First off most of the time the clubs are enforcing the rules. Just because you can find a few examples does not mean that rules are not followed at all clubs. The same would hold true if I were to go looking for Naval Officers breaking laws. I'm betting I could find a good many examples, however I'm not going to assume that all Naval Officers are out there breaking laws.

Secondly AMA is NOT an enforcement agency empowered by the FAA. This has already been put to the test. 2019 soaring Nats. One of the CDs openly stated that he would be checking for FAA registration. As you would expect arguments followed. The end result was that the FAA issued a letter stating that AMA is not responsible for enforcing registration. In part one of the reasons stated that AMA does not have access to FAA database and could not verify. In effort to provide a good example, the pilots were asked to show up with numbers visible or during check in they were offered a peice of tape and a sharpie to write their FAA number on their sailplane. Most participants complied.

Assumes facts not in evidence. I don't think you can say you've sampled all 2,000 clubs.

Let's contrast shall we?

US Navy: Break rules or breach of flight discipline brings swift and severe action. Standing by and "not noticing" breach of flight discipline or breaking of rules by others - and not acting - is similarly met by swift and severe action. And when it happens, you can count on it being publicized. Usually a message from DCNO for Aviation, or Naval Safety Center, or both -- telling the whole Naval Aviation Community what idiots you were. You see, the community polices itself. Not to mention "PFOR" that go to leaders. "PFOR" being "Personal For..." Commanding and Executive Officers when this sort of thing happens. They tend to be rather pointedly worded. In fact, after a couple concerning breaches of flight discipline, the Air Wing Commander sent one that was filled with excerpts from autopsy reports. Things like "... aviator died of transected thorax ..." and other such blunt decscriptions about the all too often consequences of such breaches. COs/XOs were also directed to have stand-downs and discuss flight discipline. Oh, and the guys involved that broke the rules? FNAEBs ... Field Naval Aviator Evaluation Boards ... one lost wings entirely, another stripped of all his flight leadership quals. Pretty much ended both careers. And you know what happens to leaders who tolerate such behaviors? They get what we call a "Change of Command w/o a band." In other words...fired. There is no tolerance of "doing nothing" or "not noticing". From above, your peers, or below.

AMA: In the case of Farview Flyers, AMA knew of violations for YEARS and DID NOTHING. Remember, CDs are "direct representatives of AMA," so the CD is the AMA at that point, which means they knew. And did nothing. Overflying non-participating people, animals, and property .. and did nothing. As did all those standing around and "not noticing" the violations. Same can be said for "Mayhem Park" in Florida. Lots of AMA members standing around and watching people break rules ... and apparently doing nothing. You can watch the videos and see people violating what's visible on a sign in the field of view .. and people walking by and not even stopping to stay something. Similarly, what's it say when your EVP attends an event where safety stand-offs are not even close to your own organization's recommendations ... and does nothing. Individuals not held accountable. Club leaders not held accountable. CDs not held accountable. In fact, NOBODY held accountable.

Never said AMA was empowered. But just as they can, and do, limit based on membership status, they can limit based on proof of registration and proper marking of your drone. The former easily solved by having ... you know ... those cards the FAA tells you to print and have on you when you fly that drone! The latter, simply show the field / event leadership where your drone is marked ... with a number that ... oh I don't know ... matches the one on the card you showed moments earlier!

I know, what a concept. Following rules and have processes in place where the organization checks itself for compliance, and doesn't tolerate people standing aroound and witnessing breaches of flight discipline and breaking of rules ... AND DOING NOTHING.

Have I sampled all 2,000 club fields? Nope. I'm thinking about between 30 to maybe 35 off the top of my head. I would venture that is more then you.

If enlisted/commissioned Naval Officers weren't out there breaking laws ( and not only Naval process/protocol) then there would be no need for JAG now would there?

Like I said, bad players can be found in any group. Doesn't mean that all within that group are bad players.

On the topic of the Fairview club, do you have any evidence that the AMA were not involved with correcting the situation. I am going to expect you to state the end result however that does not mean there were no efforts.

I will agree with you that under under the circumstances, shutting down the club was the right thing to do.

Lets talk about a CD for a moment. Again agree, if a CD witnesses a safety issue he has the responsibility to take action. If a AVP is at said event I don't think he has the authority to overrule the CD ( Andy can correct me if I'm wrong ). Not all events have an official CD and on average most clubs hold events that would require a CD only a few times a year. Most clubs don't host any events that require a CD. The rest of the time it would be the club's safety officer that would be taking action.

How many of those 30-35 are allowing illegal flights over 400'?

