Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

I've Waited Long Enough!

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

I've Waited Long Enough!

Old 10-04-2010, 01:55 PM
  #26  
K-Bob
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Anytown
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


.
Old 10-04-2010, 02:01 PM
  #27  
K-Bob
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Anytown
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

We can only speculate. Perhapshe meant so "that they can have more and larger airplanes reviewed." Larger more expensive planes=larger profit.
Old 10-04-2010, 02:14 PM
  #28  
KidEpoxy
Senior Member
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

Bauer says the PP membership and PP magazine are two separate things, just because we do away with the membership doesn’t mean we get rid of the magazine.
Oh
My
God

Anybody do the math?
"As of August 7, 2010 there are 2,275 park pilot members."

09 Revenue: PPM $43,336
09 Expense: PPM $128,771
Salaries for the PPM producers???




When did out insurance org turn into a publishing org?
And who are they to dis the 2/60E limits we have for PPP, that they want to advertise other stuff? Dont they know the marketing committee worked real hard on the 2/60E limits... they should know, they WERE they marketing committee that came up with their limit that they now dont like it
Old 10-04-2010, 02:45 PM
  #29  
tinner1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: newbury, OH
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

I would be willing to bet that most of the PPP members are former full AMA members that because they are flying parkies have decided to down size to the PP membership. It would be interested to see how many are actually former members.
From MY "personal experience", which a certain poster uses as "facts" to support HIS viewpoint......Most guys I know that are already AMA members, that do buy and fly Parkflyers, stay in the AMA. Case in point, myself. I have been an AMA member for almost 50 years, and I have several Parkflyers. I, like the others I refer to, am NOT going to sell off 25 planes and just fly Parkies. I enjoy my backyard or the nearby school, but I won't be getting rid of my bigger nitro's. Granted SOME will change, but most guys that have been in the hobby/AMA for any length of time just view Parkflyers as another great thing to enjoy, and NOT something to give up all others for. And as for the hobby going "BIGGER"......just go to ANY club field or show or competition and you will see a big increase in bigger planes. They fly more realistically, and if I could afford one I would move up to them too. Heck, the big pattern flyers like Chip Hyde are actually flying electrics in pattern competition, a direct evolution of electrics from Parkflyer to the larger models. I might be wrong but my experiences show differently.....
Old 10-04-2010, 02:47 PM
  #30  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

Bauer says the PP membership and PP magazine are two separate things, just because we do away with the membership doesn’t mean we get rid of the magazine.
Oh
My
God

Anybody do the math?
''As of August 7, 2010 there are 2,275 park pilot members.''

09 Revenue: PPM $43,336
09 Expense: PPM $128,771
Salaries for the PPM producers???
There's math and then there's accounting............ever wonder how some clever lawyers manage to get more than 24 billing hours/day?

Pet project key principles: a) borrow labor from other cost centers, b) never have overhead costs

All the program/project managers here know that; it's doing business.
Old 10-04-2010, 05:22 PM
  #31  
Luchnia
My Feedback: (21)
 
Luchnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Amelia, VA
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: cj_rumley

There's math and then there's accounting............ever wonder how some clever lawyers manage to get more than 24 billing hours/day?

Pet project key principles: a) borrow labor from other cost centers, b) never have overhead costs

All the program/project managers here know that; it's doing business.
I call it robbing without a gun. The robber with a gun robs you by using fear. The lawyer robs by using deceipt because of one's ignorance. It is still stealing just on a different scale.
Old 10-04-2010, 11:49 PM
  #32  
dbcisco
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: Hossfly
Unfortunately, for both AMA and the Clubs, I see the move to real large and expensive airplanes as possibly a detriment to the future of RC model aviation simply because so many cannot afford to be a ''Jones''. Unfortunately for our society, folks under 50 years of age seem to be mired in such ''I gotta' have more and bigger than him.'' Speaking of merchandise and toys, of course!
I think when the new FAA rules for sUAS arrive many are going to be unhappy to discover their planes and/or flying style (Alt. at least) are no longer falling under "model aircraft" regulations (yup, I bet the "guidelines" are going to be mandatory) but under sUAV regulations requiring a CoA (at least). I would be hesitant to shell out a lot of my money for something I might not be able to afford to (or allowed to) fly in a couple years. I would be waiting to see the what the FAA is going to do.
Old 10-05-2010, 09:17 AM
  #33  
K-Bob
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Anytown
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: Hossfly


