Why the AMA is not growing...........
01-03-2005 | 07:57 PM
#51
My Feedback: (3)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
ORIGINAL: horace315
SNIP
.i think our 15 minutes of fame is due.
SNIP
.i think our 15 minutes of fame is due.
I am fairly sure there a bunch of folks on this forum who agree with you. The issue seems to be getting the powers that be in the AMA to see that and act accordingly.
01-04-2005 | 12:30 AM
#52
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
ORIGINAL: tpes
Horrace, lighten up a little. This is a fun hobby where people gather to fly model airplanes, have a good time, and swap lies about how radio interferance was the reason their plane crashed. In my comments to Steve at AMA I was only repeating what I hear while being on the front lines in a hobby shop that sells R/C. My store is a full line toy and hobby store with less then 10% of my business being R/C aircraft, yet that does not decrease my interest in having the new pilot enjoy his new aircraft as I am sure you enjoy your aircraft.
Horrace, lighten up a little. This is a fun hobby where people gather to fly model airplanes, have a good time, and swap lies about how radio interferance was the reason their plane crashed. In my comments to Steve at AMA I was only repeating what I hear while being on the front lines in a hobby shop that sells R/C. My store is a full line toy and hobby store with less then 10% of my business being R/C aircraft, yet that does not decrease my interest in having the new pilot enjoy his new aircraft as I am sure you enjoy your aircraft.
I am a Life Member of AMA and that was not to save money but to establish my dedication to AMA as an organization, but not necessarily to the AMA EC's policies and/or lack thereof. I also have and am financing the ability of a club to have a club-owned flying facility. If you think that there is NOT a deed restriction requiring 100% AMA Charter in that sales-contract then you are again even more unaware of why I belong to AMA. JR stated his reasons and while not exactly the same, his remarks are adequately stated for me also. Been AMA since in grade school and kind of learned to live with it.
We support the AMA in the store, but the AMA has to make its presence better know. We receive applications from the AMA each year, yet to the best of my knowledge there is no mention for a trial membership on that application.
Let's face it these little electric planes that hit the marketplace a couple of years ago are here to stay, at least for the short term and maybe longer. We need a way to accomadate these folks, not run them off.
Ed Dupaquier
Ed Dupaquier
edit: format
01-04-2005 | 07:16 PM
#53
My Feedback: (35)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
YNOT,
If the AMA wants to grow, it has to do some basic marketing that it's not doing now. For instance, EVERY r/c model airplane or helicopter sold in this country, from the smallest park flyer to the largest composite 3D machine or sailplane, should have an AMA membership appication in the box. Have a postpaid card that gives the holder 30 days free trial membership just for sending it in. Yes, this could cause some headaches, but people would know that the AMA is out there! Why do you think the Mother and her kids got turned away from the AMA field? Moronic members? maybe, but more than likely they didn't even KNOW that there was such a thing as the AMA before they got to the field! The AMA needs to let people know it is there!
The AMA also needs to let the membership know about issues that effect the hobby - the ones it lobbies for and against. Maybe DB and company are unaware of the effect even 10 or 12 letters on a single subject can have on a Representative or Senator. If I can sit here and write this, I can (and do) write my congressman.
Want to grow your organization? You have to let people know you're out there and what you're doing for them out there. Advertise if you have to, but get the word out.
papermache (AMA member)
If the AMA wants to grow, it has to do some basic marketing that it's not doing now. For instance, EVERY r/c model airplane or helicopter sold in this country, from the smallest park flyer to the largest composite 3D machine or sailplane, should have an AMA membership appication in the box. Have a postpaid card that gives the holder 30 days free trial membership just for sending it in. Yes, this could cause some headaches, but people would know that the AMA is out there! Why do you think the Mother and her kids got turned away from the AMA field? Moronic members? maybe, but more than likely they didn't even KNOW that there was such a thing as the AMA before they got to the field! The AMA needs to let people know it is there!
The AMA also needs to let the membership know about issues that effect the hobby - the ones it lobbies for and against. Maybe DB and company are unaware of the effect even 10 or 12 letters on a single subject can have on a Representative or Senator. If I can sit here and write this, I can (and do) write my congressman.
Want to grow your organization? You have to let people know you're out there and what you're doing for them out there. Advertise if you have to, but get the word out.
papermache (AMA member)
01-04-2005 | 10:13 PM
#54
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Hoss and JR,
Your new best friend, Ed in Houston. Guys I an NOT against AMA and Hoss I have also paid my dues, both literally and figuratively. But you know what, when you need the AMA (insurance) to properly enjoy the hobby we have freely chosen to pursue, let's not hide behind some idea that this organization has our best interest in mind by throwing a Nats at us once a year and publishing a magazine once a month. As the ole saying goes, if it walks like insurance, if it talks like insurance, if it smells like insurance, and if it protects us like insurance, LET'S CALL IT INSURANCE. Why don't we just join the AMA and receive a "Membership Card" rather then a license, that word is so misleading to the non AMA member especially when it is spouted as gospel at the flying fields of America.
Your new best friend, Ed in Houston. Guys I an NOT against AMA and Hoss I have also paid my dues, both literally and figuratively. But you know what, when you need the AMA (insurance) to properly enjoy the hobby we have freely chosen to pursue, let's not hide behind some idea that this organization has our best interest in mind by throwing a Nats at us once a year and publishing a magazine once a month. As the ole saying goes, if it walks like insurance, if it talks like insurance, if it smells like insurance, and if it protects us like insurance, LET'S CALL IT INSURANCE. Why don't we just join the AMA and receive a "Membership Card" rather then a license, that word is so misleading to the non AMA member especially when it is spouted as gospel at the flying fields of America.
01-05-2005 | 01:06 PM
#55
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Well, Sir, here are my thoughts
I am a CD. I have never asked for, nor been asked for an AMA license. That might well be a geographical distinction. “Let me see your AMA card” is what you will hear most often here, or “AMA membership is required”. The simple fact is, the thing is designated a license in the by-laws. The changing of the by-laws is a non-trivial thing… very difficult to do. While some of us here believe some areas of the by-laws need to be changed, the designation of the card as a license is so minor that discussion of changing it has never come up here. Whether it is a license or not has been discussed. Changing the term is trivial, IMHO. The AMA has been issuing licenses since it’s inception. Recently, the AMA had a growth rate of 3% a year, on average. In the last two years, the AMA has lost about 10,000 members. I somehow doubt that was due to the sudden recognition by members that they were carrying a license.
There are many discussions here about insurance. You won’t find many that do not view insurance as an integral part of the AMA’s appeal, or that is the financial engine of the AMA. For the 85% that view the AMA as insurance, fine. I have no problem with that. The day all of the other 15% believe it, the AMA is done.
If you want my to know why I say the AMA would be done, and are interested in my opinion, read on. If not, we can agree to disagree.
The market for entry level “foamies” is a new one. I believe this is an entirely separate issue from the current membership decline. There is, in my opinion, a huge opportunity to grow the AMA, IF the AMA can find a way to show that it has value to these people.
