Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

More news from the AMA, boy are they busy!

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

More news from the AMA, boy are they busy!

Old 09-09-2016, 02:25 PM
  #26  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
This feels like one of those damned if they do, damned if they don't kinda things. Are you holding them solely responsible for the outcome of the registration scheme as if they had something to do with that decision? You said it yourself, membership does not guarantee a positive outcome. They are involved...have a seat at the table...and can continue to have a voice for the members. If not them, who else?
Well, it's tough to not notice that despite all their blustery rhetoric about how it was unlawful, that it shouldn't apply to AMA members because they're already putting AMA number on planes .... we're required to register with the FAA.

And as far as impact, don't know that being there made all that much difference. I wasn't even there and yet two of my comments were quoted directly in the federal register. Can't help but think the FAA wouldn't have included them unless they thought them valuable input.
Old 09-09-2016, 03:10 PM
  #27  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m
Well, it's tough to not notice that despite all their blustery rhetoric about how it was unlawful, that it shouldn't apply to AMA members because they're already putting AMA number on planes .... we're required to register with the FAA.

And as far as impact, don't know that being there made all that much difference. I wasn't even there and yet two of my comments were quoted directly in the federal register. Can't help but think the FAA wouldn't have included them unless they thought them valuable input.
Ya, that other org similar to ours in size and scope and gravitas (NRA) also bellows out blustery rhetoric about all of our god given rights to guns guns guns being taken away illegally, odd that they just can't force the govt to do what they want. They all puff their chest and make noise but behind the scenes concede, make deals, and are smart enough to realize they don't have all the power in the world. If they didn't posture for their membership, they would have to hear about how wimpy they were, and how ineffective they were, despite being involved in a process. Kinda like damned if they do, damned if they don't. But yes, it's not unexpected that you doubt their being involved will make a difference. Chances are if they weren't involved, we'd hear about that as a shortcoming on their behalf as well. Better watch that comment about the federal registry though...might find yourself at the other end of a boastful attention seeking me me me accusation there! It's been known to happen! I'm getting the sense that even if you have tons of experience, and we need to trust those that say that they do, it's best not to really talk about it. Keep it on the DL. First rule of RC experience.....you don't talk about RC experience!
Old 09-09-2016, 03:37 PM
  #28  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
Ya, that other org similar to ours in size and scope and gravitas (NRA) also bellows out blustery rhetoric about all of our god given rights to guns guns guns being taken away illegally, odd that they just can't force the govt to do what they want. They all puff their chest and make noise but behind the scenes concede, make deals, and are smart enough to realize they don't have all the power in the world. If they didn't posture for their membership, they would have to hear about how wimpy they were, and how ineffective they were, despite being involved in a process. Kinda like damned if they do, damned if they don't. But yes, it's not unexpected that you doubt their being involved will make a difference. Chances are if they weren't involved, we'd hear about that as a shortcoming on their behalf as well. Better watch that comment about the federal registry though...might find yourself at the other end of a boastful attention seeking me me me accusation there! It's been known to happen! I'm getting the sense that even if you have tons of experience, and we need to trust those that say that they do, it's best not to really talk about it. Keep it on the DL. First rule of RC experience.....you don't talk about RC experience!
This isn't about the NRA, which is vastly different in size, dollars, members, and thus influence.

It is about a rather small and narrow interest group of folks who are, like it not, bit players in the national airspace system. Not in pure numbers mind you, but rather in perceived importance.

Who do you think will carry more influence in the deliberations?
Part 121 stakeholders or AMA?
Part 135 or AMA?
Intel, UPS, Amazon or AMA?
Stanford & MIT or AMA?
Manned aircraft stakeholders or AMA?
Commercial drone stakeholders or AMA?
etc.?

I struggle to look down the list and see anyone that that would have less influence than the AMA given the makeup of the committee and the task assigned to them. So yes, they're at the table. And as I said, that's better than nothing. Despite the AMA's inflated rhetoric, I remain unconvinced that they're anything more than bit players - at best. Looking down that list, what I see is the FAA covering their bases so they can say "we involved them."

For proof, one has to look no further than the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Registration Task Force (RTF) Aviation Rulemaking Committee. If you recall the makeup was very similar, and we all know how well that worked out.
Old 09-09-2016, 04:01 PM
  #29  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Hey, they've made it up the list to "bit players"....things are looking up!
Old 09-09-2016, 04:14 PM
  #30  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,344
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
Hey, they've made it up the list to "bit players"....things are looking up!
Originally Posted by porcia83
Only here in the land of negativity can someone getting involved, talking about successes, trying to share experiences, and having a positive message be mocked and denigrated
Astro
Old 09-09-2016, 04:18 PM
  #31  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,344
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
I'm getting the sense that even if you have tons of experience, and we need to trust those that say that they do, it's best not to really talk about it. Keep it on the DL. First rule of RC experience.....you don't talk about RC experience!
Originally Posted by porcia83
Only here in the land of negativity can someone getting involved, talking about successes, trying to share experiences, and having a positive message be mocked and denigrated
didn't even make it two posts before he contradicted himself!
Old 09-09-2016, 05:39 PM
  #32  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Hey did you see the latest offering from the AMA? I bet that mouse pad is sweet!

