Mathewson VP Dist II reports on turbine regs

Dave Brown, in his column in the most recent issue of Model
Aviation,
raised issues concerning modeling, risk management, and defining a "line in
the sand" relative to modeling activities. The impetuous behind Dave's
column is the new regulations for turbine models passed at the November EC
meeting. After the meeting, in a conference call, Dave Brown asked that we
hold these new regulations in abeyance until additional information, that
was made known to us the week following the meeting, could be reviewed. A
majority of the Council agreed.
At the AMA Convention in California last week a seminar on these new
turbine regulations was conducted. At that seminar a questionnaire was
passed out to gather input from members attending and addresses three basic
changes in the revised regulations. An online version of that questionnaire
is available on our AMA District 2 website at
formatting link
you can access the form directly by going to
formatting link
You can review the current version of the turbine regulations by
going to
formatting link
on the AMA Website,
and the new revisions by going to
formatting link
also on the AMA Website.
Please take a minute to review documents and then complete the
questionnaire. The results will be included in a follow-up discussion to be
held at the February EC meeting. If you have any specific questions, fire
away and I'll do my best to answer them. When you hit "Submit" to send your
completed form it will be sent by email directly to me.
Thanks for your help,
Dave
Dave Mathewson
AMA Vice President, District 2
7271 State Fair Blvd.
Baldwinsville, NY 13027
315.727.4275
315.635.1039 (Fax)
Information forwarded by:
--
Red Scholefield
AMA 951 Dist. V
Leader Member/CD
This information should be coming to you from your District VP or his design
ated communications AVP.
Make it happen in District V - Vote Tony Stillman VP in 2004
Reply to
Red Scholefield
Loading thread data ...
questionnaire
formatting link
or you can access the form directly by going to
formatting link
on.pdf, also on the AMA Website.
The sad part about this proposed reg change is the inclusion of a maximum speed on any fixed wing model...turbine or not. It comes down to that worn out rhetoric that "speed kills".
I attended the Ontario Show last week. I overheard a conversation between Dave Brown and one of the Giant Scale Racing reps about the "ultimate worse case PR scenario" of a giant scale race plane going through a bus full of children. In what setting does this ever occur in real life? Last time I was at a race, there wasn't anything in close proximity that could come close to this. Race course guidelines have been set to incorporate minimum standards for safety and if they can't be, then the race isn't sanctioned.
If speed was "the" factor, it didn't make a difference when the modeler was killed by his own trainer last year. He can't use the death of the pylon judge as a point either because we are well aware of the extraordinary chain of events that led up to his death and the changes that have been made since then.
To me, it looks like AMA is more interested in cutting the ties with any area of high performance models. If the AMA is looking at this as a way to promote "safety", the only true way of limiting exposure is to not fly at all.
Greg
Reply to
Greg
It all the matter of control. I remember the 60's when a .61 engine was the largest because of FAI and insurance. Our lives are controlled by insurance. In my business I have to watch what I do because of insurance reasons.
The bus load of kids and a jet model is nothing more than a red herring. Or is it Green Zebra?
On the speed limit, how are they going to know unless a speed control device is required to be installed? And who sets the parameters on it.
IT'S CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maybe it's time for a better competitor, Maybe UMA can step up to the task?
Dan Thompson (AMA 32873, EAA 60974, WB4GUK, GROL) remove POST in address for email
Reply to
Dan Thompson
Has there been a glut of claims due to turbine powered models in the past few years? Personal injury, deaths, fires?
I read the column in MA regarding members' views on this issue. It's difficult, at least for me, to form an opinion based on what might happen without knowing if going fast is a "real" problem or not, claim wise.
A few people drive Italian sports cars capable of exceeding 200MPH on the freeways, but I don't believe they pose more of a threat to public safety than somebody driving the average SUV.
The details of litigation settlements are, as previously mentioned, usually sealed by the court. However the number of suits brought, or settled by various modeling activities should be available without mentioning anything specific as to names or locations, only whether turbines were involved.
Is there something wrong with this thinking?
Mike
Reply to
Mike
So Red, cuppla' questions. Did it come to you from your DVP? Does he have a designated communications AVP? Don't you wish your district had a DVP like D-II?
Abel
Reply to
Abel Pranger
No, he never sends out anything - just takes pictures of very important people for his monthy campaign column in MA that you pay for.
He does not assign his AVPs to anything. He doesn't want them getting involved in anything. Aged widows of famous modelers are not a political threat.
Yes, but not enough to make me move back to District II but enough to spend a lot of time and effort to get one elected that has the potential.
Red S. Stillman for V in 2004.
