• RCaero3.jpg
  • RCaero.jpg
  • RCaero4.jpg
  • RCaero2.jpg
  • RCaero5.jpg

1. Purpose of the article:

The main purpose of this article is to raise awareness that safety standards at flying fields can vary greatly and to ask the question why? The following example illustrates this variance and points out an important consequence of it.

Safety Variance Examples:

1. Noticing that a particular model pilot had a unique way of protecting himself from the propeller arc of his aircraft by ensuring that he never stood in front of his aircraft while starting the engine, we asked why he was using this very thorough system and he explained that he injured his hand very seriously in a pits incident some years previously. This very serious injury changed the pilot's view on using restraints in the pits forever and his unique system of restraint now means that the incident cannot be repeated for this pilot.

2. Contrast this with the other extreme where model pilots can be seen using no restraints with their model aircraft.

Consequence.

A most important aspect of this, is that newcomers to the hobby often need guidance in safety matters and such guidance from their club depends in the first place on the club's own safety standards. Should these standards be less than ideal, then the newcomer could easily be at risk of repeating well known injuries all too familiar to experienced model pilots

 

 

2. Relevant definitions for this article.

Club Constitution.

A club constitution is set of principals drawn up by the committees of model flying clubs by which their clubs are governed.

Safety Code.

Safety codes are codes of good practice on safety matters from within model flying clubs or from outside bodies such as the BMFA, where the safety related data given, are typically acquired from accumulated experience on the subject. As such, Model flying Safety Codes are not rules or mandates but recommendations on safety within model flying drawn up for the benefit of members of model flying clubs, so that they can decide what codes if any need to be embodied in their club rules. 

Club Rules on Safety. 

Club rules on safety are decided by the club membership and their committee. Implementation or changes to club rules are decided by membership votes, typically at annual general meetings of their clubs. Where such votes are carried, rules or changes to rules are then adopted as mandates for their members.  Failure by members to implement their club rules usually results in consequential action by the club as they endeavour to drive safety standards forwards.

 

3. Responsibilities of model pilots and their clubs.

It's important to note that model flying is a hobby, and as such, safety within the hobby cannot be as rigorously controlled as elsewhere, e.g. Health and Safety at Work.

The mandates that CAP393 Air Navigation Order 2016 imply, are wide reaching and if applied as rules to the nth degree in model flying, could easily make the hobby unmanageable. That said, how model clubs and their membership apply the BMFA's Safety Codes is their responsibility but typically clubs will write Safety Codes up as rules for their membership where they consider the codes are sufficiently important to be a mandate. This freedom of choice leads to the diversity in the way matters of safety are handled across the country, (GB), and for that matter internationally we suspect, in model flying. 

With these safety responsibilities stated then, the following documents apply:

 

1. CAP393: The Air Navigation Order 2016 (ANO)

2. The Civil Aviation Publication 658, (CAP658) 

3. The British Model Flying Association's Safety Codes. 

Links to these documents are given below, but in essence:

With regard to model flying, 

CAP393: The Air Navigation Order 2016 (ANO) states:

Endangering safety of an aircraft 240.

A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft.

Endangering safety of any person or property 241.

A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property. 

These legal requirements, which cover all model flying, have led to CAP 658, also issued by the Civil Aviation Authority, (CAA). Much of the content of CAP 658 is based on the BMFA's Safety Codes which have been developed over many years. While not legally binding, CAP 658's recommendations for model pilots provide a guide to what would be considered reasonable practice in the event of a model flyer being prosecuted by the CAA under the ANO

(Model pilots should also be aware of articles 94 and 95 as the content can be relevant: Small unmanned aircraft 94. Small unmanned surveillance aircraft 95.)

All this said, it will be clear that if the BMFA Safety Codes are carefully followed by clubs and their membership and implemented as Club Rules where necessary, then the chances of contravening articles 240 and 241 of the ANO will be greatly reduced, if not eliminated.

