Dues increase coming? 1 million spent on government relations.....
09-04-2015, 05:56 PM
#1127
He hasn't shown that is isn't o/k with others opinion, in fact he's repeatedly said that opinions aren't the problem, it's the statements of fact that are really nothing more than opinion. Like this for example:
"..Simply because the vast majority of drones sold are not (and probably never will be) AMA members...."
Factually, that statement lacks credibility as there is no way for that party to know who the vast majority of drones are sold to, nor whether they will be members of AMA. He can tout his connections with the industry and his "private" conversations with the who's who of the hobby (that he won't name of course), but he simply has no proof to back up or validate what he has written as fact.
"..Simply because the vast majority of drones sold are not (and probably never will be) AMA members...."
Factually, that statement lacks credibility as there is no way for that party to know who the vast majority of drones are sold to, nor whether they will be members of AMA. He can tout his connections with the industry and his "private" conversations with the who's who of the hobby (that he won't name of course), but he simply has no proof to back up or validate what he has written as fact.
Astro
09-04-2015, 06:03 PM
#1130
Well, if you are an AMA member, and the AMA bans drones (as some are requesting of them) then you wouldn't be inclined to buy one if you couldn't fly it at your AMA club field. Now, the drone manufacturer looses a sale and the traditional model aircarft manufacturer picks up that sale....
09-04-2015, 06:06 PM
#1131
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
. Better? No need to implore, just ask nicely.
If you don't see how you're questions above indicate you don't agree with the quoted persons opinions...not much I can do to show you, other than quote them again. See it now?
09-04-2015, 06:13 PM
#1132
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Hmm.. IF there were 500,000 (not stating this figure as fact, just using the figure that has been mentioned here a few times) drone units sold (this year alone) and every AMA member (175,000 give or take) bought one this year, that would leave 325,000 NON AMA members as drone owners. To me, that constitutes a vast majority.
Astro
Astro
No intent there other than to smile, it's fun! I'll just note that there are a lot of "if's" there, lots of speculation and conjecture and hypotheticals in general, coming from the average joe to the well placed industry insider in this thread (and others). I personally know a new AMA member (who signed up at our clubs suggestion) that has 4 of these "drones". I think those poor drone pilots are as addicted as heli and fixed wing addicts, they rarely have just one.
Point is, at the end of the day.....aw heck, I forget what the point is. Gotta pack up some planes and stuff for some flying tomorrow. A welcome mini heat wave in the Northeast allowing for some blue sky yet warm flying, no rain in sight.
happy flying to all this extended weekend.
09-04-2015, 06:18 PM
#1133
To you. Made perfect sense to me.
,
because of all the bad press and imminent regulation that they are bringing to others that are not interested in drones!
Not for me.
Quads are quads. drones are drones. some quads are drones and some drones are quads. Just because one doesn't like the negative connotation of a word, it doesn't mean one can re-define it!
Astro
Why would you not want to bring the Drone folks into the mainstream Model Aviation Community
because of all the bad press and imminent regulation that they are bringing to others that are not interested in drones!
that just has "win" written all over it for everybody.
Frankly I find the word "Drone" to be a negative thing marketed by the media to create hype, I find Quads as being more appropriate. Just my opinion.
Astro
09-04-2015, 06:32 PM
#1136
I much prefer to stick to the facts during a spirited debate, just so it doesn't turn into an argument!
Astro
09-04-2015, 06:41 PM
#1137
Well, if you are an AMA member, and the AMA bans drones (as some are requesting of them) then you wouldn't be inclined to buy one if you couldn't fly it at your AMA club field. Now, the drone manufacturer looses a sale and the traditional model aircarft manufacturer picks up that sale....
That right there is some TWIZTED logic!
Astro
09-04-2015, 06:52 PM
#1138
I am following you so far. Yep, I'm an AMA member...
OOPS! you just lost me!!! I am not inclined to buy one now, nor would I if they were "banned" by the AMA (I don't recall anyone here calling for the AMA to "ban" drones.) (If they did, pardon my mistake, would you kindly point to where they called for a "ban"? ) It is also a FACT that the vast MAJORITY of my club members DO NOT OWN DRONES, either!
So, is this one of the facts that you have been asking for???
