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 08-20-2008, 05:42 PM
  #326  
My Feedback: (8)
 
uncljoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,111
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

ISO certification says that you have documented some process, NOT that you actually follow it.

Gordon you are so right . We had to implement (ISO 9000) in our department but other's said that we all ready had procedures in place which worked & realized it was a total waste of money& time.

Semper Fi
Joe
Old 08-20-2008, 05:49 PM
  #327  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,575
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Please note I have said 'favor' instead of "ensure". Many huge companies spend big money just to get that certifcation, it just can't be useless ... IMHO, the global certification trend does come from the USA.
Old 08-20-2008, 06:34 PM
  #328  
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: Strykaas
Many huge companies spend big money just to get that certifcation, it just can't be useless
The reason that my prior company spent a bunch of money on the certification, is that they wanted to bid on a contract that was only open to ISO 9000 certified companies.

We all knew it would do absolutely nothing to improve our quality, but when contracts are awarded by bureaucrats who blindly follow a checklist without understanding what the items on that checklist actually mean, that means that we have to waste a bunch of money just like they did.

Gordon
Old 08-21-2008, 03:27 AM
  #329  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 16 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

IMO the ISO 9000 industry is a scam for the ISO 9000 industry's benefit. My last employer decided to get ISO 9000 so that it would be the first in its field to have it and would use it purely for marketing to claim it had one over on all the opposition. All we did was end up making forms to track the editing history of the forms we used! It was an utter waste of an awful lot of time. The highly paid "consultant" who was brought in to help us said we had done it the wrong way, instead of trying to get ISO 9000 on the core business we should just have applied for ISO 9000 on the marketing dept literature which is dead easy to get and has less value than worthless but still allows you to put ISO 9000 on your brochures and stationery.

The basis of the ISO is that you set a standard, measure your performance against it, and hold review meetings to make the performance measurement meet the standard that you set. It is perfectly valid to set a standard of "we will not answer a phone until it has been ringing for at least 2 minutes and will then be rude to the customer who is calling". We then measure how long phones are left ringing and how rude our staff are. We hold a review meeting every 6 monhs to identify which staff are picking up the phone too quickly or are not being rude enough, and retrain them. Hooray, we get awarded ISO 9000.

ISO 9000 is a worthless scam, it's a white collar crime. It doesn't tell you that the goods or services are of high quality, indeed it could tell you that the firm meets or exceeds its own targets for being bad!
Old 08-21-2008, 06:01 AM
  #330  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,929
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Pictures:

In the first picture you can see the spar at the tip is too shallow and the glue bead shows that the skin has not been contacted. Notice the difference in dimensions of two spar sections.

Second picture shows a nice glue bead, but no skin contact, spar is too shallow.

Third and fourth picture again shows nice glue bead at wing root but no contact with skin, spar too shallow.

Fifth picture shows the spar at root and the skin, showing lack of contact with glue bead.

Well, there's the evidence, make your own judgements but this is a minimalist structure, glass faced balsa spars, no carbon reinforcement, in my opinion the structural strength must be seriously compromised and this led to the wing failing in bending mode as G was applied to recover from the reversal.

So the question is, How many other wings are similarly compromised and as someone has just mentioned in an email its not just CARF ther are a LOT of cheap Asian products out there some of which we KNOW , as shown in an earlier picture are marginal at best.

That said I have examined the internal structure of my Airworld and PST composite models and they are absolutely fine, the wing of the AW Hawk is built like a tank.

Air safety is for real. Just after posting my earlier note I walked the dog through this village near RAF Syerston on which bits of Jet Provost had fallen after a collision overhead, and I walked near to the field over which a Vulcan broke up in 1960 at an air Display when the wing skin seperated. Switching on the TV , I was greeted by news of the Spanair (a SAS company) MD82 crash, which killed 150. Just last week I flew on a SAS MD82 from CPH to LHR. Things get a bit close to home somtimes !

So, please discuss the Eurosport failure situation, its a tricky one, but one I dont think can just be ignored.

