ORIGINAL: Jim Thomerson
I belong to the AMA so that I can fly in sanctioned contests. I think support of model aircraft competition is a central AMA function. However, over the past several years, the AMA EC has made several anti-competition changes. First there was the insulting change to give a CD a 50% discount on membership for CDing a contest, rather than 100%. This is insulting for two reasons. First, if the AMA is in the red, let's simply say, "Sorry, we appreciate what you do for the AMA, but we can't afford to reward you. " Secondly, there was talk that some abused the system. If you have been CD of a contest or even a flyin, you know how much effort is involved. But they chose to tar us all with the same brush. Years ago, when the AMA was rich, every member got a rule book. Now you either have to buy a rule book from AMA or print it out using your ink, paper, and time. Now a charge for advertising the events that the AMA exists to support. As I see it, the AMA EC is becoming increasingly anti competition, and I am not a happy camper.
Jim Thomerson AMA 77317 CD
Hey Jim, here is another item that I observed in the Aug. issue of MA. I have asked some questions and received answers only from the author of the article. He takes the responsibility for not making clear the item was performed outside the "Sanctioned Hours". However the article author is one of the good-guys and a little slip on his part, especially when he says he did so, certainly doesn't bother me.
Still in my mind those being paid to edit and present a magazine under AMA's rules should have caught this one big time.
In an email to the power-brokers I said:
>>>>
FIRST:
Great editorial by Bob Hunt, 2006 Aug MA
Sky will soon fall as I agree 101% with it all.
SECOND: (in answer to a kurek email)
rkurek: "We already have a solid working knowledge of the primary AMA safety code, typically printed in every issue of the magazine, and review the contents each month with this as a guideline."
Very good Rob. However I have another one for you. My magazine has caught up with me. If the event was NOT sanctioned, then disregard this item.
However using the circumstantial evidence: The event was published in MA, and the note of the CD being "patient and energetic", I am assuming it was.
Unable to research because the AMA Contest Calendar doesn't display that far back, the Members Only doesn't have the 2006 issues yet, and my library of magazines is still 1500 miles south of me.
Look at the very enjoyable and informative report of the "Flight Festival 2006" on page 27, Aug, 2006 MA: Turn to page 29 and view the F-86 picture, then read the caption with additional text on page 30, next-to-last paragraph.
Now with that "....solid working knowledge of the primary AMA safety code,..." YOU tell me what is wrong here. Par. 4 General of the SC if you need a clue.
<<<<
The article author quickly recognized the error and responded. He is an OK guy.
Those that have the "solid working knowledge" don't respond. The EC doesn't do anything about these attitudes and the resulting errors only grow and manifest into why the competition modelers are being given the run-around.
Here is my idea of an EC meeting and communication. Thanks to whomever made this card. No company name on it.