Martinolupo

Dear all,
I am new here in the forum.
As in our local flying field new safety requirements for turbine flying are going to be introduced I would like to know how the US requirements looks like.
Until now I found basically the following documents:

-SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT POWERED BY GAS TURBINES (PDF, file name 510-A)
-Fixed Wing - Turbine Waiver Application (PDF, file name 510-D)

Those documents are basically oriented to the operation of turbine models.
But I didn’t found much information about model requirements and equipment.
I know there is a list of AMA approved turbine engines.
But are there further requirements like failsafe, rc components, and general aircraft building?

Thank you in advance for your help.

Regards
Martino Pusterla

MajorTomski

Have you looked at the rest of the 510 documents?


The AMA does try to minimise detail like documents and focus on end results.

Martinolupo

Thanks for your answer.
I had a look on the documents. It seems that there is no particular requirement.
But please let me know if i missed something.
Thanks again.
Regards
Martino

Synthetic

My Feedback: (18)

Martino,
Welcome to this forum.
Don

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Martino,
Somethings that you have to look for...
1. All R/C turbine powered planes in the US must have a functional rudder.
2. They must have brakes
3. You need to have a fire extinquisher available when starting and running your turbine.
4. Somewhere in there I believe there is a statement about having fire fighting equipment on hand at a flying site. I don't remember where I read this, but I know that many guys use the water carrying backpacks (firefighting backpaks) or keep water buckets available in case of a fire at a crash.
5. This is also some information at the JPO website I believe.
6. Most of the stuff is good common sense, with a little overkill thrown in to make sure that the bases are covered.
Tommy

MLaCoste

My Feedback: (15)

This actually brings up a kind of sore subject with me...

This past weekend, another turbine pilot & I witnessed several experienced turbine pilots helping out another new turbine pilot with his new Formost 50 powered by a Wren 44. We saw that this aircraft did not have brakes on it. I approached a few of the experienced guys quietly and voiced my concern about the non-existent brakes. I was told that in their opinion, since this aircraft already had a low residual idle thrust, and that the main wheels were tightened down with wheel collars, that it didn't need brakes. Also that if they need to "Come to a Commanded Stop" all they had to do was taxi into the grass, or better yet to be AMA compliant they just had to fly off the grass.

Per AMA Doc 510-A, item 6 "For RC fixed wing aircraft: The model shall be able to come to a controlled stop on command with the engine at idle on a level hard surface."

How do the rest of you interpret this rule? As a waiver holding CD, should I have prevented him from flying until the aircraft was fitted with brakes?

Thanks for your input.

Brg,
Mark

ravill

My Feedback: (11)

Mark,

I think you should say, and do, what ever you can to keep our hobby and the airplanes of new guys safe.

Raf

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Mark,
I don't think you could prevent them from flying, however you could point out to them that the rules clearly state what they state. If it were an organized event and they were trying that stunt I beleive the CD would, should, and could prevent them from flying. It is sad to see someone flaunt the rules like that and perhaps your advice to them may go heeded and hopefully they will reevaulate the situation and put some brakes on it.
Good luck, that is a difficult position to be put in.
Tommy

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

How would you have felt if an accident/fire had occurred and the AMA insurance did not pay out due to the non-compliance of the model?

Who is on the hook for the liabilty in this case? The club? The landowner (my club is on borrwowed land) ?

If you can prevent a couple of irresponsible guys from putting everyone else at risk, then perhaps you should.

Just monday-morning quarterbacking on my part of course, I know it's very difficult to be the "heavy".

Martinolupo

Hi all,
@DocYates:
Thanks for your answer. I have somewere already found those rules. And havo to check JPO (btw you mean http://www.jpo-iv.com/ right?).

About point 6. Forget common sense. there is no common sense in the story I am experiencing.

Either you fly @ a field where a lot of people fly turbines, or you fly in a field where turbine pilots are the minority. And this is were the problems begin.

