Len Todd

Class E airspace is not regulated by the Regional FAA ATC and has a 1200' ceiling. Check your Airport Directory. Consequently, Class E airspace is exempted from the 400' rule. (So is A, B C and D airspace, but they are regulated by the FAA's ATC. Any use of Class A, B, C or D airspace requires coordination the the FAA ATC.) The rules for Class E airspace are to be negotiated with the local "ATC" (i.e. The particular Class E Airspace's Manager) as it is airspace not controlled by the Regional FAA ATC. Our particular flying site is located in Class E airspace. We negotiated the Operational Rules with the airport manager years ago. If you want to fly over 400' seek out Class E airspace (i.e. basic airports). These are great places for "fixed flying sites." There is also, in the new law, a methodology for waivers for additional altitude at fixed flying sites. However, this may prove cumbersome due to the fact that they go to the reginal (FAA) ATC for review. Maybe not though. The coordination between the FAA and AMA for fixed flying sites May facilitate this process.

Prior to this new law, we just operated under the "radar" (i.e. Section 336) so to speak. When there were meetings with the FAA, we (AMA or any other recreational flyer group) were not seated at the table. We were only observers. Now we are recognized stakeholders. This is a much better position for us. Australia went thus this transition years ago. Being a recognized stakeholder gave them access to seats at the tables, more influence with the regulators and more access to grants for field improvements as RC Flying became a recognized sport. Becoming an acknowledged stakeholder is a net positive for us!

The new law has passed. The FAA now has to determine the policies to implement the law. The FAA has already met with the AMA Reps. to identify the new law's unintended negative impacts on us. The AMA folks have informed the FAA of the issues. At least now we are recognized as a stakeholder and are allowed to sit at the table. It will take the FAA some time to develop and implement the new policies that implement the new law. Consequently, we have been told to continue operating as we have in the past. The AMA Reps are involved in helping develop the new FAA policies.

This whole transition is going down just like the FCC did with Amateur Radio Operators, decades ago I might add, including the knowledge based testing, operator licensing, well defined policies and well defined operating space in the RF Spectrum. Be glad we do not have to do a proficiency test as Hams used to have to do.The Hams have the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to represent them at the FCC's table. We have the AMA. The ARRL has a large paid staff and is a lot like the AMA. I have a been a ham for almost 50 years. This licensing, testing and regulation process has worked well to keep amateur radio alive and still growing to this day even in the age of the cell phone. Hams have been protected from ever encroaching commercial and government pressure to take over the Ham's RF spectrum, for decades!

So, … Why not give AMA a chance to work things out? Sure there may be some things that come along that put some new constraint(s) on us. But just as the Hams are still hamming, we will still be flying our recreational flyers for decades to come, in spite of the above "negative nellies" and naysayers, etc. If we unify behind our representatives, we could make great progress. United we stand! Divided we fall! The AMA is currently our most organized representative, just like the ARRL is currently the best rep for the Hams. For the folks that do not see this, IMO they are not considering things in the best interest for the hobby. If they want better or different reps, then vote them into the AMA. Sure other CBOs could come along in the future. But right now AMA is the only unified voice we have even if there are various views of their past effectiveness.

jester_s1

Well said, Len Todd. The AMA does want to work for our interests, if for no other reason than it keeps the dues rolling in. I'll never understand the knee jerk reacters who go straight to slash and burn tirades at the slightest appearance of change or cooperation with those who disagree with us. Maybe they'd be happier if the AMA took a hard line stance on every issue and lost our voice with the government as an organization that can't be reasoned with?

Hydro Junkie

It's actually very simple. The "knee jerk reacters" are those that can't handle the thought of things changing. If something changes, they react to stop it or, if that can't be done, to try and control it. That line of thought is the very reason there's been so many threads started over how the AMA and model aircraft hobby are ending as we know it and panicking rather than just rolling with the changes and adapt as needed. What's even worse is the fact that the AMA home office can't figure out that they also need to learn how to adapt to a changing environment that has new people flying park flyers and multi-rotors that believe they just don't need to be members and, truth be told, the new flyers are right. For lack of a better way to put it, the AMA is in many ways like the Brontosaurus, it's a big animal that is running out of food and about to die off because of that lack of food. Unless the AMA home office learns they need to adapt and make some hard choices, it won't be long until the AMA goes the way of the dinosaur and becomes nothing more than a fading memory

jester_s1

You may be right. I hear the Muncie property is really nice, but it's likely not a vialble business model going forward. Business history is full of stories of companies who saw the market changing but weren't willing to adapt and innovate. Smith Corona typewriters are one of many examples.

