STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

If you haven't noticed on the PPP's docs, videos and binder, the AMA is targeting public parks and indoor sites for this program. But to say that the AMA has even a slight minority control on some 10's of thousands of public, state and federal parks is really, pushing the facts. The AMA thinks big and thank god for that.

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

Slice it anyway you can LCS, but I understand the reality of just how big this country is and how many spaces could accomodate PPP's, which is a heck of a lot more then "regular" clubs. The amount of space that the AMA clubs have now is miniscule compared to the potential by anybody's calculator.

But either way ... at least the AMA is attempting to get these people on board, somehow, someway other then no how no way. You see Parkies flocking into the AMA? I sure don't. You make it sound like they won't join the AMA beause they will find out they live in a 3 mile bubble controlled by the AMA. But wouldn't an attempt to get them in at a lower price, niche tier model be better then none at all? If they won't join the program at $58, they have at least a 50% better chance of getting in another way. Only this time it's custom tailored to order.

If they are on board, they might even wind up respecting the AMA safety code. If they don't sign up at all .... they have no code to follow and respect in the first place.

804

My Feedback: (1)

[[quote According to AMA another AMA member cannot fly anywhere within a circle (without an agreement) along a radius of 3 mi. of an existing flying site. The area within that circle is more than 28 sq. mi.

Spin it all you want but that is the fact.

[/quote]


I can't find anything by AMA that supports your contention of a 3 mile radius.All I see is 3 mile seperation, which is 1.5 mi. radius. Not saying you're wrong, can you provide a link?

abel_pranger

There isn't in Tyler, TX as you well know. That is why I am supportive of TUFF opening up to PPP members. They have a right to fly models, and I have a strong personal interest in fostering model aviation.

I don't know how typical Tyler is relative to other towns across the country, But I am certain that if the regulation/prohibitions of model flying by administrators of public land there is not 'typical,' it is by no means rare. Further, it would be foolish not to admit them to a club using the only site where model flying is allowed. How do you explain that to the public entity that owns the land? AMA clubs skirt the public interest and exclude people that are not AMA members "because of the insurance." That excuse will sell like lead balloons when AMA members in a particular tier are excluded by a club.

Tyler along with all other places in the great Republic of Texas has a kinder, friendlier posture towards model flying activities than other locales in the country. It is in the law passed as a result of HB1183. Liability of landowners who provide safe locations for radio-control aircraft enthusiasts is limited. Landowners that are informed of the provisions of this statute are not going to be impressed by the $2.5 AMA insurance coverage, as they do not need it. I think parkies are smart enough to inform site owners of TX law, rather than attempting to sell them on unnecessary insurance, and provisions that would exclude the public from public property. For those reasons, I doubt that AMA Park Flying Sites will be be springing up around TX.

If AMA sincerely wants to support park flyers and the future of model aviation, wouldn't it be more productive to push for elimination of the need for huge amounts of liability protection, instead of selling it (or pushing members to sell it)? The ARF club did it by asking their state assembly representative to sponsor HB 1183. If one small club can do it, why not AMA?

Abel

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

804

I think you may have been confused/mislead by the early post by STL. The radius is 3 mi. (same as the distance of separation) not the 1.5mi as has been wrongly asserted.

Think about it a bit. We are talking radius…not diameter. The points are 3 mi. apart in this case giving a diameter of the circle of 6 mi. That is a very big circle… any other flying site or member will have to be outside it to comply with AMA rules as far as un-agreed frequency use is concerned in regards to an existing flying site.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Able

Good question!

This is exactly the type of education/thrust that should be relayed/pursued to promote the hobby. In the end, the wash would be great.

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

I understand what your saying LCS, but let's take an actual look at the situation. The club in the middle represents the first club in the area. The other four clubs moved around the club in the middle within AMA tolerances.

Each of the 4 lines on this image represents 3 miles. The diameter of each of the 5 clubs equals double the line which is 6. All 5 clubs share the same space as the first one in the middle. Even if these are 4 people flying around a single club, all of them could be facing towards the club in the middle and still be sharing as much of the club in the middle's space as far as their eyes can fix on their airplane. But once the club is established on any of the 4 points, that 3 miles also becomes THEIR 3 miles too, some of which is inside the original. So how the does the center club control the shared space???

