Originally posted by JimFranks
It all confuses me, but it seems right that the AMA should research what flying activity is costing the most in claims and try to recover that expense from the modelers that what to pursue that type of activity. Insurance companies have been doing that for years. A red sports car costs you more in insurance than a VW. A semi-truck costs more then a pick-up. A field closer to a population center has the potential to cause more damage then one out in the country. Lets come up with a complex system that bases your AMA dues on what you fly, where you fly (what club you belong to), how much you fly (AMA events), and how well you fly (hard to do).
Sorry, but the largest single group of claims have NOTHING to do with flight or airplanes. The largest group of claims are trip and fall type of claims filed by someone for accidents that just happen to occur at the club flying field.
It is my UNDERSTANDING (and it may be wrong) that several of the insurance companies that looked at bidding on our insurance coverage were interested in a loss prevention program.
When you take those two INDEPENDENT statements together, it should be clear that most of us are too careless about things in and around where guests spend their time at the flying field.
Some AMA DVP wants to keep a record of all accidents to determine if we have bad equipment out that. Think about that one for a little while and see the flaws in the basic assumptions and long term nature of any possible questionable benefits from such an activity. First someone has to determine the REAL reason a plane went in. Second someone has to document that the equipment was used correctly. Third the makers of the equipment have to not improve the equipment unless we tell them to do so. I don't think that is going to work.
However, I have suggested (and gotten no positive response) is that we appoint some guy for each district to help try to find a solution. Then we have each club send in pictures with their recharter packet. Pictures of the parking area, pit area, and spectator area. Give those pictures to the guy we appointed in that district.
His job is to see if he can identify problems in the photo. If he sees something that needs to be changed, a letter to the club contact (AND e-mail but NOT only) asking for clarification of the visible issue. If the clarification is unacceptable (the spectator benches are next to the pilot station - way out there but an example) then the club is asked to make specific changes. Another area is rotten bleachers. If they can be seen in a photo, they should be fixed.
Those ideas MIGHT reduce the non flying claims, but like anything else it is just a guess. However, then the AMA could at least claim to have a "Loss Prevention Program" in place and demonstrate its effectiveness. I bet it could reduce those household liability type of claims by as much as 10% IN THE VERY FIRST YEAR! Most of us go the the field to fly and don't really care that much for environs, except for the height of the grass.