ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
Well I hate MAAC because they are stuck in the past.
We all judge from our own perspective.... I find the latest attention to electric, indoor, turbine etc. to be rather forward thinking...
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
I don't need some silly newsletter in the mail, and it's irrelevent to me anyway since I don't care that much about what a bunch of other flyers did over the last while.
I find the magazine a good source of contacts and information that help me plan my year. Which events look interesting, are reasonable distance and schedule etc. I'm also interested in what new developments or techniques are being developed/tried. It's amazing how many good people I've met simply because I discovered a common interest through the magazine.... and now online.
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
It's stupid that guys flying big gas ships are classed the same as park flyers.
In fact, they're not. If you take the time to read MAAC's safety rules, you'll find specific requirements for many disciplines from lanyard requirements for line control to kill switches for gassers....
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
It's also stupid that there is no coverage for park flying even when it is legal.
You'l find there is coverage provided you fly from a sanctioned location. The only time it's illegal is when you fly from prperty without permission.... and that's not MAAC's fault.
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
... For example rules could allow flight of planes less than 15 oz., 7 cell or 2s lipo maximum, and require a rubber spinner.
Many have struggled with this .. your restrictions, with a light wing loading could result in a relatively safe aircraft. Shave some wing are and I could build guided anti-personnel missle with the same requirements. It's just not that simple.
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
Combined with updated safety rules and allowance to fly wherever it is legal, a whole new generation of MAAC members could be created. oh yeah
There's nothing stopping you from making a proposal.
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
...the membership needs to be like $25 or something!!
Ok, and how do you propose to pay for the rest of MAAC's expenses. I assume you feel that because you don't make use of the services at this point in your life, others don't have need of them?
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
When a newbie plonks down his hard earned 150$ for a firebird or something there's just no way he's going to buy a $100 membership to some club. This means he doesn't get help. This means he's likely to find the hobby too challenging and drop out....
You get what you pay for. There is a fine line between hobby and toy. The person who 'plonks down" (sic) $150 for a firebird may be a potential modeller but, by your won admission, has some hurdles ahead. We're here to help answer questions when needed, I've helped many with all aspects of building, trimming, learning to fly and theory (the all too often overlooked aspect of the hobby). No, I don't charge but my time is limited. I spend little time with those who are obviously simply looking for another toy, more time than I should with those who show keen interest in learning.
As for MAAC, many ideas have been tried including reducing junior membership rates, even paying for junior memberships out of zone funds (my zone does this). You can only do so much, I do demos for community events, air cadets, scouts, man the MAAC booth etc., I offer my time to help others learn to fly, to build etc. etc. You may want to consider what you do to improve the situation before you criticise others....
ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
THe days of big gas planes being the only option are done. (of course they are great too, just less beginner friendly+cheap)
This I don't get ... since when were "big gas planes" the only option? Even myself, as a "big gas plane" flyer also enjoy sailplanes, park flyers, indoor rubber etc. I think you have some preconceived notions based on the fact that large aircraft tend to net more coverage in magazines?...
** edited to close a quote [&o] **