Originally Posted by
porcia83
Do you think that perhaps the EAA has different goals, objectives, and concerns than the AMA? So what did you think about the latest AMA news? Interested to hear the negatives or downsides, and/or errors on behalf of the AMA.
I'm fine with what they're doing so long as they don't use a single word of what's passed, not one, to require membership. If they require membership to fly at their own fields, that's fine, I support that as it is their right in exchange for providing site insurance. However, I do not support their membership requirement to inspect large airplanes for those who fly at non-AMA fields.
As it sits, AMA requires membership to certify models >55lbs under the law. If they were to say that they'd inspect w/o requiring membership, then I'd support them. If the numbers of these models are as small as they say, it shouldn't be a big deal.
Lastly, this is round one. There's still the senate where powerful individuals oppose much of what's in this (govn't employee unions, EAA, etc.). I'll be shocked if the final law that goes to the President looks anything like this.