Need information on small turbine jets
04-22-2019, 05:38 AM
#51
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Redstone, CO, USA
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree to a point and disagree to some extent. First the latter.
First the latter. I think it's hard to characterize them as "toy planes" when forums have disccussions about the need for Faraday cages to protect gyros, electronic engine controls, and receivers from EMI in some applications. That tells me these are complex systems, and as was quoted in at least one mishap investigation: "Complex systems fail in complex ways." So I personally think it's a significant oversimplification to call a turbine a "toy airplane."
On the other hand, I agree that the EDF presents nearly the same risk from a KE standpoint. So in that sense, I would agree with a total energy type calculation as a basis for waivers. In your example, the EDF represents a greater energy (FYI, 23.5lbs at 185 is about the same as a F150 hitting something at about 15 mph). Not exactly a "toy plane" and that takes us full circle.
So I guess I'm not inclined to call these toy planes regardless of the mode of power.
First the latter. I think it's hard to characterize them as "toy planes" when forums have disccussions about the need for Faraday cages to protect gyros, electronic engine controls, and receivers from EMI in some applications. That tells me these are complex systems, and as was quoted in at least one mishap investigation: "Complex systems fail in complex ways." So I personally think it's a significant oversimplification to call a turbine a "toy airplane."
On the other hand, I agree that the EDF presents nearly the same risk from a KE standpoint. So in that sense, I would agree with a total energy type calculation as a basis for waivers. In your example, the EDF represents a greater energy (FYI, 23.5lbs at 185 is about the same as a F150 hitting something at about 15 mph). Not exactly a "toy plane" and that takes us full circle.
So I guess I'm not inclined to call these toy planes regardless of the mode of power.
“Some applications”?.....Really, you need to get out and examine a turbine model in real life. It might surprise you how similar they are to any other toy model airplane.
”.......a greater energy (FYI, 23.5lbs at 185 is about the same as a F150 hitting something at about 15 mph). Not exactly a "toy plane"....”
FYI? FYI? .....thanks professor, I never would have guessed.....
Ever increasing regulation is appealing to a segment of personality types that like to be involved in the process. IMO this is not what this hobby needs, as I said before, the FAA has plenty of potential to be bad enough.
This whole discussion boils down to “risk” as defined by AMA’s lawyers and insurance underwriters and whether operation of an under 12lb turbine has more/less potential for liability than anything else.
- Mike
Last edited by speed is life; 04-22-2019 at 05:50 AM.
04-22-2019, 05:43 AM
#52
The biggest part in getting a turbine waiver is learning how to safely operate the engine and how to correctly set up the engine and failsafe.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
04-22-2019, 05:52 AM
#53
The biggest part in getting a turbine waiver is learning how to safely operate the engine and how to correctly set up the engine and failsafe.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
I agree with this 100%. If you're going to talk wing loading better issue a waiver to the warbird guys. Power to weight ratio, better line up the 3D guys for their checkrides. Keep doing down this rabbit hole and we'll legislate ourselves right out of a hobby.
My opinion in regard to this topic is drop the 12lb requirement all together. But I'm guessing the underwriters won't like that answer.
04-22-2019, 06:08 AM
#55
My Feedback: (19)
This could get way over complicated. If a 2 step process is implemented pick and over under weight and go with it. Using wingloading and such requires some kind of sliding scale. 40oz/sqft on a 3 meter jet is a floater. Put that on a k45 powered jet and it is going to be a whole different beast.
04-22-2019, 06:35 AM
#57
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Redstone, CO, USA
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest part in getting a turbine waiver is learning how to safely operate the engine and how to correctly set up the engine and failsafe.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
A turbine is just another powerplant in the grand scheme of the hobby. In reality probably no worse a risk than a huge 3D gasser or big load of LiPo’s.
If the AMA insurers demand a “turbine waiver” then it ought to be just that; a signoff that one has had a checkout on how to safely operate a turbine be it a P-20 or a P-200. The KISS principle ought to apply.
- Mike
Last edited by speed is life; 04-22-2019 at 06:54 AM.
