Terror Dactyl

The following is food for thought and it comes from the top of AMA, through the offical District 8 maillist. I didnt see it posted here already and information is power (we arent flying gliders so power counts)

Yo!
I have been asked to forward these comments from AMA President
Dave Brown to the D-8 Modeling List with his permission.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here is the response I have sent to a number of people who have asked that
we repeal rule #9



Gentlemen:

I understand your displeasure with rule #9, but you have not considered
why it is necessary.

Tail touching is a neat trick, and displays a great deal of control over
the model, BUT, it will put you into an INDEFENSIBLE position in a court
of law, if an accident happens, WHETHER SUCH TAIL TOUCHING IS PART OF THE
ACCIDENT, OR NOT....

INTENTIONALLY "banging" a "vital" control surface onto the ground will
give the prosecution a way to pursue punative damages, or, perhaps, even
CRIMINAL charges, of you have an "accident". Just how hard would you
think it would be to convince a. typical. jury that the rudder is the
"most vital" control surface. (They would be sold in the basis of a ship
without a rudder is, out of control). Ironically, there is a case on
record, where a full scale aerobatic pilot, flying a "One Design"
aircraft, had a rudder cable break, and was unable to land the aircraft,
and was forced to bail out, so don't even TRY to make the point that the
rudder isn't necessary!

Think about this.....could you convince the widow of the person you killed
that your actions in banging a vital control surface on the ground was
reasonable? Please don't think you could say the rudder was not a "vital"
control surface.....the prosecution will put as many 3-D fliers as
necessary on the stand to ask them if they can hover without the
rudder....."answer yes, or no, only"......how many do you think would
answer "yes"??? Have you tried this??

Regardless of whether the crash was caused by the rudder, or even happened
during a flight in which you "touched", the fact that you had
INTENTIONALLY banged the rudder "a vital control surface" into the ground
would cause a jury to consider if your actions were reasonable. Think
about this....if an airline was to make it a habit of moving it's
airliners around the ramp with a forklift pushing on the rudder, wouldn't
you think that would become a factor in any lawsuit which came about as a
result of an accident....even if there was no evidence that the rudder
caused the crash???

I don't think any of us want to be put into that position, particularly
when the solution is so simple......All you need to do is to extend the
tailwheel back, behind the rudder, and you can touch the tailwheel to your
hearts delight. You can bang that on the ground as much as you like, and
no jury is going to be able to say this is negligence, or, unreasonable.

This rule is intended to reduce the likelyhood of a claim getting out of
hand, perhaps including punative damages, of, even criminal charges
(negligent homicide)...do you really think it's that rediculous a rule??

Dave Brown

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

..........Chief

flip3d

that is so full of crap.
y do some speed planes and combat planes have no rudder.
?????

flip

JuniorPilot

even though i live in Canada where we don;t have this rule, i think I can comment on this subject, if you are hoering yes you most likely need a rudder but if your in a harrier you don;t need the rudder unless your doing harrier circuits you can easily fly a straight harrier without rudder and yo can still fly without rudder i have seen a rudder ripped off in flight and he kept flying i don;t think it really makes a diffrence for just flying if you have a rudder or not

SMALLFLY-

My Feedback: (19)

Assuming this is a true mailing, the " what if's" in this are ridiculous. It's OK to speed along 150 mph on the edge of the runway where one little glitch could send enough kinetic energy to kill several people, but hovering and touching at zero airspeed is going to kill someone.
Dave Brown = Chicken Little
The sky is falling, The sky is falling..... Time for him to go

scole

My Feedback: (5)

But he is right, if you find yourself in a position where you've injured someone after tapping the tail, your going to lose.

davo74

My Feedback: (1)

Who needs the rudder to fly! all you need is the vertical stab, and you can fly CONTROLLABLY all day long. even if the clevis broke or the rod came off as long as the rudder can return to a somewhat neutral location THE PLANE WILL FLY, Mr. Brown, DO YOU FLY 3D? ive seen guys fly planes that have parts falling off of them at the FUN FLY NATS, and nobody gets too exited, because everyone there is well aware of the ability of our planes. At airshows there are PILOTED AIRCRAFT doing crazy stuff with far larger groups of people watching, and the chance of disaster is much larger, nobody has ruled agenst this. #9 is just a man and an organazation on a power trip. Go Pro Bros!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

UltimateFlyer120

My Feedback: (5)

Dave is up for election in November! It's time he goes to pasture. Talk all your flying buddys into voting against Dave Brown!

Funflyaddict

Anyone got the little pic of the kid peeing on the rule #9
please PM it to me so i can stick it on all of my fun flys

Owen

777M8

You guys are putting some great words on this topic, If you dont mind could you go to www.save3D.org and follow the directions for sending a letter to your district VP..

Thanks, Bill

davo74

My Feedback: (1)

If we get enough pro bros together, couldnt we do the north vs. the south thing and ceseed from the ama??? well, most of the bros are from the south anyway right? Just a thought

Gordo-ProBro

Hey all,

First off, yes this is for real. As embarrassing as it is, that really is our president's answer. I have had at least 6 guys forward it to me at Save3D.org, and he sent it to me too. First it shows how lazy he is, as not one person has sent the identical letter, but he chooses to send his membership a form letter. The funny part of that is that he will ignore/belittle us if we all send a form letter.