The title of this thread is “Why the AMA is not growing…”, so here is my opinion as to why, and it is directly related to insurance, although from a different perspective. I can not believe that enough of our older members are dying and not being replaced with new younger members to account for a 10,000 member drop over the last two yeas. The numbers available do not support such an argument. So, where did they go, and why? The reasons all relate to “risk management”. Here are a number of examples of actions taken. The AMA has (not including a few experimental aircraft) a 55 pound weight limit. Forever, it has been the custom of modelers to weigh a model dry. We balance our aircraft dry (with some minor exceptions), we have determined our building skills by weighing a plane dry. Light aircraft fly better, right? It never made much of a difference in the scheme of things. Manufacturers produced models that were larger and heavier as technology allowed. The turbine and giant scale manufacturers supplied the demand for product, in accord with desires of the membership. One day, in the name of risk management, someone decided that the 55 pound limit is a wet limit… it includes some rather heavy fuel. That put some very nice, and very expensive models on the bubble, requiring that they either be set aside and not be flown, carry an minimum amount of fuel that many consider unsafe, or… they be flown at over 55 pounds.
A rule appeared prohibiting the touching of the rudder of planes. It was also done in the name of risk management. Not as a safety issue, but, because it was indefensible in court, according to Dave Brown. While there were not a lot of people flying big birds complaining, the rule had included light electrics, and 40 sized profiles and small 3d machines. The owners of those aircraft had a choice, don’t touch the tail, for no apparent reason, or… touch the tail in violation of the safety code.
A rule appeared, without reasonable explanation, banning autonomous flight. Besides the fact that it banned free flight, on the face of it, RC autonomous craft were also banned. The ban was so wide that it was not clear that it did not prohibit “co-pilots”. Here, again, the owners had choices. They could either put their machines aside, or fly them in violation of the Safey Code. This was not a safety issue, nor an insurance issue, although many folks blamed the insurance underwriters. The “risk management” in this case related to the potential to use aircraft as terriorist weapons, NEVER as an insurance issue.
Li batteries have come under scrutiny. Misleading and false information have been put forth, and concerns raised over this developing technology. We have many members who are simply disgusted with the lack of accurate statements in support of the technology.
We won’t go into older issues, such as the rules for combat or pylon.
There are people that are flying overweight turbines and giant scale planes. There are people touching the tails of planes. There are people flying autonomous aircraft. There are people using Li batteries. I believe many of these solid, knowledgeable, skilled modelers have left the AMA membership in disgust. I believe we have lost those members right out of the heart of the AMA in the name of “risk management”. Insurance is a tool to reduce the risk to the organization, not to eliminate risk of activity.
The historical model for the AMA is that after a dues increase, there has been one year of flat growth, then a return to normal growth. Not only did we not have flat growth the first year, we had negative growth a second year. By the historical yardstick, that means not only did we lose the 10,000 but an additional 3% (5100 members) in the second year, for a total of about 15,000 members lost.
While there will be some that feel that Dave Brown won a mandate by winning the election by about 8000 votes, I submit to you that the mandate is the 15,0000 members lost that voted with their pocketbook and feet. Now, I do not view Dave Brown as trying to destroy the AMA, or as stupid. I do think that he darn well better reconsider his views on risk management and return the AMA to being an organization for the furtherance of model aviation.
I am a CD. I have never asked for, nor been asked for an AMA license. That might well be a geographical distinction. “Let me see your AMA card” is what you will hear most often here, or “AMA membership is required”. The simple fact is, the thing is designated a license in the by-laws. The changing of the by-laws is a non-trivial thing… very difficult to do. While some of us here believe some areas of the by-laws need to be changed, the designation of the card as a license is so minor that discussion of changing it has never come up here. Whether it is a license or not has been discussed. Changing the term is trivial, IMHO. The AMA has been issuing licenses since it’s inception. Recently, the AMA had a growth rate of 3% a year, on average. In the last two years, the AMA has lost about 10,000 members. I somehow doubt that was due to the sudden recognition by members that they were carrying a license.
There are many discussions here about insurance. You won’t find many that do not view insurance as an integral part of the AMA’s appeal, or that is the financial engine of the AMA. For the 85% that view the AMA as insurance, fine. I have no problem with that. The day all of the other 15% believe it, the AMA is done.
If you want my to know why I say the AMA would be done, and are interested in my opinion, read on. If not, we can agree to disagree.
The market for entry level “foamies” is a new one. I believe this is an entirely separate issue from the current membership decline. There is, in my opinion, a huge opportunity to grow the AMA, IF the AMA can find a way to show that it has value to these people.
The title of this thread is “Why the AMA is not growing…”, so here is my opinion as to why, and it is directly related to insurance, although from a different perspective. I can not believe that enough of our older members are dying and not being replaced with new younger members to account for a 10,000 member drop over the last two yeas. The numbers available do not support such an argument. So, where did they go, and why? The reasons all relate to “risk management”. Here are a number of examples of actions taken. The AMA has (not including a few experimental aircraft) a 55 pound weight limit. Forever, it has been the custom of modelers to weigh a model dry. We balance our aircraft dry (with some minor exceptions), we have determined our building skills by weighing a plane dry. Light aircraft fly better, right? It never made much of a difference in the scheme of things. Manufacturers produced models that were larger and heavier as technology allowed. The turbine and giant scale manufacturers supplied the demand for product, in accord with desires of the membership. One day, in the name of risk management, someone decided that the 55 pound limit is a wet limit… it includes some rather heavy fuel. That put some very nice, and very expensive models on the bubble, requiring that they either be set aside and not be flown, carry an minimum amount of fuel that many consider unsafe, or… they be flown at over 55 pounds.
A rule appeared prohibiting the touching of the rudder of planes. It was also done in the name of risk management. Not as a safety issue, but, because it was indefensible in court, according to Dave Brown. While there were not a lot of people flying big birds complaining, the rule had included light electrics, and 40 sized profiles and small 3d machines. The owners of those aircraft had a choice, don’t touch the tail, for no apparent reason, or… touch the tail in violation of the safety code.
A rule appeared, without reasonable explanation, banning autonomous flight. Besides the fact that it banned free flight, on the face of it, RC autonomous craft were also banned. The ban was so wide that it was not clear that it did not prohibit “co-pilots”. Here, again, the owners had choices. They could either put their machines aside, or fly them in violation of the Safey Code. This was not a safety issue, nor an insurance issue, although many folks blamed the insurance underwriters. The “risk management” in this case related to the potential to use aircraft as terriorist weapons, NEVER as an insurance issue.
Li batteries have come under scrutiny. Misleading and false information have been put forth, and concerns raised over this developing technology. We have many members who are simply disgusted with the lack of accurate statements in support of the technology.
We won’t go into older issues, such as the rules for combat or pylon.
