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

Fairest Way I can think of!

Reply

Old 06-19-2005, 12:06 PM
  #1  
ckangaroo70
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (51)
 
ckangaroo70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London Mills, IL
Posts: 2,354
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Fairest Way I can think of!

I have been doing some thinking about what would be the fairest solution to resolving the debate over Reduced Rate Insurance for certain types of models. I have come to conclusion that maybe the Umbrella type system is not quite working. What I mean by umbrella is if you have 13 Planes like I do, then any one of them is covered under the same policy(Homeowners/AMA) in the event of an accident,theft, etc.
Not to ruffle feathers here, but what if it worked on an individual Plane basis? Much like Car Insurance, certains cars are at higher risk to be crashed or stolen than others due to several factors which would include Value, Perfomance, or demand. So instead of a one policy fits all, what is so unfair about each Plane carrying a set Insurance rate based upon its Liklihood to do property damage in the event of a crash, its value which makes it more at risk for theft. Each an every Plane, and not any one single class or size would carry its own rate. Most Trainers would probally actually be at a higher rate due to the inexperienced Pilots Flying them,and the larger the Trainer the more likelihood to do damage in the event of a crash. Yet it is a fact that bigger flys better, so lots of factors would have to be considered to create rates. Most Scale Planes would probally be lower in some regards due to the nature of the way they fly, and also factors would have to be considered like Bigger Flys Better, but Bigger does more damge. 3D type Planes would probally have a higher rate due to the manuevers they perform in close proximity, and park flyers would would also have a set rate. Lets take my Planes for example. I have 13 Flying Planes. I have an GP Extra 300 lets say for example would cost me $10.00 a year to insure. I also have a GP Cap 232 lets say for example cost me $10.00 a year to insure. Now lets say my little GWS Pico Moth has a rate of $3.00 a year, and lets say my bigger GWS Tiger Moth cost $4.00 a year. Each Plane would have its own individual little permit attached inside for each specific Plane with Name/ AMA Number/Plane Discription/Date of Permit. Now lets say I only intend to Fly the Planes I have listed so far this year, and don't plan on Flying any of the others. Those Planes I am not Flying would not have to be insured which would leave only homeowners to pay for these in the event of theft. Years of Membership should also dictate rates. Just like a car, a 16 year old is more apt to be in an accident then a 50 year old. So the more experience you have which would be determined by years of membership, the cheaper the rate you would recieve. So actually new Park Flyers who just join the AMA would have a little bit of a penalty on their rate due to inexperience. Basically what I am trying to say is that there are ways to take past data, and use it to make rates fair to everyone in the hobby. If you are driving a Ferrari, you should be paying a bit more insurance then the guy driving a pinto! If you live in a Million Dollar Home, then you should have a Million Dollars Plus worth of Insurance on it, but why should the guy in the $70,000 home have to carry a Million Dollars on his? Fair is Fair, and it is time something is done that creates a level playing field for everyone within this hobby. I have alot more Planes then some, so I should pay more then the guy with one little pico moth!
ckangaroo70 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 01:59 PM
  #2  
b.bixel
My Feedback: (123)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 409
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

1st off it's good to see alternative plans put forth, thank you!

But, being the skeptic, I ask the following;

Wouldn't having the AMA issue permits for each aircraft be added expense?

Whose going to check and enforce that every aircraft has a current permit when it shows up at the flying site? Who want's to be the horses rear? Perhaps a Safety Officer if there is one, and is he always there? If not, will we need to carry uninsured pilot insurance policy (additional expense)?

What will land owners think and how will they be covered from the under insured if there is a accident?

Regards,
Bart
b.bixel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 05:22 PM
  #3  
Red Scholefield
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Consider for a moment that an insignificant number of insurance claims paid by the AMA are actually plane related. We have been told most are "trip and fall" kinds of claims against clubs/land owners.
Red Scholefield is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 05:44 PM
  #4  
ckangaroo70
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (51)
 
ckangaroo70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London Mills, IL
Posts: 2,354
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!


ORIGINAL: b.bixel

1st off it's good to see alternative plans put forth, thank you!

But, being the skeptic, I ask the following;

Wouldn't having the AMA issue permits for each aircraft be added expense?

Whose going to check and enforce that every aircraft has a current permit when it shows up at the flying site? Who want's to be the horses rear? Perhaps a Safety Officer if there is one, and is he always there? If not, will we need to carry uninsured pilot insurance policy (additional expense)?

What will land owners think and how will they be covered from the under insured if there is a accident?

Regards,
Bart
Very good questions that I do not have an answer for. I was hoping maybe someone could ad to my idea, and help to create an actual plan that makes sense. There are many variables to take into account, and at this point I am looking for answers to many things. I just wanted to put a basic idea forward, and see if there is anyone willing to ad to, change, or improve my basic idea.

