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

Should the AMA consider building two regional flying sites , one on each coast ?

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.
View Poll Results: Should the AMA build a regional flying site on each coast ?
Yes , the AMA should build the regional flying sites
27
62.79%
NO , the AMA should not build them and keep all property aquisitions to Illinois only
16
37.21%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

Should the AMA consider building two regional flying sites , one on each coast ?

Old 09-29-2016, 06:20 AM
  #1  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default Should the AMA consider building two regional flying sites , one on each coast ?

Hi guys , the subject has come up of the idea of the AMA building a regional flying site on each coast so that far more members would have far easier access to an actual AMA regional field . This would be in lieu of such projects as the indoor facility now under consideration for Indiana .

I have nothing against Indiana in particular or even Muncie in general , but we , in my opinion , already have world class facilities there and maybe now it IS time to expand our reach out to the coasts rather than continually pouring money into something that's , in my opinion , as good as it's gonna get ?

very simple voting here ;

YES = The AMA should endeavor to build two such sites , one on each coast

NO = The AMA should NOT consider building anywhere but Indiana


Thank You in advance for your participation

Last edited by init4fun; 09-29-2016 at 11:38 AM. Reason: Got the wrong state , darn it !
Old 09-29-2016, 06:56 AM
  #2  
TimJ
 
TimJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This poll should be interesting. This is something the AMA has already researched. Lawrence Tougas won his VP position on a platform based on a west coast regional site.
Old 09-29-2016, 08:41 AM
  #3  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TimJ View Post
This poll should be interesting. This is something the AMA has already researched. Lawrence Tougas won his VP position on a platform based on a west coast regional site.
Hi Tim ,

My thought is that if the AMA builds my club a field (through grants & such) that only 50 guys get to fly at , wouldn't it be far more practical use of our AMA money to instead build a field where a whole region full of people could benefit , and that's where my thought of a couple of "Mini Muncies" came from . I'm kinda happy to hear that it's been seriously considered before and yes even though I do live in the East , I'd think that since like you say most of the major shows happen here it would be a fair "sharin of the love" to build the West coast site first .

To me , the regional flying site idea sounds like a far less "Redistributionist/Handout" than the idea of spending everybody else's money on a private site that only 50 or so will fly on does . Kinda sorta a more folks served by the same dollars spent kind of thing .


Imagine if such regional sites became SO popular that SUB regional sites began to be considered ?
Old 09-29-2016, 09:00 AM
  #4  
TimJ
 
TimJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Hi Tim ,

My thought is that if the AMA builds my club a field (through grants & such) that only 50 guys get to fly at , wouldn't it be far more practical use of our AMA money to instead build a field where a whole region full of people could benefit , and that's where my thought of a couple of "Mini Muncies" came from . I'm kinda happy to hear that it's been seriously considered before and yes even though I do live in the East , I'd think that since like you say most of the major shows happen here it would be a fair "sharin of the love" to build the West coast site first .

To me , the regional flying site idea sounds like a far less "Redistributionist/Handout" than the idea of spending everybody else's money on a private site that only 50 or so will fly on does . Kinda sorta a more folks served by the same dollars spent kind of thing .


Imagine if such regional sites became SO popular that SUB regional sites began to be considered ?
Jab Jab Jab RIGHT HOOK! bahahahah! That's awesome!
Old 09-29-2016, 09:21 AM
  #5  
049flyer
My Feedback: (18)
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Regional flying fields? Great idea but it will never happen. The headquarters staff has access to a worldclass facility to use whenever they wish, and it costs them nothing. Located in an obscure part of the country where few have any reason to travel.

It's nothing more than an expensive shrine.
Old 09-29-2016, 09:45 AM
  #6  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TimJ View Post
Jab Jab Jab RIGHT HOOK! bahahahah! That's awesome!
Thank You Tim , your one of the guys out here whose opinion I really respect because I believe you do always answer from a position of honesty . To have you think it may be a good idea really does make me feel good about the idea as well . A meeting of the two coasts as it were in mutual agreement , gotta love that .

