Another RC heli fatality

[Dan22]

[QUOTE=tomatwalden;1057065] Frankly, people learning from scratch on 2nd hand Raptor's is what scares me ...

Me too, i was one of them. The Raptor 30 is a great starter heli and a good learning tool, but when i first started with my 30 it was at a club with tuition.
I used to scare myself sometimes! (although always felt safer with the 30 than i did with my Trex 500)
Another point to make is, we need to be meticulous with our heli maintenance & pre flight checks to minimize the chance of an accident. As a beginner i was taught this as one of the basic rules of flying.

Dan.

[cjcj1949]

Our opinions are not what really matters in the end. It is what ordinary people think. Most think that our models are harmless toys. It is only when things go badly wrong that they change their minds. An incident with a sponsored pilot really shouldn't happen. There are lots of people who like to ban things. It is very easy to lose flying fields.

[trillian]

The world is turning into a proper nanny state... It's ridiculous!

Indeed. There is always a 'knee jerk reaction' which results in more and more regulation. What we have to realise is that the nanny state, government meddling and regulation etc. is not done for our own good, it is done because it's part of human nature. Sure, some politicians may think they are doing the right thing but the reality is they are doing this because of a sub-concious need to control, to monitor. That's why we had the Stasi in E. Germany, all the CCTV, the proposals of things like identity cards, it all comes from the same place - a subconcious part of the human brain. It is an extension of a part of human nature that is obsessed with the activities of others, case in point all the celebrity gossip magazines. (and yes, I do realise some regulations actually are beneficial, I'm just saying that the compulsion to regulate is a by-product of human nature that doesn't need a logical reason based on real need or risk).

On average 12 college and high school football players die each year in the USA, that's one every month, no one is jumping up proposing football be banned until they can investigate and put regulations in place to make it safer. (maybe not the best analogy but the point being, the difference is that it would be unthinkable to ban football and yet look at all the injuries and deaths. RC Helis on the other hand are a fair target for regulation, they're not all cozy and familiar, not woven into the fabric of the culture, they are some wacky thing a few dare-devils partake in and now it's coming to light they may be a menace to society).

[tomatwalden]

Nobody should have the right to tell a pilot how close he's allowed to fly to himself, it's ridiculous.

To the best of my knowledge, nobody is. People are however saying "be careful" - nobody wants to see things like this if it is avoidable.

Imagine telling Jeb Corliss that he's not allowed to fly within 500 feet of the ground, in case he might injure himself? We wouldn't get videos like this...

Imagine if Jeb Corliss had been told after his (very bad) accident doing this stuff that he couldn't have medical care. Accidents cause other people to become involved - police, doctors, nurses etc. etc. These resources cost money - paid for by us through our taxes. The government needs to manage those funds and sometimes, regulating dangerous sports is part of this. B.A.S.E jumping is illegal in many places for this very reason.

The world is turning into a proper nanny state... It's ridiculous!

I disagree. The world is turning into a place where people are way too quick to sue for damages. "Had an accident at work?" companies cause health and safety to go overboard. Regulate THAT, and I suspect the "nanny state" impression will fade away ...

[Gixxer]

Imagine if Jeb Corliss had been told after his (very bad) accident doing this stuff that he couldn't have medical care. Accidents cause other people to become involved - police, doctors, nurses etc. etc. These resources cost money - paid for by us through our taxes. The government needs to manage those funds and sometimes, regulating dangerous sports is part of this. B.A.S.E jumping is illegal in many places for this very reason.

To what extent do you want to go with that?
How about:
No medical care if you have a car accident whilst not earning money for the government?
No medical care if you have an accident on a bicycle, unless you were riding it to or from work?
No medical care for your children if they fall out of a tree and break their arm?
No search and rescue support if a cruise ship sinks?

More people die from falling out of bed each year than have probably ever died as a result of an accident with an RC heli... should we ban beds?

Where would you like to draw the line?

[Rotorhead]

Nobody should have the right to tell a pilot how close he's allowed to fly to himself, it's ridiculous.

No one is telling anyone anything, but some people need to be educated to the fact that their attitudes to safe flying are putting the future of this hobby at risk for everyone else who enjoys it.

[tomatwalden]

To what extent do you want to go with that?
How about:
No medical care if you have a car accident whilst not earning money for the government?
No medical care if you have an accident on a bicycle, unless you were riding it to or from work?
No medical care for your children if they fall out of a tree and break their arm?
No search and rescue support if a cruise ship sinks?

More people die from falling out of bed each year than have probably ever died as a result of an accident with an RC heli... should we ban beds?

Where would you like to draw the line?

Sorry, you miss my point. I mean that Jeb does what he does in the knowledge that medical services will be on hand if something goes wrong. We drive our cars in the same knowledge. This is a given and we need services like the doctors, nurses, firemen etc.

My point is that these things cost money. Money needs managing, ergo, regulation is inevitable. For example, we must wear seat belts,... in Australia, bicycle helmets are mandatory etc. etc. To my mind, this isn't the "nanny state" alluded too - it's simple economics. As I say however, I have a low view of "no win, no fee" claim companies which I think is probably more likely to drive a so called nanny state.

[Jez N]

Sorry, you miss my point. I mean that Jeb does what he does in the knowledge that medical services will be on hand if something goes wrong. We drive our cars in the same knowledge. This is a given and we need services like the doctors, nurses, firemen etc.

My point is that these things cost money. Money needs managing, ergo, regulation is inevitable. For example, we must wear seat belts,... in Australia, bicycle helmets are mandatory etc. etc. To my mind, this isn't the "nanny state" alluded too - it's simple economics. As I say however, I have a low view of "no win, no fee" claim companies which I think is probably more likely to drive a so called nanny state.