But either way it doesn't matter. Saying Parkies won't sign up because they'll know they have to fly more then 3 miles from a club is crazy. Well if that is the case, then what is the incentive for them to sign up on the $58 program, nothing ... except it costs twice as much. Remember anyone outside the AMA can come right in and setup their own club witin any of these circles any time they want. But having the AMA try to at least organize these people into their niche group, is a step in the right direction. The alternative is no direction.

But when the time comes where clubs bumping heads becomes a majority issue, the AMA headcounts will be in the millions. This country is huge and the amount of available spaces out there for the taking are also huge.

Hossfly

OK, I understand your point. My difference was just in my definition of "control". If I have the use of a certain portion of property, and someone else can come in and take a certain portion of such property for their own use, then IMO I don't "control" that property. Just simply a point of individual reference. NBFD!

By the same token, if a non-AMA group comes in and sets up a flying site 2 miles away from an AMA club, then only the AMA club is in jeopardy because the non-AMA club can ignore any type of "frequency agreement". Given that the new encroachment group is a "Park Fliers" group/club, they can rule the roost because their small models are in close range and will not be hampered by the big-boys a couple miles away. OTOH those "big boys" using the line-of-sight VHF freqs. can well suffer a problem, if the Park Fliers guys so wish to ignore the AMA club. Actually, in the strictest ruling, without that frequency agreement, the AMA club has to shut down flying or go non AMA. That in itself, is a fair reason that it is better for all if the AMA can succeed with the organization of park fliers into the PPP program.

Only then can any real cooperation be made between current AMA clubs and potential encroaching PFers.

Elementary my Dear Abel: AMA would then have nothing else for their sales force -- the Charter Clubs -- to sell and keep AMA bank accounts happy.
What club administration officers would not be very happy to get totally rid of all the AMA restrictions, legislation, rules and compounded paper work if there were no potential liabilities to have to plan for?

The hard-core competition fliers are not nearly enough to maintain support of the current AMA bureaucracy. We hard core AMA members are rapidly dwindling. AMA sees the handwriting on the wall, thus not pushing for what you propose, and thus do push for bringing in the PPP.

rctrax

WHAT THE HECK IS PPP? I FOLLOW FORUMS ALMOST EVERY DAY AND I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF IT.

KidEpoxy

Regarding what control clubs have of freqs in their 3mile,
who gets 3miles & who is in other's 3mile,
and how they respond to folks that want to use said freqs....

I suggest reading the Parkflier Frequency thread,
& pages 9-14 of the Outlaw Flyer thread, where this was discussed extensively about folks wanting to usurp freqs from clubs.

I'm not going to spoil the ending by posting bits of it here, you're gonna have to read those ClubFreq threads that deal with this topic:subtopic (Effect on existing clubs : Losing freqs) yourselves.

abel_pranger

Hoss-

I find little to like in the PPP, but you squarely hit on my biggest disappointment with it. AMA has long had all of its eggs in one basket, that basket being the chartered club and strings attached with the glue of insurance. Even though the AMA has been been on the brink of collapse when their bosom buddies in the insurance companies held them hostage by showing little interest in even bidding on the insurance contract, there is NO Plan B. I had hoped that with a turnover in key EC positions would come some indications that the addiction of AMA and its members to insurance might be addressed, and other things for AMA to sell would be sought. The PPP sadly demonstrates that has not happened. It is contrived to sell insurance to a targeted group that is expected to sell the need for it to owners of the sites they need in order to fly. SOS, DD.

Abel

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

able, i love ya man,

but you really do set your sights too high.
it is still the ama, after all.

Nathan_L

I live not far from Tyler, TX. I visited their site once. I'm not sure I will ever go back. I frequent the area at least weekly and was looking for some place to fly with some other people since I fly at the house by myself all the time.

After I found out about all the rules and regulations and whether I could fly as a guest would depend on where on the map I lived in a 50 mile circle or whatever they said. I just left and figured I didn't need to get that involved in a beuaracracy to fly. I'd rather just do it at the house. Sounded more complicated than filing out my taxes.

The Toolman

I think all of these threads are moot myself. I don't even think for a minute that the Parkies are gonna flock to this program even if it was $10 per year....

From what I hear an see around here an a lot of other places, I'd say that the only people interested in this program going over big would be the AMA an stl. So far it seems that they are the only ones that have any vested interest in it.



Ronnie

Hossfly

Hey, MON! Just have to go outside the forum box every so often although it's been well discussed in this forum.

