Goodbye UMA
 

Now that it's gone and just another point in history, again the AMA Insurance has NO competition. :(

Goodbye UMA. It was a short ride.

http://www.unitedmodelers.com/


EX UMA 7160

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Hoss!
Where have you been:eek:


[8D]

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

well, at least there are no lawsuit costs to be borne this time around.

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

In order for a new rc insurance to susceed something has to be done
to break the ama strangle hold on 98% of the clubs in the US .
no club will let you fly unless you join the ama no matter what type of ins
you may have.



Ira d

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Since your homeowners is the primary anyway maybe we need to look that way. -Mike

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

The AMA is NEVER going to allow alternative insurances at AMA chartered club flying sites. You know why? Because those people who hold alternative insurance will be benefiting from AMA services like site insurance, legal services for the club, and even the very organizational fabric of the club, without paying a dime. You know what that's called? It's called FREELOADING. Good 'mericans like yourselves should be aghast that the AMA would even consider allowing freeloaders.

If an organization is going to compete with the AMA, it has to COMPETE. The UMA simply existed. They opened their doors, and sat around waiting for customers to happen by. You've got to get your name out there, convince clubs around the country that what you have is worth switching to, then take their success stories and convince other clubs to switch...

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Is any Organization more 'Murican' than the NRA?
The NRA only requires 50% NRA Membership for a club's range and activities to be covered. Sanctioned events require that the participants be National members, however.
It must be admitted that non-national club members kinda get looked at and talked about, however. Free-loaders are never appreciated.

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Generally true, but not always.

Flying sites on public lands are a notable exception, because the threat of litigation is too much for municipalities to risk.

It's not legal for a municipality to require a resident to join any third-party organization before the resident can make use of municipality-owned lands or resources.

RCRC in Huntsville found that out the hard way, and at one point were in jeopardy of having the flying site turned over to the soccer moms and archery buffs.

Huntsville residents can obtain a flying site use permit directly from the City and do NOT have to join AMA to fly at Trey Wilborn Field. Naturally, that seriously pisses off the RCRC field Nazis, but that's the hidden cost of getting full-time use of public lands gratis.

Thing is, not many non-AMA modelers know they are being discriminated against or don't want to fight city hall, but the fact remains that when push comes to shove, AMA cannot force municipalities to mandate AMA membership as a condition for use of public land flying sites.

BTDT, T-shirt never did fit.

There are a great many AMA chartered clubs using public lands and 'getting away with' forcing local residents to join AMA if they want to fly.

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

People seem to be missing something very basic here. The AMA forcing local clubs to limit participation to AMA members only (private or public owned sites).

The members of the local clubs elect their officers and in doing so set the rules that the club will abide by. If they chose to go the AMA route for whatever reason it is their choice. THE AMA HAS NO POWER TO FORCE A LOCAL CLUB TO AFFILIATE! Clubs affiliate because the majority of the members feel it is to their advantage. If what we see on this forum, that the majority of modelers don't want to belong to the AMA, then please tell me why this same majority of modelers choses to do other wise and support their AMA chartered clubs.

There apparently exits at least one "club", that of C. O. Jones (rec.model.rc.air NG), which can shun the AMA. Of course that"club" has the distinction of being totally invisible, inaccessible and for all practical purposes non-existant to the modeling community. The C. O. Jones "club" is unique in that his "members" apparently chose not to even remotely verify the existence or location of this modeling Shangrala.



S

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

The AMA has all the clubs afraid to let any one fly that is not a AMA member.
i dont think this is right if you have some other form of insurance.
your other insurance will be asked to pay first anyway the way the system is
now the AMA has a monopoly over model aviation.
we had non an AMA field two miles from my home but they built homes there
a lot of people used that field but when closed we were are forced to fly at AMA fields.
the only other non AMA field i know of is 75 mi away.

i have been an AMA member for ten years but it would nice to have a choice sometime
especialy if dont want be bothered with some of the unnessary AMA rules.




Ira d

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Fred, since I am not a lawyer and certainly not familiar with the laws of each state and/or municipality, I won't argue with your statements. I do recall, and if wrong for now, please someone correct me, that when I lived in Chicagoland, the forest preserve sites were administrated by some specific club/s and the counties required AMA for the users of the model flying facilities.
I know the big Scobee Field here in the Houston / Harris County does the same thing. Bayou City Flyers run the field, however anyone can fly as long as he/she is an AMA member.

Things are: (1) The city/county owns the facility, and they do the majority of the maintenance, so who is going to question how the facility is administrated? (2) If some one wishes to carry the fight far enough, he/she may win the battle about the taxpayer funded thing. Then the city/county simply withdraws the funding, the place is closed and ALL THE USERS are WELL SHAFTED. So just who WINS?

If each flier is required to have AMA insurance, I know that other person can finance any injury he may do to me. I also know that I may not lose the farm if I hurt someone else.

Therefore regardless of the fact that I have to put aside my lofty ideals at times, I wrote into the land contract of sale a Deed Restriction that the Club MUST maintain 100% of the AMA Charter Requirements as long as they owe me money on the mortgage. I think any owner leasing any facility can do same or as their situation calls for, regardless of whether the monies are taxpayer funded or what. H_ell, look at what the government does with my tax money and I don't have ANY say in that.

