PDA

View Full Version : Couple killed by RC model


qban_flyer
05-15-2006, 08:32 PM
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&pubid=968163964505&cid=1147609688505&col=968705899037&call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

ForestCam
05-15-2006, 10:21 PM
The model airplane that crashed had two-metre wing span and was being directed from the ground by an experienced German operator
Definatly wasn't a park flyer.

This thought just struck me, wasn't Hungary one of the first countries Germany invaded in WWII?

Hmmmm....

qban_flyer
05-15-2006, 11:15 PM
Definatly wasn't a park flyer.

This thought just struck me, wasn't Hungary one of the first countries Germany invaded in WWII?

Hmmmm....I think they began with Poland. HMMM!!! :rolleyes:

You don't think, errr, naw, do you? :confused:

I can see the media headlines if it had happend here:

"Hungarian Couple Killed By German Pilot!" :eek:

qban_flyer
05-16-2006, 03:17 AM
And here is the original Hungarian News online clip.

http://english.mti.hu/default.asp?menu=1&theme=2&cat=25&newsid=219892 (http://english.mti.hu/default.asp?menu=1&theme=2&cat=25&newsid=219892)

rcers
05-18-2006, 04:27 PM
Here is some good information from the AMA email list I am on...

Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 7:58 PM
Subject: Translation of Hungarian Accident Report [SAMTalk]

I've received what purports to be a translation of the Hungarian
accident report from a friend in England. If you accept the report as
accurate, here was a very experienced guy, with a failsafe in his
radio;
who had tested for interference before each days fight with a light
electric model. He had arrived several days early to prepare and
practice for his routine, and was flying several hundred meters from
the crowd. He got "shot down" by sudden strong interference on his
channel from a local radio broadcast station. The failsafe apparently
worked. The upshot of it all was that an airplane with a 100 inch
wingspan weighing 40 pounds flew into a crowd.



And here's the text...

Quote
--------------------------
The model flight club Szekszárd had organised past Saturday afternoon a
flight show on the large former military airfield Öcsény. As a Stefan
W. of
the DAeC Luftsport, federation Bavaria association flew his second
flight he
had a sudden and total loss of control on his aerobatics model Pitts
S12
with four-cycle combustion engine (span 2.50 m, approx. 20 kg weight).

The fail safe funtion switched on at approximately 20 m height ; driven
off
by the cross-wind the model flew uncontrolled from the airfield to
several
hundred meters away into the crowd and impacted there. It broke a panic
off;
a married couple was killed, four further humans was hurt.

The police drove off the unfortunate pilot in handcuffs. Video material
was
broadcasted over a Hungarian television channel proved that he had
flown the
fastidious aerobatics program far from the spectators. Only after the
loss
of the control did the model turn in the crowds direction.

Stefan W. was convinced that only a substantial interference resulted
in the
complete loss of control. This interference was proven free of doubts
the
following Monday and again on Tuesday morning by the public
prosecutor's
office. A Hungarian expert and the father of Stefan W, traveled with a
scanner from Germany. - Stefan W.' s plane naturally uses 35MHz
frequency.
The European Radiocommunications Committee recommends all European
Union
states to reserve it exclusively for model aircrafts. Also Hungary is
European Union member.

Overlapping of the frequency however was transmitted by a strong,
regional
Radio broadcaster in Szekszárd, in particular the channels 61, 62 and
63
were completely disturbed in the change. The plane of Stefan W. works
on
channel 62.

On Monday evening the public prosecutor's office apologized officially
with
Stefan W. for the unfair treatment and returned his passport. A bail,
about
which the police wanted to negotiate after provisional release on
Sunday,
was no more an issue. Which Radio broadcaster it concerns, which
switches
itself on so suddenly, has not been released by the Hungarian
authorities.

Stefan W. is a very experienced model pilot, who won prizes with his
demonstrations several times "Best OF show ". It was already his third
time
in Szekszárd . In order to prepare himself for the show, he had
traveled one
week in advance, and trained the days up to the Flight show.

He was conscious that the Hungarian legislation is not a guarantee to
unimpaired 35 MHz frequency. Just to protect his valuable model, range
tests
with a light electrical model belong to his routine prior each flight
day.