"PPP" AMA's new Parkflyer Pilot Program. http://www.modelaircraft.org/parkflyer.aspx

Enjoy!

abel_pranger

Nathan-

The parts I added emphasis too are a dead giveaway as to which of the two clubs using the site was represented by those you spoke to. Try the other club.

Abel

Stickbuilder

Where I used to live, a new club approached the City and requested the use of a piece of City property to use as another flying field. The City told this group that they needed to join our Club, and that No, they would not allow another flying site within the City Limits, and that they would like to remove the existing club and turn the property into 2 more Softball fields. That's the truth, and the normal mindset of the Parks Administration.

So much for the overlapping of frequencys. I don't think that the average City will react any differently. So where are you going to find 5 pieces of property that you can possibly use to enable yourselves to do this? Dang, you guys live to find something to argue about.

Bill, AMA 4720

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Nathan,

The next time you are this way please bring a plane and lets get some flying done. You have a standing invitation as my guest...you can even join TUFF...its free!

BTW my name is Mark Humphries...I am at the field often but if not, I am usually not hard to find... someone there aleays seems to know were I am at because it is so easy... Either at the hobby shop or the flying field . Pretty much a single track mind

Stl

You are still mixing two totally different issues to smokescreen us...separation is the issue and no matter the graphs or charts or whatever you present doesn't decrease the area that precludes co-operation of two AMA entities without a FA. Just give it up and admit it as true and go on for once.


PS FWIW

I do hope you understand your visual spirograh representation was not needed and doesn't negate one iota the fact that an AMA member cannot fly R/C without a FA within 3 mi of an existing R/C flying site unless a member of the club or clubs. That is the point…unless existing clubs welcome the park flyers there may not be a park that is in the clear of the 28.53 mi. footprint of upper echelon AMAers to fly at for many if not most Parkies. You are railroading this discussion as usual by going on a tangent…this time, about all the unused land in America… but remember we are not talking land out in the boonies we are talking about parks…parks that are routinely convenient and close by…the park flyers allure…the venue choice by nature…NOT a club site in BFE with locked gates.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Hoss,

Thank you. I know you see my point. Don't wish to belabor this point indefinitely but I will tell you the term "control" would have a very different meaning to you if you ever have to get a freq. agreement signed by an existing club. The term "control" becomes very real at that point. The 28.53 sq. mi. footprint becomes very real then. Been there done that.

Nathan_L

Thanks for the offer. I think I'm fixing to move and I saw a new field (well new to me may have been there since before the wright brothers) is located just outside Marshal which is closer, but I'm always looking for a new place to fly and BS.

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

Sorry LCS, separation is not the issue. Separation is an issue that some on this board deal with. But on the field and in the real world the AMA is trying to bring aeromodelers and aviation enthusiasts together under 1 unified membership organization. No different then you say an existing club controls a designated flying area, the AMA has come up with a solution for the area to be shared. You see things your way ... others see them another way. But telling me to move on is not the best way to win your argument. I have every right to speak my opinion on this board as anyone else.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Hmmm...its funny but when I or anyone else says that you disagree and make a case against the obvious.. Glad to see you finally agree! My efforts to convince you have paid off.

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

Terrific then if you believe 1-18 yr olds, International guests, Family members, PPP's, Majority members and Senior Citizens together being 1 unified group under the AMA's umbrella, terrific, we are finally on the same page. Remember, unified by definition means to consolidate.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

I'm not so sure about the led zepplin here. With the regular AMA, the AMA pilot is insured regardless of what he flies. The PPP is only insured if what he was flying at the time of an incident was not able to fly faster than 60mph or weighed mor than 2lbs. A savvy lawyer would ask that the flier PROVE this after the fact.

I would think that anyone in the beauracracy making decision on who could fly there, would likely say, "get the full AMA coverage for only $28.00 more so we are sure we are always covered."

Glacier Girl

My Feedback: (4)

LCS, THANK YOU!!! That is how a newbie should be greeted when he approaches a new club. First impressions can really make a difference. Greeted as Nathan was originally, or at least how he took it, sure ain't going to impress a new flier into wanting to join that club. Without your warm welcome, where would it have left him?

Would he look elsewhere? Some empty lot or field down the road? And who takes the blame at the club when they get shot down by Nathan? And what if he makes it his mission in life to form a PPP club and take away your freqs. LOL

The only way to try and make these groups come together, is to stop the treatment some are given by what they fly or how much experience they have.

Why we can't just see all fliers as part of our hobby, is beyond me.