Astro
and the AMA bans drones (as some are requesting of them) then you wouldn't be inclined to buy one if you couldn't fly it at your AMA club field.
Now, the drone manufacturer looses a sale and the traditional model aircarft manufacturer picks up that sale....
Astro
09-04-2015, 07:01 PM
#1139
Originally Posted by Duncman 
With all respect. I come into contact with a lot of RC'ers in every facet of the hobby and I have never heard even a whisper of a suggestion the Drone folks branch off into their own organization. I made a post earlier on this forum about our club bringing in 15 drone pilots, that is a possible $1,875 initiation fee plus annual dues of $750.00 a year and then they want to hold competitions with the proceeds going to the club, and they won't even put wear and tear on our runway, added benefit of AMA membership. Where in the world would the logic be to turn them away by telling them they don't fall into the realm of Model Aviation when all the while the basic definition of Model Aviation speaks directly to Drones and on that note, everything we currently fly either fixed or rotary wing is in and of itself the very basic definition of a Drone. I really don't mean to be mean or nasty but IMHO that 3rd paragraph of yours is about as non-productive a statement as I've ever read. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
+1 as they say....
You're spot on, not even remotely wrong with your comments. It's funny how myopic a persons viewpoint can be when they surround themselves with like minded people, who all feel the same way. To consider a different point of viewpoint isn't in the cards.
You're spot on, not even remotely wrong with your comments. It's funny how myopic a persons viewpoint can be when they surround themselves with like minded people, who all feel the same way. To consider a different point of viewpoint isn't in the cards.
Myopic much?
Astro
09-04-2015, 07:29 PM
#1142
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, if you are an AMA member, and the AMA bans drones (as some are requesting of them) then you wouldn't be inclined to buy one if you couldn't fly it at your AMA club field. Now, the drone manufacturer looses a sale and the traditional model aircarft manufacturer picks up that sale....
First, I do not advocate for a drone ban, and never have (and I have not seen anyone here advocating this ban either). I REPEAT TO THE DEAF, OR THE TOO OBTUSE to understand the last 4, 5 or 6 times I wrote it: drones can do cool stuff when used responsibly, and they are here to stay (unless banned). It is however my opinion that they should create they own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused, and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of drones weather real or perceived, is aimed at drones, and not model airplanes. We have no reason to accept being lumped together with these.
Second, the few aeromodelers who happen to fly quads do not represent the majority of drone operators. If a drone operator cannot buy a drone, it absolutely does not mean they will buy a toy airplane instead. There is absolutely no correlation.
09-04-2015, 07:51 PM
#1143
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To you. Made perfect sense to me.
,
because of all the bad press and imminent regulation that they are bringing to others that are not interested in drones!
Not for me.
Quads are quads. drones are drones. some quads are drones and some drones are quads. Just because one doesn't like the negative connotation of a word, it doesn't mean one can re-define it!
Astro
,
because of all the bad press and imminent regulation that they are bringing to others that are not interested in drones!
Not for me.
Quads are quads. drones are drones. some quads are drones and some drones are quads. Just because one doesn't like the negative connotation of a word, it doesn't mean one can re-define it!
Astro
09-04-2015, 07:56 PM
#1144
That is ridiculous!
First, I do not advocate for a drone ban, and never have (and I have not seen anyone here advocating this ban either). I REPEAT TO THE DEAF, OR THE TOO OBTUSE to understand the last 4, 5 or 6 times I wrote it: drones can do cool stuff when used responsibly, and they are here to stay (unless banned). It is however my opinion that they should create they own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused, and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of drones weather real or perceived, is aimed at drones, and not model airplanes. We have no reason to accept being lumped together with these.
Second, the few aeromodelers who happen to fly quads do not represent the majority of drone operators.
Are you implying quads are drones? If quads are not drones then there is no corolation.
If a drone operator cannot buy a drone, it absolutely does not mean they will buy a toy airplane instead. There is absolutely no correlation.
First, I do not advocate for a drone ban, and never have (and I have not seen anyone here advocating this ban either). I REPEAT TO THE DEAF, OR THE TOO OBTUSE to understand the last 4, 5 or 6 times I wrote it: drones can do cool stuff when used responsibly, and they are here to stay (unless banned). It is however my opinion that they should create they own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused, and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of drones weather real or perceived, is aimed at drones, and not model airplanes. We have no reason to accept being lumped together with these.
