Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Well, the other Fl Jets Waiver Conflict thread is locked for some unexplained reason so I'll respond here...


Wow. I'll let you guys debate the goodness of Frank's heart - you seem to know him better than I.

I will say that I was there and actually flew a bunch of times. The banners were low and out of the way, the buildings you see in Ghost's "photo" were further away then they looked and unoccupied. The big building you see in some of the photos was so far out nobody overflew it. As far as the airplanes were concerned, they were further out than the photo suggests and normally there was only one that you could see. I don't know when those aircraft were moved during the day, but I NEVER saw people on the ramp. Also, they were only overflown when the pilot made a procedure turn during a pass, during normal takeoffs and landings they were not generally overflown (did I mention that they were further out than it looked?).

I've flown and many places and I'm generally a conservative guy, but I felt entirely comfortable with the area at Fl Jets - the crosswinds were a pain, but I don't expect that Frank could do much about those...

As far as the waiver issue is concerned, its been acknowledged and we've all gotten a wake up call. In spite of what some seem to want, nothing more is going to come of this and that's the way is should be.

Get some different grist for the mill guys, this horse is dead...

Bob

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Not taking any sides but those building and the runway lights and banners where a pain in the A** to maneuver around my first and second flight [:-].

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

I have to disagree with Ghost, a couple of parked aircraft way far away is no big deal, whether it was one or two, what's the difference?
Were I the event organizer I would have at least attempted to get the aircraft moved, dunno, maybe he did try, but I'd hardly stop the event because there were a couple of aircraft parked that far away.

The banner thing, though, is pretty lame. To me, to risk the models in any way just for the sake of getting the banners in on any flight shots that appear in magazines kind of sucks. Did any models hit them?

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

I did not see any aircraft come close to the banners or buildings. The airshow pilots flew around the banners, but did not seem bothered by them. I was not bothered by them and in fact never really saw them while I was flying, but I do tend to keep my passes and acrobatics above 50' or so with my jets...

Any aircraft that came close to the buildings were either WAY too low or not under positive control.

Bob

I'll let you guys handle this from here... Back to the Mig building!

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

You were there, I was not.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

the banners were very far out, and NOT IN THE WAY at all ! .. there was a king cat that crashed into them on landing , but this means he missed the runway by like 80' off to the side ... like someone else said, if the banners were an issue to you, you should not be flying at such an event. I personally did not feel limited or inhibited by the facilities at all... the 2 planes that were parked on the far right were around 3000' away .... how come most of the complaining i see here about FLJ is from people who don’t fly, can not fly well, and/or ones that were not at the event ? This year FLJ was truly a world class event, and i would have seen no reason to custom tailor it to incompetent jet pilots,…. that’s what the local fields are for where people can learn without 7 other jets wising around at 200mph... ? Frank ran a well organized and successful event. Yes it was unfortunate that some mistakes were made .. I’m sure Frank right now is wishing he kept quit and not tried benefiting everyone by openly discussing this whole waiver incident for the benefit of others .. i think he should be praised and appreciated for such candor. He came on here to try and BENEFIT the hobby , not to be shi* on. I know Frank at times may seem to be rough and arrogant, but it truly is not the case .. I used to think so myself, but after spending some time talking to him on a few occasions, my view of him is completely different. If anyone has issue with Franky T, give him the benefit of the doubt and shoot him over a phone call, and then come back on here and post what you think then ...

Wojtek

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Now come on you guys the "ghost" has made up his mind dont counfuse the issue with accurate first hand accounts from actual pilots at the event. Its amazing how close something can appear with a 300mm lens in bright sunlight with a 22 fstop. Scott

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Lol Woj, you must have been hanging around Frank too long.

Sorry to bust your bubbles but some of those people you are talking about started flying before you knew what a TX is.

The other thread was about to die a natural death before Frank added his new post thereby flaming the whole issue.

I do not know who locked the thread but my last post was just to point out the inconsistencies in Franks last post.

I know the agency that starts with the letter F would not look kindly to the clip you posted showing 2 parked full scale aircrafts in the direct takeoff/landing pattern of model aircraft occupied or not.

I agree there must have been adequate distance between the parked full scale aircrafts and the flying area but accidents happen and why even tempt faith? I've been to uncountable jet events in my life and I have never seen anything like what was in your video clip with regards to parked full scale aircrafts.