He had not noticed the smallest disturbance during the entire entire
week up
to Friday afternoon and Saturday where isolated small interferences
occured,
up to the misfortunate flight. - The flight line of the model flight
club
Szekszárd held the usual safety routine with the check of the
frequencies
and the delivery of the transmitters, however no scanner had been used.
Gerhard Wöbbeking Member of the executive committee that DAeC sport
specialized group Modellflug

qban_flyer
05-18-2006, 08:05 PM
Awful incident.

Every single incident has been accidental in nature. Some because of radio failure and some others because the sun blinded the pilot, and or disorientation. The one in TX in '03 involving a heli was a very sad one. And as it happened in TX, I am sure the media had a field day in Hungary with these "news" as well.

Thanks for posting further details about this one. I'll copy the text and forward it to all in our two clubs' mailing lists.

vax6335
05-18-2006, 08:31 PM
That's a very good example of how much it pays off (in one way or another) to be very diligent with safety and models. I am impressed by the measure this gentleman took to ensure safe operation of his plane.

qban_flyer
05-18-2006, 08:56 PM
It would be nice if this type of incident got more coverage amongst the RC field at large. There are some flyers in some clubs that are seriously playing with fire in the way they behave when it comes to safety issues.

We know we don't need the media at large to get hold of something like this and make a mound out of a mole hill, but the RC mags should cover these type of news in order to reawaken dormant safety concerns.

crxmanpat
05-18-2006, 11:54 PM
It would be nice if this type of incident got more coverage amongst the RC field at large. There are some flyers in some clubs that are seriously playing with fire in the way they behave when it comes to safety issues.

We know we don't need the media at large to get hold of something like this and make a mound out of a mole hill, but the RC mags should cover these type of news in order to reawaken dormant safety concerns.
Qban,

I couldn't have said it better myself. The group of us "regulars" that have been showing up at the local parks to fly has grown considerably since the beginning of this year. Safety has become a big issue with us. Therefore, we organized a club. We are AMA chartered, but currently don't have a dedicated field (we're working on that though).

Incidents such as these go a long way to show that there is never 100% safety, no matter how vigilant you are.

qban_flyer
05-19-2006, 01:36 AM
When one analizes the type of models we are flying, one can't help but come to the conclusion they are nothing less than "radio controlled missiles" at best. Heavy 30% and larger gassers with their large meat grinders up front are anything but friendly when out of control. I have always considered large RC helicopters as flying guillotines. The incident in November of '03 in Houston, TX when an instructor was decapitated by the RC heli he was piloting proved that beyond any doubt.

To that we add the uncertainty factor of the radio gear's possibilty of failure (TX, RX, servos, batteries, mechanical joints of every type, etc., etc., etc.) and we have to come to the conclusion that checking our models thoroughly before the first flight of the day and giving them a cursory inspection before each subsequent flight goes a long ways in insuring that we are doing our very best to minimize as many of these problems as we can.

I have seen a power switch on a Futaba wiring harness "short" while the model (a gasser) was sitting on a stand. The thing was in the OFF position, yet the switch shorted internally and fried the 6V onboard battery pack needed with such models. The switch was dissected by a fellow flyer who is an electrical engineer, he was apalled at the low quality of the switch itself. Nothing but cheap s--t, he said of the switch.

Had this failure happened when the model was airborne I am sure everyone would had been at a loss to explain as to why the model had gone out of control. Everyone would have had a different opinion on the subject, yet no one would have ever guessed the true nature of the failure. I don't fly gassers much anymore, but after that I incident I changed the power switches on my models that require them to heavy duty ones. They are larger than the rest, they are heavier and not as pretty, though I know for a fact that the chances of such switch going South on me are infinitesimal.

Failures can and will happen. It is incumbent on us to make sure we minimize the chances of them ever happening. We will never be able to eliminate them 100%, though at least we can try by checking and rechecking our models in their entirety before every single flight.

Twmaster
05-20-2006, 02:44 AM
I'm a bit confused by the English translation of the story. It said:

"It broke a panic off; a married couple was killed, four further humans was hurt."

Does this mean the couple was killed by the plane or the panic (assuming stampede)?