Link 1 ANO: ANO

Link 2 CAP658

Link 3 BMFA Handbook & Safety Codes:BMFA-Handbook

 

4. The club's approach to safety.

The two approaches shown below show the variance in approach which the model pilot will notice by comparing different club's rules and constitutions, which are often published on the web.

The reactive approach

Such an approach will have very few rules and perhaps just a recommendation to members to read and implement the BMFA's Safety Codes, then a reactive process after a safety incident, e.g. if a model pilot's hand is injured, a committee meeting is held, and decisions taken as to the way forward. 

The proactive approach.

This approach will typically embody key aspects of the BMFA's Safety Codes as club rules. Further it will typically take all new members through these rules on joining, so that it is clear to them at the moment of joining how the club handles safety, i.e. a more complex proactive process. In addition an Accident Book is typically kept so that the committee can monitor their own effectiveness at their annual review of safety matters.

The two tables below show the pros and cons of each of these differing approaches to club safety.

Reactive Case.

Pros. Cons.

Easy to implement.

Short text in the club's documentation is typically all that is needed

 

 Allows injuries to take place before doing anything.

Can foster the misconception that this is why we have insurance, just for such unfortunate eventualities. 

Requires little effort.

Dealing reactively with safety incidents vastly reduces the effort involved.

Does not engender strong safety processes in trainees from the very start, i.e. when it is needed most. 

Will not scare members off, especially new members without experience of flying field injuries.

With no experience of model flying it is very easy for trainees to fail to grasp the risks they are under when they join a club for the first time and as a result will see no shortcomings in the reactive approach.

 Does not encourage established flyers with entrenched safety issues to change.

Saves time from the club's perspective, i.e. less to do means time is saved.

Accidents can occur and go unreported. 

This can promote a false belief of having an exemplary safety record when in fact there is no record.

 

Proactive Case. 

Pros. Cons.

Helps to prevent avoidable known injury types. 

Risk avoidance is an established process in industry. It is achieved by training and is known to be very effective  in reducing accidents.

 Difficult to implement.
Engenders strong safety awareness in trainees from the very start, i.e. when it is needed most.  Requires significant effort.

Encourages established flyers to deal with entrenched safety issues.

Good practices by experienced flyers will cascade down to others.

Can scare some members away. 

 

 

If implemented carefully, the approach can achieve total buy in by the membership, i.e. the membership sees that the club cares about their safety and makes continual effort to look after it.

Engenders high safety awareness throughout the club.

 Takes a lot of club time to implement well.

 

 

5. Benefits of a rule based system

Rule based systems designed to keep people safe in the workplace and on the roads for example, are in use globally. The benefits of these rule based systems are well known and statistically proven, i.e. they reduce deaths and injuries due to accidents considerably.

Understanding why rule based systems, which usually include consequences for breaking rules, and escalating consequences for breaking rules repeatedly, (which many clubs make clear in their constitutions), can help model pilots too.

Here are a few examples of why such systems can bring safety benefits to model pilots.

Like a motor car, a ten pound weight model aeroplane flying at 40 mph. can cause fatal injuries.

Like a circular saw, a propeller attached to a 91 size engine can deliver devastating life changing injuries.

Like any serious fire hazard, a LiPo flare can deliver life changing injuries and damage property.

Injuries like those mentioned above can be reduced in number by effective implementation of rule based systems.

It is of course impractical to deal with all of these aspects of safety with a rule based system, which leads to the question which aspects of the BMFA Safety Codes, if any, should be translated into club rules?