Hydro Junkie

I don't think Smith Corona is the only one that went by the wayside. AFAIK, the only one that might be left is left is IBM and that's only because they made the change to producing computers. Then again, many companies started manufacturing computers only to fail due to making everything proprietary. My younger brother had a computer that was like that, the only way to repair or upgrade it was to go through the manufacturer. When people found out they couldn't upgrade with better stuff, the company went bankrupt

Appowner

Some years ago I calculated 100 acres as being an adequate size for a club owned flying site. I know, less is possible and in some cases more might be required for various reasons. But in general, keeping all models over club property, 100 acres seemed to work.

The AMA owns more than 1000 acres in Muncie. There is also a private airfield that boarders the back edge of the property. One can imagine all kinds of questions from this.

Appowner

I did! Many, many years ago. And the AMA proved to me that they didn't want my input. Didn't want my ideas or help. Nor did they want to help me in any way. All they wanted was for me to continue to send them money.


Oops! Did I forget to write a check?

scottrc

ARRL, Tripoli, and NAR are all really great representative associations that I have dealt with and all three are much cheaper to belong too. In fact, ARRL doesn't even pressure you to join while going through the steps to obtain a HAM license. They seem to have put their money into good education, government, and member support.
AMA, on the other hand, to me feels like its trying to work from the dark side of the moon. AMA seems to me more like a difunctional political party than a special interest association. All I hear from them is how great their foundations are and how much I need to donate to "educate" our youth and save flying sites.
For me, I want to see AMA reorganize, sell off the Muncie site, get rid of all the layers of bureaucracy, and invest in good member support. This dang website fiasco really takes the cake.

Len Todd

The ARRL Membership is $49.00 per year. AMA is $75 per year. The ARRL and the AMA both produce an excellent monthly publications. They both have comprehensive websites and have both gone thru the pain of transitioning to new web sites. There are a ton of other similarities between the two orgs. However, the ARRL does not provide any insurance included as part of the membership dues. Paying $26 per year for that coverage seems worth the added cost, especially how in most cases the insurance coverage is the difference between getting or not getting access to a flying site! From my view, if one has a problem with any organization the answer is to get involved in its administration and leadership versus just *****in' about it. If you get involved, you can be a leader. If you just whine, then, ... what does that just make you?

Hydro Junkie

Let me throw out my .02 on this:
1) The ARRL doesn't need to include insurance coverage since, once the equipment is set up, it's not going to hurt anything unless the antenna falls over and hits something and that would be covered by most home owners insurance policies
2) The AMA makes it very difficult to "get involved". The general member has to navigate through leader members, AVPs and then, if you're lucky, you can deal with the EC. From what I've seen and heard, however, normally it's more like contact a LM and have them transmit your concerns up the chain. If you have something that's really pressing, you can contact you AVP. In either case, you'll probably never hear anything back from the EC. Since LMs are selected by the powers that be, it is also highly unlikely that you will be allowed to move up to LM status, required to be any sort of officer, unless you seriously brown nose one of those that selects the LMs.

franklin_m

Agree 100%. The EC "says" it wants new blood, but then continues to pull from the very same homogeneous pool of people. And one can't even get into that "club" until the EC says you can. So it's all but guaranteed to produce the same results.

Len Todd

Re. the comparison of value between the ARRL and AMA; My point being the AMA dues are $26 more than the ARRL. For that you get the insurance. At a minimum that is a god deal. Where else can you get that insurance for $26 and the access that it provided?

Re. the Leader Member B.S. you presented. I am a LM in three categories, All I did was make the application and I was recognized as a leader member. No brown nozing required. I think anyone who knows me can attest to the fact I am not a brown noser.

I do agree that it is a bit difficult to work your way up the AMA's leadership chain. I have found that to be true in other organizations also. I have also found that how far you go typically relates to how hard you try and the effort you apply towards that goal. Not in all cases. But usually.