Regards,

David Gladwin.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Ge96940.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	40.2 KB
ID:	1016001   Click image for larger version

Name:	Jh15673.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	49.2 KB
ID:	1016002   Click image for larger version

Name:	Vt58112.jpg
Views:	24
Size:	51.9 KB
ID:	1016003   Click image for larger version

Name:	Fc90043.jpg
Views:	21
Size:	44.6 KB
ID:	1016004   Click image for larger version

Name:	Mk25175.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	62.4 KB
ID:	1016005  
Old 08-21-2008, 06:33 AM
  #331  
My Feedback: (1)
 
schroedm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SevenoaksKent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 5,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Not being drawn on this but as of this morning, UK time, the factory was completely unaware of this incident.

May be an idea for whoever this happened to to contact the rep it was purchased through so it can be escalated to the factory before the nails are hammered into the coffin on this forum.

David, I understand your concerns and where you are coming from (aiframe/general safety is paramount) but it does seem you are over vocal whenever it is Comp-ARF related I'm sure this is just coincidence but I just don't remember you suggesting all these draconian measures when noses were falling off of 250mph £10k sport jets [X(] [8D]

Regards,
Mark
Old 08-21-2008, 07:07 AM
  #332  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,929
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Mark, I am vocal on those issues which directly concern me and of which I have first hand knowledge. I was THERE and watching the jet when it crashed, I watched the debris flutter down into the pits. where I was standing. I was at St Athan and watched and was ready to run when the stab failed on the Lightning. I own and have built and have first hand knowledge of the Euro structure, which on my model had structural deficiencies. I think I am well qualified and entitled to speak about the issue. You may disagree.

I spoke up on the BVM BobCat pitch contol problem, it directly concerned me. I have built two BCs and have hundreds of flights on them, I still fly them with complete confidence in the structural integity and pitch control system.

I was not present when the Ultra Bandit nose failed , I have never built one and know nothing of the structure and little of the circumstances. Therefore NOT qualified to comment.

No doubt a sa rep you have vested interest in keeping this quiet. Be grateful you are not dealing with more serious consequences of this failure.

Now what are YOUR ideas for ensuring that we avoid similar failures ?

regards, David Gladwin.
Old 08-21-2008, 07:44 AM
  #333  
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

David,

The points you are trying to make are spot on. I also view things from a professional aviation culture, and some others I know that are not aviators do as well. I feel it does mean I'm on the look-out. In a way it is a burden to be oriented at safety in this way, but I don't think being less aware would make the sport more fun.

In other words, ignorance would not be bliss. From what I've seen in jet modeling, there is probably more "it isn't going to happen to me" syndrome than there should be.
What you are advocating is more pro-active safety, rather than reactive.

Chris
Old 08-21-2008, 01:23 PM
  #334  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,929
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Thanks Chris, very much appreciated. If you, as a professional, can endorse that it is the way we do things, then that is most satisfying for me. Perhaps your endorsement will convince some that I have no hidden agenda but someone has to push this safety issue if our hobby and our freedom ito operate, unrestricted by legislation, is to prosper.

Lets hope we can spread the gospel, doing it right and safely is almost always just as easy as doing it wrong, and so much more rewarding, too.

Just heard there was a Hawk crash not far from here, RAF Cranwell. After the mid- air at Coventry, the Madrid crash, not a good week for aviation safety. Both guys in the Hawk ejected safely but the aircraft crashed very near the tower

Thank you again.

regards,

David.
Old 08-21-2008, 02:43 PM
  #335  
 
GrayUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

David
As you know I am with you on this 100%.
It is a difficult one, if you own a plane (ARTF) from any supplier; you have to 'believe' they have built it right!
If you have to half destroy it to inspect it then it is no good to anyone.
The issue with the Wing was a manufacturing/design problem. The spar not being tall enough prevented bonding.
Due to the way these are built it cannot really be inspected after gluing, so an inspection stage needs to be introduced before the top skin is attached.

Having worked in design engineering all my working life, I know what steps, we, as a company take to ensure we have analysed as much as we feel possible all failure modes. Much of what we do is life critical; it can be military or maybe medical.

In the medical field we manufacture respirators often used on newborn babies. If we have a failure due to a design fault or manufacturing defect and cannot prove we had done all we could be reasonably expected to do, then we are in for one hell of a legal battle!
It is down to the manufacturers to be Pro-active and undertake proper FMEA's on their designs.