At the moment in our field turbine flight has been suspended. Me and other turbine pilots have been accused of dangerous flying.
The funny part of the stoty is that we are flying there since a couple of months now. And NO ONE of the person in charge for the administration of the field or of the security on the field has never said something. I am new in turbine flight. @ the new field (my home field is way to small for turbines) I often asked if everything was fine with my flying style. Furthermore the field has some no fly zones and Asked if I unintentionally flew on those zones. The answers i got were"no problem it's fine".

Anyway they do not like turbine airplanes (for whatever reason). While no one told us anything about possible problems people were already discussing and acting in the background. Yesterday the bad news came. Turbine flying is suspended. For safety reasons.

Even more funny is that I found out the exact reasons of the suspension trough some insider sources. The "orders from the top" were to negate any information about the story.

Now they decided to introduce something similar to your turbine waiver. Do not misunderstand myself. I approve every measure to increasy safety. But i am really worried that they are going to introduce some absolutely crazy rules. Both for the pilots and for the airplanes (technical requirements).

For airplanes you can always find some technical things which can be improved. I mean, for instance, what is a safe RC equipment? You can start from a simgle PCM reciever with double battery system and you can end with double reundant 2.4ghz receiver with powerbox and and and... Furthermore we have no rule from modeler association here. So i expect really arbitrary and crazy rules.

For the side flying skills the problem is even worser. Here in Switzerland we are not so organized like you in the US. No chance of getting some flying training with "double transmitter" (i think you call it "buddy box"). So no chance of training before the "exam" (remember that turbine flying is suspended). No information about the minimum required flying skills. Nothing. And again I am afraid that the requirements are going to be totally crazy.

So. Thats the story.
Thank you again
Regards
Martino

MLaCoste

My Feedback: (15)

Martino-

Keep your head up. I would hope that your governing body would be willing to work with your turbine community to come up with a reasonable set of turbine regulations. It sounds like you guys are experiencing some growing pains, but hopefully it will all get worked out.

BTW, I did not mean to hijack your thread, but as you can see the attitude towards this one grey-area rule really bugs me.

Brg,
Mark

Wayne22

My Feedback: (2)

I recall one discussion maybe a year ago here on that topic.... The word brake does not appear anywhere in that sentence. The term "contolled stop on command " does...leaving a bit of grey area in the methodology of coming to a controlled stop. If the wheel collars are indeed tightened, then that model would most likely meet the minimum intent of the rule, though if you doubted it, you could always ask the pilot ot demonstrate a controlled stop on your command..it might roll a thousand feet before it comes to a stop (not likely) but as long as it is controlled........ However, that doesn't do them any good at all if they have to abort a takeoff! Perhaps that rule needs to be firmed up a bit.

I believe there will be a problem when all these turbinized hybrids (bobcat 50, Foremost, falcon) start showing up..most of those guys are not likely to put $350 of wheels and brakes on a $200 jet.....

Boomerang1

Hi Martino,

This is the link to the Australian Turbine rules. May have some ideas there.

http://www.maaa.asn.au/mop/procedure...Feb%202003.pdf

Turbine powered models here need a 3 year permit to fly as do other models over 7 kg. I have copies of the blank permits & inspection check lists. Is that what you are looking for?

John.

Martinolupo

Thanks.
Exactly what I was looking for.
Although some of those rules seems a little bit vague and others a little bit difficult to implement.
Saluti
M

swissflyer

hello Martino

probably you speak of the same airfield where i fly turbine since 4 years now...

beside being grounded too, i'm the first that i approve and wish to introduce regulations..

sorry to say that, but we need to find a solution..

a field reglementation is there..and we must respect it...and regarding jets...we need to be very careful, too many people showed up without the necessary knowledge and expertise and we had to see very bad situations...

reading the "reports" i'm sure that is just matter of time and some hard work.. and we will be flying again..
i really don't think there is a hate of jets...is just that we jet pilots must be even more careful than other...

alessio