04-22-2019, 09:40 AM
#58
My Feedback: (3)
The biggest part in getting a turbine waiver is learning how to safely operate the engine and how to correctly set up the engine and failsafe.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
Why add more rules and hurdles to the process? If it’s a turbine engine no matter what size it is you should be able to get a waiver. Like I said if you can fly the little ones then the big ones are easy after that.
Franklin I’m not even sure why you are involved here? You don’t hold a waiver and also don’t fly jets do you?
I work hard teaching guys and helping people get their waivers. I figure the more people at my club with waivers the better chance we have in keeping jets at the field.
It appears as though the setup and operation of a turboprop is almost identical to a turbojet.
Another issue is whether or not AMA will still require rudders on smaller jets and also keep the requirement for braking systems.
While it may be a worthwhile discussion for the AMA, at this time it just seems like a solution in search of a problem to solve.
(until of course someone shows up at the field with a turbine powered multirotor)
04-22-2019, 10:17 AM
#59
While I agree that proper setup and operation of a turbine is a primary concern, why did the AMA decide to recently introduce a separate turboprop waiver?
It appears as though the setup and operation of a turboprop is almost identical to a turbojet.
Another issue is whether or not AMA will still require rudders on smaller jets and also keep the requirement for braking systems.
While it may be a worthwhile discussion for the AMA, at this time it just seems like a solution in search of a problem to solve.
(until of course someone shows up at the field with a turbine powered multirotor)
It appears as though the setup and operation of a turboprop is almost identical to a turbojet.
Another issue is whether or not AMA will still require rudders on smaller jets and also keep the requirement for braking systems.
While it may be a worthwhile discussion for the AMA, at this time it just seems like a solution in search of a problem to solve.
(until of course someone shows up at the field with a turbine powered multirotor)
The same thing is being considered for the under 12 lbs turbine jets for the same reason.
Bob
04-22-2019, 10:49 AM
#60
My Feedback: (19)
+1 Exactly!
A turbine is just another powerplant in the grand scheme of the hobby. In reality probably no worse a risk than a huge 3D gasser or big load of LiPo’s.
If the AMA insurers demand a “turbine waiver” then it ought to be just that; a signoff that one has had a checkout on how to safely operate a turbine be it a P-20 or a P-200. The KISS principle ought to apply.
- Mike
04-22-2019, 12:06 PM
#61
Or is it that non-waiver holders can't possibly know anything?
04-22-2019, 12:53 PM
#63
I'm starting to think perhaps the waiver needs to be limited to proof of knowledge of how to safely operate, and understand the engines themselves. The airplanes are getting to where it almost needs to be irrelevant. After all, we are getting to the stage technology wise where the power system is almost irrelevant. What I mean by that is it used to be that a turbine was what you would have to have for sparkling performance in a large jet. Today's edf systems produce as good or better performance in a jet as a turbine in the same jet. The risk of fire in a crash with high power lipos is probably just about as high and the charging risk is always there.
we have people flying 40% scale aerobatic airplanes with huge props hovering over runways that dont require a waiver, but if it's a turbo prop it does doesn't it? Same with helicopters. Why is a 250mph bandit with an evf system any less complex to fly than with a P120? A turbine powered glider surely is not that complex, certainly no more than if it were electric. We have a large number of models now that could cross over from power system to power system with the same performance. That said why does only one require a waiver. On that note why does a bandit with an evf not have a speed restriction while a turbine version does. A small jet like a habu32 doing 170mph is a heck of a lot faster in perception than a 10' long jet at 230mph by perception. Yes the speed is different but my qm40 pylon racers at near 200mph keep me busier than my firebird at well over 200mph.
it seems to me that the concern is really in the power plant itself so perhaps it should be viewed simply as a turbine waiver, not an airframe. Be sure that an individual understands the operation, the safety rules the hazards of turbine operation and leave it at that. Turbine modeling has become diverse enough and mainstream enough that I think trying to have different levels of waivers is just opening a can of worms.
personally I think that electric modeling is a higher risk, partly because it's so much more prevalent but also because there is a huge volatility in the batteries and systems. To pretend that electric is "safe" and turbines dangerous is really just ignorance at best. In British Columbia last year there were 3 fires of significance caused by rc models. One required I believe 5 fire trucks to combat the blaze. I do believe 2 of the crashes were jets, but all were electric. Turbines didnt cause any fires that I am aware of in this same province and while electric flights likely out numbered turbine flights 50 to 1, the fact remains that it was electrics that caused the fires and very very few electric pilots have any form of fire fighting equipment with them.
