For those who have a problem with AMA (personal or otherwise) and only want insurance, there may be an alternative. http://www.premiermarine.com/

That is very interesting! Thanks for posting that link! I wonder how many non AMA Clubs will go that route, and how many AMA Clubs will drop there AMA Charter to go that route? Should be interesting to see how much interest another potential insurance carrier generates.

And will they sanction contests, maintain rules and records, and be recognized by the FAI?

Who cares!!!

I guess I care.

I hpe thier insurance is better than the links on their home page - click on products and then on USA.

Red S.

Will they work to protect our frequencies against raiders, like the AMA has done in the past? Will they droop you like a hot potato the first time you even mention a claim, no matter how small? Will they work with government agencies to help keep us from being regulated out of existance? I doubt it!

Evidently, they only cover Canada...
Will they do all the things AMA can do? No.
But if all you want is insurance, and you don't want to deal with AMA, then go for it.
Sounds good. Another option.
Should not be anything negative to anyone, just another option, not a "replacement" for AMA, but an alternative that could be useful for certiain situations.

This was on their contact page:

USA
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100
Seattle, WA 98104
T: 800.589.4208
F: 800.522.4461
Email Directory – Click Here

Thanks Fliers1

Guess RITA isn't the only wind blowing around here. At least it did blow itself out! We need ET on the gulf coast as a counter force.

Just got electrics back last Fri. Still cleaning up.

Sometimes I think if good ol' ET had to shut up for 5 minutes, he would f_rt himself to death.

Sent you a PM.

Have a great whatever of your choice!

Hey, guys, this Premiermarine thing really sounds great. Who the hell needs all those frequencies anyway and I'm sure Premier will intervene for us with the FAA fuzz. Who needs those frequencies since we can always go to CB radio 27 MH frequencies. They are a great bunch of folks that will spend millions to help us RC flyers.
I seriously doubt that the billions in claims from the Gulf Coast will cause them to raise their premiums, London is used to losing money and they don't mind.
Anyway, we don't mind waiting 8 or 9 months to have a lawsuit claim approved by London or another 2 or 3 years for the claim to be settled or having to fly to London to get the claim paid at all.
Boy, this has to be the dumbest idea of all. Having been a London rep for 15 years I can tell you that this one is really dumb. Now I understand that you folks who fly rubber powered models and don't need AMA have a gripe and I understand that you folks that fly in a very small club may also have a gripe since you have never been involved in a lawsuit and met the real world out there face to face as I have. As one who has been a full scale pilot for 40 years and RC for the same length of time, I am committed to aviation and AMA is aviation.
The more I think about it, the more I like the frequencies, the Washington Lobbying and the work AMA does with the FAA and the alternative of working with London, the more I like AMA.

Sorry, been there and done that

3dbob

Hey, I think Flyers1 was pulling someones leg. I'm sure he knows the minimum premiums on this company are around $1,500.00.. Right?

3dbob

All I know is the link. Just thought I would pass it on and no, I have no idea what the premiums are nor anything else about it. Funny thing though, the idea of a possible alternative to the AMA sure rubs some people the wrong way. lol

CCR

Everyone here has a good point. Now lets ask the real question. Why are there so many looking somewhere else but the AMA? The AMA over all has done an OK job in protecting most of the hobby.

Maybe there should be some tier membership in the AMA. I do not care to much for MA. If I was alone there would not be so many other Mags out there making money. I would be willing to drop MA. 1/3 of the shelf price sounds fair.

The large grounds in Muncie. I wounder what would be the savings if they did not have it. What percent of the AMA membership has ever used the field? I would really like to know. Maybe there should have a tier for the use of the field.

I think that I support the AMA due to it is required. Thats the end of it for me. If the AMA was better stewards of our funds, well I do not think this post would ever been posted.