Still tragic. If the rest of the story is accurate it sounds like the pilot went through extraordinary efforts to ensure safety.

:(

qban_flyer
05-20-2006, 03:05 AM
That is the type of translation one gets from a translator who does translations to other languages "literally" word by word.

The couple was killed by a direct impact of the 2.5 meter wingspan 40 lb Pitts Bipe on them. I am sure it was a gory sight, one the Hungarian media had a field day with. I'd guess the the four additional bystanders were either injured by crash debris or by the stampede created by the panicky fleeing observers. This info I got from a CASA member that called me after I had forwarded the first link to everyone.

The second link although lacking in details, conveys a better message of what the scenario may have been like when the model went out of control. It must have been a horrifying sight.

debhicks
05-21-2006, 10:09 PM
This was a key issue brought up at the AMA meeting in Woodruff S.C. Last week. Don Lowe was adment that this information be passed on and although the general feeling is here we would not have the issues that caused this tragedy, it does bring home how dangerous these flying projectiles can be. Thanks for posting it here. The first we heard about it was at the AMA as we have been out of the internet loop all week.

qban_flyer
05-22-2006, 12:40 AM
These types of incidents should receive widespread coverage within the hobby.

Safety is a key issue that must be kept in the forefront if our hobby is to survive a "sensationalism driven" media.

Rosie
05-22-2006, 01:51 AM
A real tragedy and if nothing else should let every R/C flyer know how
dangerous it is. Perhaps some of the flyers who fail to do a range check
whenever they fly might smarten up. I belong to two clubs and continue to
be amazed at the number of flyers who fail to do a range check. Of course
even with a range check something can go wrong, but hopefully not.

Rosie

qban_flyer
05-22-2006, 02:35 AM
A real tragedy and if nothing else should let every R/C flyer know how
dangerous it is. Perhaps some of the flyers who fail to do a range check
whenever they fly might smarten up. I belong to two clubs and continue to
be amazed at the number of flyers who fail to do a range check. Of course
even with a range check something can go wrong, but hopefully not.

RosieI did not renew my membership in a particular one because of a NO-NO going one there since '03. Namely "drinking and flying". :eek:

Some on the BOD as well as its Safety Officer drink and fly, so after fighting them for two years a few of us decided to look for greener pastures elsewhere. :)

Good thing we did, they just raised the membership fee by 50%. This they did due to the fact their membership is dwindling. I wonder if they have an inkling as to why it's dwindling. I wonder what will happen to our hobby if one of those drunkards killed someone while flying a better than 30% gasser while under the influence? :o

Hope the AMA insurance coverage is high enough to cover what the surviving relatives of such a disaster will demand in court as compensation and punitive damages from the organization. In all likelihood the AMA will cease to exist as a viable organization, the FCC will revoke our permits to fly our toys. It will be the end of our hobby.

TLyttle
05-22-2006, 02:53 AM
Wow, I think I'm going to go back to building my Peanut Scale model...

qban_flyer
05-22-2006, 03:05 AM
Wow, I think I'm going to go back to building my Peanut Scale model...YUP!

At least it won't kill anything. Well it may get rid of a bug or two that may come its way while int flight. :D

airmail wf
05-22-2006, 04:46 AM
Very, Very Tragic. Does anyone see a safety problem that a scanner was not used leading up to and during this event? I understand that in this part of the world there is a lot of radio interference. And even if not I see that radio stations are broadcasting on the same channels that the flyers are on.

I think it would be a good idea to scan the airways at least a week before a major RC event and most defiantly during the event. In our country and others. Just my $0.02

Twmaster
05-22-2006, 04:51 AM
Those folks in the EU fly on 35 MHz. Do they even have a scanner for 35 MHz? It sounds to me like the pilot took every reasonable (and then some) effort to ensure he was flying safely.

airmail wf
05-22-2006, 05:00 AM
The pilots Father brough a scanner the next day and they found the station that was broadcasting. So I would say yes they do have scanners on 35 MHz.

qban_flyer
05-22-2006, 05:04 AM
Taken from post #5 above. It appears the writing for this accident was on the wall for everyone to see but the pilot and his dad. I am not casting any aspersions here, but we all have come across RC pilots who think theirs don't stink, haven't we? There is always the possibility that Stefan W. happens to suffer from the same syndrome.