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...atron-program/
Old 09-09-2016, 06:22 PM
  #33  
TheEdge
Banned
My Feedback: (788)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bonita, CA
Posts: 1,101
Received 16 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog
didn't even make it two posts before he contradicted himself!
Someone once said, not too long ago in this thread that "Experience obviously educates some and yet clearly not all"

Obviously, denial can clearly obstruct this education, for some (1) in particular..
Old 09-09-2016, 06:58 PM
  #34  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by TheEdge
Someone once said, not too long ago in this thread that "Experience obviously educates some and yet clearly not all"

Obviously, denial can clearly obstruct this education, for some (1) in particular..
I retreat Bob as your far better at this than I and most of all, I think I shared in taking this topic away from its actual subject of discussion more than we should have.

Let's focus on how busy those folks at the AMA are, and all they have to do on our behalf.
Old 09-09-2016, 07:54 PM
  #35  
TheEdge
Banned
My Feedback: (788)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bonita, CA
Posts: 1,101
Received 16 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
I retreat Bob as your far better at this than I and most of all, I think I shared in taking this topic away from its actual subject of discussion more than we should have.

Let's focus on how busy those folks at the AMA are, and all they have to do on our behalf.
Odd Tom,,, how you look at this as a :who's better than who".
Actually ------ now I've given it more thought Tom, I do...


That's what this is, for you,,,,,
Old 09-09-2016, 08:07 PM
  #36  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

More info from the AMA, another deal for those who love the MA mag, and perhaps want more:

http://www.theparkpilot.org/subscribe
Old 09-09-2016, 09:13 PM
  #37  
mongo
My Feedback: (15)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 3,498
Received 80 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

folks that profess "love" for things,
scare me to death
Old 09-10-2016, 04:18 AM
  #38  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by mongo
folks that profess "love" for things,
scare me to death
Did I miss the part where someone professed "love" for a thing in this thread, or is this just a random thought of yours you wanted to share?
Old 09-10-2016, 04:14 PM
  #39  
mongo
My Feedback: (15)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 3,498
Received 80 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
More info from the AMA, another deal for those who love the MA mag, and perhaps want more:

http://www.theparkpilot.org/subscribe
your own post
Old 09-10-2016, 04:44 PM
  #40  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

A win for pedantry.
Old 09-12-2016, 04:44 AM
  #41  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Oh Boy another "Task Force".


Mike
Old 09-12-2016, 05:05 AM
  #42  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
Oh Boy another "Task Force".


Mike
Reminds of the damned if they do, damned if they don't approach some take with the AMA. Even Franklin has indicated it's better for them to be involved than not. Perhaps it's an issue of expectations. If folks think that because they are involved they have the ability to make everyone do what they want, well they I can see why there would be disappointment as they clearly don't have that ability (non of the participants do). If on the other hand folks realize the AMA is just one of many entities involved, and serve in an advisory and informational capacity, and can help craft a positive outcome for it's members, well then that is a different story.

Would you agree with Franklin that it's better that they are involved, rather than not?
Old 09-12-2016, 07:19 AM
  #43  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
Reminds of the damned if they do, damned if they don't approach some take with the AMA. Even Franklin has indicated it's better for them to be involved than not. Perhaps it's an issue of expectations. If folks think that because they are involved they have the ability to make everyone do what they want, well they I can see why there would be disappointment as they clearly don't have that ability (non of the participants do). If on the other hand folks realize the AMA is just one of many entities involved, and serve in an advisory and informational capacity, and can help craft a positive outcome for it's members, well then that is a different story.

Would you agree with Franklin that it's better that they are involved, rather than not?
In the Pentagon, we had a saying "Form follows funding." In the case of this committee, as was the case with the registration committee, which stakeholders represent high dollar and tax revenue producing industries? AMA? Uh...no.

I'll be the first to say it's better they're involved than not. But I'm not naïve about their ability to influence compared to other stakeholders. It's my opinion that the AMA is there for no reason other than to add legitimacy to the process, so FAA can point back and say "they were involved."

I also disagree with the AMA's internal communication strategy. I was taught that it's always better to under promise and over deliver. I feel much of the AMA internal communication does the opposite. I read many AMA releases and they're in such a rush to show members what they're doing that they're failing to see that it's creating unrealistic expectations of the organization's ability to influence among other much more powerful members in this group.