The worse thing is that he means it. He really believes that this one thing, tail tapping, is the most serious threat that he can exercise control over at this time. (but not actually the worst fear he has) He's acknowledged that no damage/injury has ever been reported from tail tapping, that he realizes the fact that tappers are very skilled pilots, and that those who forced this change on us are apposed to all 3D. He knows full well that no one !QUOT!bangs!QUOT! their rudder repeatedly, he likes to make it sound like the goal is to damage the plane.

Anyone who thinks the legal case through can see that with todays litigious society and our highly ethical lawyers, these same cases can be made for ANY form of RC. Think about these same questions: How can you tell the spouse of the person you killed why it was reasonable to fly that metal and wood toy airplane at 200 MPH? Or that it was reasonable to fly a bunch of giant scale warbirds weighing over 50 pounds around the sky, relying on nothing but a little Ni-CAD battery to keep it from plowing into the crown? Or what about if you are the guy who trained Fred to fly in just a few hours, only to have him fly that horrid trainer aircraft, clearly capable of death and destruction, right into someone's house?

I wouldn't leave my home if I wanted to prevent every possible event over which I can be sued. Heck, McDonalds wouldn't serve anything but cold coffee and veggie burgers, and don't even get me started on gun manufacturers and tobacco companies.

If we are going to write the safety code to eliminate POSSIBLE lawsuits, hey, get ready, the AMA is now a static display modeling club.


Scole, can you back that statement up?[&:] I don't know you, and I'm not picking a fight. We are very serious in our movement to stop this anti 3D tyranny, and take this very serious

JuniorPilot

I don;t understand how you guys in the USA can;t tail tap but in combat they can get in a mid air at excesive speeds of 50mph and if their plane isn;t in 100000 pieces keep flying but if a rudder toughes the gorund it's a seious harm to everyone, a "smart" pilot (no offence to anyone who hasen;t do this) IMHO would land if they noticed anythign was wron with their plane/heli because ir's putting them at risk and if someone can walk out to their 40% plane while at a comp while it's tork rolling and stand like 4 ft away from it, thats not more dangerous? What if the engine choked up, or if they mess up, or if a radio glitch happens, or if they get interference it's more dangerous, because you have a HUGE powerful engine snd plsane that is more likely to hit you or anyone else because of you being so close, it being so huge it's just a horrible rule all together (rule9)

3d_addict

[sm=punching.gif]<Begin Rant>
How does this rule affect heli pilots flying 3d and touching the rotor hub to the ground a la this thread and video http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_16...tm.htm#1692681 ?

As Gordo and JuniorPilot points out there are a myriad of aspect of this hobby/sport that are equally or much more dangerous than "touching" the tail of an airplane to the ground at near zero airspeed. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the AMA should start going after somebody else but this is a highly discriminatory rule. I would be interested in understanding the legality of such blatant and arbitrary discrimination. Any lawyers in the group?

Nobody in their right mind is going out and "INTENTIONALLY "banging" a "vital" control surface onto the ground" trying to break it. Even if you did dork it in and accidentally damage the tail/rudder I would argue that all the pilot has to do is pull the throttle back and the airplane drops where it’s. Doesn't mean it's going to make a mad dash into the spectator area, which, if I understand correctly, is supposed to be separated from the flight line anyway. Seems to me that that would make the throttle "the "most vital" control" not much chance it will be damage by touching the tail. Even if the plane remained airborne, these planes have more than enough control surface in the other axis's to overcome the damaged rudder allowing the pilot to guide the plane to a controlled crash in a safe area if need be. As for the "ship without a rudder" analogy, what the hell does that have to do with anything? These aren't ships, they're airplanes. There isn't any comparison. Airplanes are not limited to just one control surface.

Just seems to me that there are a lot more dangerous things that aren't being addressed that maybe should be than this kind of arbitrary crap. I've had far more scares in the pits than I ever have had on the flight line. Some people do some really stupid s#!t in there and it's never addressed but "that's the way it's always been done" so it must be OK. There certainly aren't any rules from the AMA about it.

Bizzaro, I fully intend to write my VP about this but I have to figure out how to be nice about it. The more I read and hear about it the madder I get. I just can't stand when a few pompous idiots start dictating senseless rules to people with no valid proof that they are even remotely necessary.

<End Rant>[sm=punching.gif]

Sorry such a long rant but sometimes ya just gotta let it out.

J_R

Suggestion:

Someone actually read ALL of DB's letter.

Then come discuss it in the AMA forum in the "Who should be AMA President thread" at http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/Who_...1642860/tm.htm

Gordo-ProBro

Please be a good sport JR. We have ALL read ALL of DB's letter. No Trolls please.

akahoverit

My Feedback: (2)

its on my avitar but i dont have it on file.

Quicker

My sig says it all.