A Hungarian expert and the father of Stefan W, traveled with a scanner from Germany. - Stefan W.' s plane naturally uses 35MHz frequency.
The European Radiocommunications Committee recommends all European Union states to reserve it exclusively for model aircrafts. Also Hungary is European Union member.

Overlapping of the frequency however was transmitted by a strong, regional Radio broadcaster in Szekszárd, in particular the channels 61, 62 and 63 were completely disturbed in the change. The plane of Stefan W. works on channel 62.

qban_flyer
05-22-2006, 12:00 PM
The pilots Father brough a scanner the next day and they found the station that was broadcasting. So I would say yes they do have scanners on 35 MHz.

Smart, really smart, bringing a scanner from Germany after the fact was truly smart. If that is what happened, daddy came to rescue "sonny" with the scanner. :o

Why didn't they bring it along before the event? Makes one wonder the level and quality of gray matter some may have in their attics. I would have expected better from someone flying such an expensive, large and heavy model. :confused:

UGHHH!!! :eek:

TLyttle
05-23-2006, 12:33 AM
Lessee... will I use a 4" or 5" prop on my Corsair...

qban_flyer
05-23-2006, 12:37 AM
I think 3" to 4" should be the way to go, though if you decide to be on the safe side, you can go to Flea Scale and use a 2 incher. :D

TLyttle
05-24-2006, 02:50 AM
Okay, that would be a good idea, but my eyesight can't do that anymore; I have a couple of 3" props, but that ain't enough for the usual peanut...

Do I still need AMA/MAAC to fly Peanut Scale for such a perilous pursuit?

qban_flyer
05-24-2006, 03:33 AM
Okay, that would be a good idea, but my eyesight can't do that anymore; I have a couple of 3" props, but that ain't enough for the usual peanut...

Do I still need AMA/MAAC to fly Peanut Scale for such a perilous pursuit?

Absolutely! :D

jonnyjetprop
05-24-2006, 06:55 PM
Lighten up Francis ( I mean Q)

Maybe the pilot didn't own the scanner. Maybe the best techs and scanners come from Germany. If I were rotting in a Hungarian jail, I would try find out why my model crashed. Was the TV station signal supposed to on that frequency? People have been killed by much smaller, less expensive planes too. I think your comments are out of line.

John




Smart, really smart, bringing a scanner from Germany after the fact was truly smart. If that is what happened, daddy came to rescue "sonny" with the scanner. :o

Why didn't they bring it along before the event? Makes one wonder the level and quality of gray matter some may have in their attics. I would have expected better from someone flying such an expensive, large and heavy model. :confused:

UGHHH!!! :eek:

rcers
05-24-2006, 08:46 PM
They had a scanner - those don't prevent a crash...they just show the conflict.

They found the cause (with their scanner) - it was intermittent from a TV station. Once that found that they guys was released from jail.

Mike

qban_flyer
05-24-2006, 09:16 PM
Lighten up Francis ( I mean Q)

Maybe the pilot didn't own the scanner. Maybe the best techs and scanners come from Germany. If I were rotting in a Hungarian jail, I would try find out why my model crashed. Was the TV station signal supposed to on that frequency? People have been killed by much smaller, less expensive planes too. I think your comments are out of line.

John
Smart, really smart, bringing a scanner from Germany after the fact was truly smart. If that is what happened, daddy came to rescue "sonny" with the scanner. :o


It is your own personal opinion, one you are entitled to.

Taking one part of a post out of context can make everything look like anything we may wish to make it look like. It appears that you failed to read the "IF" part of the post.:confused:

As recers has stated below, scanners do not prevent these incidents, they only point to their probable cause. They should be used before and during an event, not after tragedy has snuffed a life out. If that is what happened. :o

One more thing, you mention your concern for the perceived culprit rotting in a Hungarian jail, there are two human beings rotting away six feet under. They will be there for all eternity. What about them? Don't they count? :confused:

airmail wf
05-25-2006, 12:26 AM
One more thing, you mention your concern for the perceived culprit rotting in a Hungarian jail, there are two human beings rotting away six feet under. They will be there for all eternity. What about them? Don't they count? :confused:

Well said. Also the family of these two people will live with this for the rest of their lives.

