ICASA have recently done a survey at Midrand Model Soarers field to ascertain what was causing some heavy interference on certain spots in the 35 Mhz band. It was found that ESKOM seemed to be causing the problem with arcing on some of their ultra high voltage power lines. I have requested a full report from ICASA. At present they state they have informed ESKOM of the problem. ICASA want to do another full test at the site before issuing a report. On receipt of that report then I will make it public.
Another site that seems to be experiencing some frequency related problems is JOMAC. This site is also near a heavy concentration of high voltage power cables. It could just be possible that the same sort of hassle could be happening there.
I am awaiting fault reports from pilots at JOMAC before initiating a survey there.
Dave Armitage
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
World Model Pylon Racing Championships -- Peter Eagle
Hey all pilots with any interest in our WC teams
You may know that SAMPRA as the pylon racing SIG of SAMAA currently has an official, 3 pilot South African team at the pylon racing world champs at AMA headquarters, Muncie, Indiana, USA.
The team of Trevor Budd, Andre Nortje and Russel van der Westhuizen as well as Wayne Wilcox and other helpers and supporters have spent huge amounts of time, money (their own) and effort to get to the world champs. The team has been at Muncie since late last week and have been using the time to practice and adjust their equipment to local conditions. (Elevation about 1000 feet or less, hot and humid climate at this time of year)
After official practise yesterday Trevor reports via SMS " Some times from today in Richards Bay like heat - Trevor 1:06 (66 seconds); Andre 1:09 (69 seconds) and Russel 1:12 (72 Seconds) Top 12 all running 57 to 60 seconds. Please let the guys know."
I then posed a question regarding reliability and repeatability as often the very fastest have issues getting in all their times and hence a slower but more reliable setup will make for better results in some cases. Trevor replied " We are getting there. Lots of broken pipes and engines in the beginning but we are now happy with the setup. A bit slower but reliable"
I trust that all pilots with the slightest interest in these amazingly fast, expensive and temperamental planes will wish our team all the best of luck.
I will post further updates as I receive them but the German team has a regular daily posting on http://www.rc-network.de/forum/showthread.php?t=73140
Update 27 June 2007 -- link to official web site here.
Later
Peter E
You may know that SAMPRA as the pylon racing SIG of SAMAA currently has an official, 3 pilot South African team at the pylon racing world champs at AMA headquarters, Muncie, Indiana, USA.
The team of Trevor Budd, Andre Nortje and Russel van der Westhuizen as well as Wayne Wilcox and other helpers and supporters have spent huge amounts of time, money (their own) and effort to get to the world champs. The team has been at Muncie since late last week and have been using the time to practice and adjust their equipment to local conditions. (Elevation about 1000 feet or less, hot and humid climate at this time of year)
After official practise yesterday Trevor reports via SMS " Some times from today in Richards Bay like heat - Trevor 1:06 (66 seconds); Andre 1:09 (69 seconds) and Russel 1:12 (72 Seconds) Top 12 all running 57 to 60 seconds. Please let the guys know."
I then posed a question regarding reliability and repeatability as often the very fastest have issues getting in all their times and hence a slower but more reliable setup will make for better results in some cases. Trevor replied " We are getting there. Lots of broken pipes and engines in the beginning but we are now happy with the setup. A bit slower but reliable"
I trust that all pilots with the slightest interest in these amazingly fast, expensive and temperamental planes will wish our team all the best of luck.
I will post further updates as I receive them but the German team has a regular daily posting on http://www.rc-network.de/forum/showthread.php?t=73140
Update 27 June 2007 -- link to official web site here.
Later
Peter E
Monday, June 25, 2007
Saturday, June 23, 2007
SAMAA Insurance Cover -- Piet le Roux
Piet makes some interesting comments here. I've asked Joe for a formal response from the SAMAA insurance broker but to date I have not had this. I'll post it when I get it. John
Like most of us I partake in this hobby for relaxation. Knowing that I am insured makes me more at ease while flying. But after reading INSURANCE SUMMERY in the March issue of SAMAA news and then reading the POLICY ON LODGING AND PROCESSING AN INSURANCE CLAIM issued by SAMAA I have a few questions about the policy.