Thanks
Crash99
pb1143

Flyers 1, yes, having another AMA does rub folks the wrong way because most of them realize what happened with the now defunct SFA a few years ago when the grabbed off a lot of members and did absolutely nothing for model aviation in general, and certainly nothing for RC. You could consider AMA to be a Union and while the power of unions has diminished over the years, they did serve a need for many workers back when workers were almost slaves.
Surely everyone must realize that there is strength in numbers and any attempt to divide those numbers will result in a weaker organization. Sure, any organization the size of AMA will have its faults but overall, they do a damn fine job and we all need to support them.
There will always be the cranks blindly standing on the side lines criticizing AMA. This year, we had about 7 or 8 members of our own club drop out and form their own club and their stated reason to leave was that they did not want to follow our (read AMA) safety rules.
We are quite happy to have them leave because they were a continual problem.
My suggestion for those who seem to be unhappy with AMA is to run for an office where there is no pay, no one appreciates your efforts and the only reward you get is criticism and there is no way you can make everyone happy. But, don't mess with our numbers because it is those numbers that make us strong.

3dbob

With all the criticism of the AMA I've been reading on a number of sites, I would have thought somebody would have started a viable alternative by now.
In fact, the criticism has been going on for decades. Nobody has been able to come up with a replacement, in spite of a number of attempts. Only one, SFA, even came close.
When I was in the AF (1966), when Don Dewey and a former AMA exec were trying to get support for an alternative, I met a new airman on base who was a member of a regional body that had some activities of it's own separate from the AMA . Asked him about what the group's approach to the situation was. He said that the head of the group was approached to form the nucleus of a new organization to compete with or even replace the AMA to represent RCers. They were told to find somebody else. The idea wasn't viable. The AMA was just too established with all the background, experience, and connections for any off-the-street organization to challenge it. And worse, such a split would in fact be destructive for ALL of Model Aviation.
I've said it before, and I'll probably keep on saying it. AMA is the best thing we have, or are likely to have. Many of the critics don't even seem to understand the scope of the AMA. Everyone focuses on either the Magazine, or the Insurance plan, or the Muncie facility, not the overall operation, like the museum, or the scholarship program, or the committees to try to find things to help model aviation, like the sound committee, or the field retention committee, or the frequency committee, or the contacts with the FAA/NAA, or FAI, or the new plan library. The AMA is big, relatively speaking, and so much criticism seems to me to be focused on small picture viewpoints.
The AMA is a human organization, run by humans, for humans. Criticism is unavoidable, as are percieved reasons for criticism. If by some chance, a new group is sucessfully formed, within a few years, it will be in the same situation as the current AMA, subject to huge amounts of criticism by the same types of people criticising the AMA, if not by some of the people.
Each of us is part of the whole. If any part of that whole is diminished, we are all diminished!

3Dbob,

You said criticizing. By asking a question, is that criticizing? The question was why are there so many look somewhere else. Also should the AMA have tier membership to please thier clients? Every AMA member is a client.

You did say something that I did not understand what this had to do with insurance. "7 or 8 members of our own club drop out and form their own club and their stated reason to leave was that they did not want to follow our (read AMA) safety rules."

What AMA safety rules did they not like? I have taken today off to take care of my son so I can check this post.

Thanks
Crash99
pb1143

IMHO. I think a couple of reasons the other modeling organizations failed is one, there just ain't enough modelers to go around and two, AMA and AMA clubs wouldn't allow any members of another organization fly on already created AMA fields, which helped to create the situation in number one. Unlike both SFA and the recently defunct UMA, AMA had strict rules against allowing members of any other organization fly on AMA fields. Like it has been said, there is safety in numbers.

Just supposed SFA, UMA and AMA all started together. Who knows what would've happened then? Just a thought.

CCR

50+airyears has it right. For some reason, some folks simply can't focus on the big picture and see the world through a narrow set of lenses. There is no changing them. Logic simply escapes them entirely.
Criticism is good for any organization but we do have to be careful that the strength and structure of the AMA remains solid.
3dbob

Our club asked about multi-group memberships flying at charter club fields. The AMA never forbad members of the other groups from flying. The legalities of the charter only required that for an AMA chartered club to allow flying at their field, the flyers had to be AMA members. They could have any other insurance or membership they wanted. If any club kept SFA, or UMA or any other group out, it was their own choice, not the AMA's.
This decision was communicated to us from 2 different club officers talking to two different AMA officials. We were concerned about it, and for a time, were even looking at chartering through SFA. They didn't seem to meet our needs.

Hi Crash 99- In answer to your question, one member showed up at the field to fly. We use a frequency board and we found out this member did not renew his AMA and thus no insurance. Since this was last May, he obviously had no intention of renewing his AMA membership. He had a few words for our Safety Officer. We had another one continually run up his loud engine within 6 feet of our shed, where members gather to talk. While not a safety violation, it was annoying to a lot of folks. We have two flying sites and we found that the non-AMA member was giving flying instruction at the other field. He was in violation of three rules. One, he was a student giving flight instruction, two he Board of Directors had not approved him an an Instructor and three, our lease with the County requires all club members to be in the AMA. Oh yes, one more: He was giving flight instruction to non-AMA members. He did manage to crash three students airplanes, however. No buddy box.
He, and several others, obtained their own AMA Charter and we are going to turn the other field over to them. Happy to oblige them.
You are right in assuming that criticism is not a bad thing as long as it is constructive and does not attempt to destroy from within.

3dbob

3dbob,

"Logic simply escapes them entirely" [:'(] Bob I will disagree. If you mean me, I work in the IT area where logic is the rule of life. I know you do not have a weak mind so, why even go that way.

I just brought up 2 issues that would save the AMA money. In return that would be a better management of the money we send the AMA.

As you know the top 2 issues with most of the AMA's clients is MA and the monster field at Muncie that I will guess less than 2% of the AMA's clients uses. I could be wrong. I went there 2 years ago and it is huge.

Yes, the AMA is so much more. But why not address the top 2 issues with the AMA's clients? It is always easy to attempt to put down other people that you do not have any knowledge of. "some folks simply can't focus on the big picture and see the world through a narrow set of lenses" That is just weak.

I will have to "assume" there is no reason to keep the fields except we have the money so why not spend it. I will also "assume" the same fo MA.

There are some would say why can not some people grasp the idea of being a good steward of the funds that I have been placed in charge of? The goal should be "We should make our clients happy to spend money with us."

Tier membership sounds good. Cutting back on the amount of fields is good management of the funds we have been given. Where is the logic on the way the AMA is spending their money in the 2 above areas?

Crash99
pb1143

Crash 99 - I wasn't picking on you specifically. One reads so much thoughtless junk about the AMA that I was just threw you into the same box. You have valid points but frankly, all the other magazines are glorified catalogues and not much more than what Tower puts out.
Some of the reviews don't tell the entire truth about a product. If they don't give a good review, the advertisers will go to another magazine.
I read MA cover to cover and even though I am not into Rubber or U-Control, I still read what they have to say and frankly, I learn some new trick every time I read MA. Unfortunately, a lot of folks just look at the pictures and don't read the stories. But fortunately, MA has been unbiased.
I too have flown at Muncie and really was impressed and enjoyed my visits. I see all that land at Muncie as being an asset and the way property values have climbed in other areas, that land has to be appreciating in value all the time.
Except for a few past members in our club, I would have to say that our entire club membership thinks AMA is great and if you did a poll, and could get enough answers from members, you would probably find that the dissenters are a very small minority. Most simply realize that AMA does a good job, provide good insuranace at a very cheap rate and help bring order to our sport.
The tiered membership idea may be a good one but you would have to take it to a general AMA meeting, or, write each RVP and see what their thoughts are on the matter.
It appears we may need to lower the membership fees for some of the newbies that are coming in to fly electric. These are the folks who are not joining AMA because of the cost and their own lack of commitment to aviation in general. They figure they are just flying toys so why bother? A lower membership fee might encourage them to join to fly electrics. AMA is losing members due to normal, common, attrition and the electric flyers who would normally have gone to fuel airplanes are not replacing our attrition numbers. Every club, association or other organization has a normal attrition rate. My point being that your idea has merit and you should discuss it with the folks that get things done.

3dbob

I agree with the post in quote the AMA is a monoply when it comes to
model air plane flying in the USA.

that makes it extremely diffcult for a new organization to start up unless
they are able to charter many of the clubs that are now under AMA
charter so there members will have a place to fly.

OK guys the AMA is a real good thing but the only problem i see is that we all pay the same amount of money. some people are able to fly all year round while people that live in the same area as i do cannot (iowa) so why should we pay for full membership when we cannot fly all year round