Sledge-RCU

AMA vs Chartered Club 4129
Below is the story or the AMA vs Chartered Club 4129

1/30/2003
It is impossible to Solve problems that are fictitious, and only exist as fictions in the minds of Silver wings and some of the AMA officials.
The law is very clear that overflying of someone's property like Silver Wings is doing to mine can be considered as Criminal Trespass and Taking of Property.

The agreement the AMA wants me to sign written by the offending neighbor has nothing to do with safety. It demands that I agree never to never develop my 300 acres now or by any future owner. And allows him to overfly my property forever and the AMA demands that I agree. Why??

Tom Hammer president of AMA Chartered Club 4129 owns the land and mows and maintains the 5 acres that the club uses to fly. There are no Club dues. Tom allows any AMA member to fly at no cost.

Eventually as events unfold the truth will finally be proved.
Unfortunately the AMA's posture in the handing of this non event
will only cause disharmony among the AMA family.

Below is the story or the AMA vs Chartered Club 4129

I am upset when AMA contends that Hammer has done nothing
as to rectify Silver Wings complaint. It is unfortunate that while the information was e mailed to the AMA about December 9, 2002, the date of their phone call, there had been absolutely NO indication until your phone call today that they wanted the same information sent snail mail. HAMMER HAS BEEN WAITING 7 WEEKS for a reply from AMA.
And, what about the fact that AMA sponsors fly-ins and fields
at full scale airports all over the country. WE STILL WANT TO
KNOW WHAT POWER Silver Wings has with the AMA that he
can shut down Hammer's field while others continue in similar
situations. Also, might I ask if a neighbor in Muncie complains,
will the AMA shut down their own field as they have done to so
many of their clubs.
The AMA should receive the letter from our attorney shortly;
he has been advised of the February meeting.
We are sending literature to both Sandy Frank in Texas and the AMA Dave Brown in Muncie in today's mail...both priority plus registered to the AMA.

Subject: Re: My CALL
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:50:30 -0600
From: "Dr. Sandy Frank" <[email protected]>
To: Jay Mealy <[email protected]>,
Joyce Hager <[email protected]>,
Hammer <[email protected]>
CC:
Dave Brown <[email protected]>,
Carl Maroney <[email protected]>,
Wes De Cou <[email protected]>
when and if AMA is NOT in receipt of the agreement.

""I got a call yesterday from Mr. Severe stating he has informed Mr. Hammer, more than once during the last 30 days, that the agreement is complete and ready for his review but has gotten no response from Mr. Hammer."" by the FEB. EC meeting...

I would expect to withhold his CLUB CHARTER and Field coverage renewal. JOYCE PLEASE SEPARATE this Club Charter Renewal Package and SITE Coverage renewal package for this matter.. and I will instruct you if it should be sent by the close of the FEB. EC meeting.

Sandy Frank AMA D8 VP
Jay Mealy wrote:
Sandy,

I got a call yesterday from Mr. Severe stating he has informed Mr. Hammer, more than once during the last 30 days, that the agreement is complete and ready for his review but has gotten no response from Mr. Hammer. As we discussed early on in this project, what we need from you is your signature on the "AMA Vice President Authority Form" holding the 2003 club charter renewal for Mr. Hammers club. We can utilize that to make
Mr. Hammer aware of the seriousness of this matter and how important it is to resolve the dispute. This does not require Council action, simply your signature, and I personally believe you should do it ASAP as the renewals are in the process of being mailed now.

Jay Mealy AMA Programs Director

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Sandy Frank [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 10:06 AM
To: Hammer; jay; Carl Maroney; Joyce Hager
Subject: My CALL

As of this morning I did call Mr. Hammer (AMA# 9732)
and remind him of the upcoming AMA EC meeting...
and the concerns which AMA has about the safety conditions at his flying field.