There are people that are flying overweight turbines and giant scale planes. There are people touching the tails of planes. There are people flying autonomous aircraft. There are people using Li batteries. I believe many of these solid, knowledgeable, skilled modelers have left the AMA membership in disgust. I believe we have lost those members right out of the heart of the AMA in the name of “risk management”. Insurance is a tool to reduce the risk to the organization, not to eliminate risk of activity.
The historical model for the AMA is that after a dues increase, there has been one year of flat growth, then a return to normal growth. Not only did we not have flat growth the first year, we had negative growth a second year. By the historical yardstick, that means not only did we lose the 10,000 but an additional 3% (5100 members) in the second year, for a total of about 15,000 members lost.
While there will be some that feel that Dave Brown won a mandate by winning the election by about 8000 votes, I submit to you that the mandate is the 15,0000 members lost that voted with their pocketbook and feet. Now, I do not view Dave Brown as trying to destroy the AMA, or as stupid. I do think that he darn well better reconsider his views on risk management and return the AMA to being an organization for the furtherance of model aviation.
01-05-2005 | 01:51 PM
#56
My Feedback: (162)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Though negligable, I'd say the dues increase also played a little part in it also..... I believe that some of the last minute policies attributed to it as well, tail touch etc. Can't wait to see what the warning signs being put up everywhere will do...
01-05-2005 | 02:08 PM
#57
My Feedback: (35)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: West Monroe,
LA
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
JR,
Here are a few opinions of mine as to why there is such a decline in the hobby.
For starters, I see the younger crowd (15-25 years old) losing interest. With the hitec video games that are out on the market now, youngsters just aren't leaving the house.
For all the newbies to learn how to fly, they must have someone to teach them how. Sure, simulators help, but they don't completely teach a person. A lot of the people who are qualified to teach just don't have the time. I, for one, over the past four years have taught quite a few folks. I'm one of those that no longer has the time. I barely have enough time to fly at all. There are at least four or five new guys here locally that are waiting to be taught. There's nobody to teach them. Training once a week, if an instructor has the time, will not be ehough for someone to learn. Training takes flying at least four times a week, for at least a couple of weeks. People just don't have that kind of free time now. These people waiting to be trained will soon find another hobby.
Clubs, and people, are losing flying sites. Due to urban sprawl, and land developement, flying sites arel being forced out. If you don't have a place to fly, you get out of the hobby.
People, believe it or not, just aren't spending the money nowdays. The economy is in such turmoil, people are holding on to every dollar they can. Just recently, our local club voted on going up on dues, from $60.00 a year to $120.00 a year. Over half of the club members have decided not to rejoin. Where will they fly? They probably won't!
You and I have both discussed the insurance situation. I don't like it, but I've got to have it. I honestly feel that I will never use any of the other services the AMA provides, so I am paying for insurance and a pretty dull magazine. Many people choose not to join/rejoin because of this.
Lastly, there just isn't enough publicity for the hobby. Sure, a small town here and there may support the hobby pretty strongly, but here, people just don't seem to get into it. They're more into football and baseball. We've had several large flyins to try to boost the awareness, but it just doesn't bring many new members in. People love to watch them fly, they just don't care about participating. I feel that it's the AMA's job to use a large portion of the money that comes in and spend it on advertising and areas where the hobby is struggling. The money is there, they just need someone with some common sense to tell them where/how it needs to be spent.
I don't see the hobby dieing any time soon, but I definately don't see it growing much either.
Just some thoughts,
John
Here are a few opinions of mine as to why there is such a decline in the hobby.
For starters, I see the younger crowd (15-25 years old) losing interest. With the hitec video games that are out on the market now, youngsters just aren't leaving the house.
For all the newbies to learn how to fly, they must have someone to teach them how. Sure, simulators help, but they don't completely teach a person. A lot of the people who are qualified to teach just don't have the time. I, for one, over the past four years have taught quite a few folks. I'm one of those that no longer has the time. I barely have enough time to fly at all. There are at least four or five new guys here locally that are waiting to be taught. There's nobody to teach them. Training once a week, if an instructor has the time, will not be ehough for someone to learn. Training takes flying at least four times a week, for at least a couple of weeks. People just don't have that kind of free time now. These people waiting to be trained will soon find another hobby.
Clubs, and people, are losing flying sites. Due to urban sprawl, and land developement, flying sites arel being forced out. If you don't have a place to fly, you get out of the hobby.
People, believe it or not, just aren't spending the money nowdays. The economy is in such turmoil, people are holding on to every dollar they can. Just recently, our local club voted on going up on dues, from $60.00 a year to $120.00 a year. Over half of the club members have decided not to rejoin. Where will they fly? They probably won't!
You and I have both discussed the insurance situation. I don't like it, but I've got to have it. I honestly feel that I will never use any of the other services the AMA provides, so I am paying for insurance and a pretty dull magazine. Many people choose not to join/rejoin because of this.
Lastly, there just isn't enough publicity for the hobby. Sure, a small town here and there may support the hobby pretty strongly, but here, people just don't seem to get into it. They're more into football and baseball. We've had several large flyins to try to boost the awareness, but it just doesn't bring many new members in. People love to watch them fly, they just don't care about participating. I feel that it's the AMA's job to use a large portion of the money that comes in and spend it on advertising and areas where the hobby is struggling. The money is there, they just need someone with some common sense to tell them where/how it needs to be spent.
I don't see the hobby dieing any time soon, but I definately don't see it growing much either.
Just some thoughts,
John
01-05-2005 | 03:47 PM
#58
My Feedback: (10)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
While I think JR makes some valid points, I would not be so quick to discount the effect of the "park fliers"
At my field, I see A LOT of interest in these planes, and I do not mean just the little trainers, but instead the massively powerful/maneuverable 3D profile planes.
Now I can only conclude that the popularity of these planes is nationwide. As such, I am sure that MANY that were in a "mariginal" club situation (ie crappy members, officers, dues, facilties, politics etc) have found more and more enjoyment from these park fliers, and they have gradually dropped out out of the club field scene.
If you ask me, that is where a great number of the missing members went.....don't need club or club field, then they don't get the AMA either...hand in hand.
At my field, I see A LOT of interest in these planes, and I do not mean just the little trainers, but instead the massively powerful/maneuverable 3D profile planes.
Now I can only conclude that the popularity of these planes is nationwide. As such, I am sure that MANY that were in a "mariginal" club situation (ie crappy members, officers, dues, facilties, politics etc) have found more and more enjoyment from these park fliers, and they have gradually dropped out out of the club field scene.
If you ask me, that is where a great number of the missing members went.....don't need club or club field, then they don't get the AMA either...hand in hand.
01-05-2005 | 04:30 PM
#59
My Feedback: (35)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: West Monroe,
LA
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Matt,
I'm not disputing your word, you are probably right. It's just not the situation here in my part of the woods. I, personally, don't know of a single person that has chosen electrics over glows. I do, however, see that electrics are making a big entry in other areas of the nation. About the only way I'm going to go electrics is if glow is banned for good.
So, it may be just as you've stated, just not in this area.