The policy covers the association in respect of liability for injury or damage of property, arising out of the activities of the association and we are told that we are very fortunate to have this policy. I can appreciate that insurance in the aviation field is very expensive because of the high risk factor and the very expensive equipment involved. Most aircraft accidents also coincide with fatalities, very few people have been killed with model aircraft. To classify model flying as aviation in this case is nothing more than a sales pitch. The 10 million Rand cover sounds very impressive but the fact of the matter is that South African law does not allow for big liability claims like in the USA. To be successful with such a claim in the RSA you must first prove that the perpetrator could have foreseen the accident and did nothing to prevent it, or/and that he did not adhere to safety guide lines and therefore acted negligent. I would like to know what the biggest settlement claim in South Africa was when an accident occurred while nobody acted negligent? The problem is that the policy only covers the association if its members involved did not:
A) Fly reckless and dangerous.
B) Fly a model aircraft while under the influence of alcohol or judgment impairing drugs.
C) Operating a Model Aircraft which do not comply with the Manual of Procedures.
D) Intentionally fly over an active public thoroughfare, roads, over spectators or members of the public.
In other words did not act negligent.
So the 10 million cover now becomes a joke because there is absolutely no way that the association can be liable for that amount if no one acted negligent.
If the guidelines laid down by the association is found to be inadequate or the field registered by the association is found to be unsafe or/and there were not adequate signs to warn the public and as a result a liability claim against the association is successful, why should the member or members involved be responsible for payment of the excess amount? His club and the association are at fault and they should pay up. In any case remember it’s the association that’s insured and they are the policy holder so the association should pay the excess amount. If one takes in account the amount of member’s funds that was given to transformation in 2006-2007, it should be easy for the association to build up a reserve fund to pay any excess and assist members when an accident occurs.
The policy also does not cover the association against any accident involving a full size or manned aircraft because full-sized or manned aircraft have over riding right of way. This is unacceptable because any full-sized or manned aircraft that flies over a registered model airfield at a dangerous height is breaking the law. The model pilot have to keep his plane in sight at all times, if a full-size plane approaches from outside his field of view, he could react too late to avoid an accident. The plane could be a glider or had a dead stick, in which case he would not hear it coming. The model pilot could even be a deaf person.
The bottom line seems to be:
If an accident occurs while you were negligent or a court finds that you were negligent: you are not covered.
If the accident involves a full-size plane: you are not covered no matter what.
If you were not negligent: you are covered but you probably would not need it!
Piet Le Roux
Bloemfontein
Like most of us I partake in this hobby for relaxation. Knowing that I am insured makes me more at ease while flying. But after reading INSURANCE SUMMERY in the March issue of SAMAA news and then reading the POLICY ON LODGING AND PROCESSING AN INSURANCE CLAIM issued by SAMAA I have a few questions about the policy.
The policy covers the association in respect of liability for injury or damage of property, arising out of the activities of the association and we are told that we are very fortunate to have this policy. I can appreciate that insurance in the aviation field is very expensive because of the high risk factor and the very expensive equipment involved. Most aircraft accidents also coincide with fatalities, very few people have been killed with model aircraft. To classify model flying as aviation in this case is nothing more than a sales pitch. The 10 million Rand cover sounds very impressive but the fact of the matter is that South African law does not allow for big liability claims like in the USA. To be successful with such a claim in the RSA you must first prove that the perpetrator could have foreseen the accident and did nothing to prevent it, or/and that he did not adhere to safety guide lines and therefore acted negligent. I would like to know what the biggest settlement claim in South Africa was when an accident occurred while nobody acted negligent? The problem is that the policy only covers the association if its members involved did not:
A) Fly reckless and dangerous.
B) Fly a model aircraft while under the influence of alcohol or judgment impairing drugs.
