abel_pranger

AMA policy regarding guests limits them to one shot at trying model flying on a buddy box. This edict follows three paragraphs that tell us why only AMA members should be allowed to use AMA chartered club sites. I don't think this is really any of of AMA's business, though it may be the business of the club's if people were to abuse the privilege. As I see it, it is neither a safety issue nor an insurance issue, as the pilot on the master Tx is always in charge. No different situation really than the licensed pilot of a GA aircraft letting his wife or kid take the stick as it pleases him - he still has the responsibility for the aircraft and AFAIK, there's nobody counting how many times somebody else is in immediate control. I flew my dad's planes that he restored as a hobby, which started with an ancient Airknocker and continued through just about everything Piper ever built with one engine, a good number of the Luscombe lineup, and a Temco Swift. Never did get a pilot's license, and that never seemed to be a problem for AOPA, FAA, etc. Why is it a problem for AMA?
I have infrequent occasion to bring a friend, child or grandchild or a neighbor kid out for a flyig session. Some have gotten the bug and joined the hobby, and the club, and AMA, and for others the interest is there but the opportunity is too rare, or the decision to commit just isn't there yet. I see the AMA position as non other than self-serving, to collect dues from people without regard to whether or not they are ready, or will ever be ready for other than an occasional outing in the company of a member.
I could easily ignore AMA's rule with alacrity and no concern for adverse cosequences, except that are those of the roolz-is-roolz mindset at the club level that will get in the way. For that reason, I think it would be in the best interest of us and promotion of model aviation in general for AMA to scuttle this rule.
Your opinion?

Abel

SSRCCPREZ

WOW...I really don't think that this particular rule is a big deal. I can honestly say that I have put very little thought to it. I can say I agree with the fact that the master tx is ultimately responsible just as an instructor is of a student regardless of the student's AMA status. However, I think this may be an attempt by the AMA to draw the line somewhere. Most rules are too ambiguaose and lack clarity. In this case the rule is very clear. I would rather a rule being to strict but clear rather than vague. I believe every club has it's share of bone heads and intelects. A rule like this helps both groups. I also think that out of all the AMA rules we should be scrutinizing this is awfully low on my list. If the AMA changed every rule to make everyone happy, could you imagine what kind of shape the rule book would be in?

Final thought....Bigger fish, smaller pond. I'd rather focus the collective energy on reform of AMA over the number of times a non-member can use a buddy box. Further, the sooner a new member joins the sooner they may reap the benefits of the hobby and a sanctioned club.

I do, however, want to thankyou for making me think about this rule. It certainly has stimulated the synapsis in my head

Live Wire

AMA should be watching the big fish rather than the small ones so close . If a person is interested in flying RC you want to keep their interest. I don't say let them use the buddy as a way to keep from supporting a club, but to get them hooked. Then they are more apt to stay in the hobby than drop it after a couple flights. You have to expose the public to some thing to get thier attention. Then you have to make it interesting enough they want to get involved and you better figure out a way to keep them.

[8D]

Hossfly

IMO, AMA is a bit too restrictive in this area. However a Chartered Club is bound to following the AMA rules, Safety Code, own rules, etc., etc. Once a rule is broken the Club officers are liable for becoming fish bait for hungry Barracudas. Any well-administrated club will therefore hold the line to all the rules whatever they may be. As in regular life, some break the law and get away with murder, while some slob forgets to add that $1000 part time contract to his taxes and gets 10 years in the slammer plus losing most of his assets. That's why good club officers don't allow selective rule breaking.

Yes I would like to see that rule dropped. Unless there is a big change in the Directors of AMA I will not hold my breath.

Here's the loophole: Simply get whichever officer in your club that does the deed to sign you on as an Introductory Pilot. Pay your 5 Bucks and you can go for it as you wish. Each is then restricted to 30 days however that should present no problems for mountain-climbers.

As far as just introducing someone to flying, it's also simple. Using a model other than the student's model an AMA member can give one flight to the prospective newbie. OK so you have a trainer. You and several of your buddies can each give a flight and all is legal by the AMA's written words. A nice day can be had!

When we do the school thing each year, any member can do the instructor role as he is using his plane and the flights are one only. No need to make this thing too big.

OTOH, even as an Introductory Pilot, I don't do more than two lessons for any newbie as our club limits visitors to 3 sessions in any calendar year or join the club. I refuse to teach anyone to take-off and land unless he becomes a Club Member. Used to, but those that made a couple landings then went down the road and started flying off the road ruined any considerations for those to follow. My time is now too limited to waste on those looking for free schooling. [>:]

CFRACR

IMPO- I think Hossfly is right. No free lessons to go fly elsewhere!