Anyway, that just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.
we have people flying 40% scale aerobatic airplanes with huge props hovering over runways that dont require a waiver, but if it's a turbo prop it does doesn't it? Same with helicopters. Why is a 250mph bandit with an evf system any less complex to fly than with a P120? A turbine powered glider surely is not that complex, certainly no more than if it were electric. We have a large number of models now that could cross over from power system to power system with the same performance. That said why does only one require a waiver. On that note why does a bandit with an evf not have a speed restriction while a turbine version does. A small jet like a habu32 doing 170mph is a heck of a lot faster in perception than a 10' long jet at 230mph by perception. Yes the speed is different but my qm40 pylon racers at near 200mph keep me busier than my firebird at well over 200mph.
it seems to me that the concern is really in the power plant itself so perhaps it should be viewed simply as a turbine waiver, not an airframe. Be sure that an individual understands the operation, the safety rules the hazards of turbine operation and leave it at that. Turbine modeling has become diverse enough and mainstream enough that I think trying to have different levels of waivers is just opening a can of worms.
personally I think that electric modeling is a higher risk, partly because it's so much more prevalent but also because there is a huge volatility in the batteries and systems. To pretend that electric is "safe" and turbines dangerous is really just ignorance at best. In British Columbia last year there were 3 fires of significance caused by rc models. One required I believe 5 fire trucks to combat the blaze. I do believe 2 of the crashes were jets, but all were electric. Turbines didnt cause any fires that I am aware of in this same province and while electric flights likely out numbered turbine flights 50 to 1, the fact remains that it was electrics that caused the fires and very very few electric pilots have any form of fire fighting equipment with them.
Anyway, that just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.
04-22-2019, 12:59 PM
#64
So Andy, to answer your off topic question. I frequently took advice from enlisted about aircraft issues in areas of their expertise. Whether it was autopilot functioning, avionics, etc. I found that never thinking that I knew everything about the jet kept me alive longer. Unfortunately, your comment and the "waiver holder" garbage only demonstrates the astonishing level of denial and arrogance that are driving people from the hobby. Nobody but members of "the club" could possibly know anything.
Got news for you. AMA needs more people to take up large models and jets. If for no other reason than it all but guarantees a need for AMA fields, which guarantees a need for AMA membership. And yet the "you're not a waiver holder" only reaffirms my decision to sink $10k that might have gone into a jet into another hobby. One where people aren't so self absorbed as to drive away potential new members.
Last edited by franklin_m; 04-22-2019 at 02:05 PM.
04-22-2019, 01:31 PM
#65
I agree there's very little difference in a high performance EDF than a turbine. I can't even say "small turbine" because large EDF's are becoming more prevalent and they certainly rival the complexity and performance of many simple turbine setups.
Why go turbine in a small model? The cost is more but the flight time is double and lets face it, even if the performance was less, the "cool factor" is way higher.
Why go turbine in a small model? The cost is more but the flight time is double and lets face it, even if the performance was less, the "cool factor" is way higher.
04-22-2019, 01:49 PM
#66
Well...as you have just proven, that's not always a bad thing...
04-22-2019, 02:04 PM
#67
04-22-2019, 02:14 PM
#68
The turboprop waiver was introduced because the AMA modeling community asked for it - so that guys who just wanted to fly a turboprop didn't have to go out and buy a jet in order to get a waiver to just fly turboprops.
The same thing is being considered for the under 12 lbs turbine jets for the same reason.
Bob
The same thing is being considered for the under 12 lbs turbine jets for the same reason.
Bob
04-22-2019, 02:25 PM
#69
While I am not saying you dont know anything but when it comes to the subject of experience flying smaller jets and larger jets well you dont have any experience yet you still have a very vocal opinion.
When I wake up I get dressed just like everyone else does.. I am not special because I have a waiver to fly little jets. But I do believe your special Franklin. You dont have any experience at all on the little jets yet you know everything. Must have stayed in a holiday inn express I guess.