What about the people that put the show on. Didn't they think it would have been a good idea to check the airways with a scanner before and during the show. After two people are killed is a little to late. At least for those two people. Maybe this will wake up some event directors. I sure hope so.

20/20 hindsight I know. Let's get some 20/20 for sight.

qban_flyer
05-25-2006, 12:41 AM
Well said. Also the family of these two people will live with this for the rest of their lives.

What about the people that put the show on. Didn't they think it would have been a good idea to check the airways with a scanner before and during the show. After two people are killed is a little to late. At least for those two people. Maybe this will wake up some event directors. I sure hope so.

20/20 hindsight I know. Let's get some 20/20 for sight.I hope it is a world wide wake up call to all R/C event and or contest directors. :)

slipstick
05-26-2006, 09:29 AM
Some of you guys are amazingly quick to condemn someone without bothering to find out the facts. Tell me, if you were invited to fly at a different field from your normal one, would you insist on having a scanner placed there for a few months before you flew with someone watching permanently it to check that there is never a time when an intermittent illegal transmission occurs ?

The primary blame is without any doubt with the broadcast station (radio not TV) which was transmitting at excessive power on an illegal frequency. If there's any secondary blame it lies with event organisers who might reasonably be expected to know about these illegal transmissions IF AND ONLY IF they have happened before.

The person least to blame is the pilot, who made strenuous efforts to check that it was safe to fly and then got caught by an illegal transmission which switched on at high power while he was actually in the air. Scanners are nice tools but they do not help even slightly when a swamping transmission starts up while a plane is in the air.

One thing we might agree is that we should be relatively safe flying at normal RC fields because the everyday flyers would notice any frequent interference. The least safe place to fly in this context is somewhere which is only rarely used for RC.

Steve

Geoff_Gino
05-26-2006, 09:47 AM
Some of you guys are amazingly quick to condemn someone without bothering to find out the facts. Tell me, if you were invited to fly at a different field from your normal one, would you insist on having a scanner placed there for a few months before you flew with someone watching permanently it to check that there is never a time when an intermittent illegal transmission occurs ?

The primary blame is without any doubt with the broadcast station (radio not TV) which was transmitting at excessive power on an illegal frequency. If there's any secondary blame it lies with event organisers who might reasonably be expected to know about these illegal transmissions IF AND ONLY IF they have happened before.

The person least to blame is the pilot, who made strenuous efforts to check that it was safe to fly and then got caught by an illegal transmission which switched on at high power while he was actually in the air. Scanners are nice tools but they do not help even slightly when a swamping transmission starts up while a plane is in the air.

One thing we might agree is that we should be relatively safe flying at normal RC fields because the everyday flyers would notice any frequent interference. The least safe place to fly in this context is somewhere which is only rarely used for RC.

Steve

Well said Steve and you echo my thoughts exactly.

How many spectators have been killed at air shows around the world - and yet the public still stream in to those and lets face cancellation of such shows will never happen.

Twmaster
05-26-2006, 05:16 PM
Well said Steve. Spot on.

airmail wf
05-26-2006, 11:42 PM
When there is a tool at your disposal and you fail to use it that is negligence.

Negligence..Unreasonable or imprudent action or failure to act; especially, the failure to take reasonable precautions to avoid injury to persons or property.

I can't tell you who was at fault because we don't have all the information yet. But if you are flying or putting on a show in a country that knows that radio stations broadcast on the same frequencies that you fly on, legal or illegal, it would be prudent to use every tool at your disposal. Using a scanner a week before a RC air show to check for any interference would be a reasonable precaution in my opinion.

You might be right in saying that using a scanner during this show would not have helped. It would have only showed that there was interface at the time of the accident. That is why it needs to be used before and during the show. The pilot flew a small plane to check the airways before he flew his 40% plane. This would check the airways for a very short period of time. The scanner would be checking the airways the whole time it is turned on.

The pilot did experience some interference on Friday and Saturday while flying his small plane. I would wonder if the small plane had failsafe on board. If it didn't, how would he know that the failsafe on the larger plane would not trip.