There are times to fight the legal matters, and there are times to simply shut up and go with the flow. I suppose it is all referenced to the depth of one's pockets. AMA dues for the insurance coverage is one of the best deals in town.

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

It always has been and always will be up to the club to choose, or not choose, to be chartered by the AMA. Nobody's forcing anybody to do anything, period, end of discussion.

Clubs choose AMA because it's one-stop shopping for many of the essential services a club needs, not because the AMA got wind of a bunch of unorganized fliers and sent Vinny, Angelo and Tommy two-toes out to "convince" them to join.

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Could the same be applied to the idea that one's homeowner's insurance is the primary insurance? Doesn't the AMA get a free ride in that case while the homeowner still pays the dues?

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

Not so in my opinion. When I consider the amount I pay for HO insurance for a paltry $300,000 liability protection and what I "pay" AMA for two-million additional coverage and protection, actually I think I am getting the free ride. My Liability Umbrella Policy also costs significantly more than AMA, but if it saves the farm some day then it's a good investment.
Those really getting a "FREE ride" are those that have no primary liability insurance and AMA serves that purpose. OTOH, I am very happy that they're covered should they do me damage.[8D]

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

C'mon Hoss. You're talking out the side of yer mouth like a Democrat, and I know you ain't one of them. Only a small fraction of your HO policy payment goes for liability insurance, on the order of 5% (based on payout stats readily available from the insurance industry). It's an apples and oranges comparison to begin with, but to play your game, both your HO and PUP policies cover your butt in activities vastly more likely to get you in a liability situation. Tell either of those insurance carriers you fly model airplanes and the likely reply is "So What?"
Now tell them you own a Doberman and see if you can count all of your fingers before you get the cancellation notices. The excess coverage provided by AMA is comparable to the life insurance policies sold by vending machine in the airports - you've been there, I know - 2 bits per $million of coverage kind of thing. Insurance is cheap when the payout odds are a zillion to one. You'll get much better odds playing at Keno in Lost Wages.

Abel

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

I am not griping about the fee structure for AMA-I agree that it is reassuring for the r/c flier out there that has nothing and has AMA that if he crashes into my car -that I should be able to get my car fixed=also the fact that if I hit you we should not have a situation of when you are going to pay me. I saw a guy loose a trainer three weeks ago in East Houston-the plane flew away 1/2 mile and it hit a house rooftop-from what I was told the deck of the roof had a hole 5 inches by 5 inches-price of repair was over $2400.00-it was covered by AMA less deductibles-so for insurance and peace of mind I think it is great deal on the other hand there mag sucks-and they spend too much money in Muncie and I would like to see more regional participation in money and fields-Muncie is too far for me drive on a Saturday morning to fly for a couple of hours

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

I will most likely get flamed for what I am about to say here so please give me time to get my Nomex suite on.
Yes it is true that the UMA is gone and with it the only competition to the AMA.
Well not quite there still is a source of competition for the AMA and it is by the AMA's own doing.
It is a little known fact that most modelers or AMA members are unaware of.
It is a tinny little loop hole that most of us know about but only a few us are aware of.
I have been flying at our club field for 25 years and it hit me Sunday that we have one member of our club that is not an AMA member and never has been, yet he has been allowed to join our club and fly at our field for years and it is within the AMA rules and it is with the AMA's blessing.
Now I know you all are thinking how is this possible what puts this man above the rest of us?
Nothing he is not any better that the rest of us he puts his pants on one leg at a time just like all of us, in fact he is not even a U.S. Citizen.
He is a Canadian Citizen and a member of the MAAC Model Aeronautics Association of Canada.
I don't remember when the AMA and the MAAC did it but some time back they created a reciprocating agreements with one another that any AMA member can fly in Canada at MAAC fields and any MAAC member can fly in the US at AMA fields. There are some restriction and I am not going to go in to them here if you are interested you can read then your self here are the links. http://www.maac.ca/ http://www.maac.ca/forms/form_membership.pdf
I am most likely about to open a very BIG can of worms here but if you have had all that you can stand with the AMA but still would like to be able fly at your club field or any AMA field for that mater then join the MAAC and you can fly.
The dues are only $55.00 Canadian and with the exchange rate that puts it around $44.00 U.S. you get a very nice magazine and it is printed in English and French.
Now I am not saying that we all should run out and join the MAAC but if enough of us did do you think that it would get
Mr. Brown's attention.
Most likely the AMA and the MAAC would change the rules so that you would have to be a Canadian Citizen to join the MAAC and a US Citizen to join the AMA.
Ok I have my Nomex suite on so flame away.
Dave Jones
AUAV.net

RE: Goodbye UMA
 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Oh Dave. That is a great one. here I profess to be the loop-hole finder and that one I never thought of.

Yep, there is one good one for certain.

Oh well not for me as I'm a lifer in the jail of AMA. :) Just joking as that was my choice.

Still , Dave J. That is really a good one.