Take this FWIW.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Nicely put Woj...
BTW...I did question the location of the full scale parking BUT...after watching the takeoffs/approaches, they where not in the flight path...

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

You got it perfectly right Voj.

The only person who does not get the point yet is not really concerned about the safety issue. Had this been at any other event, he would not have been so active in this matter. This is all about a certain moderators personal vendetta against Frank T.

Too bad that he does not realize that his actions and childish attempts to smear Frank's event may very well damage the whole jet industry with added restrictions and more unnecessary paperwork.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

"That banner thing, though, is pretty lame".......


There have been banners at every FJ I have attended back to 2000.....in fact, although the runway was 100 ft wide at Bunnel vs the 50 ft wide taxiway used at Lakeland, the banners seemed closer to the runway at Bunnel.....I personally never have seen anyone hit them in the air, but have seen several incidents, including one this year when a pilot loses it during the roll out, but it has always taken a major FU to do so........

Not only were there banners at Bunnel, but the freakin' windsock was right behind the banners......I remember it well after watching master stick Ali Machinchy taking off with the orginal balsa Boomerang for it's first demo showing in the U.S. and doing a tight rolling circle around the windsock, between the sock and banners, about 25 ft off the deck on a day with wicked crosswinds......

As far as other aircraft in the air, no different than hazards at other Meetings where there is an active full scale runway in use, i.e. FJ at Bunnel, FIJR, Michigan Jets...set your NO FLY boundaries and have the Safety Officer enforce them......

Don't get sucked in by the telephoto effect on the JPEGs and MPEGs.......those vacant buildings and parked planes really were no greater a factor than at any other Meeting I have attended that was held at a full scale airport.......


Tom

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Hmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!. The hound dogs are on the loose.

I guess trying to correct your friend’s inconsistencies in his post is childish to you. If my intention was to smear Frank, I would have taken this topic public instead of conveying it to you off line. I even promised you on a PM to you that I would keep it off line and I did until your friend went public.

Again, Frank stated that it was only one aircraft on the ramp left of the flight line but that is not the truth. Here is another pic from Woj's video that proved him otherwise. If you guys want to go on attack, I could escalate this whole issue one more notch and believe you me, it will not be good.

Again John for the bi-zillonth time, I do not hold any grudge against your friend. I only disagreed with his past action involving his former employee that resulted in the first turbine waiver revocation USA which also resulted to the affidavit requirements that each an every one of use have to put up with now.

Like I advised you and your friend then to let the sleeping dog sleep and you refused to take my advice, I would advice you guys again to let this sleeping dog sleep.


Please for the sake of our hobby, let’s keep the hound dogs on leash and let this topic to die a natural death and stop fanning the flame.

A word is good enough for the wise.

http://www.uflyhobbies.com/videos/FLJ-06/mig29.wmv

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Only one fanning the flame is you Ghost.

Everyone else got the point 576 posts ago.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Amen!

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

For what its worth, there has always been a banner wall at Florida Jets since the very first one, and it has always been far enough off the runway that it is in no way a problem to all but a few pilots who have run way off the runway. The still photos of Florida Jets are deceptive in that they do not give proper perspective to any of the suposed obstacles. I have been attending Jet meets for over tweleve years and anyone who thinks that Florida Jets was poorly run or dangerous is, well. . .Wrong, flat wrong. There is a REASON, that events like Florida Jets and Top Gun are such heavily attended, prime events - it is because of The effort Frank puts into them - period.
Why do threads like the one that got all this started, need to go so over-the-top in their accusational nature when a mistake was noticed, admitted to, and then the corrective action to be taken was mentioned. Isn't this the evolutionary process that has been going on in this hobby since its inception? Isn't that how we make this sport better and safer? I think Frank is to be commended on what he has done not only for the hobby in general but for Jet modeling as well. People are talking about "this action" or "that mistake" as if what is going on line here is some how above it all. Personally, I think this internet chatter can, and will do as much damage to our sport as anything that can be done in the field.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

guys a fact is a fact AT NO EVENT SHOULD A MODEL BE FLYING OVER CARS OR AIRCRAFT the risk is too high and sooner or later the what if , DOES HAPPEN!:D

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

LOL....a Daniel has come to judgment.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