I really don't see why anybody would be against using a scanner to check for clear airways. It's just a tool that adds more safety for everyone.

qban_flyer
05-27-2006, 01:40 AM
When there is a tool at your disposal and you fail to use it that is negligence.

Negligence..Unreasonable or imprudent action or failure to act; especially, the failure to take reasonable precautions to avoid injury to persons or property.

I can't tell you who was at fault because we don't have all the information yet. But if you are flying or putting on a show in a country that knows that radio stations broadcast on the same frequencies that you fly on, legal or illegal, it would be prudent to use every tool at your disposal. Using a scanner a week before a RC air show to check for any interference would be a reasonable precaution in my opinion.

You might be right in saying that using a scanner during this show would not have helped. It would have only showed that there was interface at the time of the accident. That is why it needs to be used before and during the show. The pilot flew a small plane to check the airways before he flew his 40% plane. This would check the airways for a very short period of time. The scanner would be checking the airways the whole time it is turned on.

The pilot did experience some interference on Friday and Saturday while flying his small plane. I would wonder if the small plane had failsafe on board. If it didn't, how would he know that the failsafe on the larger plane would not trip.

I really don't see why anybody would be against using a scanner to check for clear airways. It's just a tool that adds more safety for everyone.
Very well said.

Especially the fact that he was willing to fly his inexpensive model to check the airwaves but not willing to risk his "expensive one" to being lost due to an interference caused crash, which is what happened in the very end. I think it would have been preferable to having had lost just the airplane before the show instead of losing the plane during the show and also killing two bystanders in the process.

Negligence is what caused this incident. Negligence of this type is what in the end may kill this hobby of ours as well. There are too many harebrained "hotshot" RC pilots out there raring to show off, and so doing without regard for the safety of others present at the field. Those who buy their heads on the sand pretending everything is "peachy" in RC land are fooling thmeselves.

One more thing, if a scanner was available after the fact, why wasn't it used before and during the event? :confused:

slipstick
05-28-2006, 09:55 AM
The idea that the pilot is at fault because he performed test flights using a lightweight (less likely to cause any harm) plane on the same channel to pinpoint any interference before putting his main plane in the sky is truely strange. That sounds to me like one excellent example of "having a tool at your disposal and using it". There was no scanner available to the club in Hungary at the time....that's an example of not using a tool because it is not available.

Would it have been better to have had a scanner on site for some time before the show ? Possibly but only possibly. The evidence in the Hungarian press is that the (pirate, local) radio station did not broadcast very often so it would still have been very easy to miss the potential for interference. But the fact that it was possible to bring in a scanner, from another country, after the event, to investigate a horrible and serious incident does not mean that either the Hungarian club who ran the event or the German pilot had a scanner available to them for an extended period before the event. That's like saying that if a scanner exists somewhere in Canada then every event in the USA must use a scanner....because obviously a scanner is available, even if it's not in the same country.

Some accidents are just that, accidents. Some accidents have causes which are completely outside the control of the immediate participants. If anything kills this hobby of ours it will be this bizarre and unfortunate tendency of some of us to assume that every single accident is preventable and scattering blame wildly about onto our fellow modellers for anything that happens. Nothing is quite so destructive as people within the hobby claiming that there are large numbers of their fellow hobbyists who are "raring to show off, and so doing without regard for the safety of others present at the field". If such remarks come to the attention of the authorities their response will not be "Well we'll shut down that dangerous hobby except for careful people like qban_flyer" it will be "Well if even the people inside the hobby think it's dangerous it's time it was banned".

Fortunately the Hungarian and European authorities are taking a much more realistic approach. I guess since most of the people shouting about blame and fault are in America, land of litigation, any problems for the hobby are likely to be yours too. I do hope you get away with it.

Steve

airmail wf
05-28-2006, 06:36 PM
Bottom line; scanners are available in Hungary. One was not used in this event. Somebody dropped the ball.

Say what you want about the USA, I would rather be here then anywhere else.

If any thing will kill this Hobby/Sport it won't be us discussing events like this. It will be people thinking that accidents can't be avoided by using simple things like a scanner.