Unfortunately, for both AMA and the Clubs, I see the move to real large and expensive airplanes as possibly a detriment to the future of RC model aviation simply because so many cannot afford to be a "Jones". Unfortunately for our society, folks under 50 years of age seem to be mired in such "I gotta' have more and bigger than him." Speaking of merchandise and toys, of course!
While there's no denying that some will upgrade in size and complexity to "keep up with the Jones", it has been my experience that the majority of folks who fly giant scale do so because very simply bigger flys better. Yep, there are always the guys that feel a need to keep up with the Jones but that is nothing new. It was the same when .40 size guys wanted .60 size, .60 wanted .90, and on and on it goes. It certainly isn't exclusive to our hobby. I went large scale as my skills progressed because, to me, the larger the aircraft, the more realistic they look and fly. This is especially important in certain types of competition flying. The competitive aspect of our hobby usually drives technology and innovation. I certainly don't see it as a detriment to the hobby. Quite the opposite, I see it as a boost to the hobby.

In this diverse hobby there can be many types of people enjoying many types of aircraft. That doesn't mean one is better than the other and it certainly doesn't mean you have to spend alot of money to enjoy it. If flying a tinyfoam plane in your backyard melts your butter then more power to you. Flying giant scale may not appeal to you at all just as the little stuff doesn't appeal to me. It seems people feel the need to convert others to what they like. We have a fellow in our club who exclusively flies small electrics. When he's not flying, he's lecturing everyone else as to why they should also be flying electric. It like he's aS-h-i-i-t-e anti-gasser. (I had to put the dashes in to keep the RCU filter from blanking out the word. I guess it's too close to a bad word.)

It should never come to one group assuming they are superior because of what they fly and where they fly it.. Don't knock the backyard/school yard guy that doesn't need or want AMA and don't knock the large scale guys who do need AMA and do need club facilities.

Surely, I would never cower or limit my participation in the hobby because of potential future government regulation.
Old 10-05-2010, 09:27 AM
  #34  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: K-Bob


ORIGINAL: Hossfly


Unfortunately, for both AMA and the Clubs, I see the move to real large and expensive airplanes as possibly a detriment to the future of RC model aviation simply because so many cannot afford to be a ''Jones''. Unfortunately for our society, folks under 50 years of age seem to be mired in such ''I gotta' have more and bigger than him.'' Speaking of merchandise and toys, of course!
While there's no denying that some will upgrade in size and complexity to ''keep up with the Jones'', it has been my experience that the majority of folks who fly giant scale do so because very simply bigger flys better. Yep, there are always the guys that feel a need to keep up with the Jones but that is nothing new. It was the same when .40 size guys wanted .60 size, .60 wanted .90, and on and on it goes. It certainly isn't exclusive to our hobby. I went large scale as my skills progressed because, to me, the larger the aircraft, the more realistic they look and fly. This is especially important in certain types of competition flying. The competitive aspect of our hobby usually drives technology and innovation. I certainly don't see it as a detriment to the hobby. Quite the opposite, I see it as a boost to the hobby.

In this diverse hobby there can be many types of people enjoying many types of aircraft. That doesn't mean one is better than the other and it certainly doesn't mean you have to spend alot of money to enjoy it. If flying a tiny foam plane in your backyard melts your butter then more power to you. Flying giant scale may not appeal to you at all just as the little stuff doesn't appeal to me. It seems people feel the need to convert others to what they like. We have a fellow in our club who exclusively flies small electrics. When he's not flying, he's lecturing everyone else as to why they should also be flying electric. It like he's a S-h-i-i-t-e anti-gasser. (I had to put the dashes in to keep the RCU filter from blanking out the word. I guess it's too close to a bad word.)

It should never come to one group assuming they are superior because of what they fly and where they fly it.. Don't knock the backyard/school yard guy that doesn't need or want AMA and don't knock the large scale guys who do need AMA and do need club facilities.

Surely, I would never cower or limit my participation in the hobby because of potential future government regulation.
Hmmm...K-Bob, this post gives me the impression you are indeed a well rounded modeler and have insight that not enough in our hobby has...hmmm...just want to say not all large scale modelers need AMA tho...but AMA makes it easy for most.
Old 10-05-2010, 09:42 AM
  #35  
tinner1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: newbury, OH
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

Hi LCS,
This post IS NOT aimed at anyone specifically, but there is only one thing everyone in this hobby needs......."AIR"..........and the more of it between your plane (no matter what size) and the ground the safer you are!! The worst thing is to have that same "air" between the ears........[sm=spinnyeyes.gif]
Old 10-05-2010, 09:53 AM
  #36  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: tinner1

Hi LCS,
This post IS NOT aimed at anyone specifically, but there is only one thing everyone in this hobby needs.......''AIR''..........and the more of it between your plane (no matter what size) and the ground the safer you are!! The worst thing is to have that same ''air'' between the ears........[sm=spinnyeyes.gif]
Thanks for giving us your perspective.
Old 10-05-2010, 10:33 AM
  #37  
KidEpoxy
Senior Member
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