C) Operating a Model Aircraft which do not comply with the Manual of Procedures.
D) Intentionally fly over an active public thoroughfare, roads, over spectators or members of the public.
In other words did not act negligent.
So the 10 million cover now becomes a joke because there is absolutely no way that the association can be liable for that amount if no one acted negligent.
If the guidelines laid down by the association is found to be inadequate or the field registered by the association is found to be unsafe or/and there were not adequate signs to warn the public and as a result a liability claim against the association is successful, why should the member or members involved be responsible for payment of the excess amount? His club and the association are at fault and they should pay up. In any case remember it’s the association that’s insured and they are the policy holder so the association should pay the excess amount. If one takes in account the amount of member’s funds that was given to transformation in 2006-2007, it should be easy for the association to build up a reserve fund to pay any excess and assist members when an accident occurs.
The policy also does not cover the association against any accident involving a full size or manned aircraft because full-sized or manned aircraft have over riding right of way. This is unacceptable because any full-sized or manned aircraft that flies over a registered model airfield at a dangerous height is breaking the law. The model pilot have to keep his plane in sight at all times, if a full-size plane approaches from outside his field of view, he could react too late to avoid an accident. The plane could be a glider or had a dead stick, in which case he would not hear it coming. The model pilot could even be a deaf person.
The bottom line seems to be:
If an accident occurs while you were negligent or a court finds that you were negligent: you are not covered.
If the accident involves a full-size plane: you are not covered no matter what.
If you were not negligent: you are covered but you probably would not need it!
Piet Le Roux
Bloemfontein
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
A proposal for Park Flyer regulations -- Alan Fraser
Preliminary thoughts on the Regulation and Control of Park flying in RSA.
1. Introduction:
Park flying is here to stay! The progress of technology in recent years in the areas of electric propultion, power sources, materials, construction methods and radio equipment, has made it possible to fly r/c models in much smaller spaces than we have been traditionally used to.
This has resulted in an ever increasing number of pilots flying their models from sports fields, open urban velt areas and even indoors in sports and school halls, from here the advent from "park" to "indoor" flying.
2. SAMAA and park/indoor flying:
SAMAA has the responsibility of regulating and controlling all r/c flying activities in the RSA. SAMAA has therefore started a process of looking onto the phenomena of park/indoor flying in an attempt to establish the ways and means for it`s members to participate legally in this fast growing dissipline of our hobby, in a safe and controlled manner at recognised flying sites with insurance cover and, without interfering with other RC flyers.
This regulation process obviously needs to be done in such a manner that the enthusiasm and growth of park/indoor flying is not dampened.
3. Definition of a park/indoor flyer:
"A small and light electric power driven aircraft that can be flown in a confined area such as sports fields or indoors in a hall".
4. Specification suggestions:
4.1. Aircraft:
Wingspan: 1,2m max.
Weight:1kg max including battery.
(Note: This specification will force a trade-off between the model type, size, mass, and the limits of the specification ie.: a glider type model will fit into the 1,2m wingspan, 1kg limit, but a power model might have a reduced wingspan for the same mass.)
4.2. Helicopters:
Main rotor diameter: 800mm total max.
Weight: 1kg max with battery.
4.3. Propulsion:
Electric power only
4.4. Flying sites:
"Field" size app. 100m x 50m (outdoor.) Hall size app. 35m x 20m (indoor.) ie.: Rugby, soccer type sports field.
*Park flying sites are to be at least 2,5km apart, and at least 5km from normal R/C flying sites.
4.5. Airspace:
All flying to be done within the perimeter of the field used, to a max. of 50m high.
*This is a very important restriction as it will ensure that the pilots fly the type, size and weight of aircraft that is within their proficiency and skill level, to stay within the boundaries of the field that they are using.
5. Management and control:
5.1. In time all park/indoor flying sites will have to be registered with SAMAA as such.
5.2. Each site will have to be under the control of a club committee or a responsible person.
5.3. Normal SAMAA safety rules are to apply, ie.: Frequency control, spectator lines, no-fly areas, pilot proficiencies, SAMAA membership, insurance cover etc.
