I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

As i rifle through the jet forums and see multiple problems with airframes and their failures i have to wonder how no one has been seriously injured or worst yet .. killed. I'm talking mostly about the spectators . I was at Joe Nall a few years ago when a well know pilot fireballed his turbine into the runway . Though in my opinion ,it wasn't his fault . but what bothered me was the fact that it happened in clear site of the AMA council while they were conducting a meeting while that plane was clearly breaking the 200 MPH mark set by AMA. that bothered me.. I like every other pipe jockey love to go fast but you have to ask , how fast is fast enough ? What i'm getting at is the fact that i see over and over , guys putting way to much power in some of these air frames. I would like to see a set of regulations that make a jet builder/flyer adhere to the manufacture recommended power plant for their air frame. I believe that being proactive rather than reactive is the best approach. As everyone knows, we are under a microscope as it is and one bad event could really hurt the whole modeling community . i would like to start and open and non-combative discussion on this topic . i'm in no means in favor of more rules and regulations and we have had a really good safety record and i'd like to see it stay that way . I'm not putting all jet flyers in the same mold,but the few percentage that put safety second are the ones i'm concerned about . The second concern is the quality of some of the ARF's being sold to us. The manufactures have little or no vested interest in our future as modelers. That is evident by the lack of quality which translates into lack of safety concerns. they are protected against legal action , we are not . i welcome ideas good and bad but let's keep in civil

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

While I commend your intent for improved safety, I take real exception the suggested method. A few problems:

Which mfg's recommendations do we have to adhere to? Are we obligated to adhere to a mfg's recommendations that doesn't even produce a safe product to start with? Would this mfg engine restriction exempt the mfg from any issues of airframe defects..."you had a bigger engine than we recommend even if it was dialed down (prove it) thus it is your fault".

The size of the engine is not what makes it unsafe. If I want to fly a dialed down P160 in my Flash because it's the only engine I have, am I forced to buy a new engine?

Is it safer to have a P120 that can't make it beyond 200 S&L even if I can get it well over that in a dive?

Safety is not a function of the size of the engine. It is the pilot. Anyone who is flying in excess of the 200 mph safety code isn't going to be influenced by a "restriction" that they must adhere to every mfg's recommendations on what engine they should put in it. And I think the best way to maintain safety is to stop buying cheep products with know safety issues and enforce the AMA regs that exist.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

it's a start. i'd find it hard to believe that all would be willing to turn the turbine down . the whole reason for adhering to the manufacture engine size is to deter someone from putting a bigger than needed engine in to begin with especially if the airframe is of low quality. high power and low quality = trouble and that's before you factor in a pilots ability.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Don't entirely agree, only 99% of the time is it the pilot!

Came back from a weekend fly in last Sunday thinking exactly the same as Warbird 1.

It was a mixed event at an average club field with all sorts of models & 5 jets. All but one of the
jet pilots did the right thing, plenty of high speed passes but parrallel with the strip, aerobatics well
out from the crowd, vertical climbs not too high (we generally have a 400 ft limit in Oz.) One women
was heard to say 'I love those jets, the're awesome!'

BUT, one knob with a Flash had to show everyone what a hero he was. Climbs out of sight, full speed
figure 8's towards the crowd, full speed high G turns towards the crowd, full throttle passes 2 feet off
the strip angled out beyond the no-go line - great work! The best thing about his flight was it finished &
it was too late in the day for another chance to create more uneasiness. At least this saved the organisers
the awkward situation of having to tell him to pack it away.

Now the mutterings of the crowd was how scary & dangeous 'those jets' are, the 'what - if's' came out &
the perceptions of jets had changed from awesome to dangerous.

I don't know about the US but in OZ there are VERY few places to fly jets close to the major cities. Most
'average' clubs don't allow them & with clowns like the guy above I can see why. If he had crashed, and he
is a serial crasher, the crowd would have thrown him on the fire.

Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. - John.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

The last thing we need is more regulations. Before you know it you will regulate yourself out of a hobby.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

If everyone used common sense there would be no need for any regulation.

Unfortunately common sense is not that common so the next step is self regulation
by the people who actually are involved with flying jets.

If that fails you're on the slippery slope to being regulated by people who have'nt got a clue what we do.

John.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Unfortunately your experience is not unique. Fortunately most don't fly that way and hopefully the clubs try to throttle the guys that do. I just can't see a safety code that places more restrictions on everyone and does little for safe flying. If I want something larger than a JetCat P100 in a Elan, I have to buy from a different mfg since the next size, P140, is above Boomerang's recommendation engine size. If I only had a P140, I would have to buy another engine and non of those requirements would make me a safer pilot. If you think speed is the issue, enforce the current safety code. If we can't or don't do that, another restriction isn't going to make those that ignore the first, fly with a smaller engine.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

I agree with you 100%.

Used with common sense the bigger engine will not be an issue at all, probably safer if you struggle from a short grass strip.

Unfortunately some guys have the push it to the limit mentality & when something finally gives it's not pretty.

As Warbird 1 also mentions with some of the ARF's available that limit is not even close to where we would reasonably expect it to be. - John.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

We pretty much self regulate now and hero's go unchecked. We need rules that are enforceable . not to police good pilots but discipline the cowboys . if your not breaking the rules, you have nothing to worry about. just opinion

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Something else to think about is the varying environments in which we fly. For instance we can approach 6k' density altitude. I run a P120 in my BV mig, not because I want to go fast (not at all the plane for it), but because it feels more like a 100 at 2k and 100 deg F. Do you want a guy in Denver marginally powered because he followed the std recommendation but in reality is far below that thrust level in his environment?

Dave

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Fortunately the laws of nature help regulate our Hobby. Poorly built, poorly designed airplanes have a tendency to have VERY short lifespans. We almost all fly at a field where we don't fly over people and almost all of the models you are concerned with regulating ... The force of gravity and Mother Earth are pretty effective regulators.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

So your saying the pilot lost control of his aircraft due to the speed? We finally got to a point where this FAA thing was calming down. Why would you want to stir the pot? RC airplanes crash all the time, its part of the hobby. It's soooooo disappointing to see this post. I'm sorry you feel the need to try and ground us turbine guys by posting something like that. I will not look back at this thread again, so don't bother replying to me, I just had to say my peace (in the nicest way I could)!!!

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

O.K. one more reply. Anyone else reading this check out his other posts. He's on a rant. I for one don't think we need someone like this trashing RCU. JUST SAYING!

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

What does this mean?

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Most ARF Jets don't have any instructions at all in the box so quite how following them would work baffels me

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

In the UK we do not have a speed limit regulation of 200 mph like the AMA.  However very few fliers exceed this speed anyway.

In the USA there is a 200 mph speed limit rule imposed by the AMA.  Again, very few fliers exceed the limit.
Having a rule does not seem to make much difference.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

it's obvious some people fail to read the first post or they wouldn't have to ask repetitive questions.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

lol trashing rcu ? i'm trying to carry on a post with people that share ideas. you obviously have a chip on your shoulder.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

there can be provisions made for your condition . i'm just trying to think of a way to hold careless and reckless people accountable , not drown myself or anyone else in rules. but when i go to an event i want to feel safe, sometimes i don't

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

that simply means ..there are people flying either on the edge of their abilities or the edge of the planes abilities or both . then you have to factor in the overall construction of what their flying . after all that ,they become a liability in the hobby and either there's no rules in place or no one wants to say anything to make this person slow down. Let's say i have a... boomerang with a titan in it and i'm out there flying a model that's built out of balsa and ply going over 200 . would you feel safe around something like that given the type of construction ? i have a intro with a p-80 . now allen says it's ok and in fact they had instructions on how to modify the fuse to accept it. that being said , i wouldn't feel comfortable at all going even bigger . my boomer has a max speed of 175 maybe 200 in a dive and that's fast enough of that particular airframe .