Now to think of it, the electrics that MA advertises and promotes could very well be a large part of what causes the organization to crumble.
John
I'm not disputing your word, you are probably right. It's just not the situation here in my part of the woods. I, personally, don't know of a single person that has chosen electrics over glows. I do, however, see that electrics are making a big entry in other areas of the nation. About the only way I'm going to go electrics is if glow is banned for good.
So, it may be just as you've stated, just not in this area.
Now to think of it, the electrics that MA advertises and promotes could very well be a large part of what causes the organization to crumble.
John
01-05-2005 | 04:45 PM
#60
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Washington,
DC
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
J_R, to summarize your thoughtful post, it sounds like you believe the reason the AMA is losing members is members are disgusted by too many new rules. Without scientific evidence, I guess the best we can do is disagree, but I definitely do disagree. There are just too few people with 55 pound planes or the inclination to touch their planes in flight. Take that small number of people, and factor in how many really care about the rules, and you get an even smaller number. Of those, the number that would quit the AMA (and thus the hobby) because of an abstract disagreement on rule making would be insignificant.
I can tell you that in my club of 200 people, there is probably not a single person who would leave the AMA over this. Actually, it's not clear that more than about 40 of the club members even fly regularly, and only a dozen or so have the size of plane or skill to worry about these rules.
My guess is that the factors are closer to what yard_dart contributed (loss of flying fields) and mr_matt (electric 3D planes). I am seeing a LOT of these little electric powered 3D capable foam planes at the field and guys are having a blast with them. If someone's driving 30 miles to a club field, and now finds he's having a ball with a plane he can fly at the local school, to my thinking, that's a more likely lost AMA member than someone with a 55 pound plane. The guy with the 55 pound plane is not likely to garage it, or fly it in a parking lot.
Actually, I'm sort of in that boat myself. The $150 a year I spend on club membership and AMA membership would very quickly pay for the kind of electric power that would be really fun. I have my eye on a couple of fields close to my home that are set in the middle of forests and are virtually empty when the soccer kids leave. I think I could trust my homeowners insurance plus umbrella policy to cover any liability.
On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen a park flyer at a park, and you are right that it's probably too recent a development to cause the decline, but I think it's definitely a threat for the future.
I'm not sure the aging of the membership is not a big factor (coupled with not attracting new members). If the average age of AMA members is 57, there have to be a LOT of old guys. They don't have to die to stop being members. Maybe their eyesight or reflexes prevent them from flying.
I can tell you that in my club of 200 people, there is probably not a single person who would leave the AMA over this. Actually, it's not clear that more than about 40 of the club members even fly regularly, and only a dozen or so have the size of plane or skill to worry about these rules.
My guess is that the factors are closer to what yard_dart contributed (loss of flying fields) and mr_matt (electric 3D planes). I am seeing a LOT of these little electric powered 3D capable foam planes at the field and guys are having a blast with them. If someone's driving 30 miles to a club field, and now finds he's having a ball with a plane he can fly at the local school, to my thinking, that's a more likely lost AMA member than someone with a 55 pound plane. The guy with the 55 pound plane is not likely to garage it, or fly it in a parking lot.
Actually, I'm sort of in that boat myself. The $150 a year I spend on club membership and AMA membership would very quickly pay for the kind of electric power that would be really fun. I have my eye on a couple of fields close to my home that are set in the middle of forests and are virtually empty when the soccer kids leave. I think I could trust my homeowners insurance plus umbrella policy to cover any liability.
On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen a park flyer at a park, and you are right that it's probably too recent a development to cause the decline, but I think it's definitely a threat for the future.
I'm not sure the aging of the membership is not a big factor (coupled with not attracting new members). If the average age of AMA members is 57, there have to be a LOT of old guys. They don't have to die to stop being members. Maybe their eyesight or reflexes prevent them from flying.
01-05-2005 | 04:49 PM
#61
My Feedback: (3)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
ORIGINAL: yard-dart
SNIP
I, personally, don't know of a single person that has chosen electrics over glows. I do, however, see that electrics are making a big entry in other areas of the nation.
SNIP
John
SNIP
I, personally, don't know of a single person that has chosen electrics over glows. I do, however, see that electrics are making a big entry in other areas of the nation.
SNIP
John
John,
It is odd that you say that after what I saw at my club meeting last night. We elected a new president in December, and he took office last night. We are a wet club, he is an electric only flyer. Then during show and tell, a young kid (still in high school) got up and showed his high power 3D electric plane with a radio receiver and ESC he made himself from discussions on another forum. I questioned him about the cost of that RX and he said something like $2.63. I challenge you to say HE is not a modeler.
My point is that HE represents a large and growing group of REAL MODELERS that are having less and less to do with the AMA. A larger portion of our membership IS moving to electrics, HAS moved to electrics, or also plays with electrics. These are the folks the AMA is not offering enough to. Why should some kid who makes his own electronics bother with AMA membership? Why should some park flyer guy pay more for AMA membership than he pays for a 3D electric shock flyer? Indeed, why when the AMA tells him that his power source of choice is bad when he knows different (as Fred Marks discussed).
Guys, we have a problem of perception and we need to help get it changed. That probably is going to mean some grief and heartache, but that is better than the alternative. The current AMA administration clearly has been looking the wrong way and has not made things better, rather has clouded the water we all must drink. I hope we can all work up something effective we can get the administration to listen to, but it does take some effort. I am willing and there are others here willing also. Maybe between all of us we can come up with something that will fly.
01-05-2005 | 05:23 PM
#62
My Feedback: (22)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston, TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
I have always bought top quality engines and fuels. I am a little mechanically inclined. I get to the field and I fly. But I see many floks that don't. They are in another hobby. They tinker with stuff that just doesn't work. They really struggle. It is sad. Of course there are aways experts around to help. But junk is junk. And sooner or later these folks just aren't around anymore, duh.
Well, the electrics are idiot proof. Almost anyone can make an electric motor run. And for the non-mechanically inclined segment of the population, ( which I believe is growing) the electrics are the user-friendly answer to thier prayers.
And the performance of these electircs is fast approaching any of the glow models. The cost for the higher performing electrics is substantial, but likely to come down. I do know people that prefer electrics to glow, many. I try to convert them to glow, and they say here, fly this. And man, I have to tell you, these things are strong flying little planes.
I beleive the electrics will continue to grow in popularity and I bleieve the electrics will constitute a larger and larger segment of the hobby. The number one reason that my E-friends decline invitations to the feild is time. Oh, that feild is too far away. Maybe some other time. Flying isn't an entire afternoon for them. They step out in the morning and grab a flight and maybe a couple after dinner. Not a bad lifestyle really. The wife prefers it over hubby dissappearing all day. It just fits many people's life style much better. There is nothing what so ever to be done about it. Except perhaps 100,000 small neighborhood AMA feilds !!! I would vote for that !!! But , you know, $$$$$
Well, the electrics are idiot proof. Almost anyone can make an electric motor run. And for the non-mechanically inclined segment of the population, ( which I believe is growing) the electrics are the user-friendly answer to thier prayers.