This would have three effects.
1) Safer designs
2) More sales.
2) A degree of 'due care and diligence' should they ever be taken to court due to a death related to a structural failure proven to be a design or manufacturing defect.

It would be beneficial to them and us.

My 2 Cents…

Paul
Old 08-21-2008, 02:53 PM
  #336  
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

I'm not sure about the "more sales" part.

The extra QA/QC costs money, which means that the price of the product must include that. Time and time again a very substantial number of people on this forum have demonstrated that they would rather have a poorer quality product that is cheap, than a higher quality product that costs more.

Gordon
Old 08-21-2008, 03:30 PM
  #337  
 
GrayUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

It costs less to build something correctly and not have to put it right afterwards.
Care in manufacture and design is much cheaper than correcting errors, losing sales and possibly ending up in court!
More sales come from confidence in the product standards, brand and reliability.

If cost was all that mattered we would all drive around in the cheapest car we can buy, as we know, this is not what happens.
Quality is the key to business.

Faults cost sales in the end, no matter what your name or brand is, that is what killed the UK Motorcycle industry and almost wiped out the car industry in Europe and USA.
I wonder how many of the ARTF companies actually employ qualified engineers (contract or full time) to examine the design, structure and manufacturing processes involved?

I hope it never comes to it, but I feel we have been very luck so far.
Lets not rely on luck!

Paul
Old 08-21-2008, 04:14 PM
  #338  
 
JetCatJimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 462
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

I agree with your point, to a point. There is a forum here that has a massive following with pilots modifying a prop-powered Bobcat copy and putting a turbine on the back. My concern here is that no only are people with less experience moving into this field, cutting corners as they build their first turbine on a budget, but also that there is a lack of respect for your airframe when you can replace the entire plane for a fraction of the cost of the turbine that powers it.

There are many highly qualified builders out there that will undoubtedly make sure their airframes are secure before taking a chance on harming someone or something, but there are just as many people who are budget builders 'driven' to buy this 'model' as an entry into this section of the hobby. I for one, would feel uncomfortable flying such a blatant ripoff of another's hard work and design. Many of these tried and true airframes are built on the backs of much hard-learned experience. Those improvements that lie beneath the skin will not easily be transferred to another model - forcing other pilots to make the same mistakes without knowing that these roads have already been paved by the more expensive model. My 2 cents.
Old 08-21-2008, 04:37 PM
  #339  
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: GrayUK
It costs less to build something correctly and not have to put it right afterwards.
Care in manufacture and design is much cheaper than correcting errors, losing sales and possibly ending up in court!
Do you really think that the companies building the various China ARFs etc would ever end up paying a crapload of money due to a court case in a country like the US ? I don't.

I expect that if they ever got held legally accountable at all (which in itself seems highly unlikely) then hey'd simply close up as Brand X and reappear a few weeks later as Brand Y. Look at how many times Anton has started up a new factory when he had fights with the old one, and you'll see how willing some are to walk away from their prior problems and start over.

More sales come from confidence in the product standards, brand and reliability.
Uh, yeah …

Years ago at least every second jet you saw at a jet rally here in the US was from one of those "high standards, high reliability, recognised brand" companies called BVM. Now maybe one in ten here is a BVM model, and the cheap China ARFs proliferate. While some of us still value high quality to the point of being willing to pay noticeably more for it, we seem to be a distinct minority.

Most people seem to be very willing to accept the lower quality as part of the cost of getting cheaper goods. I just had this exact conversation with one of my buddies who's assembling a China-ARF .. he started off cussing about the poor quality of workmanship, with crappy assembly and missing or incorrectly placed blocks for control horns etc. (which could be catastrophic if the error were not caught) etc … but then he said ".. but that's the cost we accept for having cheap-ass China ARFs – if this thing were as high quality as a JMP model hardly anyone would be able to afford one !"

If cost was all that mattered we would all drive around in the cheapest car we can buy, as we know, this is not what happens.
The car anaology has numerous flaws. For starters, people buying the more expensive cars typically have them comprehensively insured ; as a result, people don't tend to look at the extra money they spend on their higher-quality car as something that may well be totally lost any time they drive the car. With our toys, I constantly hear people saying things like "Given that I'm just gonna stuff it and lose it at some point anyway, I'd rather lose $x than $2x so the cheap one is fine by me even if it is lower quality". Also, most car companies have serious assets that you can go after if things went wrong ; a China-ARF sweatshop on the other hand...

