gow589

My Feedback: (1)

Lot of discussison, how about a vote?

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

I prefer rates that are somewhat active, not tired. I would also vote no to Tiered rates.

uncleTom

My Feedback: (30)

Oh hell no!!!!!!!!!!!!

jonkoppisch

My Feedback: (162)

I'm tired of the crud that keeps coming up, rule #9, turbine waivers have to be renewed every year, now tiered rates.......DB isn't going to stop!! It's been reported that the main cause of claims against the insurance is trip and fall. I vote that we raise the rates for spectators because they are clearly unsafe and a hazard!!!

Bob101

If tiered rates were implemented it will go to show that the AMA is in fact good for nothing more than insurance.

Your either a member of AMA or your not - that's how it should work.

rcjon

I say NO to tiered rates.

You are in the "Academy of Model Aeronautics" or you are not. When AMA has something to offer the proverbial "park flyers" they will join. An offer of "nothing at a reduced cost" is appealing to noone.

Some of my friends fly 25-40% gassers, I fly 40-60 scale glow. Our club has many members that only fly electrics. But we all hold the same AMA card and club registration status. I think our club would be destroyed by fractionalizing the membership into sub-groups.

While I appreciate Dave Brown's efforts to open discussion on different fronts, it seems to me that his main concern has become the head of the monster, AOT benefitting to the members.

Ask who stands to benefit from this wholesale effort to increase membership? Individual AMA members? The Park Flyers who as of yet have never heard of the AMA? The AMA politic?

papermache

My Feedback: (35)

Rcjon is right on. My club, too would be destroyed by the fractionalization caused by tiered rates.

That's my main concern with the tiered rate concept. I think that many clubs, for many different reasons, would end up REQUIRING their members to hold the top rate card to continue club membership. That kills the concept right there. If a club were to okay membership on 2 levels, I don't think I would like to be a member holding the lower rate card (can you say "Second Class Citizen"?)

In the meantime, most park-flyer flyers remain blissfully unaware of the AMA. This is not surprising since the AMA has made little effort to recruit them and really offers them nothing more than expensive secondary insurance. Rcjon is right - nothing at a reduced cost appeals to noone.

papermache

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

Why do park flyers have to Join the AMA?
If that is all I flew, I would not pay the $58 dues.
I think Tier rates is a little more than that.
If we have a basic rate then riders for different types of aircraft, then I am for that. If you are trying to say that Tier rates is just for park flyers and everyone else, the that sounds a little unrealistic.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

The very thought of tiered rates presents a nightmare for club administrators. Stop and give this some thought. The AMA since its inception has represented ALL facets of model aviation from indoor microfilm, hand launched gliders, scale in all its forms, free flight, control line, various aspects of R/C all with ONE membership fee. There is nothing unique about "park flyers". Unfortunately someone hung this name on a very viable aspect of the hobby that brings light weight modeling back into the main stream, a marriage of old modeling disciplines and radio control. Until it can be proven that a specific aspect of modeling represents a significant risk over the others this tiered rate fiasco should be tanked!

Red S. Multi-interest modeler.

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

I would say this then, If I flew an indoor model, light weight, then why should I have AMA other than a way to reduce personal liability. If I looke at two aspects of the hobby. If I have a powered control line model I need AMA. If I have a control like glider, I don't need AMA (Kite) so in this case the difference is power. If I have an indoor model, FF model, glider, or IMAC plane, the risk in each situation is different. If I have a kite or control like aerobatic plane, the risk is different. If someone can come up with a system to define this risk, then why not review the merit of this system. I spend $40,000 for a car and $2000 a year for insurance. that is 5% of the value of my car. I spend $3000 for my plane, so $150 a year for insurance would not be outragious but in line with my other personal conveyance. How much would it cause to insure a $3000 motorcycle or boat? I understand that 50% of the cost may be collision insurance but if you look at liability only (what we have) it is still a good deal.

J_R

Geistware

Who would you have administer this program at the club level? As you have pointed out, there could be an almost limitless number of membership teirs. Are you willing to stand at the club frequency board every day of the year to verify that each pilot is flying what his membership allows him to?

It would not be surprising to see teirs based on weight or engine size. You are welcome to the tasks involved. It's hard enough to get club officers now. Add the liability of making sure the pilots are insured for what they are flying, and how many that will now serve as officers will continue to be willing to serve?

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Tiered rates would ONLY work if it were tied to tiered license/permits for which you had to qualify.

Just some random ideas:

Planes under under 24 ounces & 30 mph - No test/qual required
Planes over 24 ounces or over 30 mph
planes over 60 ounces or over 60 mph
Planes over 100 ounces or over 100 mph
Planes over 160 0unces or over 150 mph
Above that.

No special rational here, just illustrating what I meant. To have an AMA sanctioned membership and insurance coverage you would need the appropriate membership and have passed the appropriate level of certification.