I reminded him that AMA has requested that he answer fully those questions of model field at his flying site.. and have in place an agreement which AMA has also agreed to.. which will confront those concerns which have been raised...
BUT much like a TRAFFIC TICKET which a driver disregards...
in the absence of HIS presentation of solutions to the problems of flying at his field... when asked WHAT the OWNER has done to remedy the problem.. if the answer is ""NOTHING..."" his continued Coverage by the AMA Flying Site policy will assuredly be terminated... IT IS THE responsibility of Mr. Hammer to reply in writing as to the safety concerns at his field... I asked that all of his correspondence be directed to AMA in Muncie,IN as I will be in transit soon and could well miss his correspondences while enroute.. He mentioned that his lawyer will be doing so soon... (contacting AMA on his behalf) and I also AGAIN reminded
him of the EC meeting on FEB. 8,2003 where I am sure that this
will be presented...
Sandy Frank D8 VP
(ps if this is to be presented at the EC meeting..
please include this correspondence as well as all other such correspondence which I have done in this matter.)

bpu699

My Feedback: (1)

I read it. Couldn't make heads or tails of what is happeining. Perhaps you can rewrite this in a more organized fashion...?

Scar

My Feedback: (3)

Hey BPU, thanks. I thought I was the only one who couldn't get the gist of this one.

Really, a concise description of the story would be good, here.

Thanks
Dave Olson

cap10fan

My Feedback: (13)

:spinnyeye

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

Sounds to me like a neigbor is ticked, and the owner will not respond to AMA? If he will not take the action needed to get it resolved, they will pull coverage? We had a similar situation, but it did not get this far. When I was pres, we talked to the neigbor many times, did as much as possible to limit noise including grounding just about every plane I own. He came over one night screeming at a .15 size plane flying around, and after we got him cooled down, he admitted that he really couldn't hear it, but it just ticked him off seeing it. We told him to go away, and never come back and lifted all the noise restrictions. That really ticked me off. Never had a problem again with him.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Flyboy, I think you are right, the neighbor is mad. It also sounds like the 'club' (?) over reached their 'rights'.

I am heavily involved in getting my club a new site and overfly rights are THE MAJOR issue. Who in their right mind would develop a 5 acre field without first securing the overfly area? That is critical unless it is a park flyer field.

This looks like another nightmare like Torrey Pines.

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I flew at a site north of here. The runways are right on the pits, and behind you is a runway to a large airport. It is a terrible spot. Only place I have been yelled at for flying too high, and I never fly high. I was uncomfortable standing in the pitts to fly. I like some room between the pitts and the runway. Always need room when there are guys crashing on the runway, and the debree slides into the pit fence. Not a good setup.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

LOL

A few years ago I went to visit some folks I taught to fly who lived in Houston. They took me to their field and proceeded to tell me to stay low as I was under the approach path that was heavily used by T-34's. Sure enough, it was.

Now a days I stay inside the fence line (about 9 acres) and below the tree line. I have to remember not to pull when I have put on too much bank, because the bird goes DOWN! I have more crashes from 5 feet or less than most people have crashes.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Does this mean you intend to take American Airlines, Delta, and Southwest Airlines to court for Criminal Trespass? While I bet not, I also believe I understand part of the frustration I see you have. It is probably created by several parties all misunderstanding each other's position and some reaching for power they do not have under the rules.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sledge
The agreement the AMA wants me to sign written by the offending neighbor has nothing to do with safety. It demands that I agree never to never develop my 300 acres now or by any future owner. And allows him to overfly my property forever and the AMA demands that I agree. Why??[/QUOTE

Exactly WHO wrote that agreement? I suspect that you and your neighbor have had some strong words over this and neither of you is willing or able to think in the cold clinical manner necessary to avoid this entanglement. That appears to be proven by the District VIII AMA VP instructing people to deny the club (who appears to be your neighbor) Chartered status pending his decision which rests on you giving away your rights. If that is a fair assessment, you may, as property owner, may just ignore the whole mess as it is the CLUB's problem. You could be gracious and just allow the overflight (including the recovery of the occasional downed a/c since some run out of fuel) and go on.