04-22-2019, 02:46 PM
#70
I'm the last person that you can accuse of flipping my nose up. I dont care what people fly I always help. Even when I dont have time to help I make time. Doing stuff like buddy boxing with the civil air patrol or helping a new guy with his .40 size trainer to helping guys get turbine waivers on my own jets. I have 2 guys right now I am working with to helping get waivers.
While I am not saying you dont know anything but when it comes to the subject of experience flying smaller jets and larger jets well you dont have any experience yet you still have a very vocal opinion.
When I wake up I get dressed just like everyone else does.. I am not special because I have a waiver to fly little jets. But I do believe your special Franklin. You dont have any experience at all on the little jets yet you know everything. Must have stayed in a holiday inn express I guess.
While I am not saying you dont know anything but when it comes to the subject of experience flying smaller jets and larger jets well you dont have any experience yet you still have a very vocal opinion.
When I wake up I get dressed just like everyone else does.. I am not special because I have a waiver to fly little jets. But I do believe your special Franklin. You dont have any experience at all on the little jets yet you know everything. Must have stayed in a holiday inn express I guess.
So again, just like BH, I direct you back to comments that dealt mostly with physical factors (arguably I'm an expert), safety program management (arguably I'm an expert), and policy making and implementation (arguably I'm an expert, taught it in master's program). Oh but that's right, I'm not a Demi-God "waiver holder," so I guess the laws of physics, aerodynamics, and human nature (safety program) are different for your turbine toys. Silly me, I was being sarcastic. Of course they're not. Except perhaps in the eyes of the mythical waiver holders, who seem to think that they're the sole source of knowledge.
You want to challenge what I said, then tell me what I said wasn't true? Kinetic energy is kinetic energy. There's only so many characteristics one can distinguish in certification programs, I named a few. We can disagree about whether those are the right ones, but the ones I mentioned are scientifically supportable. As for safety program management, you may have to trust me on that one, but go ahead and challenge the ideas.
So what I commented on are things I know more about, much more. And arguably know more than most if not all of the "waiver holders" taking shots as me.
04-22-2019, 03:06 PM
#71
You would be surprised what most of us do for a living....
BTW I have been in my profession for over 20 years and I would never walk around saying I am an expert like you are doing and instead try and learn something new every day to better aviation safety. Matter of fact one of my courses in for my FAA renewal course was human factors in aviation. Guess what being a know it all is one of the safety factors that cause crashes. But hey your the expert lol.
Also the airline pilot we had show up one day at our club with a jet was allot like you. We tried to help him but he knew it all and didn't need our help because he flies full scale and knows it all. So we all sat and watched him smash his plane into the ground just after takeoff . He then loaded it all up in his Porsche never to be seen again. A very good amount of us do aviation for a living also Franklin so stop talking down to us its getting funny Mr. expert lol.
BTW I have been in my profession for over 20 years and I would never walk around saying I am an expert like you are doing and instead try and learn something new every day to better aviation safety. Matter of fact one of my courses in for my FAA renewal course was human factors in aviation. Guess what being a know it all is one of the safety factors that cause crashes. But hey your the expert lol.
Also the airline pilot we had show up one day at our club with a jet was allot like you. We tried to help him but he knew it all and didn't need our help because he flies full scale and knows it all. So we all sat and watched him smash his plane into the ground just after takeoff . He then loaded it all up in his Porsche never to be seen again. A very good amount of us do aviation for a living also Franklin so stop talking down to us its getting funny Mr. expert lol.
04-22-2019, 03:06 PM
#72
I'm starting to think perhaps the waiver needs to be limited to proof of knowledge of how to safely operate, and understand the engines themselves. The airplanes are getting to where it almost needs to be irrelevant. After all, we are getting to the stage technology wise where the power system is almost irrelevant. What I mean by that is it used to be that a turbine was what you would have to have for sparkling performance in a large jet. Today's edf systems produce as good or better performance in a jet as a turbine in the same jet. The risk of fire in a crash with high power lipos is probably just about as high and the charging risk is always there.