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

What can be done now is the simple enforcement of the existing rules. When we fly anything around spectators there should be an Air Boss or CD who is the final authority. When we fun fly daily with other pilots they assume the risks of flying with others and generally know the limitations of the aircraft in the air and know to keep a lookout for a wayward aircraft. That is not true with spectators who do not know the potential dangers of a wayward aircraft. My suggestion, based on what you shared, is perhaps to limit the size of events to what can be enforced by a CD or Air Boss particularly where more than a few spectators are involved. That would provide a good start.

Also, your comment about the AMA Council...as the leadership goes so goes the membership.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

There are so many variables involved in fitting out and flying jets safely that it will always be very difficult to legislate appropriately to cover all possibilities. The value of appropriate human judgement then comes to the fore. None of us want to be over-regulated but by the same token, the "cowboy element" exists everywhere and those people whose ego dominates their decision making/ judgement need to be reeled in. The problem with those sort of people is that they exhibit a lack of self-discipline and their selfish behaviour potentially endangers our hobby. There are areas in Australia where jet flying has now been banned at certain times of year. Overzealous bureaucrats don't need much justification to shut things down and the cowboy element don't seem to get that.

The solution exists at club level. You must have the right people in the safety officer role.....those that are educated enough to make a call on what is appropriate and what is not and that means they need to have a grasp on both the building/ flying side of things but also the legal ramifications of the risks at hand. Furthermore, they need a pair of bollocks to be able to put their foot down if necessary AND most importantly, they need the unwavering backup of the club executive in the event that a club member needs to be pulled into line.

Our club is suffering from a lack of the latter atm; a lack of leadership as mentioned above and I fear the consequences. You have to really sit back and ask what the hell is going on when a guy doing a 3D routine with his jet flies into the ground and then continues on doing his routine!!! Like I said.....his ego is making decisions and that is never a good thing. The leadership should have tapped him on the shoulder and told him to land immediately until the airframe was checked for damage.

It is up to the clubs to cultivate the appropriate safety culture according to the intent of bodies like the AMA and in our case the MAAA.

The heroes amongst us need to be reminded from a personal perspective they are flying toy aeroplanes (so they need to calm down and define themselves in more significant ways) but from a legal/ safety perspective they are flying models that could easily kill a person. If you can't conduct yourself appropriately you should be told to pack up and go home so the rest of us are able to continue to fly safely and enjoy our great hobby. Period.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Couple things:

I fly scale/warbird type of events and also jet events. There are way more crashes in the scale/warbird events than jets. I can speculate why, but it doesn't really matter anyway. The last event I went to was RT66 jets and there was 0 crashes over 1000's of flights. If you look at KY jets, biggest in the country, I believe there were two or three crashes and none was due to overspeeding the aircraft.... servo fail, and lost orientation on landing I believe.

I will agree there are always people out there pushing the limits but that is everywhere. A more frequent danger is some folks that are attempting to fly way more than they can handle. Are we going to propose regulations on that also. You can't regulate everything. Even if you do, you have to have someone to enforce it. We have regulations on speed now, but are you going to hire someone to radar every aircraft to take to the skys? If you see someone not following our rules, its up to YOU to walk up to them and say something. It would be far more productive than trying to put more rules on the books.

Also, regulating someone to put the manufactured recommended turbine in the aircraft to control speed is flawed. A Carf Flash recommends a 120 turbine which will still take it over 200mph. A P180, which is well over recommended for my Eurosport will still not take it to 200mph.

I would encourage less talk of rules and regulation and just go ahead and tap someone on the shoulder that you feel is acting in an unsafe manner. I bet it would have more significant results.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

I don't fly jets but it's not just a jet problem. We don't self-regulate. At least the clubs I've been to have let guys fly really unsafe planes - everyone talks about it - nobody wants to be the bad guy. The few times I have seen a club member approach one of these hot-shots his attitude was to shout the other person down, do what he wants and the person who approached him backed down.