However, if you elect to be vindictive you cannot stop the over flight. Nor can you prevent the recovery of downed aircraft under the law. Since it appears that the 300 acres is currently undeveloped, there is little action you can take unless provable damage is done to you or your property. A model impacting the dirt does negligible damage to the dirt. However you CAN post "NO TRESPASSING" signs charge a large access fee for recovery of downed aircraft. You can make the collection easy by pressing criminal charges against those who violate the signs. In fact, if you do it right you can probably get your local law enforcement folks to check and help protect your property from foreign invaders. These actions ARE legal even if they will not make you any friends. I would not do them, but I am not you.[/B][/QUOTE

First things first. I think it is kind of stupid to involve the AMA in what is clearly a personality clash between a pair of landowners, one who happens to have a model field and has NO impact on liability. I wonder exactly where the authority to take this action stems from. Is this more of the "My way or the highway" approach to modeling I have heard of? Unless there is development there what right is there to deny or cancel a club's right to fly under the AMA? This clearly is not a way to help the AMA grow which is what I THOUGHT part of the job of DVP was.

Does all this aggressive action by the District VIII AMA VP mean that now we have to kiss up to him to stay in the AMA? He has to inspect and approve all our flying fields? This ability to deny clubs Charter status is much more dangerous than the effort to allow DVP's to punish CD's. It impacts hundreds, no thousands of modelers.

Have I missed something here that is obvious to any other observers?

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Uh, when a public airport is built the right of way is granted under eminent domain...I think, different situation.

Beyond that, I am completely lost at what is going on in this situation, some clarification would be nice.

bigtwin113

it is like this
this is the biggest flying field i ever have had the privlage to fly at in arkansas and many other states he claims 5 acres but to me that is just the air strip.not to count the close to 300 acres surounding the field .its not that he dosnnt want to talk to ama he has many times but they refuse to listen we have great flyins sometimes 30 or more flyers show up.at our last flyin we actually had a ama offical show up, we and the owner obey all ama rules while flying r/c but heres the delima we have been an ama santioned field for around 8 years without a single claim. and some guy deceides to put in an airstrip right acrossed the street taking off directly over our 2 strips, and a very busy road .the airstrip in question is to many unnessary in the first place due to a airport about 3 miles away as the crow flys.in the last 6 or 7 months this new air strip has had mabey 6 or 7 planes land there.we have flown acrossed the street for 8 years 3 to 5 times a week.what is trying to be said is ama is against us for flying due to a new airstrip that had been built acrossed the street.and its my opinion as i stated to ama officials that if there is a saftey issues in our case then there should infact be a saftey issue at all the big ama events that are either based on or even near a airport.iff anyone has ever seen a big ama event or on video they should agree with us how can there be saftey issues when there are full scale planes being flown right from an ama events...i could start a worldwide petition just from how the ama treats us but not at this time ...and with all due respect to hammers field vrs ama or whoever,i feel that untill the ama can come to an agreement that iff we are in violation then all events are in violation and therefore all ama events should be shut down untill someone can get there act together ..as far as mr.hammer is concerned he is doing just what anyone in there right mind would do. speak to an lawyer
first..

this could happen to any and all of us ama members in the future

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

DUH! I hate it when the communication is so fouled up you cannot tell what is being said.

It does not matter if you had been flying there for 50 years, if a neighbor developed something for you to endanger in your overfly, you would be DONE.

The fact that you are now flying in the traffic pattern of an ACTIVE full scale airport without written and agreed upon procedures IS a safety violation that cannot be allowed. On that point Dr. Frank and the AMA are on target and you need to modify your approach.

As for other operations at rider scale airports, you assumption that everyone else is wrong and should be shut down does not wash. I have operated at several rider scale airports over the years and in each and every case there was a previously agreed upon procedure for models and rider scale birds - THAT ARE FOLLOWED!

There are clubs all across the south that share ex military fields with general aviation birds. In each case there is a specific operation procedure that all parties have agreed to. It may not be written, but it IS ENFORCED! I am not sure what the problem with that is in this case, but I am impressed.

I happen to know that Dr. Frank will be at a large event near the end of this month at an active rider scale airport that is shared by drag racers, an AMA club, and rider scale birds. I doubt that he will prevent that club field from being insured, but I know the club has some very specific things they do when rider scale birds arrive or depart. Should be an interesting weekend!

