MPA Elite Veteran Location: Australia
| | Quote |
| everyone should take safety more seriously...
|
But they dont.
The how_to of providing guidance to risk management has not been approached here.
Has been proposed but no interest exists even from those who uphold safety itself and I can only assume they feel the current system suitable where each adpots or creates rules, some they live by themselves and some not and then those who just cant be bothered with rules.
What we have to date is a set of sets of rules each person creates or adpots, rules are like advertisments they are soon forgotten if you didnt get the essence of the message then the advert does no good..
We have concensus there is danger in this sport / hobby and thats about it, yes the choir all sings together, but not the same song.
The thread I posted here Re "Counting Risks" is a simple preface to how risk is identified, managed and reduced.
It is the essence of how civil and miltary aviation manages risk courtesty of my old dad who spent his life doing just that for an aircraft manufacturer..
In his case reducing risk so military aircraft don't fall out of the sky, even under battle conditions.
You can do all sorts of dangerous things with a minimum of risk and so you shouldnt stop doing things because they may present too much of a risk alone and I specifically refer to flying close to yourself doing 3D displays.
Why not, it looks spectacular and the operator is full knowing of the danger of doing it, but it should only be done so long as all additional risk is removed and you have to know what they are, how to put them in order and how to remove them from the heap_of_trouble_that_awaits.
A sole issue does not represent un manageable risk but attach many small ones in addition to a large risk and that paves the way to disaster.
Of course for some things there needs to be specifics in rules so for an example lets take a dead stick or heli about to crash.
I read at all club sites when an aircraft looses contact or the like you must call out "dead stick"
Ive also heard it said in some incidents of mishap "But he didnt even call out dead stick".
The rule clearly doesnt account for human nature or "senior moments"
that render some speechless for a period and your pride and joy makng way for earth un planned is the kind of thing that could do it.
Perhaps the rules are better served in the spirit of the rule defined more.
Like:
In the case of loss of contact or control and or possible collision with the ground the operator should loudly and vocally warn all others around, a prefered term for many is to call "dead stick" but is simply a suggestion and any warning suffice to attract the attention of others to warn of disater from above will do as well.
Likewise at any time a member calls loudly from the field to any degree including anything you didnt clearly understand, all present should look skyward for potentional danger.
All present should be always aware in part at least of aircraft flying in proximity, do not become too focused on whatever other task or duty you are engaged in that you forget dangerous aircraft are in flight nearby, to put in in terms "keep your ears open as well as your eyes"
Safe flying distances from others also comes into the same rule, the distance is not the issue (save the laws legal minimum requirements), what the individuals are doing at any distance is the more important factor.
A person watching the aircraft fly represents less danger, a person at 20 feet further away than them reading a book not keeping an eye out is the greatest risk even some further distance away.
Not everyone is excited about heli's and may get dragged along for the day, if thats the case leave them in the club rooms or car or home.
All eyes on the danger and youve reduced a large risk as anyone looking at what goes on from a safe and legal distance wont have to be terribly fleet of foot to avoid a flight path of the crashing aircraft seeing it loosing it's normal flight path and heading their way.
In rules the more specific you get the more risk you exclude.
All those I read are simply way too specific to cover everyone for just the one singular issue..
Also, In rules and danger it usually takes two_to_tango and both or all parties should be covered where applicable.
On that subject so long as this sport / hobby continues down the road of misplaced financial liabilities it is never doing to get out of that rut unless it adopts the practices of larger more organised motor sport bodies it will forever be writing these rules with the root problem causing them to make up poor sets of rules with misplaced blame steering their creation.
To reduce risks:
Start with some things you think you should do yourself that are a bit hairy and that's a good start rather than waiting for instructions on how to be safe.
Yesterday I went and purchased an Icom IC handheld scanner to scan all RC frequencies anytime I am out flying but not in operation so I can get a picture of activity in the area.
I dont fly at a club, but I wouldnt want to disrupt them so now I can be assured that I will be able to see (hear) an RC field on the scanner not just from memory of where they are.
I can see others and avoid them, I have 2 ch xtal sets to use in case one is taken where Im going and it not a busy area like near an RC feild.
I also have police air wing so can hear them approaching (they fly low) and the nearest Airport tower.
If there is anyone on any off the RC channels or aviation Ill hear it on the Icom as it scans all at once in a moment over and over.
Scanner is not the gear for everyone to carry around but I have a number of risks with a heli cam that some others dont so I take additonal steps to remove some other risks like radio issues for one.
This bring me back to a level of managable risk again, some other things done for the same reasons, as risk adds up so it should be removed even if it's from the other end of the heap so long as you dont pile up too much at once.
Anyway enough for now.
Cheers
Dave
www.polecam-systems.com |