You want to wipe out this hobby as we know it today. All you have to do is KILL MORE PEOPLE AT RC AIR SHOWS!!!

How many more need to die (10,20,30) before we use everything at our disposal to avoid a accident?

Here is a question for you. The next time this club puts on a air show in Hungary do you think they will use a scanner? Just curious.

rcers
05-28-2006, 10:01 PM
A scanner is a tool. It would NOT HAVE PREVENTED THIS accident. Simple as that.

It was a horrible accident. I have been to many, many RC events, including flying RC demos at full scale airshows. We did not have or use a scanner. The cheap ones of today were not available.

Face it gang - nothing makes life 100% safe. No such thing. The number of RC related deaths is so small you likley have 100x chance of dying of getting struck by lightning.

We should learn from this, but you guys who think a scanner would have solved it are WRONG.

We can speculate all day long. The people at fault are they folks broadcasting ILLEGALLY on a frequency designated for another use. Those guys get to go to jail.

Sad thing is, if this happened here in the US, they would have sued Hobbico (maker of the scanner) Futaba (maker of the radio), Engine maker, Fuel maker, the Pilot, the Club the airshow event the airshow organizers and the city.

Be safe, but every time there is anything in the air, you run a risk. Simple as that.

Mike

qban_flyer
05-28-2006, 11:40 PM
A scanner is a tool. It would NOT HAVE PREVENTED THIS accident. Simple as that.

It was a horrible accident. I have been to many, many RC events, including flying RC demos at full scale airshows. We did not have or use a scanner. The cheap ones of today were not available.

Face it gang - nothing makes life 100% safe. No such thing. The number of RC related deaths is so small you likley have 100x chance of dying of getting struck by lightning.

We should learn from this, but you guys who think a scanner would have solved it are WRONG.

We can speculate all day long. The people at fault are they folks broadcasting ILLEGALLY on a frequency designated for another use. Those guys get to go to jail.

Sad thing is, if this happened here in the US, they would have sued Hobbico (maker of the scanner) Futaba (maker of the radio), Engine maker, Fuel maker, the Pilot, the Club the airshow event the airshow organizers and the city.

Be safe, but every time there is anything in the air, you run a risk. Simple as that.

MikeAnd the AMA. :o

Not to mention the field day the media would have with it for weeks on end. :eek:

airmail wf
05-29-2006, 06:16 AM
It would NOT HAVE PREVENTED THIS accident. Simple as that.

Mike

How do you know that?

qban_flyer
05-29-2006, 03:52 PM
I would hazard to guess a scanner at that location prior to the flight would have alerted everyone about a radio station (whether legal or not makes no difference) bradcasting on that frequency.

I am sure such an alert would have prevented the pilot from risking his expensive and heavy model to an "iffy" flight at best.

The fact of the matter remains that a scanner was available after the fact. If it was available after the fact, why wasn't it before disaster struck? Absent mindedness? :confused:

Makes on wonder. :o

slipstick
05-29-2006, 06:13 PM
You seem to have ignored the rather important fact that the radio station in question only broadcast very occasionally on that frequency. That's why the large number of flights which took place on exactly the same frequency before the accident were not troubled. I've seen some good scanners but I've never seen one good enough to detect interference before the interference is transmitted.

BTW you keep going on about a scanner being available. A scanner was brought in FROM GERMANY after the event to help with the investigation. There was no scanner available for the club putting on the event IN HUNGARY (that's a different country) to use before the event. Apparently neither their national body (AMA equivalent) or their insurers required them to have a scanner and they didn't have one. Someone else in another country did have a scanner when it was required urgently. Just because one scanner exists somewhere in Europe (e.g. Germany) this does not mean that every single event being run anywhere in Europe (e.g. Hungary) will be able to use this one scanner. Europe is a bit too big for one scanner to cover the whole of it. The fact that a scanner was available in Germany AFTER the event does not mean that a scanner was available in Hungary for a week or more BEFORE the event.

Surely it's not that hard to understand ?

Steve

qban_flyer
05-29-2006, 06:46 PM
You seem to have ignored the rather important fact that the radio station in question only broadcast very occasionally on that frequency. That's why the large number of flights which took place on exactly the same frequency before the accident were not troubled. I've seen some good scanners but I've never seen one good enough to detect interference before the interference is transmitted.