Don't get me wrong – I'm all for there being improved quality in the products that we are all using .. I am simply dubious of the claim that higher quality will necessarily mean more sales, because I don't see hordes of people ditching their Feibao / Jet Eagle Models / Xtremejets / whatever cheap China ARF preferences to buy JMP, BVM, Airworld / whatever - if anything, I've been steadily wathcing the exact opposite happen with people ditching higher quality in favor of immediate cost savings.

Gordon
Old 08-21-2008, 06:09 PM
  #340  
 
GrayUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Have to say...i do not know WHAT you are defending?
Crap quality?
Crap manufacture?
Crap designs?

Who wins?
Old 08-21-2008, 06:10 PM
  #341  
 
GrayUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

[]
Old 08-21-2008, 06:52 PM
  #342  
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: GrayUK

Have to say...i do not know WHAT you are defending?
Huh ??? Where on earth did this 'defending' stuff come from ???

Gordon

Old 08-22-2008, 03:14 AM
  #343  
 
GrayUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Thats what it looks like in your post...
Old 08-22-2008, 03:53 AM
  #344  
 
Boomerang1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,965
Received 21 Likes on 11 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

I agree with your point, to a point. There is a forum here that has a massive following with pilots modifying a prop-powered Bobcat copy and putting a turbine on the back. My concern here is that no only are people with less experience moving into this field, cutting corners as they build their first turbine on a budget, but also that there is a lack of respect for your airframe when you can replace the entire plane for a fraction of the cost of the turbine that powers it.

There are many highly qualified builders out there that will undoubtedly make sure their airframes are secure before taking a chance on harming someone or something, but there are just as many people who are budget builders 'driven' to buy this 'model' as an entry into this section of the hobby. I for one, would feel uncomfortable flying such a blatant ripoff of another's hard work and design. Many of these tried and true airframes are built on the backs of much hard-learned experience. Those improvements that lie beneath the skin will not easily be transferred to another model - forcing other pilots to make the same mistakes without knowing that these roads have already been paved by the more expensive model. My 2 cents.
I have one of these 'Bobcats' and having repaired & recovered the thing after the previous owner crash landed it the structure (apart from the fibreglass fuselage) is all good quality, conventional balsa/ply construction. It gives me more confidence than some of the composite structures I've seen. Of the 130 plus pages of the 'massive following' perhaps 4 models have been converted to turbine power.

No lack of respect for the cheap airframe from me, I'm relying on it to keep my expensive turbine safe. Flown sensibly I can see no problems at all with a turbine suited to the size of the model, in this case an 8 pound Wren..

I'm sure some people think the house of purple invented the twin boom jet & think everyone else should be paying Bob royalties.


What REALLY worries me is the combination of suspect asian composite airframes fitted with far larger engines than recommended by the manufacturer by people who really have no idea of the consequences. John.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Hf97905.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	5.7 KB
ID:	1016568  
Old 08-22-2008, 07:20 AM
  #345  
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: GrayUK

Thats what it looks like in your post...
Show me where, and I'll do my best to reword / explain it as appropriate.

Gordon
Old 08-22-2008, 08:20 AM
  #346  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 16 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

I read it as Gordon agreeing with those who want quality but being realistic about human behaviour and recognising that in an unregulated market a great many will only see the attractiveness of a cheap price and either not bother about quality or simply not understand the need for quality when dealing with something weighing perhaps 30lbs travelling at 150mph. I did not read Gordon defending poor quality.
Harry
Old 08-22-2008, 09:06 AM
  #347  
 
David Gladwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CookhamBerkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,929
Received 146 Likes on 94 Posts
Default RE: 2 death 4 wounded in model airplane crash

Perhaps we need to redefine poor quality vis a vis unacceptable quality such as was the case on the Euro wing.