Reply to
Red Scholefield
I think under "normal" conditions you would be right. However, we have people in this hobby who hang rockets under the wing, shoot paint balls and what have you at passing models. Tail touching in the pits and what looks like to the casual passerby, intentional attempts to ram each others plane.
So who's to say some whacko won't take his unlimited racer and see how fast he can zoom it past that parked police car on the interstate? Bus? I didn't see no stinkin' bus!
And because we, the clubs, the renegades, the everyday flyers are sooooooooooo good at policing ourselves...........
DB has nothing to really worry about! Right?
Think again!
Chuck
Reply to
C.O.Jones
Just another example of un-enforceable "rules" from Muncie. Seen any model airplane traffic cops lately ? How the Magnificent Eleven propose to _enforce_ that nonsense rule should make for interesting reading.
It does, however, go right along with the present mind-set of the EC in terms of inventing new ways to brow-beat the members into being politically correct right-thinking sheep.
Close, no cigar. AMA is decidedly interesting in avoiding TSA and FAA attention in fear that our hobby will be classified as a national threat. In one respect, Dave Brown is correct in his assessment of such possibilities, because even Mr. Brown recognizes that the brown-shirts now running the country could give a rat's ass about the Constitution, Bill Of Rights, or anything else except insuring that the general population is convinced that they, TSA and FAA, are doing a good job of keeping terrorists at bay.
In fact TSA and FAA have done nothing to thwart terrorist threats, they've simply driven the cost of commercial aviation through the roof while providing nothing more than pure and simple harassment of the fare-paying (and tax-paying) public.
It's as if Mr. Brown & Co. would like to limit model aviating in the US to indoor rubber so they could point out that our models bear no semblance to the sort of UAV terrorists might employ.
I'd much rather Mr. Brown & Co. attempt to educate the TSA and FAA folks regarding the difference between modelers and terrorists.
If you look at a couple of my giant scale gassers absent any other considerations, they could possibly be construed as a threat by the uninformed. TSA and FAA are supposed to be informed agencies, and they need to learn how to tell the difference between me and a suspected terrorist. It's up to AMA to properly inform TSA and FAA regarding how to deal with model airplanes and model airplane lunatics.
I rarely agree with Jim McNeill, but one thing he says over and over is that the AMA isn't about models, it's about people, and in this decidedly narrow context he is quite correct.
The way TSA and FAA can tell the difference between me and a suspected terrorist is by looking at _me_, not my models. Mr. Brown & Co. have failed to realize that fine point, and are busily making sure TSA and FAA won't find anything wrong when they look at our _models_,
TSA and FAA are looking in the wrong direction, just as federal agencies are prone to look. AMA bears the responsibility of pointing TSA and FAA in the proper direction, that is, the _users_ of RPVs and UAVs, not the aircraft themselves.
If we want to preserve our hobby, whether we're in AMA or not, we need to educate The Feds. The only organization capable of being recognized as competent to do that educating is AMA.
If anyone knows of another organization in the US capable of being accredited by TSA and FAA I'd sure like to know about it, but AFAIK AMA is the only such entity.
Sadly enough . . . Cheers, Fred McClellan The House Of Balsa Dust
formatting link
L180201 IMAA LM 090 NASA 6512 LHA 3
Reply to
Fred McClellan
I am not so sure. I know that at EVENTS there is little possibility of that happening because there usually are NO children in busses around. However, I cannot say the same for the fields where the competitors practice at and that makes me wonder a bit. I bet it is a lot less open and remote at some fields than others and the AMA has to cover ALL of them.
Just my opinion
Reply to
Six_O'Clock_High
Here's the way a gun-control advocate would solve the problem of speeding: Speed Limit = 30. Problem: Teenagers speed through town at 70mph. Solution = Lower speed limit to 25.
This is sort of what the AMA is doing here. There's ALWAYS going to be an idiot out there somewhere that will do something stupid at some point. The "rules" don't matter to them. So why should they set rules for the 99.9% of modelers who fly with common sense?
MJC
sanctioned.
Reply to
MJC
Gee Fred! You got some evidence to back up your accusations? Or are you just experiencing another episode of Potty Mouth?
I'd rather have a storm trooper in the White House than a Howard Dean!
Chuck
sanctioned.
Reply to
C.O.Jones
"Terrorism And Tyranny", James Bovard, Palgrave publishing, ISBN 1-4039-6368-1 (hardback) addresses the antics of TSA and FAA over the last three years.
Mr. Brown's column over the last 18 months, and the minutes of the AMA Executive Council meetings over the last three years, more than adequately describe the specific actions AMA has taken to insure that our models do not draw the attention of TSA or FAA.
