mongo

My Feedback: (15)

400 ft

it would appear that AMA is acknowledging franlkins point about the applicability of the new law.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/ama-...t-class-g.html

Appowner

Mods, since you've taken away my ability to do so, please lock this thread. It would seem that some people simply can not play nice with others.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Appowner

Read the link.....

Hydro Junkie

Why don't you fill us in on the whole story then? I'm all ears(or should I say eyes). BTW, I want official documentation either linked or cut and pasted, just like Franklin does, to back your statements or we'll all be calling you the same things you call Franklin.

jester_s1

Guys, please keep conversations civil. 2 different people have reported posts in this thread, and I agree that the conversation has taken a very unproductive turn. I'll be having a private conversation with those who are not adhering to the RCU community standards. When RCKen, the AMA forum mod gets a chance to review what's here, he may decide to do more.

So, gentlemen, please stick to the topic and do so in a civilized manner, or don't post at all.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

franklin_m

It's clear that you and I disagree about the value of AMA. What you call tearing down, I call holding them accountable for the decisions they make (financial, operational, legislative, etc.). I think it's fair to say that I fundamentally disagree with the direction of the organization, one that I see will ultimately hurt the hobby in the long run. Why? Because as long as they focus on a misguided effort to create carve-outs for members instead of creating real perceived value for ALL participants, they will be limiting their "market" to only those who require club fields to fly. That market is only so big in terms of potential membership revenue. ARRL, NRA, AOPA, and others advocate for ALL participants, which I believe is the correct strategy. Also, the EC's financial decisions threaten the long term health, for if they run the place into the ground financially, then there won't be an advocacy group at all. There's any number of examples where they've lost money on things year, after year, after year, and yet they're trimming around the edges. The two biggest expenses are employees and the magazine. Yet on the former, they're adding staff. On the latter, it continues to lose money. And lastly, they continue their past practice of being less than fully honest with members about the rules as they know them to be (witness this last fiasco with class G information), which I believe is out of fear of losing even more members. The reality is, those who will leave over class G issues are going to leave eventually anyway; obfuscating the true state of affairs only delays it.

While I appreciate the armchair psycho-analysis, comments about my ego etc., I would note that you're not a doctor, and if you are, you have not examined me. To make comments about one's mental makeup is at best a personal attack. At worst it's petty. It's also based entirely on emotion. And not my emotion.

As for "Dear Leader." I would note that starting a letter with "Dear________" is a common traditional salutation. As President of AMA, he is in fact a "leader". So "Dear Leader" is a completely approprate start to a letter. How you choose to interpret it is your business. It was used in the manner it was used.

On the subject of our "Dear Leader," I would note that this is the same individual that called for the FAA to take enforcement action against the very people he's presumably hoping will become members. Now I don't know of many succesful business models that rely on insulting your potential customers. But hey, I suppose there's always a first. Actually though, it isn't a first, at least not a succesful one. Which circles me back to the opposition to the direction and decisions of the organization. I cite this as yet more proof that they're on the wrong path. As a dues paying member, I'm free to register my displeasure. If you disagree, fine. But that doesn't prohibit me from doing anything.

Appowner

As the OP of the thread I have requested the thread be closed because of the attacks by two individuals. So why is it still open?

franklin_m

I honestly have no idea what you mean by this. The AMA is working to retain carve-outs for its members in controlled airspace, with mixed success. The FAA has said that even this is temporary, for eventually anyone (CBO member or not) will be able to get authorization for flight in controlled airspace via LAANC system.

As for class G, there is a law in place that explicitly prohibits flight above 400 AGL (note 1). I personally believe that it harms the hobby to have legislators, regulators, media, and taxpayers seeing CBO members ignore the law, especially when it's done based on a CBO's comments to "fly as we always have." Defiance of law is not a good case for saying "we're not the problem." But if you disagree, you're free to do as you please. But my argument is that such actions have the potential to hurt the very hobby you say you love.

Note 1: https://www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22cite%3APL115-254%22%7D

franklin_m

Airfield where Jets over Kentucky will be held is class G. I'm not aware that they have an FAA waiver to exceed 400 AGL, nor am I aware of any FAA waivers to exceed 400 AGL anywhere in the nation. AMA says (or strongly implies) that it's legal, but FAA has been exceedingly consistent that 400 is the limit in class G.

Appowner

Wow! Holding the management, elected or otherwise, accountable for their decisions and actions. Go figure! Next thing you know we'll expect Congress to act responsibly. Maybe even throw Hillary in the prison she deserves.

It's a trend in America these days to let everyone be a winner. And not a good one.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Hydro Junkie

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the AMA trying to "run the hobby"? They already require clubs to force people that apply for membership join the AMA as a condition of acceptance. It seems, to me anyway, that would be "tearing down the HOBBY". If someone doesn't want or can't afford to pay for the membership of both the AMA and the club, that person has just been turned away from that club and will probably sell off anything they have already bought.
For me to race boats, I have to pay $15 per year for any boats I want to register and run, $20 for the first and $5 for each additional boat to race PER EVENT and $50 per year to NAMBA. That means, for me to run the full season, I'm looking at $325 per year, not counting food, gas and lodging just to get to and stay at the race location, consumables such as battery packs, nitro fuel(50% nitro minimum at $35+ per gallon), glow plugs(up to 7 per race at $4+ per plug), etc.