An un certified membership would be equal to the lowest level.

Using the scale here, anyone could join for whatever $$ and fly that class of plane and have full coverage and privledges. Now, if you are flying a 5 pound plane and hit something, don't bother to file an insureance claim cause you ain't covered!

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

Tiered membership.

IF WE CUT THE WORM IN ENOUGH PIECES IT WON'T WIGGLE ANY MORE.

jonkoppisch

My Feedback: (162)

This is one thing that I could really see happening!!!! Someone gets hurt, the person doesn't have the proper tier level, ama denies claim as they weren't properly insured, clubs start requiring the maximum tier level to avoid any lawsuits etc or the property owner starts to require it (or they just decide that it's become to complicated and to high of a risk to keep the site open)

Crashem

So Aeajr,

When will you be donating you time to administer/Enforce this idea of yours.


Tiers Sound great on paper... Then the reality of implementing such an idea hits[X(]

Nobody answered why its so important to incorporate parkflyers into the AMA.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

This is how a tiered system works. It is self enforcing in that the individual assumes the risk when they go outside their license/certification.

The Clubs insurance, on the other hand, need not be tiered.

If the club decides that everyone has to be at the top tier, then it is just like it is now.

However many clubs, mine for example, would not permit planes on the field that exceeded the level that the club establishes. To some extent this happens now. You ahve all glow clubs, sailplanes only, electric only, contorl line only, etc. Just a different approach.

We fly sailplanes and electrics. Nothing powered exceeds 30 mph today. As to the size and weight of the planes. 98% would fall under 100 ounces. The club would allow planes over that weight by exception only, or not at all and the pilot would need the proper certification. Just as turbine pilots need certain certifications today.

If you don't like the chart I tossed off my head, make your own. But that is how a tiered system works. Some kind of defined brackets. Each bracket carries a license/certification and a fee associated with that level. For that fee you receive certain rights and privledges.

We all work under such a system today. It is called your drivers license. There are different classes for cars than for 18 wheelers. Drive for hire, need a differnt license and different insurance.

It is the insurance and training that drives this, as I am sure you all know. Limit the liability and you limit the cost. Today we are all paying for unlimited liablity for the privledge of flying almost anything we want. Works fine, but if you tiered it you could reduce the insurance exposure at the lower tiers and thus the exposure and the cost.

I don't care if you like it, that is how it works.

J_R

Therein lies the problem. If a pilot flies out of his teir and hits you, you are out of luck unless the pilot has other insurnance.

If you are a club officer and allowed this to happen, would you be surprised if you were sued for your neglience?

bhole74

Let's assume for a moment someone actually came up with a plan for tiered rates which was half-way fair for all (not likely), and set a fair fee for each classification (ha ha), what would that fee have to be to actually get the average park flier to join? My guess would be less than $1 and the AMA would have to supply the stamp for the envelope!

Crashem

You forgot that in your example we have an entire profession enforcing compliance You know the Police!!!!.


The AMA works because it is simple.

BTW Who in your system is going administer the certifications????

The fact of the matter is that today you can go to about 2000 AMA chartered clubs and be 99.99% sure you can fly as a guest because you have a current AMA card. Without the simplicity clubs will need to hire full time administrators just to keep the paperwork from filling the clubhouse

I can just see it now Tiered system in place with a certification required.

"Well son I see your Certification allow you to fly 20oz planes at less the 30mph.... Oh wait I see you are visiting from NY sorry we don't accept the certification... Have a nice day"

Or a National AMA controlled Certification Program..

"Could entire membership please show up at club headquarters on Monday May 1st for our annual certification test"

Every Idea put forth needs to be analyzed for feasibility. Tired rates add so much weight to the organization at both the club and National level I can't imagine how much dues would need to be increased (both club and AMA) to make it worthwhile

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

In my opinion a tiered system should NOT be created to bring in the small parkflyer crowd. If that is the only motivation, kill it now.

A tiered system should be created as a cost containment measure for the benefit of the entire membership or it should not be created at all. However, as a result of such a system, if you could drive down the cost at the lower tiers, you would be more attractive to new members who are interested in joining. You would encourage growth in the low risk catagories as well. You would also be able to retain more of you membership. You might also give clubs the opportunity to reduce their insurance costs by limiting their memberhips to lower risk, lower cost types of activities.

Then the guys who are in the big risk catagories will bear more of the cost, or that part of the hobby will slow down or stop.

If it cost you $58 per year to fly Jets, that is one thing. However if it cost you $58+$500 special use license to fly jets, maybe .90 glow planes are not so boaring after all. Today we all pay for the risk assumed by higher risk activities and planes.

Of course I am making an assumption here that an insurance underwriter would consider a 15 pound 200 mph Jet a higher risk plane/activity, just as an example, then the guy flying a 12 ounce slow stick or a .40 glow plane. That may not be valid, but you get the idea. Some part of the hobby must be considered a higher risk activity or a tiered membership won't drive insurance savings.

