GOOD ON YOU KEVIN!
I couldn't agree more.
| RC Tanks Australia Forum http://www.rctanksaustralia.com/forum/ | |
| ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRIL http://www.rctanksaustralia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=846 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | King Tigerman [ Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRIL |
Dear MBRCTC Members, It is with great disappointment I have to advise you all that the MBRCTC will not be attending the next club outing at Coolum on Sunday 27th April. Here is a copy of the message Mark sent out via sms: Dear members with regards to the show at Coolum, the club will not be attending this is due to them requesting guarantee of certification on all of our transmitters following a crash at the airfield recently, David Sipos has been in discussion with them but they are demanding the guarantee as we cannot do this we are left with no option to withdraw from the event, please contact me for further details if reqd. Gary |
|
| Author: | Phyrephish [ Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRI |
Dear All This certification of transmitters is complete and utter BULLSHIT. Seriously these Aero clubs have NO FUCKING idea. Run by morons without a neuron in their collective skulls Elitist ASSHOLES the lot of them. They are abusing the privileges given to them by councils to set up their own personal fiefdoms. Rant over P-fish |
|
| Author: | King Tigerman [ Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRI |
GOOD ON YOU KEVIN! I couldn't agree more.
|
|
| Author: | scalawag [ Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRI |
Well said Kevin. What a completely ludicrous situation. 
|
|
| Author: | Phyrephish [ Mon Apr 21, 2014 9:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ANZAC MILITARY SPECTACULAR COOLUM CANCELLATION 27th APRI |
Thanks guys A little more level headed approach. The next time this issue arises think of these points: 1. There is no "evidence", no standard, scientifically approved testing whereby any of the radios in question have cause other radios to fail. 2.4 gHz doesn't operate in a way like previous crystal based systems. 2. Electronics that require the CE or C tick approval must go through "testing" by a approved agency. This costs big $$. If I had to get MAKO approved with a CE sticker this would of cost more than my entire profit on MAKO to date. Electronics is changing so fast and companies are updating their designs regularly. To have something approved that may be "revised" a few months later is problematic. 3. Just about everything these days is wireless, phones, iPads, Androids, hell even my camera is wireless. If a "crash" were to happen due to interference how can anyone possibly pin down a cause and say with 100% sureity "yep that device caused it"? Further let's contemplate the issue of range. There isn't any 1 km "Radio Exclusion Zone" around any aero club field. Any decent radio these days has at least a 1 km range. You could be 1 km away and fly a plane over any aero club. It is a rule that would be simply impossible to enforce if it were actually an issue. 4. Human nature, pride and maintaining face. If I were to have built a $6000 jet and it crashed. The FIRST thing I would do would be to find something to lay the blame upon. Heaven forbid that is would have been MY FAULT. No it could not have been my fault I spent thousands of dollars, both my model and I are superior to anything (or anyone) that spent less. This is plain old human nature. I admit to this myself. The number of times I've made a PCB and it not work, my first though is to blame the Chinese manufacturing process. 99.99% of the time it turns out to have been MY FAULT entirely.  5. As a part consequence of point 2. Electronics is moving so rapidly and when you factor in the rise of "open source". Not even Governments can keep up with any legislation. I may have a radio of brand "X" BUT it may be using the TX and RX electronics of Brand "Y" OR it could be using BOTH brand "X" AND "Y". Heck it may not even be using a brand I may have written my own coding. It may not even be operating on 2.4gHz at all. I can't even keep up. To accommodate such requests ONLY perpetuates this myth and that is a bad thing. Cheers Kevin G |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |