and I never heard about it?
RC Jet crashes into apartment complex in Taiwan
On July 3, a turbine powered Rafael jet crashed into an apartment complex in Taiwan, resulted in a fire that caused evacuation of all residents. The crash started a fire in the 28th floor which destroyed a whole unit. Cause of crash is unknown, as the pilot is a seasoned veteran. As a result, the pilot was detained for possible public safety charges, and one of the last two flying field was immediately closed by the government.
So, was anybody nearby? I can’t believe I never heard about it? Did it even make the taipei times?
I’m guessing we would have heard about it if it was an actual, full-sized jet with a pilot, bombs and/or passengers. As it is, nobody actually got hurt. You couldn’t say the same thing about the scooter accident I saw on Wednesday morning(it’s amazing what happens when someone decides to drive up the wrong side of a busy street and another monkey doesn’t look to the right before turning right onto said busy street) but that certainly won’t get much coverage.
Gosh, you sure do not watch the local news. They were calling it “Taiwan’s 911”. :loco: :fume:
It was right here in Xindian. Strange thing, the guy was flying the thing along the riverpark in Yonghe, so, the little bugger covered quite a distance.
I actually live in that apartment complex and we had been complaining about the planes ever since moving in (more about the noise at 8am on Sunday than the chance of them crashing into us).
I wasn’t home when it happened but when i got home in the morning there were fire crews and police everywhere, with Taiwanese people crying and screaming into TV cameras.
I think a couple of apartments were completely burned out but as far as I know noone was hurt.
You live there? We’re neighbours then, separated only by the Bitan bridge. An old lady got killed, by the way, according to another Flobber who lives in that complex.
Sometimes I think I actually know rather little about the world in which I live. There exist remote control planes which weigh 30lbs and have jet engines? That are capable of gutting apartments? Why? What are they for? People find this fun?
Who is allowed to fly the things, either here or in the west? Just anyone, I suppose, no test even? What about air traffic control?
[quote=“smithsgj”]Sometimes I think I actually know rather little about the world in which I live. There exist remote control planes which weigh 30lbs and have jet engines? That are capable of gutting apartments? Why? What are they for? People find this fun?
Who is allowed to fly the things, either here or in the west? Just anyone, I suppose, no test even? What about air traffic control?
Weird.[/quote]
Thanks for the responses everyone.
I need to know more about these planes too. Taiwan never ceases to amaze me.
Normally anyone. In Germany you do need a real pilot license though if the weight is more than 25kg.
Usually there are dedicated “air fields” for this purpose, and usually they are away from areas where the risk of harm is high, like major streets/highways, residential areas etc. or where it could be a nuisance to people. Exceptions do exist, as proven by this incident and what Mugatu said (about the noise).
yeah I remember the headlines…huge 9/11’s everywhere…I thought it was a real plane at first. Everyone freaked out…but then again, the also send BURNING lanterns into the sky :loco:
Normally anyone. In Germany you do need a real pilot license though if the weight is more than 25kg.
Usually there are dedicated “air fields” for this purpose, and usually they are away from areas where the risk of harm is high, like major streets/highways, residential areas etc. or where it could be a nuisance to people. Exceptions do exist, as proven by this incident and what Mugatu said (about the noise).
Thanks Rascal. Sounds like a funny sort of hobby to me… what’s wrong with flying a kite?
Of course the apartment was not gutted intentionally, if it had it would have been arson and nothing to do with the risk associated with the hobby. Which risk, it seems, is way too high! At least with driving cars you’ve nominally had some training before you crash into someone.
Seeing that link someone posted up above for rcforums.com, it becomes clear that none of the guys talking about the situation there have any clue how Taiwan works. Sometimes I forget that not everyone understands what a strange place Taiwan is.
Nothing wrong with flying a kite, I don’t recall myself saying that.
Weak analogy at best, and if you read what I wrote you will find that there countries that have restrictions in place, but this is Taiwan and if you have been here a while you will know what that means. So blame the idiots that designated the space in front of the apartment as airfield for RC planes.
Furthermore I disagree that the risk is “way too high” as you put it, or how often have you heard about RC planes causing fires or killing people? Can’t be that often because until a few days ago you didn’t even know such things exist.
Nothing wrong with flying a kite, I don’t recall myself saying that.
Weak analogy at best, and if you read what I wrote you will find that there countries that have restrictions in place, but this is Taiwan and if you have been here a while you will know what that means. So blame the idiots that designated the space in front of the apartment as airfield for RC planes.
Furthermore I disagree that the risk is “way too high” as you put it, or how often have you heard about RC planes causing fires or killing people? Can’t be that often because until a few days ago you didn’t even know such things exist.[/quote]
I know you didn’t say there was anything wrong with flying a kite. I was just suggesting it as a safer alternative.
I can’t actually see what is wrong with the learning-to-drive analogy. In both cases the person is in control of a piece of fairly heavy machinery that is capable of causing a lot of damage on impact. Out of control, the r/c planes are I guess just about as dangerous as an out of control car. You are right to say that I only recently heard about r/c planes, but I have heard a certain amount about the problems cars can cause when they are not driven properly, including cases where they are driven by unqualified people.
If I made an analogy with situations where piloted, real planes fly into buildings, would that have been more satisfactory to you? Is there any reason at all to suspect that impacts of that kind will happen with less frequency in the case of r/c planes (taking into account the time that planes of both sorts are in the air). Not only does it strike me that impacts are more likely in the r/c case; also, it is certainly true that air accidents (like traffic accidents) are seen as an acceptable risk, because travel is a necessary thing. Does that make sense? The hobby is merely a hobby, and hobbies that present a real risk to the life and property of non-participants should not, in my opinion, be allowed.
The Taiwanese passion for tiandeng (sky lanterns) has been mentioned on this thread. Most right-minded westerners would, I think, be in favour of a ban. I am wondering how much evidence there is that sky lanterns represent a greater potential risk to the public than do r/c planes?
(You mentioned that one country, Germany, has some sort of test requirement before a person can be in charge of an r/c plane, but only for particularly heavy models. You did not in any way give the impression that Taiwan was unique in allowing just anybody to be in charge of a plane of any weight. Are there not even any age restrictions here? I noticed on our campus sports ground the other day that users are banned from flying r/c planes – just as well, as it’s more or less surrounded by university buildings!)
I dunno about you but if my hobby is flying RC planes I am not interested in alternative suggestions, because if kite flying would be of interest to me I would do that (too).
Cars often cause more harm then RC planes, simply based on the fact that you have people sitting in them. And as I mentioned usually RC airfields are located where they should not pose much danger. Sure, RC planes can cause harm but those are rare occurances that there is IMHO no need to ban the entire hobby; a license would not help because the planes mostly crash due to technical problems rather than “pilot” error.
Well, no. Real planes obviously can and do cause more harm when they crash. Comparing a remote controlled plane to real things is IMO always flawed.
In that case you have to ban a lot of hobbies, starting with riding a bicyle.
Dunno, but I doubt you will find any statistics on that.
I don’t know if there are any regulations in Taiwan but as repeatedly said the location of the airfield was certainly a reason why the risk was higher here and contributed to the extend of the damage. The university may have imposed the ban without that there is a law against it, after all it’s their property so they can impose such regulations as they like.
In Germany the airfields are normally located away from residential areas, highways or airports, one reason being safety the other one being noise pollution. Most fields are also restricted to clubs that have an appropiate insurance and there are notices to visitors about the dangers, i.e. if you stay there to watch you have agreed that you do so at your own risk. Those regulations are applied regardless of the size and weight of the models.
:fume: