astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

And that is a task that (IMO) the AMA should have run far and fast away from. Since all are in agreement that WE are not the issue, WHY would we try and incorporate MILLIONS that are the problem? Not only is the AMA and its membership only capable of mentoring a group far smaller than our whole, can you imagine the dissent and disruption to our "traditional" flying fields if the majority were drone flyers? (just look at the dissent that helicopters and 3D caused). THAT would've led to a rapid decline in our traditional ranks as well.

If WE are not the problem and the FEDS realize(d) that, the FEDS should have implemented a program for the droners that would assure the Federal concerns were met. Since WE are not the problem, why should WE have to envelop and be responsible for those who ARE the problem?

Very poorly executed by the AMA IMO.

Astro

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Yea well, if we could rely on what we know from hindsight i wouldn't have married my first or second wife.

At the time, with the information available, I supported the concept.

TBH I thought, given the demographics of the EC at the time, I thought it was a bold move.

FUTABA-RC

And you know this how? Have you contacted anyone at the FAA who has confirmed your statement? If not, it is mere supposition on your part. Simply stating something you think is true does not make it true.

Hydro Junkie

I wouldn't have married my first wife either

I might have too, if not for a certain person being part of the EC

It was but, then again, it was not thought out well enough to make it feasible

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I honestly believe that a major reason for taking that course was so they didn't have to take the heat from being labeled, "drone haters" and risk losing support from and being perceived as alienating a certain demographic of member.

Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

It was sarcasm......
If our AMA officials are meeting weekly with the Feds, why does the membership not get any updates, or know what they are talking about?

Astro

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Have you watched any of the AMA Air, pod casts, signed up for the email lists? This stuff is being published almost daily

Hydro Junkie

Seems like that's doing things the hard way. The boating club I have a membership in has a website that gives anyone that wants to look general club information. For members, there is a member's only area that has information that the powers that be don't want to be general knowledge such as contact information, minutes, etc. The AMA could do something just as simple EXCEPT they don't want to have that kind of transparency as the members might start asking questions the EC won't want to answer

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

My bad, no I have not. I will have to look into it.

Astro

Hydro Junkie

Andy, do you still think this "Happy" thread is misnamed? You just gave Astro some information he didn't know(or forgot about) that he can go look into

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Know what makes me really happy? It's Friday and tomorrow I will be out flying, now THAT makes me HAPPY!

Y'all have a good weekend.

Hydro Junkie

Not me, not going out playing in the near future
Looking at rain from yesterday through Sunday morning
Sun and nice weather forecast for next week while I'm at work
Boats aren't ready to go, planes aren't either
Worst of all, if there's a break on Sunday, the wife will want to work in the yard all day

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Yea, we had plenty of that, this weekend is going to be nice for a change.

ECHO24

Again, AMA propaganda. Model aircraft are a footnote in all of this, at least the hobby as we know it. It is seen by the FAA as an anachronism
to be phased out over time. AMA helped it along by buying into the "drones are the future" thing and those few of us left will pay the price,
not withstanding the gigantic pretty pictures.

(Between the awesome photos BarracudaHockey's point implied that AMA was doing big things with the FAA - bending that bureauracracy to AMA's will maybe!!!)

ECHO24

As I mentioned, when the Flight Test guys visited the FAA's UAS Integration Office in Washington DC, the staff there were surprised that people flew
RC model aircraft anywhere but an AMA field. The base assumtion is that we are dealing with people who know nothing about the hobby, and now never
will because of AMA. AMA is the defacto voice of model aviation and all AMA has talked about is AMA. They are a victim of their own CBO scheme, having
pitched it relentlessly to the FAA for over a decade, shutting out the other 80% of the actual hobby and killing themselves and us in the process.

Cheers for barracudaHockey, a great representative for all that we love about model aviation. It has nothing to do with him.

franklin_m

I can say that staffers absolutely hate that. A group comes in, in this case AMA, and presents itself as advocating for the entire hobby. But then the staff later learns, for example during FliteTest visit, that AMA was in fact misrepresenting and trying to manipulate the staff into supporting something they're led to believe is for the entire hobby, when in fact it's for AMA alone.