And the performance of these electircs is fast approaching any of the glow models. The cost for the higher performing electrics is substantial, but likely to come down. I do know people that prefer electrics to glow, many. I try to convert them to glow, and they say here, fly this. And man, I have to tell you, these things are strong flying little planes.
I beleive the electrics will continue to grow in popularity and I bleieve the electrics will constitute a larger and larger segment of the hobby. The number one reason that my E-friends decline invitations to the feild is time. Oh, that feild is too far away. Maybe some other time. Flying isn't an entire afternoon for them. They step out in the morning and grab a flight and maybe a couple after dinner. Not a bad lifestyle really. The wife prefers it over hubby dissappearing all day. It just fits many people's life style much better. There is nothing what so ever to be done about it. Except perhaps 100,000 small neighborhood AMA feilds !!! I would vote for that !!! But , you know, $$$$$
01-05-2005 | 05:40 PM
#63
Senior Member
My Feedback: (17)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Cressona, PA
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
I think that one of the problems that the AMA has (as you already know) is the park flyer/foamie fad. "Why join AMA when I can fly in the park down the street."
Helping these electric foam fliers find and negotiate indoor sites for flying would definately help attract many of these people.
Helping these electric foam fliers find and negotiate indoor sites for flying would definately help attract many of these people.
01-05-2005 | 05:48 PM
#64
My Feedback: (162)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
I agree about the foamies, especially in the last year with the intro of the li-poly batteries and the performance that they are getting now. I pretty much only fly gas, 40%, and electrics right now. If all I did was fly the electric I would be VERY tempted to drop the ama for sure!!!!! It's very possible that the more the electrics become popular, which from day to day is increasing exponentially, that the ama is going to dramatically suffer in the future.......
01-05-2005 | 08:19 PM
#65
Senior Member
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
There are people spending big bucks to develop better small electric motors for various applications. Also people spending big bucks to develop cheaper, lighter, smaller, safer, more powerful power sources for electrics. There are a few dollars being spent to develop better IC engines. My guess is that ten years from now my IC engine on the flying field will be a curiosity. I may not even be allowed to fire it up.
What is happening is that model aviation is becoming more populist and less elitist. It is growing fairly rapidly and the growth is happening outside the AMA. We are, in fact, an elitist organization. We are faced with the challenge of becoming populist while retaining our elitist virtues (whatever you think they are.)
Jim
What is happening is that model aviation is becoming more populist and less elitist. It is growing fairly rapidly and the growth is happening outside the AMA. We are, in fact, an elitist organization. We are faced with the challenge of becoming populist while retaining our elitist virtues (whatever you think they are.)
Jim
01-05-2005 | 09:20 PM
#66
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
ORIGINAL: J_R
Well, Sir, here are my thoughts
I am a CD. I have never asked for, nor been asked for an AMA license. That might well be a geographical distinction. “Let me see your AMA card” is what you will hear most often here, or “AMA membership is required”. The simple fact is, the thing is designated a license in the by-laws. The changing of the by-laws is a non-trivial thing… very difficult to do. While some of us here believe some areas of the by-laws need to be changed, the designation of the card as a license is so minor that discussion of changing it has never come up here. Whether it is a license or not has been discussed. Changing the term is trivial, IMHO. The AMA has been issuing licenses since it’s inception. Recently, the AMA had a growth rate of 3% a year, on average. In the last two years, the AMA has lost about 10,000 members. I somehow doubt that was due to the sudden recognition by members that they were carrying a license.
There are many discussions here about insurance. You won’t find many that do not view insurance as an integral part of the AMA’s appeal, or that is the financial engine of the AMA. For the 85% that view the AMA as insurance, fine. I have no problem with that. The day all of the other 15% believe it, the AMA is done.
If you want my to know why I say the AMA would be done, and are interested in my opinion, read on. If not, we can agree to disagree.
The market for entry level “foamies” is a new one. I believe this is an entirely separate issue from the current membership decline. There is, in my opinion, a huge opportunity to grow the AMA, IF the AMA can find a way to show that it has value to these people.
The title of this thread is “Why the AMA is not growing…”, so here is my opinion as to why, and it is directly related to insurance, although from a different perspective. I can not believe that enough of our older members are dying and not being replaced with new younger members to account for a 10,000 member drop over the last two yeas. The numbers available do not support such an argument. So, where did they go, and why? The reasons all relate to “risk management”. Here are a number of examples of actions taken. The AMA has (not including a few experimental aircraft) a 55 pound weight limit. Forever, it has been the custom of modelers to weigh a model dry. We balance our aircraft dry (with some minor exceptions), we have determined our building skills by weighing a plane dry. Light aircraft fly better, right? It never made much of a difference in the scheme of things. Manufacturers produced models that were larger and heavier as technology allowed. The turbine and giant scale manufacturers supplied the demand for product, in accord with desires of the membership. One day, in the name of risk management, someone decided that the 55 pound limit is a wet limit… it includes some rather heavy fuel. That put some very nice, and very expensive models on the bubble, requiring that they either be set aside and not be flown, carry an minimum amount of fuel that many consider unsafe, or… they be flown at over 55 pounds.
A rule appeared prohibiting the touching of the rudder of planes. It was also done in the name of risk management. Not as a safety issue, but, because it was indefensible in court, according to Dave Brown. While there were not a lot of people flying big birds complaining, the rule had included light electrics, and 40 sized profiles and small 3d machines. The owners of those aircraft had a choice, don’t touch the tail, for no apparent reason, or… touch the tail in violation of the safety code.
A rule appeared, without reasonable explanation, banning autonomous flight. Besides the fact that it banned free flight, on the face of it, RC autonomous craft were also banned. The ban was so wide that it was not clear that it did not prohibit “co-pilots”. Here, again, the owners had choices. They could either put their machines aside, or fly them in violation of the Safey Code. This was not a safety issue, nor an insurance issue, although many folks blamed the insurance underwriters. The “risk management” in this case related to the potential to use aircraft as terriorist weapons, NEVER as an insurance issue.
Li batteries have come under scrutiny. Misleading and false information have been put forth, and concerns raised over this developing technology. We have many members who are simply disgusted with the lack of accurate statements in support of the technology.
We won’t go into older issues, such as the rules for combat or pylon.
There are people that are flying overweight turbines and giant scale planes. There are people touching the tails of planes. There are people flying autonomous aircraft. There are people using Li batteries. I believe many of these solid, knowledgeable, skilled modelers have left the AMA membership in disgust. I believe we have lost those members right out of the heart of the AMA in the name of “risk management”. Insurance is a tool to reduce the risk to the organization, not to eliminate risk of activity.
The historical model for the AMA is that after a dues increase, there has been one year of flat growth, then a return to normal growth. Not only did we not have flat growth the first year, we had negative growth a second year. By the historical yardstick, that means not only did we lose the 10,000 but an additional 3% (5100 members) in the second year, for a total of about 15,000 members lost.