I have to agree with Franklin on this one, Speed.
I personally got an officer(and pilot) removed from flight status and, ultimately, ended his career. He ended up being billed for his schooling at the Naval Academy, his flight school and other training when he requested(and received) a hardship discharge.
This was all due to him not following regulations and procedures:
1) Failing to use required safety gear.....Per Navy regs, when you are off the ground, be it on a ladder or on top of a aircraft, you are required to wear protective head gear to prevent injury in case of falling. The officer in question climbed the boarding ladder of one of my squadron's Prowlers without head gear
2) Before entering the cockpit, the ejection seat must be inspected for safety pins....The officer in question never checked for the safety pins. Worse still, he was about to enter the cockpit in the pilot's position. If the pilot's ejection seat is activated, all the other seats eject before the pilot's seat finally ejects, letting the pilot verify the rest of the crew got out as well as letting him keep the aircraft under control for the few seconds it takes for the other seats to eject. In this case, there were three of us occupying the other seats doing maintenance on the plane
3) You do not touch the ejection handles on a seat unless you need to eject.....This one should be pretty self-explanatory. In this case, however, the officer was using the windshield framing and ejection handle to get into the cockpit. Since the plane was in a hanger, had the seat not been pinned, he would have shot three of us into the hanger roof, probably taking our heads and legs off when going through the canopies as well
In this case, my reaction wasn't to report the incident but handle it directly. I told the officer to get off the plane before I threw him off bodily and, when he asked for my ID so he could report my communicating a threat and various other charges, I threw it across the hanger and told him to go get it if he wanted it that bad. A week later, there was a hearing to determine what charges would be held up and punishment given. The result was I ended up on probation for the next year while the officer was stripped of his flight qualifications and sent back to the training squadron to be retrained in how to board and fly a Prowler. Problem was that not one of the instructor pilots would fly with him and he eventually received his discharge, along with a bill for his training since he didn't fulfil his contractual obligations.
As far as JAG, they don't just cover officers. Did you ever see the movie "A Few Good Men"? That was about a pair of Marine enlisted men that got charged with a crime because they followed orders. AFAIK, JAG only gets involved when a capital offence is committed or when international law clarification is needed. Needless to say, IF you saw the series JAG, it was always a cut and dried major case and never anything that could be considered a grey area that could be handled by a ship/squadron CO. Had a guy in my squadron that was drunk on duty, more than once. Squadron CO sent him to rehab three times before he was booted for that and violating the "Don't ask Don't tell" protocol that also got four or five others booted with him. Jag wasn't even consulted as it wasn't a capitol offence.

Bad players? As in folks who don't follow the rules? Like knowingly flying over 400'?
I'm failing to see where YOU draw the line.

Astro

This is from the AMA Safety Guide Book:
Over the years AMA established and evolved a safety program which guides modeling activities through education and voluntary compliance.

Voluntary compliance puts the responsibility squarely on the operators shoulders. The AMA does not have to play policeman the only enforcement they would need is to deny insurance coverage and AMA status while you operate outside the guidelines.

35 out of 2000 isn't even statistically significant! And that's not accounting for other sampling errors - like limited geographic sampling. And so what if you went to more?

SJA and JAG Corps officers, and their investigations, are judicial in nature. In a mishap, they investigate only line of duty issues for determination or criminal acts. But you knew that right? Or are you just slinging acronyms?

No, it's guys like me that do the investigations. Requires sub-speciality code that's awarded only after specific aviation mishap investigation training. Nope, its aviators going through the wreckage, scouring training records, etc. HOLDING OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE. Quite UNLIKE the AMA. And again, the results of the mishap investigations, or near miss HAZREPS, are PUBLISHED for all aviators to read. Again, all processes geared toward holding ourselves accountable and learning from the mistakes (or idiocy) of others.

There's NOTHING like that in AMA. If there was, they would have published a post-mortem on the Fairview Club in MA. But they didn't. If there was, they'd have posted a lessons learned after nearly planting a 100lb LMA into the crowd. They didn't. And if there was, they'd have written a "This is what NOT to do" article on the people standing around "Mayhem Park" and tolerating breaches of flight discipline / not enforcing their own rules. And yet again, the sound of crickets. Nothing.

Yep, and in my aviation experience, they're not tolerated and they're held accountable. I've yet to hear of AMA holding ANYONE accountable for breaches of flight discipline. Let alone CDs that make awful risk decisions.

Except that I have email from EC member saying they were "monitoring" ... no mention of ANYTHING they'd done / would do.

Read the court case. There were frequent events at the club, which required CDs. Even if not, is the club not representing the AMA? Why should it take a CD to fix things? Or is that just rationalizing not taking action to control your own (i.e. clubs') actions? And so what if it wasn't weekly ... there should not have been years of experiences by neighbors of the overflights. All that shows is that they indeed tolerated it.

Unless of course you're doing as you suggested above, going to the FAA hat in hand and saying that you control your members.

And we know that's not going to happen. Rich has too big of ego for that

Well since we are going back 40+ years and the 400' law has only been in effect 2 I think that even you can do that math.

