Hydro Junkie

EXACTLY!!!!!!
And it's what the EC is counting on getting

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Except for the fact that safety is the main basis for the AMA’s lobby to begin with. Even though they have no way of ensuring compliance to the safety code outside the boundaries of established flying fields.

Not a very prudent plan

Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

so, to answer my previous question, you are just here to be obstinate.

I gave you the direct quote from Mr. Hanson, but that is not good enough for you?

Good-bye, troll.

Astro

revmix

To operate r/c properly is up to the hobbyists, the lobbying is just self-serving for their own survival

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

You must be a little slow on the uptake. First of all I never have advocated one must be part of the organization to fly, in fact quite the opposite. Read what you have quoted very slowly you might comprehend my take on it. Hanson’s quote states to be part of the program, a program developed for members you must be part of the organization. Many organizations have programs and you have to be part of that organization to participate in that program. However anyone can follow the guidelines of that program and not be part of the organization. I believe that is what the FAA is requiring not membership.

We have the same thing in Canada and not so surprising we have a similar number, a few who will argue that MAAC is trying to dictate to non members or heaven forbid they aren’t doing enough to support the modelers that choose to shun membership. I guess things north or south of the boarder are never going to change. Thank goodness you guys only amount to a handful and would never have the gumption to do much else than whine about it. Have at it fellas but try and develop some spine and actually do something about it then maybe when you write to your reps you won’t get ignored LOL.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

LOL. I do not care what YOUR take is, doesn't matter your take or my take, we are discussing what the AMA's position is.

Astro

rcmiket

That's nothing but a assumption on your part. You have no clue on just how involved we are in trying to change the way our organization operates. The sad fact is a majority of AMA members don't care and belong simply because the flying field they fly at REQUIRE membership. Now looking at the numbers they indicate that our organization is losing members at a startling rate so in the very near future the ones that want change will grow and have more of a impact on decisions.

Mike

fliers1

There is no doubt that our numbers are dwindling, but just what can they do at AMA headquarters or anyone else for that matter?

rcmiket

NAR (National Association of Rocketry ) has had great success in attracting youth into rocketry. I know for a fact the President of NAR gave the AMA EC council a presentation on this topic. As a NAR and AMA member our club has embraced rocketry and the kids love it and are exposed to model aviation at the same time. Droners are not the only group out there that we should be working to attract.

Mike

fliers1

Let me guess. They were not in the least interested? I once belonged to a club that no matter what was suggested, the regular reply was, "no" most of the time before who ever made the suggestion was finished talking.
I call it CRS. contrary reflex syndrome. lol

jcmors

You know if you think about it, it really is the "nuts" that are causing all of the issues... Coconuts, and nuts who fly their aircraft beyond line of site like the nut who recently took pictures of an airliner in a landing approach beneath his drone in Vegas!

Sigh...

mkjohnston

My Feedback: (2)

I would like to say that this hobby is in such shambles that its down right scary for an old school builder like me. Every other day you hear about some RC related business going belly up.I have been a member of the AMA several times over the years. I first joined when I was in California in the early 90's and I was never impressed with this organization at all. I rejoined a couple times and then just stopped flying and building because where I lived at the time I would have drive 25 miles or more one way just to get to a flying field and then there was the high cost of belonging to a club. Another thing that ticked me off where some of these guys at these clubs where very standoffish to say the least.I currently belong to a small club that has two fields and the guys are nice be around. I started flying at a small airport in the 1970s in SE Kansas. We where not a club for say but we did have a permission to fly at this small airport until th day some jack@## called the FAA and turned us in.The FAA said we where not authorized to fly at this site. So we got banned from flying there for 10 years then all of sudden they let us fly there again. But the catch was we had to have proof of home owners insurance and a aircraft band radio just in case a full size plane was coming in. In years before the one guy that flew out of there would buzz over once to let us know he was coming and we we land and get out of the way.
Thank You
Michael Johnston

Stickslammer

The 10 year ban was very unfortunate but it seems like a pretty good deal now if you`re still able to fly there. No AMA mandate, all you need is homeowners insurance and aircraft band radio. Sounds pretty reasonable to me for safety`s sake.