Originally Posted by 049flyer View Post
Regional flying fields? Great idea but it will never happen. The headquarters staff has access to a worldclass facility to use whenever they wish, and it costs them nothing. Located in an obscure part of the country where few have any reason to travel.

It's nothing more than an expensive shrine.
Hi 049 Flyer ,

Ok , now here's my pro regional pitch to the folks in Muncie , The AMA could look at it this way ;

Every dollar the AMA gives to private clubs is a dollar gone from the AMA coffers for good . It's in private hands , out of their control . Gone . God forbid what if just after the AMA lays out the grants to build up a private club's nice new runway the private club were to dissolve for whatever reason , those dollars really would have been spent in vain as the runway they bought gets plowed under to ready the land for it's next use , whatever that may be (maybe even a XXX massage parlor , one could only hope ) . But with the regional flying site idea , every dollar spent remains directly under AMA control as it's building up AMA owned facilities , and ALL the dollars go into making the AMA itself bigger & stronger as a truly national organization . Sure , we got members from all over , but only one site truly "owned by all" that's not all that easy to get to for a lot of folks , the reach of the regional sites being all the better for far more folks to access something actually owned by the AMA (in other words each and every one of us members) .
Old 09-29-2016, 10:52 AM
  #7  
MajorTomski
 
MajorTomski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 2,536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm just curious when did the AMA pay to have Muncie moved from the middle of Indiana to Illinois?
Old 09-29-2016, 11:36 AM
  #8  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MajorTomski View Post
I'm just curious when did the AMA pay to have Muncie moved from the middle of Indiana to Illinois?
Sorry Maj. , Good catch , and will be corrected promptly . Weird mistake that is for sure , go to type one state's name with an "I" and the pop out with another .

Truly no slight intended to Indiana or Illinois !
Old 09-29-2016, 11:43 AM
  #9  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

And of course I can't fix the mistaken use of Illinois for Indiana in the actual Poll question itself , But I'm sure folks will get the right idea once they read down this far ....
Old 09-29-2016, 03:13 PM
  #10  
ira d
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maricopa County AZ
Posts: 3,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I don’t think the AMA should outright build another site in the western U.S. but I do think it would good if they could partner with a club in the west to create something along the lines of what they have in Muncie.
Old 09-29-2016, 04:17 PM
  #11  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

voted no with 1 reservation,
not willing to limit future property acquisitions to just id, someday, it might make sense to move the entire facility to another location. hopefully a bit more pleasant one to visit for the non flying enthused family members.
Old 09-29-2016, 04:31 PM
  #12  
mr_matt
My Feedback: (10)
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Weren't they going to make a national flying site in Visalia, CA?

You could have as many clubs as you want now in the San Joaquin valley, they have fallowed so much land for the drought
Old 09-29-2016, 04:40 PM
  #13  
PLANE JIM
My Feedback: (109)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: AT THE AIRPORT
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

they should build three-on all three coasts
Old 09-29-2016, 06:55 PM
  #14  
Desertlakesflying
My Feedback: (28)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sun Valley, NV
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mr_matt View Post
Weren't they going to make a national flying site in Visalia, CA?

You could have as many clubs as you want now in the San Joaquin valley, they have fallowed so much land for the drought
The California politician made drought.....
Old 09-29-2016, 06:58 PM
  #15  
049flyer
My Feedback: (18)
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Has anyone EVER gone to Muncie on vacation, a vacation not involving model airplanes? I have never been there but it sure looks like a desolate place with little to do but watch corn grow.

it would sure be nice to have a facility in a place where other recreational opportunities exist for non-flying family members to enjoy while we pursue our hobby.