I don't know what percentage of our $58 goes to insurance, but I would guess it is about 1/3-1/2. So of the $58, you are talking about impacting about $20-$30 of the membership fee.

Assuming I am correct, a big assumption, you could bring the membership fee down to about $30-$35 for the bottom tier and tack on annual license and certification fees above that, which might go 80% to insurance.

I have no facts, nor do I pretend to have facts. This is all guestimates and projections on my part. However I would not be surprised if my projections were pretty close.

Crashem

One other point. If an individual finds that the benefits of joining are not worth the cost then why bother with them.

Here's what I mean if 58.00 yr is not worth

1. The ability to fly as a guest at about 2000 clubs nation wide (and I also beieve Canada)
2. 2.5 million dollars in secondary liability insurance.
3. Supporting an organization that was founded for the express purpose of fostering model avaition.

Why on earth does anybody think doubling or tripling our membership numbes is going to matter from a political aspect even at triple our current membership we still comprise less one 1% of the population correct???

I grew up in the Me generation and sometimes it not about Me. Why not stop trying to recruit and instead educate maybe the majority of parkflyers think the AMA stands for American Medical Assoc.

58.00 dollars is what it currently costs to be a member take or leave it and be done with it

Heck What do I now I just "paid" a Boy Scout $3.00 for a .50 candy bar

J_R

The most recent numbers are in the AMA’s 2003 financial statement on the AMA site in the Member’s Only Section. Without again going through how they are derived, it comes out to about $22 per open member. Of that, we know that about half goes towards trip and fall claims generated by clubs (as opposed to flying type claims). That leaves $11 dollars to be tired. If you charge the lowest risk class $1 and the highest risk class $21 the amounts involved are so small that it makes no sense, at least in my opinion.

Since, as you acknowledge, there is no data to support any risk assessment, where do you go from there? Just do this on the perceived risk by someone? The whole idea is worthless at the dollar levels involved.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Good points. Let's see if we can address them.

Today the AMA has safety guidelines. The club is the enforcement arm. If you are involved in an accident and you are operating outside those guidelines, I believe your insurance claim will be denied. Nothing new. You shoulder the risk and the liablity. Now, if your club gets dragged into court for letting you do that, .... nothing new. The club is the enforcement arm of the AMA. Always has been.

Who will administer certification? It would likely be the same people/process that your club follows to sign off solo pilots. Or you can just hand out certificates, if that is how your club solo's people. Nothing new. The club is the AMA enforcement arm. Always has been.

Certifications don't have to involve annual tests, just annual fees. Tests or minimum flight time might be required too, just as they are for turbines today.

Today any fool can show up with a 40 pound 4 cylinder plane and run it down the runway and fly into a neigborhood and hurt someone. Or they can miss the runway and fly it into the pit area and kill a few people. Maybe that should not be that way. But that is not a topic of my comments.

My outline says IF you want to show up with a 40 pound 4 cylinder plane and run it down the runway and fly it into someone's house and expect to be covered by AMA insurance, you have to pay the $200 ( or whatever) annual large plane fee. And if the club wants to be protected under AMA insurance they better make sure you have that certificate or the club won't be covered either. No different from letting non-AMA members fly on your AMA field. If something happens, guess what club insurance claim will be denied. Oh, and be prepared to lose your flying field too. Nothing new.

Now, if your club wants to impose a test in order to qualify for that certificate, or if the AMA says there is a test so that you can qualify for that certificate that is fine. It could be a one time test, or it could be an annual test or it could just require an attested annual minimum flight time. If the AMA wants the club to do it, which would be typical, that is fine too. No different than today.

They can hand 'em out to anyone they like and be neglegent in their responsabilities. Just as they can ignore AMA safety guidelines. As long as nothing happens, no problem. Just like letting a guy with a jet fly at your field without the proper papers. He hurts someone, the club will be at risk for allowing it. Nothing new! Same as today.

Nothing really changes from today except who shoulders the risk and who pays the cost. Today we all carry the risk and we all pay the cost.

Hope that clarified the concept.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

I did not say there was no data to do a risk assessment. I am quite confident there is data.

I said I don't have it, nor did I claim to have it. But it looks like I took a pretty good SWAG at our insurance burden. I would also guess the 2004 insurance component is higher as it was 2004 when we almost didn't have an insurance carrier. But at least I was in the right range.

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Uhhhh ... yeah, right ... $58 - $11 is definitely in the range of $30 to $35. Sort of. Kinda. Sounds kinda like the Enron school of creative accounting.

... and that's even assuming that you could somehow remove the entire $11 per member cost in those cases, which would (a) mean those members get no liability insurace at all, and (b) totally ignores the administrative cost to the AMA of the tiered system.