A larger sampling then you right? This is where you loose everyone who ever reads this forum except for a few guys. You expect everyone to take everything you say at face value based on your limited experience with AMA clubs. Then when somone with FAR MORE experience with AMA clubs makes a statement that is dangerous to your cause you post up some long winded pile of garbage to discredit the guy with experience on the current topic. This is exactly the thing that keeps us from having actual useful conversations.

No AMA lessons learned from dangerous near misses, and you're getting upset about me saying 35 out of 2000 isn't statistically significant? Outside of the fact that it's a true statement, your emotionalism is getting the best of you yet again.

If AMA were serious about wanting to be viewed as a serious player to the FAA, they'd have many of the things I described. And you know what? What I described above are all components of a ... wait for it ... Safety Management System. Oh, and wasn't it the AMA that told the FAA and others that they had an SMS? We see of course they did not. And do not to this day. Which is precisely one of the major reasons they're not viewed as credible among the other aviation stakeholders - most notably the one writing the regulations.

It's just not that hard to be serious about safety. There should have been a major expose on the Fairview Club. So other clubs could avoid making the same mistakes, drawing more unwanted attention, or God forbid prevent a mishap. But no. AMA takes the "If we don't talk about it, it never happened" approach. Same for standing "Mayhem Park." Same for sending the spectators diving for safety as a LMA careens toward them out of control. Same for a number of other events. Or tell you what? How about some no-kidding SCIENTIFIC analysis of things like receiver placement, transmissivity of full tanks vs. unfilled, how antenna placement or number of satellites affects reliability. I'm talking real science, using spectrum analzyers etc. I'd imagine that nearby Ball State has some engineering students that could help. People might actually read that ... instead of YET ANOTHER article about electric motor functionality. Some sort of reporting system is necessary, but even that doesn't need to be difficult. And publish data from time to time ... so again, everyone can learn.

So like I said, it's just not that hard to be credible. My piece above talked about several. You were more worried about how many clubs visited than the real issue - one that affects why AMA isn't viewed as credible.

LOL, you have been claiming 3 clubs that had safety issues reflects on the AMA safety program not working for YEARS. Of course when I state that of the 30+ clubs I have set foot on your claim is " statistically insufficient ". But of course you then do your normal discredit approach by making the emotionalism comment. Exactly what I said before, that's why you only have a few guy buying your crap.

In Canada we use the same wording and there is no control by MAAC. You sign the application for membership agreeing you read, understand and agree to follow the safety guidelines. It was explained to me that if you fail to do this you are not flying as a MAAC member and the government agency is responsible for you. I imagine if you fail to follow the AMA rules they to will wash their hands of any responsibility for your actions.

Your insurance is somewhat different than ours it's 3rd party using all your own before AMA coverage kicks in. Ours is 7.5 million first party your personal insurance is never involved.

It's not as if a few of us are blindly agreeing with Franklin. Don't discount that many of us have as much if not more, experience as you do and happen to agree that some of the issues Franklin discusses have been witnessed across a broader spectrum than just the three he cited.

Astro

What?
The question was, "out of the 30 - 35 clubs that you visit, how many allow illegal flights over 400'?"
Your constant deflection of the questions that actually PROVE negligence are the REAL reason these topics spiral down the toilet bowl. Well, that and the resident trolls.....

Astro

I would actually agree with you on this. Keep in mind that I'm in no way claiming that problems don't exist. I'm saying that Franklin's apparent claim that ALL AMA clubs have safety issues and/or ignore safety infractions is incorrect.

Moot point since the law has only been in effect for 2 years. What about that do you not understand. Would you be able to grasp the idea if I made up a pretty little multicolored graph the way Franklin does?

It's not moot at all, it is very relevant to where we stand TODAY. As in todays' REALITY.
How do we expect to be able to advocate for ourselves (within the programing of...a safety code) if we have no regard for the rules that we are mandated to follow?

Astro

The reality is that during the majority of my 40+ years in the hobby and having flown at 30+ club sites flying over 400' was legal at the time. They all however had a safety program in place. At events we always have a pilots meeting which includes specific safety rules as they apply to that particular site. I have seen many rules infractions result is suspensions and a few membership terminations. Why is it that the same few of you guys refuse to accept those facts?

Really, do you feel that because I drove without a seatbelt prior to it being law I should now confess my sins to the DMV. Or what about flying AM wide band prior to 1991? Oh the sins against humanity I have done LOL.

Somehow, I don't think Astro is talking about what happened prior to the law change, any more than when it comes to an AM wide band system that for sake of argument, I still have one of. Mine has been sitting in my garage for years, just need to change out the guts to a 2.4 four channel and I can start flying with it again.

Obtuse much?
I'm CLEARLY not talking about 40 years ago.
Here, let me ask you again :

How many clubs have you flown at since 400' became the law, that illegally allow flights over 400'?

Astro

Ah but that's not what he asked. He specifically asked " Out of the 30-35 clubs" after I had stated that the 30-35 were spread out over a 40+ year time frame.

Well since I am not the public relations officer for any clubs, if you want that answer you should contact the clubs directly.