BTW you keep going on about a scanner being available. A scanner was brought in FROM GERMANY after the event to help with the investigation. There was no scanner available for the club putting on the event IN HUNGARY (that's a different country) to use before the event. Apparently neither their national body (AMA equivalent) or their insurers required them to have a scanner and they didn't have one. Someone else in another country did have a scanner when it was required urgently. Just because one scanner exists somewhere in Europe (e.g. Germany) this does not mean that every single event being run anywhere in Europe (e.g. Hungary) will be able to use this one scanner. Europe is a bit too big for one scanner to cover the whole of it. The fact that a scanner was available in Germany AFTER the event does not mean that a scanner was available in Hungary for a week or more BEFORE the event.

Surely it's not that hard to understand ?

SteveAHHH!

The pilot came from Germany as well. His dad brougnt the scanner from Germany after the fact. If a scanner was available to his dad in Germany after the fact, it surely was availble before the fact as well. Why didn't he bring it? :confused:

In a weekend long event at one of the electric clubs I belong to, this weekend we had three privately owned scanners and one club furnished spectrum analizer. Of course, we live in wealthy America, we can't expect everyone to follow suit. :rolleyes:

What you "appear" to miss altogether is the fact that if a scanner was available in Germany to the man's dad before he took off for Hungary, he could have very easily brought it along.

Is that fact so difficult for you to understand? :confused:

airmail wf
05-29-2006, 06:49 PM
OK Steve, When was the last time the radio broadcaster turned on his radio?

Now you want me and everyone else to believe that in the whole of Hungary there wasn't a scanner available to this club. Two things wrong with this. First; The only way you would know this is if the club made a statement and said so. Covering there butts why they did not check the airways with a scanner. Second and most important; Why were they trying to find a scanner in the first place? Maybe because they knew of the problems with the airways.

Now really is that to tough to understand.

You seemed to have ignored the question about this club using a scanner at there next event. Do you think they will?

Twmaster
05-29-2006, 06:55 PM
You guys are un-freaking-believable.

Non of you -know- exactly what happened yet you all go on and on and on about it pointing fingers at each other.

Worse than a bunch of old women. Shameful.

:(

airmail wf
05-29-2006, 08:53 PM
You guys are un-freaking-believable.

Non of you -know- exactly what happened yet you all go on and on and on about it pointing fingers at each other.

Worse than a bunch of old women. Shameful.

:(

You do realize you are whining about a bunch of whiners. So who is worse?:rolleyes:

I didn't know we weren't aloud to argue our points with the information that we have available to us. Man if we have to wait for all the information to be in before we can talk about anything, this forum is going to be very quiet. But I do believe it is time to move on. I think all the people here have their own opinions and some see the light and some don't.
I'm going to go hang some laundry and go BS with all my women friends.

rcers
05-29-2006, 09:41 PM
How do you know that?

Simple he had full control of the airplane, the scanner would have showed no issues.

He would have flown the bad guys start broadcasting and the result is the same....

Now with that said - I get why a scanner is valuable. I understand they may have seen that signal earlier and done some investigation.

RC with spectators is a bit dangerous. I once had a servo lock (aileron) in one position. That went down past the pits in a club field parking lot. Hit a car, but a nice dent (it was a tiny .15 glow 2lb glow plane). I am really glad that didn't hit anyone. I don't think it would have killed them, but it just goes to show you stuff happens.

I was not there, I just know you can't make life, hobbies or anything 100% safe.

Mike

qban_flyer
05-30-2006, 12:33 AM
You do realize you are whining about a bunch of whiners. So who is worse?:rolleyes:

I didn't know we weren't aloud to argue our points with the information that we have available to us. Man if we have to wait for all the information to be in before we can talk about anything, this forum is going to be very quiet. But I do believe it is time to move on. I think all the people here have their own opinions and some see the light and some don't.
I'm going to go hang some laundry and go BS with all my women friends.I do thank you for telling it like it is. :)

And I do thank you for you clear powers of perception. You have hit the nail on its head. :)

Jason T
05-30-2006, 02:22 AM
Closing this thread per request of the thread starter.