I remember when the AMA was able to work with the Government and the FCC to protect the radio frequencies that we all used at the time. It seemed that there was a general understanding of who and what the AMA was and what it represented and was recognized and respected for its relevance by the government and the general public. The AMA was granted "special" treatment by being granted a range of frequencies to be used for model aviation.

Now, it is clear that the Government and general public do not view "us" with the same respect and relevance.

Many, many things have changed since then that I believe have contributed in a large part to where we are today. I will not focus on how the world around us, or how society itself has changed, but rather where I believe the AMA let us down and what they could have done to help "our" cause and keep model aviation relevant and have a chance at carving out exemptions and protecting model aviation.

First off, I believe the AMA IS, "us" and, "we" ARE the AMA. The messages and vibe I get from Muncie is more of a top-down style of managing and directing, creating an "US vs. THEM" atmosphere that has seemed to become the accepted norm by the majority of AMA members. Many discussions at club meetings are the club officers communicating the directions of AMA management to the membership. In my opinion, club meetings are the place where the local membership is able to bring their wants, needs, concerns and opinions to the local club leadership for them to convey to our area AMA representatives. In turn, our area AMA reps are responsible to take our collective voice to the AMA leadership for discussion and consideration, providing them the direction the collective membership wishes the organization to pursue. I also believe that ALL blame should not be directed at AMA leadership, because I have also witnessed general malaise and lack of participation by the vast majority of AMA members when it comes to being engaged in any AMA affairs, other than those that directly affect their their ability to bring a plane to the field and be able to fly when and how they want.

Second, I believe the AMA lost focus on the vast majority of its' membership and our roots in model aviation, by simply focusing largely on growth; growth ="good", growth = $$.. The AMA had blinders on when the technology for affordable, autonomous, GPS capable, FPV flight hit the consumer market. I believe they saw this simply as an opportunity to bloat the membership and grow the bank account instead of focusing on representing its members' needs. It is very clear to me that the vast majority of the "drone" demographic, do NOT fit the same mold, nor do they have the same wants, needs and expectations of the AMA as do the members that had "built" the AMA to that point. I believe the AMA errantly romanced the drones in order to "grow", believing that would, in some way, keep them "relevant" in the FAA's eyes, all the time ca$hing in on a new source of income. The AMA did not need to "SHUN" the droners, they simply had to clearly differentiate between the hobby of "model aviation" and the hobby of "droning" i.e. autonomous flight, GPS guided, BLOS, FPV assisted-flight as well as aerial photography aerial cinema buffs. While SOME of these activities can be considered somewhat related to "traditional" activities of building and flying models for the sheer joy of building and flying models, it has become clear to me that they are distinctly different hobbies, drawing a different demographic and CLEARLY needing a distinctly different set of rules in order to fly safely within our NAS. It is also clear to me that by inviting these distinctly different demographics into the AMA fold, it has created a "divided" membership, that has less of a chance of putting together a unified front to fight for any kind of "special" status with the FAA.

That is just a PART of my $.02!!

Regards,

Astro