abel_pranger
Posts: 2361
Joined: 5/7/2003
From: St Augustine, FL,
Status: offline
|
JR-
The list of choices in your poll is long, but still managed to dodge a firm yes or no from me! I think tiered rates could/should have a place. That place is insurance for categories of models/activities that the EC has deemed too risky to insure under their present, seemingly occult, criteria. Case in point is big racers (yeah, Gordon, that one's for you). Giant scale racers were left hung out to dry for several years while the EC pondered how to deal with them. Not faulting the EC, I had some queasy feelings about them as a spectator. At least early in that game when Madera, CA was the primary venue, there were many crashes. There were also many spectators. The organizers did a reasonable job of keeping potential out-of-control racing models separated from the crowd. So did the competitors: I recall a real beauty of a Tigercat that experienced a high-speed stall after rounding a pylon, sending it toward the crowd with too little altitude to allow for reasonable certainty of regaining control. The pilot had the guts and skill to spin it in before it could reach the spectator area - it probably cost him in excess of $10K and months of labor. It was apparent to me that the mass, speed, and wing loading of these models, along with a large crowd of spectators, made for a level of risk that would be very hard to assess intuitively as of similar order of magnitude that we experience in our usual club flying environment. Is it worth the risk, i.e., is it an 'acceptable' risk? I think it is. These events draw in many non-modelers, some fraction of which are inspired to become modelers by what they see. In that sense, it is a great promotion for our hobby and sport, and so AMA as well. Point of this long story is an example of an activity that AMA might have turned it's back on (and it appeared they did for quite a long time) due to liability risk. It might have been handled more expediently if AMA had a mechanism in place to provide insurance coverage at a special rate commensurate with the greater risk. I don't know what else may come down the pike, but I'd like to see some avenue of accommodation open to new aspects of our hobby/sport, as well as some current ones you have mentioned that are threatened with curtailment, due to a perceived risk that exceeds the comfort threshold of the EC in the current one-size-fits-all packaging of insurance. Some form of tiered rates would seem to be a viable way to do that.
BTW, I don't think AMA needs to bear all of the load re administration of special or tiered rates - SIGs like the JPO and GSRA , for examples, could be players representing the particular interests of their members. Administration at the club level isn't as big a deal as some have made it out to be either. For jets, they already have to check that pilots have the necessary AMA waivers. What's the big deal if more than one waiver level were involved, e.g., under and over 55 lbs? I submit that it wouldn't be a big deal, if it came down to a go/no-go ruling by the EC re those exceeding 55 lbs, wet.
The real bugaboo that I and others have brought up here previously is the prospect, or lack thereof, for realistic assessment of risk, and so apportionment of insurance premium cost. Don't have a ready answer to that one. Maybe the risk assessment consultants AMA has allegedly hired to investigate will.
Abel
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> Tiered Insurance Poll 
Tiered Insurance Poll - 
Tiered Insurance Poll - 