Most clubs have an "we're all safety officers" approach which means nobody wants to take responsibility to be the guy who says no. And no, I don't want to do it. I'm not that assertive being a beta male, not an alpha male. One of the first clubs I belonged to had a bonafide safety officer and when he was around the monkey business stopped. Everyone except the hot shot felt a lot safer, didn't feel like they had to be ready to dodge an over-weight, over-powered bullet at any time and there was just a lot less stress at the field. The guy took me to task for hinging I'd done (I was a novice builder) and he made it clear I couldn't fly the plane until I fixed it. He showed me what to do, I did it and got to fly the next time I went.

Anyway, I don't see a lot of self-regulation going on in general and it bothers me a lot. I would personally rather fly at a field in the boonies by myself or with a buddy than at most clubs. The politics, the dangerous planes, the attitudes, etc.... are all a huge turn-off.

Then we get all the yahoos who buy into the hobby with no work invested. They act like clowns at the field, make us all look like idiots and then quit the hobby and move on to their next quick fix. I wish I could say that if people had to build their planes they'd fly them more safely but that's not really true. A lot of the missiles I see are kits the pilot built and maybe even built well - 20 years ago. Now it's a fuel-soaked brick that's been repaired a dozen or two times and flies way too fast and always on the edge of being a disaster. I won't lie - I love seeing these planes get splattered across the field with no hope of rebuilding as long as they don't hit anyone. But then the guy shows up next week with another plane just like it.


Everyone says it and knows it's true but it's worth repeating - if we do not regulate ourselves someone else will and then we'll really have something to complain about. All you folks who don't want more rules - what's your realistic, practical answer? "If everyone exercised common sense..." that's a big IF that obviously isn't happening so please skip the "IF" and go straight to a solution so that we don't get more rules. Please.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Hello everyone i don,t fly jets,but we have had some peaple do the crazy type of flying . the thing to do is when yuou see someone, then as a groupe you should say somthing have a pollilte talk

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Also, regulating someone to put the manufactured recommended turbine in the aircraft to control speed is flawed. A Carf Flash recommends a 120 turbine which will still take it over 200mph. A P180, which is well over recommended for my Eurosport will still not take it to 200mph. ........ that's why the manufacturer needs to do more R&d

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Everyone that has replied to this thread sees the correct way to enforce the issue involved. I belong to a club that had a problem with high speed flyers. The officers of that club got together and sent every member ( not just jet flyers) a memo telling them that we are being watched by BIG BROTHER. If we continue to fly at this high rate of speed, we stand a good chance of loosing our field. It is one of the best grass strip jet flying field I have ever been on. That memo got everyone thinking, and I have seen the high speed flyers slow it down a lot so everyone still has a place to fly. I guess these officers had the RIGHT STUFF to say something to protect their (our) field. No more regulations will solve the problems, it's entirely up to the PILOTS to take the actions to solve this problem.

Poor designed arf's can be made to fly safer if you have the knowledge and skill to see the problem and make corrections. Sure someone has already said "Why should we make the corrections?". Depends on the price and the money people want to put into ARF's.
Do we tell people that want to get into Jets that we won't let them fly that model jet if they show up at our event? It just takes common sence with a lot of the cheeper airframes out there as to what power plant goes in them. If you are a speed freak, then buy the airframe that stays together ( ones that we know are built for speed). If you like to have a safe airframe that needs more power to get out of a small field or you like to go higher than most, than by all means use a larger powerplant because you know how to throttle manage..........


Larry

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

this was after the event was done for the day. doesn't matter . the speed rule still applied . it was open flying now what ?

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Then it's up to the club that is hosting the event to tell this pilot to land and not fly in that manner again or he/she will be grounded for the rest of the event, and that encludes the after flying when the event is offically over. If you want to hold events like this again, then the host club has to take charge and enforce the rules. AMA will not step in at this time because the event ended at, let's say 5 PM.....

Larry

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

We want to try to regulate the manufacture now??

