well, to put a Worst Case Scenario in scale, I'll first give a Best Case
Best Case:
Nobody does nuthin to tip the apple cart.
AMA respectfully declines FAA's wishes of grabbing approval/control of cbos. AMA enjoys the protections granted by congress, as will other startup cbos that cater to hobby niches AMA either under-caters or wont cater to. Modelers enjoy the freedom by congress and the hobby benefits from more choices and groups. And should AMA find itself the target of the government trying to oppress CBOs, then AMA wont have to stand alone but stand with the other cbo liaisons stating We, ALL the CBOs, will have their combined memberships fight for the hobby
(teehee, even though out of the 400k combined memberships, we just skip over the part that many modelers could belong to more than one org).
Good times for all.
....
Really Bad Case (from a few pagses back)
If some CBO starts up and trys to talk the fed into 'better defining' models as to be Electric Only,
you would be greatly irked over that cbo trying to make what AMA does (glow&gas) a federal offense.
Even regardless of their 'good intentions' to save the planet, and go green, and quiet neighborhoods, and any other junk they say to convince congress to 'better define' model aircraft as Electric Only.
Their 'better definition' is actually a WORSE DEFINITION for model disciplines(gas&glaw)
that they dont consider part of the hobby and therefore they dont need to protect
wow
that Electric Only startup cbo sounds like a bunch of jerks
....
Most likely worst case:
Somebody gets themselves taken care of but poisons it for the rest.
Some huge CBO goes ahead right from the start and surrenders control/approval to the FAA, despite congress protection from that, and it sets a precedent that makes it harder for other startup cbos to get out from under FAA's illegal controlling of cbos. Once a huge cbo refuses to take the FAA to court over it, the small startup cbos will have to fight that precedent... and the small startups dont have millions in assets and a rabid fan base of 30000 willing to send $100-$1000 to an ama legal fund.... FAA could just pull the modern classic of
bankrupting the plaintiff rather than winning the case on merit. Why would the HUGE cbo choose not to fight FAA approvals/control? Well, maybe its cause that CBO already knows THEY will be approved and its really just other cbos that will suffer / fail to startup.
Where do the FT 200+lb models fly then?
Where do the Look&Launch model gogglepilots fly then?
Where do the Program,Look&Launch autonomous model pilots fly then?
We saw all the non-safety junk in the ARC, junk like model equipment bans, that had AMA's fingerprints all over it... thats what 'we the people' were asking FAA to ban. When we were not free from FAA control we saw junk like that, and the overall abandonment of HeadsDown, from AMA in order to appease the FAA. Come on, 20 folks on the ARC were 19 guys that use and dont mind metal propellers plus AMA that hates metal props... and we see '
the ARC not the AMA' asking the feds to ban them? Asking for a ban????
sheesh[:@]
AMA-Only means no Superheavy cbo rules, AMA-Only means no HeadsDown cbo rules, AMA-Only means no programming the 14oz autonomous heli to fly around your front yard. And all those non-members cannot even vote in AMA leaders that would open up AMA to their disciplines, cause nonmembers cannot vote
(hey, lookit that, AMA learned a trick from what they did to the PPP: 'No Vote ForYou')
....
Last month, the government was allowing a lot of model flying, and AMA rules allowed less of it.
Right now congress allows slightly less model flying, and AMA rules allow
even less of that.
We dont need to make the government allow less as to be more like AMA.
We dont need to have our 'extensive' cbo documents rewritten/submitted to meet FAA
(now illegal)requirements.
We dont need to poison the waters against other cbos.
We DO need to, right off the congressional bat, take FAA to court to stop them from getting any ideas in the future.