While there will be some that feel that Dave Brown won a mandate by winning the election by about 8000 votes, I submit to you that the mandate is the 15,0000 members lost that voted with their pocketbook and feet. Now, I do not view Dave Brown as trying to destroy the AMA, or as stupid. I do think that he darn well better reconsider his views on risk management and return the AMA to being an organization for the furtherance of model aviation.
Well, Sir, here are my thoughts
I am a CD. I have never asked for, nor been asked for an AMA license. That might well be a geographical distinction. “Let me see your AMA card” is what you will hear most often here, or “AMA membership is required”. The simple fact is, the thing is designated a license in the by-laws. The changing of the by-laws is a non-trivial thing… very difficult to do. While some of us here believe some areas of the by-laws need to be changed, the designation of the card as a license is so minor that discussion of changing it has never come up here. Whether it is a license or not has been discussed. Changing the term is trivial, IMHO. The AMA has been issuing licenses since it’s inception. Recently, the AMA had a growth rate of 3% a year, on average. In the last two years, the AMA has lost about 10,000 members. I somehow doubt that was due to the sudden recognition by members that they were carrying a license.
There are many discussions here about insurance. You won’t find many that do not view insurance as an integral part of the AMA’s appeal, or that is the financial engine of the AMA. For the 85% that view the AMA as insurance, fine. I have no problem with that. The day all of the other 15% believe it, the AMA is done.
If you want my to know why I say the AMA would be done, and are interested in my opinion, read on. If not, we can agree to disagree.
The market for entry level “foamies” is a new one. I believe this is an entirely separate issue from the current membership decline. There is, in my opinion, a huge opportunity to grow the AMA, IF the AMA can find a way to show that it has value to these people.
The title of this thread is “Why the AMA is not growing…”, so here is my opinion as to why, and it is directly related to insurance, although from a different perspective. I can not believe that enough of our older members are dying and not being replaced with new younger members to account for a 10,000 member drop over the last two yeas. The numbers available do not support such an argument. So, where did they go, and why? The reasons all relate to “risk management”. Here are a number of examples of actions taken. The AMA has (not including a few experimental aircraft) a 55 pound weight limit. Forever, it has been the custom of modelers to weigh a model dry. We balance our aircraft dry (with some minor exceptions), we have determined our building skills by weighing a plane dry. Light aircraft fly better, right? It never made much of a difference in the scheme of things. Manufacturers produced models that were larger and heavier as technology allowed. The turbine and giant scale manufacturers supplied the demand for product, in accord with desires of the membership. One day, in the name of risk management, someone decided that the 55 pound limit is a wet limit… it includes some rather heavy fuel. That put some very nice, and very expensive models on the bubble, requiring that they either be set aside and not be flown, carry an minimum amount of fuel that many consider unsafe, or… they be flown at over 55 pounds.
A rule appeared prohibiting the touching of the rudder of planes. It was also done in the name of risk management. Not as a safety issue, but, because it was indefensible in court, according to Dave Brown. While there were not a lot of people flying big birds complaining, the rule had included light electrics, and 40 sized profiles and small 3d machines. The owners of those aircraft had a choice, don’t touch the tail, for no apparent reason, or… touch the tail in violation of the safety code.
A rule appeared, without reasonable explanation, banning autonomous flight. Besides the fact that it banned free flight, on the face of it, RC autonomous craft were also banned. The ban was so wide that it was not clear that it did not prohibit “co-pilots”. Here, again, the owners had choices. They could either put their machines aside, or fly them in violation of the Safey Code. This was not a safety issue, nor an insurance issue, although many folks blamed the insurance underwriters. The “risk management” in this case related to the potential to use aircraft as terriorist weapons, NEVER as an insurance issue.
Li batteries have come under scrutiny. Misleading and false information have been put forth, and concerns raised over this developing technology. We have many members who are simply disgusted with the lack of accurate statements in support of the technology.
We won’t go into older issues, such as the rules for combat or pylon.
There are people that are flying overweight turbines and giant scale planes. There are people touching the tails of planes. There are people flying autonomous aircraft. There are people using Li batteries. I believe many of these solid, knowledgeable, skilled modelers have left the AMA membership in disgust. I believe we have lost those members right out of the heart of the AMA in the name of “risk management”. Insurance is a tool to reduce the risk to the organization, not to eliminate risk of activity.
The historical model for the AMA is that after a dues increase, there has been one year of flat growth, then a return to normal growth. Not only did we not have flat growth the first year, we had negative growth a second year. By the historical yardstick, that means not only did we lose the 10,000 but an additional 3% (5100 members) in the second year, for a total of about 15,000 members lost.
While there will be some that feel that Dave Brown won a mandate by winning the election by about 8000 votes, I submit to you that the mandate is the 15,0000 members lost that voted with their pocketbook and feet. Now, I do not view Dave Brown as trying to destroy the AMA, or as stupid. I do think that he darn well better reconsider his views on risk management and return the AMA to being an organization for the furtherance of model aviation.
01-05-2005 | 09:49 PM
#67
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
J R I invite you to the largest public field here in Houston, called Scobee Field named after Dick Scobee the shuttle pilot that died in the first shuttle crash. Over the gateway it clearly states that you must have an AMA LICENSE to fly at the facility and should you ask any of the regular pilots that fly there they will tell you that you need a "license". It is the word "license" that puts off these new fliers, they have enough trouble managing their lives on a day to day basis, they (the neebee) does not want to deal with another invasion on their life to fly a model plane.
I would guess that you are rather well known at your local, as well as other, flying fields in your area. Come to Houston, I will take you to Houston and you better have your "AMA LICENSE" or you won't fly except on a buddy box. FYI-I haven't been asked for my either in probably 20 years.
Hopefully the issue about the cost of dues or the yearly cost of AMA as discussed in other postings, not yours, is not a deterrent to existing members. Any ACTIVE member who spends the kind of money we spend on our hobby should quit the hobby if 50 plus dollars in out of their reach. As someone else stated about Houston, a Suburban (mine) takes $60 just to fill up. None the less I still think we need to find a place in the AMA for these new folks, as originally stated, the future of the hobby.
Thanks,
Ed
I would guess that you are rather well known at your local, as well as other, flying fields in your area. Come to Houston, I will take you to Houston and you better have your "AMA LICENSE" or you won't fly except on a buddy box. FYI-I haven't been asked for my either in probably 20 years.
Hopefully the issue about the cost of dues or the yearly cost of AMA as discussed in other postings, not yours, is not a deterrent to existing members. Any ACTIVE member who spends the kind of money we spend on our hobby should quit the hobby if 50 plus dollars in out of their reach. As someone else stated about Houston, a Suburban (mine) takes $60 just to fill up. None the less I still think we need to find a place in the AMA for these new folks, as originally stated, the future of the hobby.
Thanks,
Ed
01-05-2005 | 10:04 PM
#68
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Fort Worth,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Ah Ha. The "License" is the problem
I propose a two-tiered membership.