we have people flying 40% scale aerobatic airplanes with huge props hovering over runways that dont require a waiver, but if it's a turbo prop it does doesn't it? Same with helicopters. Why is a 250mph bandit with an evf system any less complex to fly than with a P120? A turbine powered glider surely is not that complex, certainly no more than if it were electric. We have a large number of models now that could cross over from power system to power system with the same performance. That said why does only one require a waiver. On that note why does a bandit with an evf not have a speed restriction while a turbine version does. A small jet like a habu32 doing 170mph is a heck of a lot faster in perception than a 10' long jet at 230mph by perception. Yes the speed is different but my qm40 pylon racers at near 200mph keep me busier than my firebird at well over 200mph.
it seems to me that the concern is really in the power plant itself so perhaps it should be viewed simply as a turbine waiver, not an airframe. Be sure that an individual understands the operation, the safety rules the hazards of turbine operation and leave it at that. Turbine modeling has become diverse enough and mainstream enough that I think trying to have different levels of waivers is just opening a can of worms.
personally I think that electric modeling is a higher risk, partly because it's so much more prevalent but also because there is a huge volatility in the batteries and systems. To pretend that electric is "safe" and turbines dangerous is really just ignorance at best. In British Columbia last year there were 3 fires of significance caused by rc models. One required I believe 5 fire trucks to combat the blaze. I do believe 2 of the crashes were jets, but all were electric. Turbines didnt cause any fires that I am aware of in this same province and while electric flights likely out numbered turbine flights 50 to 1, the fact remains that it was electrics that caused the fires and very very few electric pilots have any form of fire fighting equipment with them.
Anyway, that just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.
we have people flying 40% scale aerobatic airplanes with huge props hovering over runways that dont require a waiver, but if it's a turbo prop it does doesn't it? Same with helicopters. Why is a 250mph bandit with an evf system any less complex to fly than with a P120? A turbine powered glider surely is not that complex, certainly no more than if it were electric. We have a large number of models now that could cross over from power system to power system with the same performance. That said why does only one require a waiver. On that note why does a bandit with an evf not have a speed restriction while a turbine version does. A small jet like a habu32 doing 170mph is a heck of a lot faster in perception than a 10' long jet at 230mph by perception. Yes the speed is different but my qm40 pylon racers at near 200mph keep me busier than my firebird at well over 200mph.
it seems to me that the concern is really in the power plant itself so perhaps it should be viewed simply as a turbine waiver, not an airframe. Be sure that an individual understands the operation, the safety rules the hazards of turbine operation and leave it at that. Turbine modeling has become diverse enough and mainstream enough that I think trying to have different levels of waivers is just opening a can of worms.
personally I think that electric modeling is a higher risk, partly because it's so much more prevalent but also because there is a huge volatility in the batteries and systems. To pretend that electric is "safe" and turbines dangerous is really just ignorance at best. In British Columbia last year there were 3 fires of significance caused by rc models. One required I believe 5 fire trucks to combat the blaze. I do believe 2 of the crashes were jets, but all were electric. Turbines didnt cause any fires that I am aware of in this same province and while electric flights likely out numbered turbine flights 50 to 1, the fact remains that it was electrics that caused the fires and very very few electric pilots have any form of fire fighting equipment with them.
Anyway, that just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.
I'm the last person that you can accuse of flipping my nose up. I dont care what people fly I always help. Even when I dont have time to help I make time. Doing stuff like buddy boxing with the civil air patrol or helping a new guy with his .40 size trainer to helping guys get turbine waivers on my own jets. I have 2 guys right now I am working with to helping get waivers.
While I am not saying you dont know anything but when it comes to the subject of experience flying smaller jets and larger jets well you dont have any experience yet you still have a very vocal opinion.
When I wake up I get dressed just like everyone else does.. I am not special because I have a waiver to fly little jets. But I do believe your special Franklin. You dont have any experience at all on the little jets yet you know everything. Must have stayed in a holiday inn express I guess.
While I am not saying you dont know anything but when it comes to the subject of experience flying smaller jets and larger jets well you dont have any experience yet you still have a very vocal opinion.
When I wake up I get dressed just like everyone else does.. I am not special because I have a waiver to fly little jets. But I do believe your special Franklin. You dont have any experience at all on the little jets yet you know everything. Must have stayed in a holiday inn express I guess.