But I think that Abel was more pointing to the occasional, let the grandkids take the stick here & there. So that maybe when they get older they will already have a taste for the hobby & may possibly want to take it to the next level down the road.

I think that even know a rule by the AMA may apply here. I feel that this would be a club discretion thing. If you belong to a club that has no problem with you bringing the grandkids ect. along here and there. They just do it!

CRFlyer

I believe the rule is a little strict here, but I also agree with Hossfly, that we don't want to just provide free schooling. Seems simple to me since the "instructor" is always in charge, that anyone should be able to fly on the buddy box with no problem. However, teaching TO's and landings would be another situation. Seems this rule could be done away with at the AMA level, and each club could have their own rule to their liking on this issue.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

As much as I like your idea, I don't think it is possible. Letting each club determine how it is going to impact the organizations insurance coverage probably won't fly very far.

That being said, I wonder what the problem with instruction is when the IP always has the master. Since we now insure commercial operations (instructors who charge), it makes sense that the ONE time rule be revisited as possibly ancient history.

What a tangled web.

CFRACR

Well it seems to me that the instructor is taking FULL responsibility when putting someone on a buddy box. There is no gray area where the instructor would say it was the trainee's fault. Who was on the switch???

I don't think that most clubs give it a minutes thought. If they are having a fly in, a party or some sort of gathering & are allowing possible flyers to take the stick & get a taste. Well who's at fault in the event of a crash with damage?? A crash without damage other than the plane would go no further.( which would be the case anyway ) But if there's some sort of damage that would need insurance to get involved. Might go something like this.......................

Instructors AMA>Clubs AMA>The Person Flyings HOI>The Persons Guardians HOI>

JNorton

My Feedback: (2)

This fall my son was asking about flying. I took him to the field and flew with him on the buddy box. He was hooked. Later on the Internet we got a Introductory AMA membership for 3 months for $20.00. I think the one time rule is a little restrictive, but it gave him a taste of what it was like. He has since been out to the field two more times and with the help of Real Flight G2 last week he soloed. I told him it was all the video games he played as a kid. He is 32 now and got a kick out of it.

John

Live Wire

You know if you have some one on the buddy box , get them hooked and give the instructions and they go some where else to fly You better start looking at your club ,and what has sent them away.
No one personally[&o]


[8D]

Hossfly

Hey, Outlaw, maybe we agree on that. We do think about it every so often. Our conclusion is that we ar doing something right and if it ain't broke don't fix it.

1. There is an eon of open space around these parts with roads, school buildings, undeveloped sub-additions etc., where the casual flier can have a ball.

2. Out here in some of that space are some acres owned by a Premier RC Club with very nice facilities such as some 5000 sq. ft shelter over concrete, tables, electrics, office/impound area, kitchen, running water, indoor t-facilities, and a nice area to fly-over. It all belongs to the club.

3. Oh yes our dues are reasonable, only $150 per year plus $50 for initiation for the newbies. Of course we fly 12 months of the year, so monthly cost is rather cheap.

4. Our membership loses 10-15% each year, but by the end of the year we are always back ahead of the previous year, so we're not following the AMA's lead by going down in numbers on an annual basis.

5. As long as we can pay the bills including the contracted mowing, then our analysis is that those that don't want to stay with us will not be chased after. OTOH it is not our responsibility to teach them to fly.

6. If you can figure why they go other places, please let us know as we want to be sure we hold on to it.

CFRACR

It seems as most seem to agree on this rule of the AMA's. Its kinda like a lot of laws on the books. There are laws which are still on the books but not enforced, because they are outdated & really don't apply today.

So even know its there, clubs forming there own rule/rules seems to be the best for what works for that particular club.

ira d

The one time rule should be done away with becaue there is no logical reason for it .
the AMA seems to want to have more strict rules for rc planes than the FAA has for full
scale planes.