As far as current AMA leadership listening to us, I know that the couple times I have communicated specific issues, I have received feedback. I did not always like the answer. But then I do not always have all the relevant information to come to the same conclusions they have. So being a professional, I accept and support the decisions they make. If I thought they were really out to lunch, then I would get more involved.

It just the way I approach such issues. It works for me. How you approach such issues is totally up to you. Only thing is, based on what you are writing, it does not appear what you are doing is working for you. Good luck.

Hydro Junkie

Actually, Len, this wasn't from my experience but from others I've known over the years. If you've had a better experience with the "powers that be" that's great. The people I know out on the left side of the map have rarely been so lucky. I don't know if it came down to their state of residence or the fact that they weren't the most popular people in the club but, for whatever the reason, they weren't nearly as fortunate.

Appowner

Not to start a political segment but the AARL is known for throwing their weight behind the DNC. So now I guess I'm saving $124 a year?

As for the insurance, for recreational flying my Home Owners does just fine for me. And even with AMA membership, my home owners would be tapped long before any AMA coverage got involved. And to my knowledge there is NO additional cost for the HO Coverage.

Long time ago my barracks room mate was flying his 60 size Ugly Stick on base with permission. When he lost control and punched a hole in the Vert Stab of a C-130. No sweat! AMA insurance. AMA refused to pay claiming the Air Force is self insured. Permission to fly on base was then revoked. Point? This insurance BS has been going on for a long time now. At least 50 years by my count.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Appowner

Point, the AMA does NOT pay every claim. Contrary to what you would suggest.
Fact, I've flown on more military installations than you ever will. I am well aware of the issues and requirements.

As for BS? Where's that RC resume of yours again?

Appowner

Well, as the saying goes. The definition of insanity is..........................

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Hydro Junkie

Since you guys want to debate flying at military bases, let me tell you the rules that applied to NAS Whidbey Island, when I was there. The rule was simple:
NO R/C AIRCARFT WILL BE FLOWN ON THE MAIN OR SEAPLANE BASE GROUNDS. There was no discussion or debate on this as these two locations were areas that aircraft and people were going to be. HOWEVER, the base command was not being anti R/C. They allowed a local R/C club to fly at the Auxiliary Landing Field located outside of Coupeville, roughly half way down the island. They would allow the club to use the actual paved runway on weekends when there wasn't aircrew training that required the unobstructed use of the runway. The schedule was sent to the officers of the club and they were required to inform the club members of when the airfield would be closed.

Appowner

Off hand I can come up with some dozen military installations around the world I've flown from at least once. I know for a fact at least half no longer allow it.

scottrc

Hey Len, whats your secret password from your AMA decoder ring that allows you to see such a great and comprehensive website at the AMA?????
It's been two months of working with them and they still cannot get me set up with full membership access do to some issue with my profile set up. And their magazine is getting less and less generalized in representing all aspects of modeling and more into just what they want to promote.

Become a leader in the AMA??? Like others said, we don't meet the requirements to be in the "club" .
AMA is just about the insurance, PERIOD, without it as their cash bait, they would be gone.

fliers1

The AMA states that it's all about growth. Growth means AMA has to offer something for the potential newcomer. Namely timely and adequate flight instruction. An assurance they can't provide.
Economics 101 dictates that the industry, including AMA must provide excellent customer service. Unless that happens, eventually we all will be SOL.

franklin_m

Look at the bright side, they just named a marketing and communications guy as the ED.

So we'll have pretty websites and great press releases, but not that much in the way of actual value to the "unwashed masses" of rank and file members.

fliers1

I'll have to give him a tiny bit of credit. I emailed him before he was appointed ED and he did reply to my email. I explained a proactive and productive growth plan to him that I could and have demonstrated in the past. . After that I didn't hear a peep from him.
I see where some highly educated folks on this forum did contact headquarters offering very good ideas, but it seems those on high didn't think anyone other than them had anything worthy of their attention.
Seems like they are content with watching the hobby not so slowly die. Considering how many of the big distributors and so many hobby shops have gone under, it would seem AMA would search under every rock to find a solution..