My mother trying to fly 50" model at 400'
is far more dangerous to many more folks
than LCS flying a 120" model at 4'

Folks are seeming to forget that the giant DA100 3D planes
do not actually NEED a giant 240 acre field to hover in.
Any local jr high football field is more than ample room to hover 10' from the pilot with a DA100 plane.
After all, how many times have we seen folks complaining about the giant gasers hovering over the runway their whole flight. They can take off in 10', and hover down for a harrier landing... heck, a baseball diamond is plenty for the 100cc gasser
Old 10-05-2010, 12:17 PM
  #38  
Luchnia
My Feedback: (21)
 
Luchnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Amelia, VA
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

My mother trying to fly 50'' model at 400'
is far more dangerous to many more folks
than LCS flying a 120'' model at 4'

Folks are seeming to forget that the giant DA100 3D planes
do not actually NEED a giant 240 acre field to hover in.
Any local jr high football field is more than ample room to hover 10' from the pilot with a DA100 plane.
After all, how many times have we seen folks complaining about the giant gasers hovering over the runway their whole flight. They can take off in 10', and hover down for a harrier landing... heck, a baseball diamond is plenty for the 100cc gasser
Maybe for a good RC pilot [X(] I don't qualify, yet
Old 10-05-2010, 01:08 PM
  #39  
K-Bob
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Anytown
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

My mother trying to fly 50" model at 400'
is far more dangerous to many more folks
than LCS flying a 120" model at 4'

Folks are seeming to forget that the giant DA100 3D planes
do not actually NEED a giant 240 acre field to hover in.
Any local jr high football field is more than ample room to hover 10' from the pilot with a DA100 plane.
After all, how many times have we seen folks complaining about the giant gasers hovering over the runway their whole flight. They can take off in 10', and hover down for a harrier landing... heck, a baseball diamond is plenty for the 100cc gasser
True that. Well, almost. I've never witnessed your mothers flying prowess ...............

My type/style/discipline of flying however, does require quite a bit of room. Add to that, 3D is not just hovering. In fact hovering has become rather passe as more complex and exciting manuevers have been developed. More accomplished 3D flyers will include a bit of hovering and torque rolling but not very much. It's become so commonplace and gets a little boring after 30 seconds or so.
Old 10-05-2010, 01:34 PM
  #40  
KidEpoxy
Senior Member
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

and torquing can be done in the 90' baseball diamond,
rolling harriers along the baselines,
etc
Old 10-05-2010, 01:40 PM
  #41  
K-Bob
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Anytown
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

Rolling harriers down the baseline with a tail touch on each bag. Paintball interference optional.
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

and torquing can be done in the 90' baseball diamond,
rolling harriers along the baselines,
etc
Old 10-05-2010, 03:14 PM
  #42  
dbcisco
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

ORIGINAL: K-Bob
Rolling harriers down the baseline with a tail touch on each bag. Paintball interference optional.
If you get tagged with the paintball your out.
Old 10-06-2010, 02:47 PM
  #43  
dbcisco
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: dbcisco

I wonder if they will share this on their website?
''f. FAA
Council received a copy of the document Model Aircraft Flying Location, Flight Operations, and Airspace Utilization.''
It has been stated on the AMA website that this is an AMA document, not from the FAA/ARC.
In as much as the deadline for comments to the ARC ended in Sept., what is the purpose of this new AMA document?
Old 10-06-2010, 03:08 PM
  #44  
cj_rumley
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga, CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!


ORIGINAL: dbcisco

In as much as the deadline for comments to the ARC ended in Sept., what is the purpose of this new AMA document?
I missed something then. Last I heard the NPRM from FAA is expected to be on the street this month. Is that the deadline you are referring to?
Old 10-06-2010, 03:18 PM
  #45  
dbcisco
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: I've Waited Long Enough!

ORIGINAL: cj_rumley


ORIGINAL: dbcisco

In as much as the deadline for comments to the ARC ended in Sept., what is the purpose of this new AMA document?
I missed something then. Last I heard the NPRM from FAA is expected to be on the street this month. Is that the deadline you are referring to?
Editted to correct my possible erroneous info RE dates.
I might be in error on the ARC deadlines. I have contacted the AMA and FCC to request the Federal Registry docket number to be sure.
The latest comment from the FAA is [link=http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6287]this FAA UAS FAQ Sheet[/link] released on Sept. 20th 2010.

From that document, a hint of things to come:
"Recreational use of the NAS is covered by FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91-57 which generally limits operations to below 400 feet above ground level and away from airports and air traffic."
Expect it to be more than a "suggestion"

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.