I'm not sure how regulation is about managing the economy tbh Tom. It's a lot cheaper to let people kill themselves than it is to try to stop them! You crash with no seatbelt or no crash helmet and you are more likely to be dead than alive than if you use them. Regulations are there to make people safer and are based around campaigning for common sense. My father was heavily involved in bringing in seatbelts and bicycle helmets having setup and run probably the biggest road safety charity in the country.

[Gixxer]

No one is telling anyone anything, but some people need to be educated to the fact that their attitudes to safe flying are putting the future of this hobby at risk for everyone else who enjoys it.

Do you honestly believe this pilot wasn't aware of the danger he was putting himself in every time he came within feet of himself whilst performing a hurricane?

'Safe flying' is an oxymoron, there's no such thing, so unless people are suggesting that an outright ban should be imposed, I don't see how else can it be regulated.

Sorry, you miss my point. I mean that Jeb does what he does in the knowledge that medical services will be on hand if something goes wrong. We drive our cars in the same knowledge. This is a given and we need services like the doctors, nurses, firemen etc.

My point is that these things cost money. Money needs managing, ergo, regulation is inevitable. For example, we must wear seat belts,... in Australia, bicycle helmets are mandatory etc. etc. To my mind, this isn't the "nanny state" alluded too - it's simple economics. As I say however, I have a low view of "no win, no fee" claim companies which I think is probably more likely to drive a so called nanny state.

Sorry, I'm not missing your point... but my point is that people die all the time, and more die whilst participating in probably every other 'dangerous' hobby than do from RC heli attacks, so why should regulations be imposed on RC helis and not, for example, motocross riding, mountain climbing, etc?

Regulation, in my humble opinion, would be neither about keeping people safe, nor managing finances. It would be about some pen-pushers attempting to justify their miserable existence, whilst power tripping over their latest 'victory'.

More people die each year from auto-erotic asphyxiation than have ever died as a result of an RC heli accident, but the government won't be regulating that because most of them are probably bang at it.

[tomatwalden]

Jez, if every accident resulted in death, no doubt it would be cheaper. Thankfully nobody wants that! But most accidents don't result in outright death. They result in injuries that need managing, ... long hospital stays, intensive care, etc. etc. Regulation (eg. seat belts) helps reduce injuries, benefitting not only the poor person involved - but all those obliged to help him/her recover. Lesser injuries therefore = lesser costs. Without safety regulations, more lives would be ruined, and emergency services would be overwhelmed.

We already have regulation in RC helis. We (should) have insurance - we should fly at official sites. Radio regulations come into play too. I agree with Rotorhead - if we don't want more prohibitive regulations from misunderstanding politicians, we need to regulate ourselves. Pro/sponsored pilots should probably lead this I think ...

[Jez N]

I still disagree with your cynicism (and I'm a pretty cynical man myself!). Regulation is there to prevent harm in a modern society that expects safety. You can't ignore the benefits of seatbelts or seating in football stadiums or improvements in aircraft design and safety. These things have been implemented after it was shown that the improvement would save lives. None of them have been brought about by the government looking to save a few quid. Usually it is one key event either on a large scale such has hillsborough or to one individual J Styner, who reinvented trauma management after losing his family when he crashed his light aircraft.

[tomatwalden]

I still disagree with your cynicism (and I'm a pretty cynical man myself!). ....

LOL. I've often been accused of being a cynic! I'm perhaps laying it on a little thick. I just wanted to make the point that I find it hard to agree with the "nanny state" view. I think regulations though are inevitable and necessary (as a general point - not necessarily for RC helis though) - for many reasons. One of those reasons is fiscal - but clearly not all! My wife is a doctor, and helps people because she wants to help people - not because of money.

Back on topic though - In apparent contradiction to the above point, I do not want to see unnecessary regulation on our hobby due to an over-reaction by ill-informed people with agendas.

[tomatwalden]

.... so why should regulations be imposed on RC helis and not, for example, motocross riding, mountain climbing, etc?

I'm not suggesting regulations should be imposed on RC helis.

EDIT : Re-reading my posts I realise it's far from clear that I'm talking in a generalised sense about regulation (I was thinking about the "nanny state" view). With direct regard to RC helis however, no, I don't think regulation is the right path.

Sorry for any confusion!

[Gixxer]

I'm not suggesting regulations should be imposed on RC helis.

EDIT : Re-reading my posts I realise it's far from clear that I'm talking in a generalised sense about regulation (I was thinking about the "nanny state" view). With direct regard to RC helis however, no, I don't think regulation is the right path.

Sorry for any confusion!

Nor am I suggesting you're the gubberment pen-pusher who will inevitably get on a power trip and attempt to pass legislation... it was a rhetorical question.

One thing is for certain... legislation will be passed. Not for our own good, or for financial reasons but because it's too easy to strap a camera to a copter and take pictures of people doing things they shouldn't be doing, and the first time a politician is at the receiving end of this, we'll suffer the consequences.

[Mark_T]

I am also a scuba diver, people die every year diving in the places I dive, they also die training in the places I trained in.

Scuba diving is not banned, mostly I suspect, because the divers don't die in the middle of a public park and because people generally regard diving as being 'dangerous' so there is no shock factor.

The problem we have here is that flying a 'toy' helicopter is not considered by the public and politicians to be 'dangerous' so when a sad accident like this happens people are suddenly scared by the fact that a 'toy' killed someone in a public park.

It pushes all the wrong buttons and you get the defenders of public safety stepping in to make our parks safe and to investigate these 'toy's that can kill.

Once people accept that they are dangerous and what we are flying are not 'toys' we should be OK to return to normal like all the other dangerous sports. I expect we'll lose our ability to fly in a few public parks, but honestly I don't see that as a bad thing really.