That said, how can you tell a full sized turbine pilot he knows nothing when the only difference is that he had a different point of view when flying than someone that flies R/C? That would be like telling unlimited hydroplane great Chip Hanauer that he knows nothing about driving a boat since he doesn't race a scale R/C hydroplane. The physics, acceleration and principles are all the same so what makes a full sized pilot different than someone standing safely on the ground moving a couple of sticks mounted on potentiometers to control his toy plane? I have to agree with Franklin, I'll go with a DF or EDF rather than have to deal with the elitists that fly turbines to get a waiver that, in reality, means nothing to the FAA
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 04-22-2019 at 03:17 PM.
04-22-2019, 03:50 PM
#73
You would be surprised what most of us do for a living....
BTW I have been in my profession for over 20 years and I would never walk around saying I am an expert like you are doing and instead try and learn something new every day to better aviation safety. Matter of fact one of my courses in for my FAA renewal course was human factors in aviation. Guess what being a know it all is one of the safety factors that cause crashes. But hey your the expert lol.
Also the airline pilot we had show up one day at our club with a jet was allot like you. We tried to help him but he knew it all and didn't need our help because he flies full scale and knows it all. So we all sat and watched him smash his plane into the ground just after takeoff . He then loaded it all up in his Porsche never to be seen again. A very good amount of us do aviation for a living also Franklin so stop talking down to us its getting funny Mr. expert lol.
BTW I have been in my profession for over 20 years and I would never walk around saying I am an expert like you are doing and instead try and learn something new every day to better aviation safety. Matter of fact one of my courses in for my FAA renewal course was human factors in aviation. Guess what being a know it all is one of the safety factors that cause crashes. But hey your the expert lol.
Also the airline pilot we had show up one day at our club with a jet was allot like you. We tried to help him but he knew it all and didn't need our help because he flies full scale and knows it all. So we all sat and watched him smash his plane into the ground just after takeoff . He then loaded it all up in his Porsche never to be seen again. A very good amount of us do aviation for a living also Franklin so stop talking down to us its getting funny Mr. expert lol.
Even your "know it all" comment demonstrates your lack of understanding of the topic of human factors. I'm arguably an expert in aviation safety. You can disagree with me on policy, on what is or isn't a valid approach, etc. But the fact that I'm an expert does not mean I'm a "know it all" in the sense of human factors. That term would actually be more appropriately applied to those who so rapidly throw the "are you a waiver holder" epethet when confronted with alternative views. That would be an accurate use of the term, not what you tried to twist into an insult.
The physics, aerodynamics, human behavior, policy making, centrifugal turbine response characteristics, and safety program management points were all valid. The science is the science. The fact that my points are meeting with such unwillingness to even consider them is the best indicator of a latent safety culture problem. It also proves why there's a compliance problem in the turbine community (per Bob and AMA EC minutes), and why it's likely to continue.
04-22-2019, 05:29 PM
#74
Bob why didn't they just include turbo props into the turbine waiver? Does this mean I cant fly a turbo prop now? If we have new rules for under 12lbs will i be able to fly those? I have flown all of the above and I cant tell you right now the smaller under 12lb aircraft was by far the hardest. Anything turbine powered should be included in the turbine waiver. Their is no need to divide it all up making things more complicated and having more hurdles to cross to fly an RC plane.
With a turbine waiver, you can fly a turboprop - no other paperwork needed. However, the turboprop waiver was added so that guys that ONLY wanted to fly turboprops didn't have to buy/borrow a jet to do the waiver flight.
BTW, what did I tell you about feeding the trolls?!?!
Bob
04-22-2019, 06:18 PM
#75
Also the airline pilot we had show up one day at our club with a jet was allot like you. We tried to help him but he knew it all and didn't need our help because he flies full scale and knows it all. So we all sat and watched him smash his plane into the ground just after takeoff . He then loaded it all up in his Porsche never to be seen again. A very good amount of us do aviation for a living also Franklin so stop talking down to us its getting funny Mr. expert lol.
- a licensed private pilot bragged about how he flies a Cessna try to fly a trainer and end up inverting it and flying it into the ground. Needless to say, it was everyone's fault but his.
- experienced R/C car guys try to fly a trainer put it right into the ground. Again, everyone else's fault but his
- an engineer that works on aircraft fly an R/C into the ground after losing orientation