Muncie? Is that the best they could come up with? Or was the decision making process as flawed then as it is today?
Old 09-29-2016, 07:00 PM
  #16  
049flyer
My Feedback: (18)
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Desertlakesflying View Post
The California politician made drought.....
Government rarely solves the problems that government creates.
Old 09-30-2016, 04:45 AM
  #17  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Hi Tim ,

My thought is that if the AMA builds my club a field (through grants & such) that only 50 guys get to fly at , wouldn't it be far more practical use of our AMA money to instead build a field where a whole region full of people could benefit , and that's where my thought of a couple of "Mini Muncies" came from . I'm kinda happy to hear that it's been seriously considered before and yes even though I do live in the East , I'd think that since like you say most of the major shows happen here it would be a fair "sharin of the love" to build the West coast site first .

To me , the regional flying site idea sounds like a far less "Redistributionist/Handout" than the idea of spending everybody else's money on a private site that only 50 or so will fly on does . Kinda sorta a more folks served by the same dollars spent kind of thing .


Imagine if such regional sites became SO popular that SUB regional sites began to be considered ?
Regional sites that are accessible to more of the membership makes sense but you'll never please everyone with the locations.

Mike

Last edited by rcmiket; 09-30-2016 at 04:47 AM.
Old 09-30-2016, 05:41 AM
  #18  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,450
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket View Post
Regional sites that are accessible to more of the membership makes sense but you'll never please everyone with the locations.
Hi Mike , Yea I too had thought about how optimal placement would be achieved as my second thought right after thinking about the regional sites question . The "ya can't please all of the people all of the time" adage was what specifically came to mind . But then Franklin posted this statement I've quoted below in the thread where this was originally being discussed , and to think that we could program in a bunch of factors like "easiest access for the most folks while being close to other attractions" and any other desired decision making criteria and let the decision be made without Human emotion involved , this I really DO think would work with the results being acceptable to all . As we all know , usually there is much emotion with making such decisions and sometimes the loudest voices that win out aren't always the "most right" , But the computer I do believe would make the best decision provided it was given the best programming simply because it has no skin in the game beyond the actual making of the decision based on the preset criteria .

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
There's software out there that can geolocate optimal positions for such things.

Also , Thanks to everybody so far who has responded , 23 replies in less than 24 hours is great response indeed ! Yes I really do like to hear not only the pro viewpoints , I like to hear why folks think it wouldn't be a good idea too .

Last edited by init4fun; 09-30-2016 at 05:46 AM. Reason: Oh yea , you know it , me & the dreaded typo monster .....
Old 09-30-2016, 06:23 AM
  #19  
beepee
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

OK, I'll bite. I'm a NO vote. My concern would be total acquisition and operating costs, and what that would to do our annual dues rate. No matter where you locate these sites, the majority of the membership will not feel the benefit, but will feel the cost. It is possible such regional sites could be operated on a zero cost basis ("pay to play"), though that would get even more expensive for the users. The sites would still have to be managed and by whom?

I feel the grant system works. Help clubs defray costs and keep the control and the grass-roots level.

Bedford
Old 09-30-2016, 06:34 AM
  #20  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by beepee View Post
OK, I'll bite. I'm a NO vote. My concern would be total acquisition and operating costs, and what that would to do our annual dues rate. No matter where you locate these sites, the majority of the membership will not feel the benefit, but will feel the cost. It is possible such regional sites could be operated on a zero cost basis ("pay to play"), though that would get even more expensive for the users. The sites would still have to be managed and by whom?

I feel the grant system works. Help clubs defray costs and keep the control and the grass-roots level.