We took a measuring wheel and marked out 1500 feet from each side of air show center and 1500 feet straight out in front of us.
At the request of the Tower Manager at the airport, Two weeks Before the event I took John Burdin and my P-47, and went out to the site and flew as wide a pattern as I deemed safe, one where the model was as far away as I would ever wnat one as far as eyesight goes. The Airport had one of their ground crew mark spots underneath the flight path of the P-47 and then we measured the distance to those spots from show center to see if we could live with it and to see if we would be comprimised by anything resembling a full scale aircraft. At those distances, which is very far away from yourself, we never encountered ANY full scale aircraft. One airplane, during the 5 days DID come to one of the Sun nn Fun meetings, and he was the closest at about 1800 feet but we simply flew way OVER that aircraft, nowhere near it. In fact, to hit it you would have to fly at 6 feet of altitude and 1800 feet away from yourself, hardly an easy task. You lose sight of the back of your model at that altitude at around 1150 feet!
One airplane DID catch a wingtip on one of thos banners, but, that dude was a full 80 or 90 feet off the runway at a high alpha and really slow. I think that banner actually saved his butt!
Last but least, I am fully aware that our moderator doesn't care for me. But I really don't think he is confusing his dislike for me with the facts. Honestly, the man was not at our event so he must rely on others for those facts. Unfortunately, it appears that much of that input may be coming from others who perhaps were not there as well!
Anything anybody needs to know, just ask.
Thanks,
FT

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

reality shows must guys are NOT in control when they have a problem so why ever temp fate and put the already shakey ground we fly on at risk? if i am not mistaken the reason topgun was moved was due to proximity issues and related lack of control when the what it happened

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

I think that Ghostrider should just "Zip-it" before he embarrasses himself anymore.............It's fairly obvious from the content of his posts that he is mostly anti-Frank rather than pro-safety.................

Tailwinds,

John

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

ROFLMAO.....that's a good one. Another Daniel has come to judgment.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Frank

You are wrong again as usual. The reason you are in this predicaments you are in now is that those around you are afraid to tell you the truth. If I was there, believe you me, you will hear it first hand from me Sir.

You are very fast to bring up the word “moderator” into the equation but the fact that I am a moderator does not restrict me in participating in discussions related to specific aspect of my hobby. That is why we have more than one moderator in this forum and many community moderators and admins that could step in any time and moderate my posts. If the community moderator or site admin decides to moderate my posts, I will not loose sleep over it.

You made false statement with regards to the number of parked full scale airplane at the site, I poke a hole into you false information and now you are calling me a villain.

If you post facts without trying to spin it, you will never hear anymore from the ghost.


Best regards

Ben

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

Im not quite sure I know what this means? Is this a racist comment? Maybe an inside joke that noboby understands?

I cant believe that you would post pictures of models flying close to full scale aircraft, talk about how unsafe we jet people are, and that we are doing this without insurance....ect. I guess you have missed the threads on this website that talk about Jet pilots losing their fields all over the country. Does anyone remember the Superman fiasco?
ARE YOU REALLY TRYING TO LOSE US MORE PLACES TO FLY?
I could have sworn that the jet forum was FOR the jet pilots! Im not here arguing any of your points Ghost Rider, all I am saying is that you have now given more ammunition to the people who want our jets banned.
If I were an outsider looking in reading all this......I wouldnt want any Jet pilots flying at my field.
Dont take this the wrong way, I just think you should all think about the re-procutions before lashing out at someone.

Presta

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

also a p-47 flying at 60 mph is not covering the same amount of ground per second of say a king cat cruising at 175 mph+ and you know that these days guys are flyng much larger patterns than ever before due to airframe sizes. during an event staff should always be patroling boundries to see what overfling is being done. that tells the real stories you can not tell from the flightlines due to depth MISconception. frank i'm on no ones side but i want to continue to be able to fly models that i have consderable investment in and you have been very influetial in that growth but sometimes in haste we all make bad decisions that have long term effects. if the field is not right, find another and don't put your future or turbine flying at risk. we all know the day is going to happen there will be fire and loss of life. don't be the one exposed by short cutting to GET BY.

RE: Fl Jets Issues - part II
 

The planes in question must not have been there the whole time as this picture shows. It was taken during a final landing approach on Saturday afternoon. The Velocity in one of the earlier pictures I know it was only there while one of my Turbine waivered friends was at the show for a few hours. I gotta go.
Jetboy


[img][/img]