A whole new" way to pay" would have to be developed, and almost every single member would be paying different rates taking into account many varibles like years of experience, type of Aircraft, and number of Aircraft. The cost of the actual "AMA Tag" for each individual Aircraft would have to be figured into the cost of each said "AMA Tag". When you apply or reapply to AMA each year you would have to fill out a more detailed application that list each Plane you wish to insure, and some info about your years experience(Years in AMA),etc. to determine your yearly rate. Each time you build or buy a new Plane that you plan to fly you could register it on the AMA website, and they could send you a tag with the additional added expense in the form of a bill. This method would basically work where a person with only one Plane whether it be a park flyer, trainer, sport plane, 3d, glider, ff, heli, or jet is going to pay less then someone who has several diffent Planes to insure. Also people who have an incident with a Plane that causes harm to another individual at the fault of the pilot should be required to complete a test on the AMA website, and maybe some other sort of safety training and also put into high risk, and required to pay a high risk insurance rate for a certain period of time.

I wish I had all the answers, but I don't. All I do know is that the AMA needs to come up with a system that is deemed fair by all those within the hobby. Half the problem now I see is people feel like the system is not fair to them. It wouldn't be hard to make it fair for everyone. Nobody likes to pay more for anything than anybody else, but as I stated before the guy driving a Pinto can't be expected to pay the same rate as the guy driving the Ferrari! This system puts alot of the burden on the die hard flyers that have a ton of Planes in the hanger, and are always investing money in the hobby. The ones who are going to get off cheap are the people with one little Nitro Plane, or one little electric. If you have lots of little nitro Planes or Electrics then your rate is going to go up as you go up in the hobby!
ckangaroo70 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 08:18 PM
  #5  
jonkoppisch
My Feedback: (162)
 
jonkoppisch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,782
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

I don't really see what the need is to change the insurance levels at all. The question a while back was over a lower rate to draw the park flier crowd. According to this thread, http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_3078070/tm.htm, the amount of the dues that actually goes toward insurance is only around $15/year. If anything it would be great to offer 2 groups. 1 that offers everything that you get with the ama, ability to compete in contests, the mag, on the mailing list for the cds (JK) for the full payment then a 2nd group that only offers the insurance for $20/year, a $5 dollar profit :^) All that you get is an ama card and you put an extra $5 in to promote model aviation... If everything has gotten so out of hand and unbalanced the way that's been suggested I would think that the amount that actually goes toward insurance would be at least more than half of the due amount!!!!
jonkoppisch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 08:23 PM
  #6  
jonkoppisch
My Feedback: (162)
 
jonkoppisch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,782
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

If a tier level or a per plane insurance rate is established I do look for another insurance company to step in. I think a majority of modelers want to promote the ama but put in a that kind of position would be tempted to go with another organization that offered insurance if the clubs would change their policy to allow other insurance to be used which is the main obstacle that's faced!!!!
jonkoppisch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 08:48 PM
  #7  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 3,128
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!


ORIGINAL: jonkoppisch

If a tier level or a per plane insurance rate is established I do look for another insurance company to step in. I think a majority of modelers want to promote the ama but put in a that kind of position would be tempted to go with another organization that offered insurance if the clubs would change their policy to allow other insurance to be used which is the main obstacle that's faced!!!!

You dont have to worry about another insurance company coming in.
the AMA has already taken care of that by telling clubs to only let
AMA members fly and the AMA insures 98% of the U.S. clubs.

I think there should be three tiers all with different coverage and
premiums as far as enforcement I dont think we need to make a big
deal about it , if someone files a claim that involves a plane that they
are not insured for they simply wont be paid and risk being sued if they
cant pay for damages.
ira d is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 08:49 PM
  #8  
Bob101
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rural, TX
Posts: 845
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Best solution is to separate insurance from the AMA. Problem solved. Insurance companies would provide "real" documentation on where the money was going and charge accordinly - not like Dave Brown who "says' it's going to soandso segment but provides no proof.
Bob101 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 09:12 PM
  #9  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Well…Maybe the biggest part of the insurance costs should be absorbed in the policy cost of the (club?) flying site and the individual’s coverage could be reduced substantially to allow lower membership dues. If the modeler deems he needs more insurance he can acquire some type of umbrella policy to fit his particular needs.
littlecrankshaf is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 09:17 PM
  #10  
jonkoppisch
My Feedback: (162)
 
jonkoppisch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,782
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Best solution is to separate insurance from the AMA. Problem solved. Insurance companies would provide "real" documentation on where the money was going and charge accordinly
:^) They'll never do that... The ama would go broke!!!!!!!!!
jonkoppisch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 09:46 PM
  #11  
blw
My Feedback: (3)
 
blw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Opelika, AL
Posts: 9,447
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

I'm not completely sure that it is all about just insurance. It all doesn't sound right to me considering the recent negative opinions offered by the AMA concerning turbines. Maybe the intentions are good, but this is a sure way to leave the door open to make giant scale and turbines too expensive to stay in the AMA.