Bedford

I don't know that we should assume acquisition costs. If the results of the geolocation analysis show proximity to exiting club field(s), then why not a partnership / subsidy relationship? AMA becomes a stakeholder in the club actions, decisions, events etc. in exchange for enhanced resources for improvements and maintenance. Those events would be the regional events on a 'not less than' type basis.
Old 09-30-2016, 06:53 AM
  #21  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Desertlakesflying View Post
The California politician made drought.....
On background

I headed a base in that area and I was intimately involved in the San Joaquin valley water issue. We had 11,000 acres of land surrounding my airfield in the DoD agricultural outreach program (largest in all of DoD - $$ brought in from our base funded all DoD environmental programs), which also created a nice anti terrorism / force protection buffer as the relationships with the farmers go back years. Also allowed us to influence crops planted which resulted in fewer birds in the pattern - a real win-win (one bird down an engine can easily results in a $1.5 million rebuild - if not also a danger to safety of flight).

The issue is as old as it is complex. There's three major components to the problem: basic soil composition is high in salts that have to be flushed with water to drive them down so things will grow, however the geology is such that there's a relatively impenetrable floor of clay a few hundred feet down that after years of flushing these salts down with water from elsewhere, raises the water table of contaminated high salt water, and lastly the environmental court ruling to protect the endangered Delta Smelt that prevents the Federal Bureau of Reclamation from using the water pumps in the Sacramento Delta to send water south during very hot months.

End result, yes, there is a lot of land and even some crop duster paved strips that might be good places to look initially. Additionally, there's relatively good N/S access via either I-5 to the west or state route 99 to the east. If you could find one between those two (east / west wise) on a good road, that would be great.

Don't forget airspace issues, something also quite familiar with. Attached are two charts of the area (one big picture, one zoomed in around Lemoore / Visalia). Big picture, you can see how SJV is easily accessable from LA, Bakersfield, Fresno, SF, even Reno. The zoom in shows the airspace issues to watch though. Over by Visalia there's a lot of Class E with a floor at 700 feet. If we're talking an optimal regional site, we should be looking outside that, where Class E doesn't start until 1200. Don't be too concerned about the Lemoore MOA, floor of that is well above altitudes we should be flying.

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Large CA.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	385.2 KB
ID:	2183523   Click image for larger version

Name:	Zoom In.jpg
Views:	58
Size:	527.6 KB
ID:	2183524  
Old 09-30-2016, 06:54 AM
  #22  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
I don't know that we should assume acquisition costs. If the results of the geolocation analysis show proximity to exiting club field(s), then why not a partnership / subsidy relationship? AMA becomes a stakeholder in the club actions, decisions, events etc. in exchange for enhanced resources for improvements and maintenance. Those events would be the regional events on a 'not less than' type basis.
That's along the lines of what I think would work for both parties. The site and club selected to be a regional site would submit a yearly budget and work out the details with the AMA.

Mike.
Old 09-30-2016, 06:59 AM
  #23  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TimJ View Post
This poll should be interesting. This is something the AMA has already researched. Lawrence Tougas won his VP position on a platform based on a west coast regional site.
Yep. And he did so completely ignoring that there was a big push to build a regional flying site in District X a few years back. The effort failed after many years of effort, time and expense. Proving once again that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Old 09-30-2016, 07:09 AM
  #24  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R View Post
Yep. And he did so completely ignoring that there was a big push to build a regional flying site in District X a few years back. The effort failed after many years of effort, time and expense. Proving once again that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Just what caused it to fail?

Mike
Old 09-30-2016, 07:13 AM
  #25  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R View Post
Yep. And he did so completely ignoring that there was a big push to build a regional flying site in District X a few years back. The effort failed after many years of effort, time and expense. Proving once again that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
So what was the post mortem? WHY did the effort fail? Wrong business model (acquire a site vs. partner/underwrite existing site)? Wrong location (encroachment, local regs, etc)? Wrong location (poor access, airspace, facilities)?

If our local school district followed your "doomed to repeat it" generalization, they would never have tried again for referendum to build new high school (schools funded mostly by local taxes where I live). But they did it right. They took the time to understand in detail WHY the prior effort failed and corrected the mistakes. Little over a year ago, they put it to the voters again and won by 40+ points. Nothing prevents moving forward and trying again provided one understands WHY the effort failed before.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.