1. For $30/year, you get an insurance card. This would be valid at your club or flying site.
2. For $58/year, you get a competition "license" which allows you to participate in events at other clubs and or flying sites, in addition to your own.
This would satisfy all the "I don't compete" crowd, and limit liability exposure. For option 1, you would have to specify your flying site and or club. Should you wish to change, you would have to apply to the insurance carrier and AMA for a change--or you could upgrade to option 2.
Option 2 is like it is today.
Roger
I propose a two-tiered membership.
1. For $30/year, you get an insurance card. This would be valid at your club or flying site.
2. For $58/year, you get a competition "license" which allows you to participate in events at other clubs and or flying sites, in addition to your own.
This would satisfy all the "I don't compete" crowd, and limit liability exposure. For option 1, you would have to specify your flying site and or club. Should you wish to change, you would have to apply to the insurance carrier and AMA for a change--or you could upgrade to option 2.
Option 2 is like it is today.
Roger
01-05-2005 | 10:12 PM
#69
My Feedback: (162)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
I can definately understand why there's not as many new people. A new person goes to the hobby shop, finds out that to buy a trainer they have to spend around $350 for a combo package of plane, engine and radio (more if buying separate). Then they have to spend another $35 on fuel, pump and glow battery. Then they're told they need to join a club. Ours is $100 with an initiation fee of $50. All this and you may have only been able to fly 1 time to try it out. So far we have $535. Now we find out that we have to join the ama before we can join the club so that the club is covered in case there's an accident, insurance reasons....!!!!!!! Now it's cost $593 for that first $350 trainer to learn on!!!!!!!!
On the other hand
$50 Ultimate w/brushed motor
$110 futaba 4 channel radio
$20 for a nihm battery
$100 for a flight pack
Go crash for $280
No club fee and no ama!!!!
On the other hand
$50 Ultimate w/brushed motor
$110 futaba 4 channel radio
$20 for a nihm battery
$100 for a flight pack
Go crash for $280
No club fee and no ama!!!!
01-05-2005 | 10:50 PM
#70
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
ORIGINAL: tpes
J R I invite you to the largest public field here in Houston, called Scobee Field named after Dick Scobee the shuttle pilot that died in the first shuttle crash. Over the gateway it clearly states that you must have an AMA LICENSE to fly at the facility and should you ask any of the regular pilots that fly there they will tell you that you need a "license". It is the word "license" that puts off these new fliers, they have enough trouble managing their lives on a day to day basis, they (the neebee) does not want to deal with another invasion on their life to fly a model plane.
I would guess that you are rather well known at your local, as well as other, flying fields in your area. Come to Houston, I will take you to Houston and you better have your "AMA LICENSE" or you won't fly except on a buddy box. FYI-I haven't been asked for my either in probably 20 years.
Hopefully the issue about the cost of dues or the yearly cost of AMA as discussed in other postings, not yours, is not a deterrent to existing members. Any ACTIVE member who spends the kind of money we spend on our hobby should quit the hobby if 50 plus dollars in out of their reach. As someone else stated about Houston, a Suburban (mine) takes $60 just to fill up. None the less I still think we need to find a place in the AMA for these new folks, as originally stated, the future of the hobby.
Thanks,
Ed
J R I invite you to the largest public field here in Houston, called Scobee Field named after Dick Scobee the shuttle pilot that died in the first shuttle crash. Over the gateway it clearly states that you must have an AMA LICENSE to fly at the facility and should you ask any of the regular pilots that fly there they will tell you that you need a "license". It is the word "license" that puts off these new fliers, they have enough trouble managing their lives on a day to day basis, they (the neebee) does not want to deal with another invasion on their life to fly a model plane.
I would guess that you are rather well known at your local, as well as other, flying fields in your area. Come to Houston, I will take you to Houston and you better have your "AMA LICENSE" or you won't fly except on a buddy box. FYI-I haven't been asked for my either in probably 20 years.
Hopefully the issue about the cost of dues or the yearly cost of AMA as discussed in other postings, not yours, is not a deterrent to existing members. Any ACTIVE member who spends the kind of money we spend on our hobby should quit the hobby if 50 plus dollars in out of their reach. As someone else stated about Houston, a Suburban (mine) takes $60 just to fill up. None the less I still think we need to find a place in the AMA for these new folks, as originally stated, the future of the hobby.
Thanks,
Ed
I would suggest to you that you call Wes DeCou, the western Flying Site Assistance Co-ordinator. His number is on the AMA site. Explain to him your problem, he may be able to help.
01-05-2005 | 11:00 PM
#71
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
tpes
Another point you have raised twice that I am curious about. Are you an AMA Intro Pilot, having been named by the club at Scobee field? If so, great. If not, and you are under the impression that you or your student are covered with AMA insurance, I suggest that you review the Club Recharter Kit, Page 10, Item A 5 which states: Any flying at the field on a “buddy-box” permits a non-AMA member (e.g. spectator, friend) to fly on a one time-per-person basis. NOTE: Liability insurance does not extend to the non-member for this model flight.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/2004clubkit.pdf
Another point you have raised twice that I am curious about. Are you an AMA Intro Pilot, having been named by the club at Scobee field? If so, great. If not, and you are under the impression that you or your student are covered with AMA insurance, I suggest that you review the Club Recharter Kit, Page 10, Item A 5 which states: Any flying at the field on a “buddy-box” permits a non-AMA member (e.g. spectator, friend) to fly on a one time-per-person basis. NOTE: Liability insurance does not extend to the non-member for this model flight.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/2004clubkit.pdf
01-05-2005 | 11:03 PM
#72
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
I had posted this a while back...it seems to FIT better in this thread:
"""""""''quote"""""""""
With a HUGE park whose lawn is mowed constantly AVAILABLE AND EMPTY every day---and having to drive 2 miles only, to FLY --(the field at which I need to use the AMA card lies at exactly 46 miles from my garage)-and with Electric models that run the GAMUT of RC : i.e. FORMOSA - ALFA - et.al. + helis etc, getting all the benefits PLUS (+++) silence and (NO OIL)
and having resigned from at least 3 "political beehives of good ole boys' circles" a.k.a. (CLUBS)
MY AMA CARD HAS NOT BEEN USED IN OVER A YEAR !
why do I need it ?
I can't think of ONE reason........
THINK OF IT THIS WAY : THE HOBBY INDUSTRY ITSELF HAS ENCOURAGED ME TO PRESCIND OF THE AMA SERVICES !
FAREWELL AMA .... especially """GOODBYE R/C CLUBS""" who needs you ?...I certainly don't need arrogant "safety officers" or moronic 3D flying up close and in my face, for sure !...or two month wonder boys who in sixty days have acquired 30 years worth of "experience" !
My new Club is called RCU.
I learn MORE here than anywhere else and I don't have to put up with "pseudo-xpert" newbies.
And it's free !
