crash99

My Feedback: (3)

I don’t know if the AMA would ever support such a membership excluding the PPP group. Insurance is a large portion of our membership so should our dues to the AMA be fair to the safer groups? It sounds fair. T

Crash99

init4fun

[>:] Way to go crash99 , , , for promoting further hate and "class warfare" among your fellow hobbiests ...... Now , before ya go mouthing off to me , NO ! , I'm NOT a "bad bad 3D hater" , , In fact , I may even indulge in a bit of it myself on occasion , but your little attack video on "the evil circle flyers" is the perfect example of everything thats wrong with our hobby today ..... I'd go as far as to say YOUR kind of thinking is exactly what promotes such division .... You've proven yourself to be just as bad of a hater as those you so lamely attempted to call out .......

I dont see where your misguided hatefest has ANY business belonging in the AMA forum here , and should be removed as any other troll post would be ....

KidEpoxy

You quickly run into a problem of scale when talking about reduced cost for reduced risk:
If we say a group is so risk free that they should pay 1/2 as much for insurance,
exactly how many dollars off AMA membership do you believe that "1/2 Off Insurance" is?

Check out in the Annual Financial Report (like AMA's 009financialstatement.pdf online)
how many dollars AMA pays to have 135000 folks insured,
divide that number by 135000,
and then take half of that

If I was gonna guess at a number, I would throw the number $1.05mil spent on membership insurance.
Divide that, and then apply the "Half Off Tier" to see how many dollars that would actually save a member in that tier

My point is,
if we use a completely outrageously hypothetical number like $20 per member for insurance,
it would be a bonehead and irresponsible thing to do if we gave them $25 or $30 off membership for "Low Risk".
Just as it be be just as dumb to give more than $10 off membership if we only pay $10 for insurance.
Just as it would be to give more than $7.50 off if insurance only costs each member $7.50
.... and some "Half Off of $7.50" tier results in how much saved by the member of that tier?

Your concept would be sound if the common misconception that insurance is a major AMA cost
was true.
But when folks learn just how little of their dues is for insurance.... well, you see what happens when actual costs are used

KidEpoxy

I4F
???
Hatefest? I dont see any hate in this discussion of AMA Tiers
(other than the stuff spewing from you about Crash99 being allowed to live)


You dont think a discussion of AMA tiers belongs in a AMA discussion forum?
Just where DO you think it belongs? Some NRA forum? A PlannedParrenthood forum?
Where do you mandate discussion of AMA Tiers be other than an AMA Discussion forum.... or is it that Tiers is some Verbotten subject that you want Censored to protecrt... I cant even hazzard a guess as to what you are trying to protect with your demand for censoring ama topics you dont like

init4fun

Yea Kid E , I figured you'd comment without first checking out the linked video "presentation" in crash's first post .... The video in question , in a nutshell , was the hatefest to which I was referring , and its removal by RC Ken is most welcome .

In case your wondering , the video was pitting 3D flying against "circle flying" in a sarcastic and mean attack on one type of flying over another ... Now , as someone who flys ALL kinds of stuff , from circles to 3D and , Oh my GOD !!!! the occasional ZIG ZAG as well , (Free thinker alert , get the butterfly nets , George !!) I find it PATENTLY OFFENSIVE to stir the hate amongst ANY subdivisions within our hobby ....

Clear enough for ya ?????

Hossfly

As far as the insurance thing goes, there is no effective way that AMA could determine the good and bad groups. It is not like auto insurance where the individual can be either a good or bad risk. Again as KE explains, AMA insurance is about 3-4 steps down from AMA major expenses. First is the bureaucracy, then next is the magazine, MA, and then - without taking a look to refresh my mind - insurance comes into the expense thing.

Hossfly

OOPS double post. Ken you can remove this if you please.

init4fun

So anyway ,

I highly doubt that the AMA or their insurance company(s) would want to go to the extra administrative cost of maintaining differing levels of coverage to different groups , even if one group or another could be proved "statistically safer" . And if such administrative costs were to be granted , well now how about a "low use" tier , like those of us who live in cold enough climates as to only want to fly 4 months out of the 12 ..... We're safer cause our planes are parked 7 or 8 months out of the year . Where's our discount ? .... Before long , your giving out enough "cut rate" memberships that administrative costs are greater than the dues ya take in .... No matter how it's picked apart , one year's worth of insurance for $58 is a number I can live with .

Silent-AV8R

Can you tell me which groups are safer than others and the data upon which you base that determination? Also, can you define "safer"?

Silent-AV8R

You could also argue that the pilot who flies is less safe due to a lack of recent currency which may cause a lack of proficiency. The FAA recognizies this in their currency requirements for carrying passengers, flying in IFR, etc.

DadsToysBG

My Feedback: (35)

Have you noticed Crash hasn't been back to defend his stance. Dennis

crash99

My Feedback: (3)

I have to be careful to post anything. This thread might be removed. Also some of us still have to work. The proof is with the AMA reports. I asked if any 3d airplane we in the accident clamed from the past 2 years. The response was 0 3d type airplanes were involved. 0 is a good number.