I certainly agree with Paul that quality sells, doesn't have to be TOP quality, just acceptable, and if ithere were to be a slight price increase meaning that some guys can no longer afford them thats just tough, thats life, we can't all have everything we want. That said I can't see why there would need to be ANY price increase for correcting the sort of problems seen in this Euro wing.

What I see in Gordon's post is that we have to accept the status quo and little can be done about it. I dread to think of the consequnces if this carries on, sooner or later it will all go pear shaped.

I wonder too about the legal status of the various reps and sales agents of these Asian ARTFs. I doubt if many, any, have determined exactly how liable they would be if they had sold a customer a model which, due to a manufacturing defect, causes a serious accident. No doubt that would vary from country to country but IF I were rep/ or agent I would be seriously concerned.

Still, no one has yet suggested any answer to the problem with which we are presented................ and the uncharacteristic silence from the C-arfs "reps" is deafening !

Regards, David Gladwin.
Old 08-22-2008, 10:10 AM
  #348  
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: David Gladwin
I certainly agree with Paul that quality sells, doesn't have to be TOP quality, just acceptable, and if there were to be a slight price increase meaning that some guys can no longer afford them thats just tough, thats life, we can't all have everything we want. That said I can't see why there would need to be ANY price increase for correcting the sort of problems seen in this Euro wing.
For RETRO-actively dealing with issues like this one specific case, I certainly agree that C-ARF ought to be able to fix that without increasing the price.

However, for PRO-actively instigating a program to improve the overall quality of all aspects of the models from the cheap end of the model market, I highly suspect that there would be price implications.

I have a number of friends who own manufacturing companies that outsource various jobs to China, and according to them it is far from cheap to get Chinese factories to adopt decent quality procedures / mechanisms. I fail to see why ARF Jets would be any different, but I am willing to be convinced by logical argument


What I see in Gordon's post is that we have to accept the status quo and little can be done about it.
I wouldn't say that little CAN be done about it – more that I think little WILL be done about it unless we collectively become more willing to pay increased prices for increased quality.

As far as I can see, it is within our collective power to change the average quality of our models by not going too far with the "I'll accept poorer quality in exchange for lower prices" approach, but how many amongst us are actually going to do that ? I guess I have a little less faith than you guys that we are all focused on protecting the hobby by paying for quality goods. Not sure if that makes me a realist or a cynic …

What can those of us who believe in the non-trivial value of a decent level of quality do to dissuade others from being swayed by the almighty dollar ? Any ideas ?

Gordon
Old 08-22-2008, 10:11 AM
  #349  
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: HarryC
I read it as Gordon agreeing with those who want quality but being realistic about human behaviour and recognising that in an unregulated market a great many will only see the attractiveness of a cheap price and either not bother about quality or simply not understand the need for quality when dealing with something weighing perhaps 30lbs travelling at 150mph. I did not read Gordon defending poor quality.
Harry
Bingo ! Give the man a coconut !
Old 08-22-2008, 01:54 PM
  #350  
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



Regarding these cases where jet models have come apart in flight resulting in a crash...

Post crash-

The first thing I would do after determining it was structural failure, is get the word out which has been done. This should happen regardless of whether the failure was caused by manufacturing defect or owner's building or damage from use.

Second thing, is to look at the point of failure then the point of impact or crash site, and consider if the location was tolerable or acceptable from a safety point of view. If not, (the pits, parking lots, or spectator areas would not be) then try to determine if a flight pattern, altitude rule or safety zone needs to be changed or adjusted. There is probably a lot more we could do to improve on this at most jet meets. Mandatory zero lines are a start but not enough.

Third, all owners of the incident model design should assume it directly affects their own airplanes. I 've said previously that I feel we tend toward the "it won't happen to me" thinking a bit too much. Manufacturers should feel obligated to help determine this ASAP. But we should also give them time.

If the manufacturer determines an engineering or procedural fix is needed, or preventative measures could be taken to avoid a similar incident, reputable companies will get the info out and provide the necessary parts and procedures. However, we should avoid setting a "compensation should be required" or "replace my jet" precedent. Buyer beware is not a bad thing as long as we have info. I believe the market does have some self cleaning to it.

The second and third post accident steps mentioned above could be considered pro-active safety measures as they help prevent future safety failures.

Thanks for listening,
Chris

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.