 06:21 PM
  #275  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CanberraACT, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Hi Guys,

Another thought. I think a lot of it comes back to who teaches you to fly to start with and the attitude and skill of that instructor. At my club field, I think it is safe to say that the ability of many pilots to land from one particular end is less than impressive. First, given the prevailing wind, we only land from that end maybe 10% of the time and there is turbulence at that end too. Also, many do not seem to have the ability to land in a consistent manner in even a modest cross-wind and rather than practice using ailerons AND rudder, prefer to just land at an angle across the strip and run off into the long grass.

I hold my MAAA Instructors rating and I may a very, very big point of making absolutely certain that anyone I teach to fly can land consistently from both ends in all conditions. In fact, I'll make a point of getting them out there doing approach after approach after approach (on buddy cord, of course) after everyone else has called it quits and is sitting around in the club house because of the wind. From my observation, the end result is that by the time my students are finally solo, they are more prepared and capable than some in the club who have been flying for 20 or more years and this is something I take great pride in. I even make a point of ensuring that I still do sessions of getting approaches and landings spot-on in all conditions rather than getting complacent and just flying around aimlessly.

The same holds true for model preparation and safe handling in the pits. If you set someone on the right path from day one and explain the reasoning and importance behind the actions, it sticks with people for a long time.

Regards,
Garrett

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.