BTW - in case you haven't been paying attention to current events over the last couple of years, you _have_ a "storm trooper" in the White House.
Now, fuck off you simpering ass. Cheers, Fred McClellan The House Of Balsa Dust
formatting link
Reply to
Fred McClellan
Fred,
Once again you demonstrate just how stupid you and your kind really are. I ask for simple evidence and once again, true to form, like so many times before you can only respond with name calling and the general behavior of an uneducated ignoramus. What a fine example of American society you make. No wonder the world hates us. You are the Ugly American!
Now why don't you practice what you preach for a change! You pathetic looser!
Chuck
Reply to
C.O.Jones
How does asking for evidence make me a hater of America? How does preferring one individual over another make me a hater of America? I'd really like to see how you explain this one!
Chuck
Reply to
C.O.Jones
A quick follow-up on the Turbine Regulations Questionnaire discussed in my previous email (copied below).
1. Two members emailed and said they had trouble submitting their completed form. Doug Crawford, District 2 Webmaster, speculates this may be due to some browsers or email programs that are incompatible with the software used to create the questionnaire. He has recreated the questionnaire using another program. If you tried to submit your comments and they bounced back to you, try again. If you're not sure, go ahead and send them again anyhow and we can purge duplicates.
2. Apparently, there is some minor ambiguity in the questionnaire. The questions are word for word from the document passed out at the turbine seminar held in California during the AMA Convention. The questionnaire titled "Turbine Questionnaire" pertains to turbine powered models only. To help clear up any confusion the word "turbine" has been added to question 3 to now read, "...........would set an overall maximum velocity for RC fixed wing "TURBINE" aircraft at 200 mph.
Dave
Dave Mathewson
AMA Vice President, District 2
7271 State Fair Blvd.
Baldwinsville, NY 13027
315.727.4275
315.635.1039 (Fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: AMA District 2 Discussion [mailto:AMA snipped-for-privacy@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM]On
Behalf Of Dave Mathewson
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 10:24 AM
To: AMA snipped-for-privacy@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Subject: Turbine Regulations Questionnaire
Dave Brown, in his column in the most recent issue of Model Aviation, raised issues concerning modeling, risk management, and defining a "line in the sand" relative to modeling activities. The impetuous behind Dave's column is the new regulations for turbine models passed at the November EC meeting. After the meeting, in a conference call, Dave Brown asked that we hold these new regulations in abeyance until additional information, that was made known to us the week following the meeting, could be reviewed. A majority of the Council agreed.
At the AMA Convention in California last week a seminar on these new turbine regulations was conducted. At that seminar a questionnaire was passed out to gather input from members attending and addresses three basic changes in the revised regulations. An online version of that questionnaire is available on our AMA District 2 website at
formatting link
or you can access the form directly by going to
formatting link
You can review the current version of the turbine regulations by going to
formatting link
on the AMA Website, and the new revisions by going to
formatting link
on.pdf, also on the AMA Website.
Please take a minute to review documents and then complete the questionnaire. The results will be included in a follow-up discussion to be held at the February EC meeting. If you have any specific questions, fire away and I'll do my best to answer them. When you hit "Submit" to send your completed form it will be sent by email directly to me. Thanks for your help, Dave
Dave Mathewson
AMA Vice President, District 2
7271 State Fair Blvd.
Baldwinsville, NY 13027
315.727.4275
315.635.1039 (Fax)
Reply to
JR
Here are some of the facts surrounding the 200 mph speed limit for jets.
Don Lowe, AMA Safety Committee Chairman asked the JPO for input for a "clean sheet" set of rules for turbines. The old rules, still in force, have issues, some of which relate to the fact that they grew with a new area of the hobby. Out of that input, the TRC (Turbine Review Committee) was born. It was agreed that the TRC would be composed of three members appointed by the JPO and three by the SC (Safety Committee). In fact, when the appointments were made, 5 members of the TRC are JPO members. The TRC, in conjunction with the SC, came up with a proposal. Steve Ellzey, President of the JPO, made the statement to the EC that 90% of his membership would support the proposal. The TRC made a presentation of the proposal to the EC, who approved it. Within the proposal was the speed limit of 200 mph.
JR
Reply to
JR
Gather a clue.
I suspect there are a lot more people that'd really like to see you explain your statement "I'd rather have a storm trooper in the White House than a Howard Dean!"
Reply to
daytripper
And, what is so magical about 200mph? And, who is going to monitor the speeds? How will the speed be determined if there was an incident?
This smacks of more eyewash to please some bureaucratic sense of "we did something about it".
Reply to
Paul McIntosh

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.