Most jet manufactures are outside of our country and will not be concerned with our rules.

It just comes down to less talk and more personal action.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

You can't regulate risk out of an activity. You can't regulate risk taking out of people. You can however, regulate the freedom to conduct an activity using all sorts of excuses such as "safety".

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Here's the problem. Before we can even consider any new rules, figure out a way to enforce the ones that exist. Review them for validity and revise them so they are manageable by the people who will have to enforce them.

PaulD

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Well, if it's a repeat-offender then the club members present should be able to stomp on all his planes, flight gear and break out all the windows in his car. Seems reasonable to me.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Rules are already set in place. What is needed is more enforcement of the existing rules from CDs at events. A good example is what Lewis does at KY Jets. At the beginning of each day there is a pilots meeting to remind all of the pilots of the rules. And then he actually enforces those rules with warnings if needed. I've seen this work and it works well. Making another rule isn't going to change a thing unless it's enforced in the first place. What makes anyone think that placing more rules on the books is going to change anything if the original rules aren't enforced? The only way to do this is for all to expect to be called out when breaking the rules and for those who are charged to enforce them to do their jobs.

I see no benefit from creating more rules.

Andy

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

No doubt, there are some quality issues with some of the jet arfs...there are also issues with some of the non-jet arfs as well. Ultimately you the model builder/assembler/flyer owns the responsibility to go over your model and insure it is airworthy. Scratch builders understand the concept, and in fact it is rooted in the AMA safety code. The AMA has an excellent safety record, one that has been jealously guarded by it's membership. It is your responsibility as a member to step up and act if you see a violation of our safety code and not wait for someone else to "handle it". It would bother me too if the AMA council saw a violation and did nothing about it...are we sure that is what happened, isn't it conjecture to assume so? The idea of regulating or restricting powerplant to airframe is not a new one. Poor thrust management trumps structural limits regardless, so this would just be another regulation with poor results. You cannot regulate stupidity, but you can kick them out of the club.

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Andy,

I agree with you 100% the other part of that is Perception, people need to accurately measure the speed of the aircraft to actually make sure it's going faster than the 200MPH limit. At an event, we thought a couple of jet jocks where actually flying faster, so we got out the radar guns only to find out they where at 180 MPH when all of us where sure they where doing 220+. Not saying some might not be breaking the rules, but we need to verify it first and then call the pilot on it. How many events have you been to where the speeds where measured? Let's find a problem or identify the problem child's before we look for more rules to impose.

Ralph

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Andy and All,
I believe the current AMA Safety Regs for Turbines are fine and don't see a requirement for anyaddtional regs-if the current ones are enforced.
Last year, I attended and flew turbines at 11 jet events, some were a gathering of a dozenguys while others were sizable, 50-75+ pilots-ie, Capitol Jets and the Horizon Air Meet. Hundreds of flights were made in total at these events with very few losses, mostly due to bad landings. Regarding speed, I witnessed a singlecase where a non-flying club member brought his own radar gun and was taking speed measurements of the pilots. Most runs were in the 150-170 MPH range but one pilot decided to dive thru and recorded a 206 MPH run downwind. The pilot was warned and the radar gun put away with no further infractions during the event. The turbine size was appropriate for thejet andthe pilot was skilled in flying it.The CD made the decision to warn the pilot and that ended the situation.
Structural integrity of jet models is the purview of the manuafcturer and builder/ownerthis is difficult to regulate.Most manufacturs post a recommended engine size for their models and others even specify a Vne. However, it all comes back to the pilot-in-command on exercising their control of the left stick. You can't regulate common sense when it comes to safety but you can self-police it when necessary.

Art ARRO, Turbine CD

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

YES this nice smell of K-1... and a rooaring turbine @ 170000rpm... it is a musik to my ears...

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

he is wright and we all know it

RE: I'd Like to propose an addendum to the safety code
 

Best thing in jet safety is jet cost factor normaly keeps skilled compentent people at the sticks with out any Micky mouse components normaly just saying this should be enough