I asked when I saw 3D hate post here. They were not removed but that is ok. I hate to see the flow of thoughts stop.

I did post a link to a web page, Ken, I am not going to place it here, with humor but one person ...... I guess has no humor.

Ok, I have to get back to it. Have a great day. If a group is shown to be more safe than others I don't see the issue.

Crash99
Sent by iphone

H5487

Could it be because he asked an innocent question and got pounced upon?

Harvey

cfircav8r

My Feedback: (1)

Not really an innocent question. His response to any and all concerns for the unsafe practices of some 3D'ers is "They are just jealous" or "no one has gotten hurt yet" (a favorite of five year olds everywhere.) His erroneous belief that a lack of documented 3D claims to the AMA proves they are safe just shows his bias and his agenda. The lack of claims does not take into account how many accidents may have been caused by 3D'ers or how many were just not reported. I do not feel that 3D'ers are more or less safe, and until I see an actual scientific study to prove otherwise I will lump them in with the rest of us. The judgment of the pilot makes more difference than any amount of skill.

Silent-AV8R

The AMA itself admits they do not track the type of activity in incidents, so there really is not way to determine that this type of flying is more dangerous than another type of flying.

KidEpoxy

Silent
If AMA dont know anything about the risks of types of flying,
how did they come up with the $29 Tier needing only $500k insurance instead of full liability insurance we $58'ers get?

I hope you are wrong, and that AMA knew what they were doing and had info to make that decision,
cause otherwise there could be lots of $29Tier guys with full risk but only a fraction of the coverage if AMA didnt look at the risk of that group compared to the main.


...

I4F
uh, PPP sound familiar?

ira d

I dont think the group thing would work nor would it be fair, Just think how some people pay more for car ins just because of their zip code in fact someone
with a clean driving record can pay more than someone with a ticket in a different zip code. ins cost should only be based on the actions of a individual IMO.

nute12

My Feedback: (14)

what defines a "safer group" circle fliers? electric? or a club that has not reported a accident for a set amount of time. too many holes and it would never be fair.
guys that fly 3d need to pay twice as much? warbird drivers are gonna git hit too. oh, then while yer at it dont forget requiring a physical with eye test.
sheesh, just pay the 58 bucks and fly.

BobbyMcGee

This subject was kicked around about six months ago. Isn't there something else to write about? Geeze, this is getting to be like MA magazine ... they rehash the sametopics everyfew months and this placerehashesthe same issuesevery few months.

Flexnbeef

My Feedback: (9)

I myself got into a big aurguement with my district vp over this same issue, Told me the insurance company wouldn't give out info on insurance stats concerning claim occurance or areas clames are generated from. Said if I wanted to get any worthwhile info or action from the AMA I would have to start a petition. IMO The AMA is like any other organization, they started out as something needed and then turned into a corporate money making machine with no intent on giving anything back to its members but confusion and misinformation. get in line sheeple................

GerKonig

Exactly. I normally go and fly 2 to 4 times per month, weather permitting. So, based on that, I could say that I want to pay 1/10 (or less) of whatever a retired guy that files every day pays.

As nute said "Sheeesh, just pay the 58 bucks and fly". To give you some perspective of how small this sum is: My field is at 15 miles from home, and I have to pay a toll bridge to get there. Even going sparsely to the club, I pay much more in tolls and gas... As a matter of fact, I go to Giant Scale fun flies and Warbird events in the tri-state area in summer. Each outing is more than $58....

I think some people just feel the need to complain, and nothing will change that. If we would be charged $20, they would still be complaining. The funny thing is that with time you recognize the call names of these people on this forum, and their posts are 100% predictable. Oh well...

Nothing new here, let's move on:-)

Gerry

pilotchute

My Feedback: (29)

GerKonig-

+1

Amen.

KidEpoxy

Ira
Muncie is forcing it to work regardless of if its fair or if it is a moneypit.



Nute
Muncie has already determined the "safer group" is <2lb Electric <60mph, regardless if thats fair


Bobby
This has been a subject of discussion for over 3 years, thats when Muncie stuck us with the lower insurance for lower cost $29 Tier,
and we have been discussing its need/fairness/cost since.


Ger
You predicted I would speak against cheaper member dues for insurance tiers?
WOW, cause... like... a LOT of folks didnt see that coming

Flexnbeef

My Feedback: (9)

And now the AMA is getting in bed with the FAA under the guise of protecting it's members. Wake up sheeple, The AMA is a giant money generating machine wanting to get a government sponsered monopoly on a hobby worth millons of dollars to them. All we are ever going to get is increased fees and excuses. I unlike others am not satified with the status quo. Hmm, 1.Start a organization, 2.Get locals to start feeder clubs to serve said organization, 3.Don't allow anyone to fly at local clubs unless they belong to the mother organization, 4. Lock up the parks with more feeder clubs, 5. Get in bed with the FAA to write a set of self serving safty rules, 6. Prevent use of rules that you write unless you join mother organization or pay a fee, 7.increse fees to pay for all the hard work you did to screw everyone in this hobby. That about sums it up.....

Silent-AV8R

This is a most bizarre interpretation. So is your position that the AMA should do nothing and just leave us all to operate under the default rules??