Ducted Fan Dan

My Feedback: (2)

I am not a proponent of Dave Brown, nor am I a proponent of the "save 3d" movement. So here is my .02.

How many court cases has anyone attended on behalf of the AMA? Dave Brown is describing what CAN and most probably WILL happen if a prosecutor presents a case to a jury that is unfamiliar with RC or aviation in general. The prosecutor will present their case in the most extreme fashion they can to make the jury think you did something wrong. Then, for each slanted and skewed situation the prosecutor presents, the defense has to defend.

As an organization looking out for YOUR legal best interest, you should listen. The AMA board could do away with rule number 9 and be found neglegent in a CRIMINAL CASE for having and then doing away with a rule that "promotes safety" (the way it would be presented to a jury, all of us in the hobby know it is far fetched that tail touching would be the direct cause of an accident, but the possibility exists and so does the liability).

So go ahead and knee jerk and get up in arms and protest all you want, rule 9 is here to stay wether Dave Brown is president or not. Do you think the next president will do away with all the rules some members don't like? I think not.

Tail touch all you want, just don't expect the AMA to be there when after a day of tail touching you get a radio hit and you plane goes into the crowd and kills someone and then ONE PERSON says you were flying dangerously and it was because you broke the rudder. We all know that's not the cause but unfortunately it is very easy to convince 12 outsiders that it was the cause.

scole

My Feedback: (5)

But he is right, if you find yourself in a position where you've injured someone after tapping the tail, your going to lose.


Scole, can you back that statement up?[&:] I don't know you, and I'm not picking a fight. We are very serious in our movement to stop this anti 3D tyranny, and take this very serious.

Hey Gordo, i'm with you guys and i love hovering low and touching the tail. There are much more dangerous things out there than tail tapping, but i think he has a point that is someone does hurt someone after tail tapping the laywers are gonna be all over the fact that you intentionally tapped a part of your airplane that is essiantial for controling a full size airplane and then crashed into someone.

Now that i think about it, if you do break your rudder off or linkage off on these small airplanes, your obviuosly going to be able to fly and land all you want with out rudder, and it's highly unlikely that you will injure someone with your airplane. Sorry Gordo, i was just trying show you guys how he justifyed his new rule. Now that i actually thought about it, it is kind of stupid with the control we have of our airplanes. Sorry.

Quicker

What a crock.

At the last R/C airshow I was at a plane went into the crowd. Guess what it was....an electric Zagi. None of the 3D planes went out of control, not even the 40% 150cc monsters. Nobody will convince me that a 3D plane going 5 to 15 mph doing slow aerobatics is more dangerous than a "NORMAL" r/c plane doing 60mph to 80mph doing fast aerobatics.

Ducted Fan Dan

My Feedback: (2)

They can't convince you because it's not true, we all know that 3D is probably less dangerous than other aerobatics. You are deeply into the hobby and know what is true and what is not, I agree with you. However, it's not that hard to convince a jury with no background in r/c what the cause was, even if it isn't true.

J_R

Not one of you has acknowledged the fact that DB provided his answer to the problem. One I think is bull, but, I still wonder if anyone actually read his entire letter. Dave Brown's solution:

"All you need to do is to extend the tailwheel back, behind the rudder, and you can touch the tailwheel to your hearts delight. You can bang that on the ground as much as you like, and no jury is going to be able to say this is negligence, or, unreasonable."

LavaRocks

i have a 11.5 x 4 on my sledge and it hovers gr8!!!!!!11

Gordo-ProBro

JR That has been beat to death. What a silly idea, that the PRESIDENT of AMA has told us ho to defeat the rules of the AMA. How would it be if the mayor of your city went on the radio and told the citizens of the city how to get around a new law?

The idea of adding a tailwheel to the rudder is akin to what most do now, and say "Sorry, that was an accident" when the tail happens to touch. If all I wanted was to get away with tapping, I'd just do it. No one I fly with cares. The point is we want to fly within the rules, as any good citizen would. If I don't believe in a law, I don't just go breaking it, and tell the cops why I don't like it. I work to change it.

If this rule stands, there will be annother (this is the third so far). Maybe next it's no hovering over the runway, or as some want, planes must be over 25 feet from the pilot. Heck, how would anyone explain to a jury that we intentionally fly our planes stalled? Hey, we might just see 3D banned all together.

I'm done, been here, done this too many times.

I would encourage all of you to save your fingers for typing to your elected representatives. This has been hashed over so many times on RCU we could just number the points and counter-points, and shorten the discussion to "Gordo says #1, JR says #3, Gordo #11" At least JR you're reasonable. a certain unnamed former VP wannabee hasn't come back around since there isn't an election afoot!

STEVE LENZ

My Feedback: (45)

Ok Dave Brown is going to make rules than tell us all how to break them. He e-mailed me telling me the same thing add a longer tail wheel . I say what a bunch of BS . Guess whats next Jets? Combat? pylon? helicopters all can be some way hazardous . Dose that mean all who pay AMA have to bow down to him not me. I say Dave brown must go or everything that may cause a problem with RCN may be on the books. If he has his way.