I'm only building 40 and 60 sized planes right now. What if I do want to move up to gassers? This tier system leaves all kinds of room to speculate, etc. I like the simple AMA membership system we now have. I don't want to start calculating how much it will cost if I have this or that category plane. What about the guys who fly the top tier planes only once or twice a year? They would be paying more in that case. It just seems to me that this is opening an opportunity to squeeze out the guys who move up to big planes/turbines. Maybe not now, but maybe in the future. I'm sure that some of them already see this as a looming possibility.

What surprises me most is listening to guys who have been in the AMA a long time. They openly talk about not needing it to fly. We have ample fields to find for ourselves in my area. I'm not so sure that the AMA has the guaranteed membership base they have counted on for a long time. Plus, you can read a lot posts with anti-AMA sentiments here on RCU from the fliers who are new to the hobby. If a simple membership plan turns them off now, a more complicated plan seems more unattractive to both classes of fliers, old and new.

Things aren't critical now, so why predict doom and gloom is my question about this whole idea. Before anyone starts to label this opinion as anti-AMA, let me say that I'm not that way at all. I lived in Germany for 6 years and knew r/c'ers there. One of the best things about flying r/c here is the absence of the headaches those guys have to put up with. This tier system seems like we are taking similar giant steps towards taking the fun out of the hobby.
blw is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2005, 11:09 PM
  #12  
b.bixel
My Feedback: (123)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 409
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

I prefer to leave things as they are myself.

If you, I, or Bill Gates (yeah right) walk into a McDonalds, we each pay the same amount for the Big Mac, regardless of our incomes or what we drove to get there, etc. Same cost for equal goods or equal service.

I do however think those who want change should put forth ideas or plans for all to consider. That has been done here and in other threads. Kudos to those ideas so far and for those to come.

I just hope if change does occur that it is fair. I mean fair to the big players (IMAC, giant, Jets, etc) as well. I'm not into "income redistribution" or other such nonsense.

Regards,
Bart
b.bixel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2005, 08:13 AM
  #13  
gow589
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: evansville, IN
Posts: 678
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Seperating the magazine from the insurance is a much more valid issue. Then the people who only want to pay the insurance $15 or so) can do so. If people can't pay $15 for insurance then they have a lot more important life issues they need to deal with. As far as letting other insurance at an AMA field, if it was an AMA charter then there is nothing wrong with them imposing guidlines. If the club want's to drop AMA and use an independant insurance, that's up to the club NOT the AMA. Many people have chimed in here with non-AMA fields and their policies so it does happen/work.

AMA is not stopping people from creating NON AMA clubs. If people want a non-AMA field, they can make a NON-AMA field. The land owners and insurance companies are not going to come to them, they have to do it on their own. Complaining about it won't get it done.

It would be nice to see an insurance/industry wide type plan that would become accepted such that companies such that you could buy pachages from nation wide companies such as State Farm. I would think they would want a full amount reguardless of the amount of club members. It would take more to manage a club such as that. You would need a fairly large base just to cover such a thing.

It makes the AMA look cheap and simple.
gow589 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2005, 09:32 AM
  #14  
P-51B
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
P-51B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Posts: 6,747
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

Well,

If you want to go down the rating road, then wouldn't each category of pilot, or even each pilot, need to be rated based on flying ability/record.

That is how car insurance works.

Sportflyers make up the largest percentage of flyers...and are therefore more likely to wreck a plane (either skill or number of flights basis, take your pick)...and therefore should pay the highest rate...


Does anyone really want to go down that road?
P-51B is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2005, 12:33 PM
  #15  
TexasAirBoss
My Feedback: (22)
 
TexasAirBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

I wouldn't shift the cost of insurance at all.

As the system stands now, a small group of guys can generally afford to start a new field. That is what is good about the current system. It fosters new clubs. That is what we want. New clubs, lots of them, all over the place.

If you start shifting more insurance cost from the individual to the clubs, it will be more difficult for new clubs to get their feet under themselves. Lets not demand $2500 or $3000 from the small club that is just getting started.

So don't think of the insurance as being unfair because I only fly this or I only fly that. IF we all share the cost evenly, WE are promoting the hobby by making it affordable to all, especially new club start-ups.
TexasAirBoss is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2005, 09:00 PM
  #16  
blw
My Feedback: (3)
 
blw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Opelika, AL
Posts: 9,447
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Fairest Way I can think of!

The handwriting on the wall is that we are entering a phase where new fliers don't need or want the AMA. The more the little electrics catch on, the more of these guys are going to teach themselves to fly....whereever they da#ned well please. They may get their cues from the car guys. On one hand, this is good since they get to fly. On the other hand, it takes away from potential membership increases and uninsured accidents could give AMA members a bad rap.

I'm not into electrics and I support the AMA. But, the expectations don't seem to have a chance in panning out. Then, there is that nagging punishment factor involved in the idea.
blw is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service