 

 

6. BMFA Safety Codes.

To show just how important our BMFA Safety Codes are, a short selection are written in tabulated form and abbreviated in the table below in order to show the worst case consequences that could occur if the Safety Code concerned is ignored. To do this, the relevance of each code is emphasised in terms of CAP658's incident definitions, namely: 

1. An accident is where a person suffers a fatal or serious injury as a result of contact with any part of any model including parts that have become detached from the model. Incident Definition A

2. A serious incident means an incident involving circumstances indicating that an accident nearly occurred. Incident Definition SI

3. An incident is an occurrence that has the potential for an accident or a serious incident to occur. Incident Definition I

 

Please note the CAP 658 ratings given below are all worst case. This is deliberate, in order to show how bad the consequences could be for failing to be aware of the risks involved.

 

BMFA Safety Code  Members Handbook (2017 Edition) reference. Page.   Sub Heading Item  CAP658 typical worst case incident rating   Comments
Pre flight checks 42 General Model Safety  (b.)  I Failure to attend to this safety code typically results in damaged aircraft. 
Rounded Spinners, safety propeller nuts 42 General Model Safety  (c.)  A Pointed metal spinners can lead to serious injuries or worse. 
Restraints  42 General Model Safety   (k.)  A Many accidents are on record, some very serious and life changing.
Face out of propeller arc at all times. 42 General Model Safety   (l.)  A Blade shedding could lead to devastating injuries.
Before takeoff checks. 43  Radio Control Flying safety.  (c.)   Failure to attend to this can lead to aircraft crashes and injury.
Do not taxi into or out of the pits.  43  Radio Control Flying safety.  (g.)   A   If ignored, injuries could result.
 Before takeoff checks. In particular never takeoff or land towards other pilots, spectators or the pits area. 43 Radio Control Flying safety.  (h.)   A  If ignored, injuries could result.
 "Do not over fly..." List. 43  Radio Control Flying safety.   (k.)   If ignored, injuries could result.

 

 

7: Risk Assessment.

While formal risk assessments are unrealistic where model flying is concerned, devastating injuries can still occur from accidents within the hobby, so consideration of the risk assessment process is still worthwhile if only from an from an understanding perspective.

The process works though a series of logical steps and is dynamic in that the approach is continually modified and updated as new risks to personnel become clear.

The basic steps are these:

1. Identify the hazards.

2. Decide who might be harmed and how.

3. Evaluate the risks and decide how to handle them optimally.

4. Record all results.

5. Review regularly and update as needed.

 

 

8. What can members and their clubs do to improve their safety and the safety of visitors at their flying field.

Given that formal risk assessments are unrealistic, then the following proactive steps could be considered by all clubs to help minimize accidents : 

 Appoint a Safety Officer whose duties could include:

1. The upkeep of an accident book so that, members and their committees can have visibility of their cub's safety performance.

2. Performing an annual review of Safety which could be read out to the membership at the AGM.

3. Addressing the membership at the AGM to ask if they are satisfied with their safety and the safety of others at their club, by polling members for any safety concerns.

4. If concerns are raised at the AGM, the committee, after consideration of the safety points raised, could report back to the membership via the Safety Officer with their decisions on the members' concerns.

5. Letting it be known at the AGM that Safety is every member's concern and that any unsafe operation should always be skillfully and considerately handled by all members.

6. Defining an accident handling system for the membership, so that members realise that any steps they take are not unilateral but rather needed and expected by their club.

7. Reviewing Club Rules on safety annually, adding new rules where it is considered necessary.

 

9. Conclusion. 

Ultimately safety at the flying field is the responsibility of the individual model pilot and their clubs and there are no mandates other than those written into club rules.

How model pilots and their clubs implement their safety is entirely up to them. It is precisely this freedom which leads to the disparity of approaches to this important subject.

This article seeks to raise awareness of this disparity so that model pilots may become more informed and so are better able to decide how to proceed with their own safety needs. Perhaps nowhere is this more important than with new club members who will be particularly unaware of much of this material, and so only pick it up very gradually.

You have no rights to post comments. We want to encourage wide participation in RC Aerobase, unfortunately there's people out there that will abuse an open system. Please register by following the link below the login fields and after your registration has been accepted you will be able to add your comment.