""""""end of quote'"""""
AMA since 1966 ( AMA 11117)
"""""""''quote"""""""""
With a HUGE park whose lawn is mowed constantly AVAILABLE AND EMPTY every day---and having to drive 2 miles only, to FLY --(the field at which I need to use the AMA card lies at exactly 46 miles from my garage)-and with Electric models that run the GAMUT of RC : i.e. FORMOSA - ALFA - et.al. + helis etc, getting all the benefits PLUS (+++) silence and (NO OIL)
and having resigned from at least 3 "political beehives of good ole boys' circles" a.k.a. (CLUBS)
MY AMA CARD HAS NOT BEEN USED IN OVER A YEAR !
why do I need it ?
I can't think of ONE reason........
THINK OF IT THIS WAY : THE HOBBY INDUSTRY ITSELF HAS ENCOURAGED ME TO PRESCIND OF THE AMA SERVICES !
FAREWELL AMA .... especially """GOODBYE R/C CLUBS""" who needs you ?...I certainly don't need arrogant "safety officers" or moronic 3D flying up close and in my face, for sure !...or two month wonder boys who in sixty days have acquired 30 years worth of "experience" !
My new Club is called RCU.
I learn MORE here than anywhere else and I don't have to put up with "pseudo-xpert" newbies.
And it's free !
""""""end of quote'"""""
AMA since 1966 ( AMA 11117)
01-05-2005 | 11:21 PM
#73
My Feedback: (22)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston, TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Quote from J3FAN
FAREWELL AMA .... especially """GOODBYE R/C CLUBS""" who needs you ?...I certainly don't need arrogant "safety officers" or moronic 3D flying up close and in my face, for sure !...or two month wonder boys who in sixty days have acquired 30 years worth of "experience" !
There are plenty of screwed up clubs. I'll bet that many folks can relate. There are also some cool clubs around without the egos and the boy-wonder-know-it-alls. If all of the COOL people leave, what is left ?
I think you have really hit upon something.
FAREWELL AMA .... especially """GOODBYE R/C CLUBS""" who needs you ?...I certainly don't need arrogant "safety officers" or moronic 3D flying up close and in my face, for sure !...or two month wonder boys who in sixty days have acquired 30 years worth of "experience" !
There are plenty of screwed up clubs. I'll bet that many folks can relate. There are also some cool clubs around without the egos and the boy-wonder-know-it-alls. If all of the COOL people leave, what is left ?
I think you have really hit upon something.
01-05-2005 | 11:47 PM
#74
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Houston,
TX
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
Dear Barney up in Kingweed, 6 miles north of my house :
please tell me of ONE club in your area....that fits your description of COOL, w/o the egos and the wonder boys....? PLEASE
the 3 examples were, actually, specific and I quote "
1 -A safety officer actually pushed me off for standing in the wrong place ( about 3 yards) WHILE TRAINING an adult New Flyer with a NEXSTAR and caused the total loss of the aircraft. No complaints were accepted as valid, either by the "safety officer" or the Club itself......cost to myself : 428 $ to replace the plane
2 - A new club member, very experienced, flying 3D and other maneouvers directly in front and close up in everybody's face.. Not challenged but ADMIRED by the dumb club "leaders" who fail to enforce COMMON SAFETY.
3 - A "pattern flyer, well known" literally screaming in my face very loudly in the presence of 50+ other flyers for saving an old man's plane from a sure crash and landing too close to the barriers while doing the saving. ( I am pushing 70 and I deserve more respect than that, if for no other reason that I have been flying before this fool's PARENTS were born) . No apologies were offered and THAT club is anathema.
Please list me a COOL CLUB in your neck of the woods
thank you
Maybe ? NASA ?
No more Clubs for this old man, thank you VERY MUCH......my close by park is sufficient
please tell me of ONE club in your area....that fits your description of COOL, w/o the egos and the wonder boys....? PLEASE
the 3 examples were, actually, specific and I quote "
1 -A safety officer actually pushed me off for standing in the wrong place ( about 3 yards) WHILE TRAINING an adult New Flyer with a NEXSTAR and caused the total loss of the aircraft. No complaints were accepted as valid, either by the "safety officer" or the Club itself......cost to myself : 428 $ to replace the plane
2 - A new club member, very experienced, flying 3D and other maneouvers directly in front and close up in everybody's face.. Not challenged but ADMIRED by the dumb club "leaders" who fail to enforce COMMON SAFETY.
3 - A "pattern flyer, well known" literally screaming in my face very loudly in the presence of 50+ other flyers for saving an old man's plane from a sure crash and landing too close to the barriers while doing the saving. ( I am pushing 70 and I deserve more respect than that, if for no other reason that I have been flying before this fool's PARENTS were born) . No apologies were offered and THAT club is anathema.
Please list me a COOL CLUB in your neck of the woods
thank you
Maybe ? NASA ?
No more Clubs for this old man, thank you VERY MUCH......my close by park is sufficient
01-06-2005 | 01:34 AM
#75
My Feedback: (3)
RE: Why the AMA is not growing...........
PARK!
Who needs a park?
I don't need no stinking park.
Most of the 'funner' e planes can be flown in larger front/back yards. I have a friend who lives in a subdivision and he does touch and goes off the neighbors roof with his shock flyer. Average lot size there is between 12 and 18 thousand square feet with the largest homes being about 3000 feet and the smallest around 1700. When I cannot afford the time to go to the club field, 45+ miles away, I fly my e stuff in my drive way, but it is ~ 80x18.
The problem is that when many start doing that, they realize that they don't need the club expense any longer and shortly after that discover that the AMA cost is another unneeded drain on the hobby budget. The numbers of those kinds of folks are growing in leaps and bounds. I think the reason you don't see it is that 10% of the membership would not exceed 17000 people. How far would you be aware of any of that number on a nationwide basis? Your comments about the 40% gasser is right, but the total market share of that bunch is probably less than 5% of the membership.
In short, I more agree with JR's comments and analysis than yours because we are only talking about AMA loosing less than 10,000 members. Before you say so what, remember that the elephant is eaten one small bite at a time.
Who needs a park?
I don't need no stinking park.
Most of the 'funner' e planes can be flown in larger front/back yards. I have a friend who lives in a subdivision and he does touch and goes off the neighbors roof with his shock flyer. Average lot size there is between 12 and 18 thousand square feet with the largest homes being about 3000 feet and the smallest around 1700. When I cannot afford the time to go to the club field, 45+ miles away, I fly my e stuff in my drive way, but it is ~ 80x18.
The problem is that when many start doing that, they realize that they don't need the club expense any longer and shortly after that discover that the AMA cost is another unneeded drain on the hobby budget. The numbers of those kinds of folks are growing in leaps and bounds. I think the reason you don't see it is that 10% of the membership would not exceed 17000 people. How far would you be aware of any of that number on a nationwide basis? Your comments about the 40% gasser is right, but the total market share of that bunch is probably less than 5% of the membership.
In short, I more agree with JR's comments and analysis than yours because we are only talking about AMA loosing less than 10,000 members. Before you say so what, remember that the elephant is eaten one small bite at a time.