Second, the few aeromodelers who happen to fly quads do not represent the majority of drone operators.
Are you implying quads are drones? If quads are not drones then there is no corolation.
If a drone operator cannot buy a drone, it absolutely does not mean they will buy a toy airplane instead. There is absolutely no correlation.
That is because some (not all) of the AMA VP's and executives are behaving like royalties and feel that we should be more like subjects, and not really members.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
It certainly is ridiculous.
Please accept my apologies, I misunderstood. You don't want to ban drones, you simply don't consider them "model avaition" (your post above). As such, they don't belong in the AMA. If they can't be in the AMA becuase they are not "model aviation", then they can't join AMA chartered clubs and fly at their fields. You're correct, that's not a ban at all. That's just a reclassificaiton, and of course, it still protects your vested financial interest in "model aviation".
09-04-2015, 08:03 PM
#1145
Quads or Drones, that is the question, islandflyer in an earlier post gave a definition of drones, the intent was to rebut an earlier comment I made but he actually succeeded in bolstering my comment, you might want to go back and review it, has little to do with negative connotation and more to do with proper definition.
I don't think that "we" as a collective group posting on this thread have ever unanimously agreed on the definition of a drone.
Astro
09-04-2015, 08:07 PM
#1146
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/ama-...l#post12094454
Aparently, few read or understand it.
09-04-2015, 08:08 PM
#1147
I didn't say anything about "banning" the technology. Please refrain from mis-quoting and blatantly misrepresenting my statements.
Again, see my comments above. Are you neurotic?
Astro
for no other reason than the fear of the newness of it and the challenge it presents..
Astro
Last edited by astrohog; 09-04-2015 at 08:11 PM.
09-04-2015, 08:14 PM
#1149
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is ridiculous!
First, I do not advocate for a drone ban, and never have (and I have not seen anyone here advocating this ban either). I REPEAT TO THE DEAF, OR THE TOO OBTUSE to understand the last 4, 5 or 6 times I wrote it: drones can do cool stuff when used responsibly, and they are here to stay (unless banned). It is however my opinion that they should create they own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused, and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of drones weather real or perceived, is aimed at drones, and not model airplanes. We have no reason to accept being lumped together with these.
Second, the few aeromodelers who happen to fly quads do not represent the majority of drone operators. If a drone operator cannot buy a drone, it absolutely does not mean they will buy a toy airplane instead. There is absolutely no correlation.
First, I do not advocate for a drone ban, and never have (and I have not seen anyone here advocating this ban either). I REPEAT TO THE DEAF, OR THE TOO OBTUSE to understand the last 4, 5 or 6 times I wrote it: drones can do cool stuff when used responsibly, and they are here to stay (unless banned). It is however my opinion that they should create they own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused, and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of drones weather real or perceived, is aimed at drones, and not model airplanes. We have no reason to accept being lumped together with these.
Second, the few aeromodelers who happen to fly quads do not represent the majority of drone operators. If a drone operator cannot buy a drone, it absolutely does not mean they will buy a toy airplane instead. There is absolutely no correlation.
Based on the many events I attend in different states, and the many conversations I have had with many members there, my position is reflecting the majority of the modelers attending these events. A few of them have drones, but with the exception of two, all feel that drones should have their own organization as Drone are not the same as Model Aviation: one of the two runs a Multirotor Forum who obviously supports it first; the other is just "undecided" on what AMA should do.
.I'd say certainly giving an indication of a support in that direction and then this post goes on to say: It is my opinion that they should create their own organization, as they present and create issues that traditional aeromodeling has not caused and should not have to pay for (via AMA's advocacy program). All the negative public opinion of Drones whether real or perceived, is aimed at drones and not model airplanes. We have no reason to be lumped together with these. I would interpret this to mean a ban from the AMA in it's basic form. The only question I have is "in regards to public perception, how do we not get lumped into mixing bowl"? The public is going to do it whether we like it or not and that will fuel a lot FAA action, so why would we not want to have some control over our fate. I know it is a small control, but at least it is something.