Appowner

One of the reasons I left the competition scene. Even in the late 60's it was obvious that to compete required one thing, MONEY. And as a lowly AF junior enlisted, it just wasn't in the checkbook.

BTW, Since this is my thread, I have asked the mods to close it, lock it whatever. And someday they may actually do it.

franklin_m

Of your several posts here, noted below to refresh your recollection, all but three discuss AMA in one way or another. It seemed pretty clear to me that "the hobby" and AMA were used interchangably in your posts.Hence my comments on AMA.

#5 Discusses AMA event Muncie
#8 Discusses NATS in Muncie and Blytheville
#10 Questioning whether or not I'll attend AMA events
#12 Non-AMA related post
#14 Discusses me going to (AMA) events
#16 Discusses his attendence at (AMA) TD event
#18 Discussing IMAC, CDs etc., AMA related
#20 Questioning whether or not I'll attend AMA events
#22 Discussing AMA in several places
#24 Discussing AMA prep for NATS
#27 Non-AMA related post
#30 Post from FAA site
#34 Now discussing "the hobby" separate from other 8 AMA related posts

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

franklin_m

What has a bigger negative effect on the hobby is ineffective lobbying / representation or, worse yet, no lobbying / representation ... which is what could easily happen if AMA doesn't fix itself. The biggest mistake they make is to believe their own rhetoric. The EC seems to think that everyone enjoys (and values) flying toy planes as much as they do. That's a major miscalculation, for most people don't. For a vast many, it's a take it or leave it hobby. And from what I can of the numbers, they're leaving it.

I've never once accused you of being a leader member or having used the word "cult" in reference to you ... not once. But on the subject of AMA, it would be wise for them to start thinking about how to create REAL value for the $75 a year and no rely on silly things like "attractive laminated membership card." I mean you've got to be kidding.

Whether or not there is a 400 foot AGL limit or not is a matter of law. And don't look now, but it's in the law. And I hate to break it to you, but flying toy planes is a much lower priority to the Congress and the taxpayers than creating an entire new way of delivering goods and services. Goods and services by the way that have the potential to generate a lot more revenue (and tax revenue) than toy airplane sales.

Nope.

Hydro Junkie

Franklin, you didn't call him a leader member but I did. Actually, I've done so many times and have done so since several of his posts were very similar to someone else's that claimed to be a leader member. It doesn't really matter, when you really look at it since the AMA, like the Titanic, has hit an iceberg. The only difference is that the Titanic hit one made of ice while the AMA hit one made of quad copters and Congress members. The Titanic may have sunk faster but the AMA is still going to sink unless the damage control becomes more effective, like that on the USS Franklin(CV-13) back in March 1945, and very quickly

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

franklin_m

Just as the Academy of Horse Drawn Carriage Drivers (AHDCD) had to make room on the roads for cars, so too with the Academy of Model Aeronautics have to make way for new users of the airspace. It's not the a first one here wins, it's a balance of intersts. And it's governement's job to do that. It would have been much easier to shut down recreational flying all together. But they didn't.

Whether you want to admit it or not, large numbers of TAXPAYERS, who vote for CONGRESSMEN, don't give a hoot about toy airplane flying. They seem to value products and services from commercial sUAS more. Even if they don't value the products and services themselves, they sure value the dividends and increase in value of stock from companies providing those goods and services more. I have to wonder how many of those lamenting the Googles and Amazons have retirement funds or other mutual funds that own those stocks?

It's not the little guy getting the shaft, it's capitialism at work. And if you want to see what it REALLY looks like when the little guy gets the shaft, I strongly suggest you go live in any number of countries where oligarchs run things. Then you'll be very appreciative of what we have here. Which brings me to another point. I'm sorry you have such a dim view of government. Ours isn't perfect, by any measure, but I've lived and worked in places that make me very happy every time I return to US soil .. faults and all.

Hydro Junkie

Can't help but agree. After seeing how the people live between Olongapo City and Manila, back in December 1985, I'm glad to be in the US. Being in other countries was the basis of a major culture shock but seeing how people were living in shacks with tin roofs and cardboard walls..........................................
Mombasa Kenya wasn't much better. While the people were nice, the locals lived in run down buildings along a river while the tourists stayed in extravagant beachfront hotels a few miles north of town. The difference was night and day between the two, One one hand, you had sparkling white beaches with gleaming hotels near by and, on the other, a muddy looking river with utilitarian buildings closely spaced with just enough room to let one car get between them,

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

https://www.modelaircraft.org/events/ama-northwest-jamboree-0

I just visited this AMA event at the Wenatchee Red Apple Flyers' field in Wenatchee, WA. The field was packed, and everyone seemed to be, "flying as they always have", despite that field being within 2 miles of Pangborn Field and listed on the FAA map as 0' altitude limit. LOL

Astro

Appowner

Well, the question then would be, do they have a written agreement with the FAA? They do NOT appear on the spread sheet of authorized sites from the FAA web site. So assuming Pangborn Field is controlled........................................ .......