So what did FAA do in response? They gave AMA exactly what they asked for, just not in the way they wanted it. AMA got their FRIAs, but with serious strings. My point is that FAA (and many Congressional staffs) no longer view AMA as this group of nice old guys playing with their toy planes. They've been made aware of major disconnects in AMA's actions. One example is how AMA told Congress that 336 was for the hobby, then turned around and told citizens that had to be members of AMA to use it (note 1). And once they knew that, Congress promptly corrected that problem by changing an "and" to an "or." Another example is AMA telling FAA and others they have a Safety Management System. Only to have FAA and staffers be made aware of several high profile specific events, or patterns of behavior at sites, where AMA knew or should have known there were issues - yet did nothing. In one case, AMA's own safety standoffs were waived with EC member in attendance - who did nothing. It becomes yet another example of AMA presenting itself to staffers one way, only to be discovered as quite different.

Again, staffers absolutely hate that. And once that credibility is burned, you don't get it back. I think it explains why AMA is making such little headway. Exactly how many sites have received higher altitudes as a result of AMA involvement so far? A dozen or so? Out of hundreds in controlled airspace? And out of thousands in class G? I don't know about you folks, but that's looking like another "slow roll" to me.

Yep. Well done to those "Pretty smart guys" of the EC!

Note 1: Hanson OpEd, ED statement on YouTube video, Hanson statement in MA column, EVP statement in MA column, and Flying Site Coordinator statement during online interview, AMA blog posts - among others.

franklin_m

Just because AMA says something does not make it true. I seem to remember piles of communications saying how the FAA reauthorization bill was going well. Only to find out the complete opposite later.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Anyone aware that the F3A team selections is happening right now in Muncie and the 2021 F3A World Campionships will be hosted in Muncie. I'm kinda wondering why the FAA would allow this if their intent is to phase us out.


@Hydro, great story about being on deck. Sincerely glad that neither of you were injured. Indeed a great example of situational awareness ( required training at Aerojet ). As to observation, I would be interested in you sources of observation. It appears to me that those in this forum speaking the loudest about the unavoidable doom coming to our hobby are those who are not very active or not currently active at all in the hobby of flying model airplanes. I'm just wondering where your observation is happening if not seeing first hand the happenings at any club site.

franklin_m

Because FAA knows they're going to win the RemoteID battle. Just as they won the testing battle. Just as they won the operational limitations battle. Just as they won the end of 336 battle. Just as they won the registration battle.

See above. In addition, revenue continues to drop. The magazines continue to lose money. Club fees and event sanction fees continue to drop. And despite what some are saying about membership is being flat, the trend in membership revenue is continued down.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

First paragraph, they haven't won yet on RID. What test? Wasn't the deadline several months ago? Registration, big deal. $5 every 3 years and a sticker on an airplane.

Second paragraph, my post had nothing in it's content to imply the financial health or lack of, simply pointing out that when given ample opportunity to shut us down the FAA is leaving us alone. This is proven every time a sanctioned IMAC, Pattern or soaring contest is held. Thus the observation is that the FAA is working with the AMA. If you or anyone else can offer a different view of why these events are happening with somewhat a blessing from the FAA I'd be glad to hear it.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I think we all would!
I wonder why we're not?

Astro

franklin_m

RemoteID? Go back and read the words. I never said they'd won.
Operational Limits? AMA wanted none. FAA won.
Testing? AMA didn't want any. FAA won.
Registration? AMA wanted exemption, or AMA number. FAA won.


Why bother. All it takes is one ugly event an not only can FAA easily prove the individuals involved were in blatant violation of law, they can also prove that the AMA was sanctioning such violations. Would be really easy to use that as justification to either deny or even revoke a CBO status. Pretty smart of FAA eh? And besides, assuming FAA gets pretty much what they want out of RemoteID, AMA will be irrelevant in a few years. Unless of course AMA craters financially first - which they seem on a path to do.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Operational limits? Where? Muncie is hosting a team trials right this very minute with zero operational limits.

Test? By all means show me any test that is required in order for fly a recreational UAS.

Last point, do you really think that the FAI approved Muncie as a venue for a WC without proof of suitability which included FAA blessings or do you think the FAI and special interest groups from 20+ countries just figure they're going to show up and hope for the best?

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I mean, that is what you have been doing this year, right?

Astro

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Nope, not to mention that me attending a regional contest is as compared to a venue submitting a proposal and being approved to host a WC is not anywhere near an apples to apples comparison. Just because you guys aren't hearing about agreements being made with the FAA and City Counsels doesn't mean they aren't happening. Perhaps if you would actually participate in the hobby you would see what is happening in the real world. Example, before today how many of you knew that the team selections were happening in Muncie this weekend? How many of you knew that Muncie was approved by the FAI to host the 2021 F3A WC?