They were involved in the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Registration Task Force (RTF) Aviation Rulemaking Committee, and we see how that turned out. In the end, all AMA could do was release statements that "AMA wanted to include dissenting comments in the final task force report, but was prevented from doing so." Which looked like nothing more than whining. This November, it'll be two years since that release, and we're still registering.


AMA's "Dissenting Opinion" release:
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/med...-registration/
Old 09-12-2016, 07:57 AM
  #44  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
Hot off the press......adorned mugs! Nice!

Those mugs of the HQ building will turn a few off. I bet there are comments about that between these posts.
Old 09-12-2016, 08:01 AM
  #45  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by astrohog
didn't even make it two posts before he contradicted himself!
I don't see the contradiction?
Old 09-12-2016, 08:08 AM
  #46  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
Those mugs of the HQ building will turn a few off. I bet there are comments about that between these posts.
I am surprised, no comments about spending too much on buildings and their airfield.
Old 09-12-2016, 09:19 AM
  #47  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
Those mugs of the HQ building will turn a few off. I bet there are comments about that between these posts.
Some will like them, some will use them once again as the basis for complaints, some will think it's not their cup of tea (sorry, too easy). I'm only surprised they weren't criticized earlier for not having cups, or not thinking about them earlier. Perhaps this was one of the ideas the potential candidates thought was a good way to raise money, but refused to tell us about earlier. After all, it's so easy its amazing nobody had thought of it before.

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
I don't see the contradiction?
There wasn't one, just more attempts to manufacture drama. Every thread doesn't have to be like that. Expect a response shortly though.

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
I am surprised, no comments about spending too much on buildings and their airfield.
Been there done that, the new outrages are being worked on. Same with the adorned shirts, pins, cost of office supplies, travel costs, misspellings and dead links on websites, the insurance scams, failures with all prior committee involvement, etc etc etc. Going on 14 plus years of this, both here and elsewhere. Que up the "where there's smoke there's fire" generalization standard response, the reality is only a small percentage of folks feel this way. There is no doubt about that, nothing shows to the contrary. But ya, there will be more to complain about before long. Or, as some would like to posture.."questioning". But put a thread up about anything even remotely on the fringe of positive, and this is what you'll see. It just descends into the usual...perhaps the other threads, specifically the ones asking questions of our possible future president are far more entertaining.
Old 09-12-2016, 09:21 AM
  #48  
J330
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 640
Received 29 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot
I am surprised, no comments about spending too much on buildings and their airfield.
That's been an issue for over 10 years, hasn't it? There was some budget issues back in 2006 that made me quit paying them another penny. I like FAA rates, $5 for every 3 years. Maybe AMA will try to adjust the annual membership accordingly, or they're just going to be history, like Fox engines.
Old 09-12-2016, 09:48 AM
  #49  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m
In the Pentagon, we had a saying "Form follows funding." In the case of this committee, as was the case with the registration committee, which stakeholders represent high dollar and tax revenue producing industries? AMA? Uh...no.

I'll be the first to say it's better they're involved than not. But I'm not naïve about their ability to influence compared to other stakeholders. It's my opinion that the AMA is there for no reason other than to add legitimacy to the process, so FAA can point back and say "they were involved."

Yep all it does is give them a out.

I also disagree with the AMA's internal communication strategy. I was taught that it's always better to under promise and over deliver. I feel much of the AMA internal communication does the opposite. I read many AMA releases and they're in such a rush to show members what they're doing that they're failing to see that it's creating unrealistic expectations of the organization's ability to influence among other much more powerful members in this group.

Never any content more like cheer leading for themselves. My favorite will always be every communication had they were always " happy but unhappy"

They were involved in the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Registration Task Force (RTF) Aviation Rulemaking Committee, and we see how that turned out. In the end, all AMA could do was release statements that "AMA wanted to include dissenting comments in the final task force report, but was prevented from doing so." Which looked like nothing more than whining. This November, it'll be two years since that release, and we're still registering.

Yep "whining" ia just what it was. Nothing more and registration will never go away. I doubt using your AMA numbers will ever take the place of the FAA number either. Why should they?

AMA's "Dissenting Opinion" release:
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/med...-registration/

I'm not saying the AMA is bad. Just pointing out that were a really small fish in a pretty big pond.

Mike
Old 09-12-2016, 10:33 AM
  #50  
porcia83
Banned
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by J330
That's been an issue for over 10 years, hasn't it? There was some budget issues back in 2006 that made me quit paying them another penny. I like FAA rates, $5 for every 3 years. Maybe AMA will try to adjust the annual membership accordingly, or they're just going to be history, like Fox engines.
10 years? Well, the complaints have been around for 10 years, but on all issues. But sure, $5.00 dues sounds great. Let's see how many towns, cities, and municipalities will let clubs fly on their property when we show them the FAA registration.

You do realize the difference between the registration, and the AMA membership right?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.