Ira d

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Ira D,

Please don't go there.

abel_pranger

Why not? I invited him to go there by starting this thread, and I thank him for accepting the invitation and putting in his 2 cents worth.
This rule is one of a class of of AMA rules, those designed to exclude non-AMA members from becoming involved in club-based model aviation. These rules taken together implement a core element of AMA's business plan: make paying dues to AMA a prerequisite for becoming involved in aeromodeling in the US.
This business MO has a fundamental flaw that I see as the root cause of shrinking membership and the decline of the club-flying population: the source of potential club/AMA members is the non-AMA members with an interest in aeromodeling, IOW, exactly those individuals that are being excluded from developing that interest by AMA itself.
At the time when AMA was growing, most new members were already involved in aeromodeling. That shouldn't be surprising. What has changed is that the venues and other elements of opportunity to be involved in aeromodeling prior to joining a club or national organization have been disappearing. AMA could have mitigated that situation by simply operating according their charter to promote model aviation, but instead has chosen to hard-sell AMA.
How does that old adage go....... A hungry salesman doesn't sell?
I wanted to prompt people to think about changing this rule not because it is all that important in and of itself. It would be a start though, and I think something ought to be done and that something needs a starting place.

Abel

MajorTomski

Came to this thread a little late, I went to the AMA site, looked at the membership manual and the safety code. I even searched for Buddy box and got 45 pages of listings. Could you please specify where to find this one flight buddy box rule?

Thanks

Tom

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/911.pdf

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

At our club we take advantage of the "One time" rule to reward our helpers in the Cub Scouts, and other groups.

We also run model "Elective" classes at some local schools, and at or close to end of term we take the classes to one of our fields for buddy box sessions.

The AMA rule is a bit ambiguous about the "One time" definition, we construe "One time" to mean one day, allowing repeated sessions so long as the airplanes, batteries, instructors, and fuel hold out.

I also agree, though, this rule needs to be modified to allow more than one session.

Throwing the extra $5 at AMA is not the answer, as AMA limits the number of instructor pilots in each club.

Bill.

abel_pranger

Tom-

Go to the AMA docs listing and click on doc 911.

Abel

randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

I think that's why you see so many AMA clubs losing members. Too many rules and too much restriction. That's why the parkflyer craze has hit so hard. If I want to use my equipment to teach someone to fly that should be between me and the person I'm training. This whole idea of having designated instructors never did make much sense to me anyway. This puts too much on too few and then you get in to all sorts of issues like having instructors at the field on this day or that one and there are going to be days when none of the instructors will be available, etc etc.
How would you like it, if you showed up at the field, but no one was there to let you have a go at the buddy box to see if you are even interested, and yet the flight line was full of people that are obviously competent rc pilots?
I've seen this happen, and you usually don't see these people come back because they get the idea that it's an exclusive sort of thing.
It just seems to me that the AMA is more interested in making rules than making new pilots. That's pretty much the reason I've decided to drop flying at club fields alltogether and build a runway on my property. That way I can pretty much do whatever I want without AMA interference and only use my AMA membership in order to fly at local funflies.
I have really good homeowners insurance and they will pick up the tab if something happens, which, knock on wood, hasn't.
If it weren't for having to have AMA to fly at funflies I would have dropped my membership a long time ago.

Mike in DC

At first, I really didn't like the one time rule, because I really see the instructor as "flying the plane". With an easy-to-fly trainer, a competent instructor and up a mistake or two high, it should be extremely unlikely for the plane to cause anybody any harm.

But I don't get to heated up about the one-time rule anymore, because of the three month $20 membership availability. It seems to me that compared to almost any recreational activity, $20 is such a tiny amount that it doesn't seem worth fighting.

Hossfly

Nay, no longer true. A couple years ago 3 was the limit however if special dispensation was requested by a club, it was usually provided. Jetero at one time had 6.
The limit rule was rescinded and a club can have as many as they wish. You know, "Comes the revolution, we can all be Introductory Pilots."
While the term Instructor is not used, it's Introductory Pilot, in the document's discussion of the person, Instructor is well discussed.

Ain't it wonderful what $5 can get you these days?

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Abel,
My grief was with wanting more rules than the FAA. Sorry for not making that clear. I have NO PROBLEMS with the purpose of your thread, and agree it appears to be bogus. Didn't I already say that?

Mike has it right about the temporary membership, but most of us have missed the real issue. (Peak) Dues before Muncie were $38. In the grand scheme of things, that is still a tiny amount where $58 is not. Coupled with the other things Mike noted, we have a problem that the one time only rule only makes more evident.

At least in my opinion.

ira d

Jim what i was refering to in my post about the FAA is that i can go to the airport at
anytime pay the plane owner there fee and i can fly any type plane as long as i want
till my money runs out the FAA does not care. that is with the pilot on board of course.
so why should the AMA be concered about who is flying what and how many times on
a buddy box ? there are non pilots that have the right connections flying f 16 p 51s the
list is endless.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

VERY good point!