6. Process:
6.1. Publish the draft suggestions in the SAMAA news and website for comment by members, refine the document to final publication.
6.2. Draw up a database of sites being used for park/indoor flying.
6.3. Register as many of these sites as possible with SAMAA.
6.4. Encourage as many people as possible to make use of these registered sites, and to stick to the aircraft specifications, through SAMAA news, website and distribution of a SAMAA park/indoor flying leaflet through the dealer network.
7. Conclusion:
We have to start somewhere. Please address your comments to: Allen Fraser, the Chairman of the special committee on Park Flying and the SAMAA Dealer Association
Tel:012-362 4925 • Fax:012-362 4926
for what it is worth my comment to Alan is here. John
1. Introduction:
Park flying is here to stay! The progress of technology in recent years in the areas of electric propultion, power sources, materials, construction methods and radio equipment, has made it possible to fly r/c models in much smaller spaces than we have been traditionally used to.
This has resulted in an ever increasing number of pilots flying their models from sports fields, open urban velt areas and even indoors in sports and school halls, from here the advent from "park" to "indoor" flying.
2. SAMAA and park/indoor flying:
SAMAA has the responsibility of regulating and controlling all r/c flying activities in the RSA. SAMAA has therefore started a process of looking onto the phenomena of park/indoor flying in an attempt to establish the ways and means for it`s members to participate legally in this fast growing dissipline of our hobby, in a safe and controlled manner at recognised flying sites with insurance cover and, without interfering with other RC flyers.
This regulation process obviously needs to be done in such a manner that the enthusiasm and growth of park/indoor flying is not dampened.
3. Definition of a park/indoor flyer:
"A small and light electric power driven aircraft that can be flown in a confined area such as sports fields or indoors in a hall".
4. Specification suggestions:
4.1. Aircraft:
Wingspan: 1,2m max.
Weight:1kg max including battery.
(Note: This specification will force a trade-off between the model type, size, mass, and the limits of the specification ie.: a glider type model will fit into the 1,2m wingspan, 1kg limit, but a power model might have a reduced wingspan for the same mass.)
4.2. Helicopters:
Main rotor diameter: 800mm total max.
Weight: 1kg max with battery.
4.3. Propulsion:
Electric power only
4.4. Flying sites:
"Field" size app. 100m x 50m (outdoor.) Hall size app. 35m x 20m (indoor.) ie.: Rugby, soccer type sports field.
*Park flying sites are to be at least 2,5km apart, and at least 5km from normal R/C flying sites.
4.5. Airspace:
All flying to be done within the perimeter of the field used, to a max. of 50m high.
*This is a very important restriction as it will ensure that the pilots fly the type, size and weight of aircraft that is within their proficiency and skill level, to stay within the boundaries of the field that they are using.
5. Management and control:
5.1. In time all park/indoor flying sites will have to be registered with SAMAA as such.
5.2. Each site will have to be under the control of a club committee or a responsible person.
5.3. Normal SAMAA safety rules are to apply, ie.: Frequency control, spectator lines, no-fly areas, pilot proficiencies, SAMAA membership, insurance cover etc.
6. Process:
6.1. Publish the draft suggestions in the SAMAA news and website for comment by members, refine the document to final publication.
6.2. Draw up a database of sites being used for park/indoor flying.
6.3. Register as many of these sites as possible with SAMAA.
6.4. Encourage as many people as possible to make use of these registered sites, and to stick to the aircraft specifications, through SAMAA news, website and distribution of a SAMAA park/indoor flying leaflet through the dealer network.
7. Conclusion:
We have to start somewhere. Please address your comments to: Allen Fraser, the Chairman of the special committee on Park Flying and the SAMAA Dealer Association
Tel:012-362 4925 • Fax:012-362 4926
for what it is worth my comment to Alan is here. John
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
