I also fly quite a lot in my own yard these days which is something I never did a couple of years ago. I honestly think park flying something more than a passing fad simply because convienient and the planes have become quite capable in the right hands.
I'm not quitting my club. I still like my big planes, but I can see how some people could be quite happy flying nothing but small parkfliers and never miss the AMA or what it might have to offer them.
Wiz
[X(] Wow, has this thread ever slid off the rail? Initiated as a political statement in hopes that someone might actually nominate me for AMA EVP other than my local buddies which I am NOT soliciting from, here we go again all about park fliers and their worth, their flying facilities, etc., etc., and so forth. Well folks, in this old modeler's opinion, the changes have happened many times in the history of model aviation. The advent of the gas engine back around '33 shook the current-at-that-time rubber powered fliers all to "L". Gas made rubber obsolete overnight as a contest item pitted against gas.
Today, gas survives, and so does Rubber-Power which is a model flight art-form all its own.
Control-Line "killed" Free-Flight. Both survive today.
.35 - .65 CL was the vogue, then Ray Arden did his thing, the GLOW PLUG, and then the 1/2 A (.049 and there abouts) brought CL back to the local schoolyards and backyards, another "technology" item that was going to shoot modeling down. Actually it did just the opposite as it kindled new interests and rekindled old interests, with new growth in the hobby.
Radio Control started in the '30s. It became the vogue in the '60s. RC snobs abounded. Still do. Yet, there are still those that fly rubber, FF, CL, and even gliders. Along the mid-'80s if one did not fly those gigantic "Big-Birds" of 80" wingspan or larger then one was truly only for walking on. Now an 80" w/s model airplane is no big deal. Is this sport/hobby great or what? So much for so few. [sm=thumbup.gif]
Now on one hand, the "park-fliers", whatever they really are, will destroy the sport. On the other hand they will help it grow. Who is right? Some speak of "data". Who gives a 'shot' other than the gut feeling as one sees in one's own community?
In my opinion, as I said in the first post of this thread, park flying only proves one thing which is the INTEREST IN THINGS THAT FLY IS NOT DEAD which is a welcome sign to me.
There are other items that indicate to me that there are some people in AMA that have their thinking cap on. Personally I am usually most impressed with one Mr. Steve kaluf, Technical Director. He runs a well organized shop and he obviously is very interested in how the overall model aviation operation moves along with current technology. I think his April 2005 article is excellent. He mentions a number of problems and the various directions that might be taken. Mr. Kaluf even called to attention a less than popular thing he suggested about CL Pull tests. From the quoted letter from the CL Speed group, I think that the group greatly over-reacted to Mr. kaluf's inquiry. In addition I think the North American Speed Society is just a bit overly pompous.
This is illustrated simply to evidence how things said can be altered by those that are so anxious to "Disagree"
. It seems that some here are of the opinion that my proposed method of gaining an increase in AMA membership is to court the park fliers. Nothing could be more wrong. The park fliers, having demonstrated interest in both model flying and things that fly, then they are, IMO, prime subjects and promise for new converts. However, the big item to gain AMA members is through making so many people within the entire populace aware of the overall sport of model aviation, not just some specific group.
When I owned a Hobby Shop in Mt. Prospect, IL, if all the model airplane kits that just I sold had been built and taken to the flying fields, I think all the sites in greater Chicago Land would have been flooded with airplanes.
I doubt that more than 2% ever made it to a flying field. Right now, just from the local HSs stock, reading the magazines, etc. I feel that if 2% of the non-club-member "park-fliers" could be lured into the AMA, then the administrative staff would be seriously loaded.
So while the park-fliers are many in number and have the interest, as an AMA officer, I would not support any significant expense to pursue them.
To build the AMA back up into a viable organization supporting all the disciplines, both in competition and sport, providing a suitable liability insurance, totally dedicated to the advancement of model aviation through publicity and education, and sincere help in establishing flying facilities are all definite objectives should I be allowed to serve as the AMA Executive Vice President.
The ball is in your court.