Sledge-RCU

I'll also try to summarize briefly. We have flown for 8 years at the same location. We own 300 acres; the field occupies 5 of those acres. All flying is completely over our property.
Our neighbor decided to build a museum/runway. He has had 2 planes land there since it opened. His notice to the FAA states there is model plane activity off the south end of his runway, across the highway.
He notified the AMA he did not want us to fly on our property. They called and gave us hell.
Neighbor said he'd write up an agreeement for all to sign. AMA and Dr Sandy Frank want us to sign it. Surely Dr Sandy has not seen this agreement??? The agreement wants us to fly over 2 county highways and a 3rd neighbor's property, rather than being over our own property. OVER 2 COUNTY HIGHWAYS! VERY UNSAFE! THE AMA ENCOURAGES THAT!??!
Further, he wants us to agree never to use ANY of our 300 acres, nor allow any future owner to use it. The neighbor wants to use it!
His sod/rock runway is 1800 to 1900' long; marginal at best. His runway begins 16' from the paved highway. Any plane
approaching on a 20:1 glideslope would cross the highway at
18" (yes, inches!).
If they touch down 100' down his runway, they'd cross the highway at 5'.
If they touch down 200' down his runway, they'd cross the highway at 10' and hit the top of schoolbuses, UPS. etc. They would be slightly above that height over our property -- meaning, by his agreement, we could never build a home, etc, etc etc, there. Even our canopy, which has been about 20' off his approach since way before he bought his property, might break the agreement he wants signed.
The AMA claims to want to help obtain flying sites. This has certainly not been the response most chartered clubs, like us, have found. One complaint from anyone and they threaten.
The entire neighborhood is in an uproar over this neighbor. The county does not have zoning and is looking for some recourse to shut him down; the FAA controls the air only, not the land. No one wants low flying full scale planes coming in over their home!

p1800volvo

Well, it may be time to stand up for yourself, and your community. Here is what I would do, but this will cause a lot of trouble, and some of it may be legal trouble.

1) Put in a flag pole, say 50 or 60 feet high, with a giant American flag. How could he argue with that? It's patriotic! Than add a second one!

2) Allow a company to put in a highway sign, perhaps 30 feet high?

3) Ignore them all, and go with the UMA, or whoever they are.

4) Add a light pole, to help with safety when flying at dusk!

5) Have the town put in a street light.

6) Have the FAA pull his ticket for operating an aircraft in an unsafe manner. (This is my best idea yet!) Just file a complaint that he almost hit your car when he wads landing.

7) Just sit down with him, and iron out a plan. Have an agreement that when he takes off or lands, you all land. It will be easy to tell when he is about to take off or land.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Now that we have the "rest of the story";

1. Talk to a lawyer, I'm not sure the airport can complain if you were known to be there, and it is not a public strip.

2. While the strip is operational, I believe the AMA rules state a 400' altitude max for flying, not that you won't fly at all. (There is a public R/C air strip in Salt Lake City within 3 miles of the Salt Lake City Airport that is often on the approach pattern, no problems yet. Also, my club in Virginia is within a mile of a private strip...take that back we fly on a private strip, that is one mile from another private strip...no problem. There is also a club in the DC area right near Dulles Airport)

3. Since it is not a public airport, maybe he has to get overfly rights from you (back to the lawyer thing)

Closing thoughts...trees grow naturally....

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

This is not an FAA runway. They don't have any jurisdiction on it. It is a private runway, and if you contacted the local fsdo (flight standards dist office), they would let you know the rules regarding his building of a runway this close to a public road. There are rules we have to follow in full scale aviation. It doesn't sound like they have been followed here. He can probably get away with what he is doing, but he can not shut you down. There is a field here within 1000 feet of a major runway. They all get along. The FAA can help get him shut down or solve the problem if he is coming over a road that low. I know that is not legal. I would check into this first. If that doesn't help, then find out who the FAA Principle inspector for the area is and talk to him. I sure wouldn't let it go on too long. Sounds to me like there are other dangers to him flying off of this strip that need to be covered. I sure as heck wouldn't sign anything stating you will change what you do with your field. If you own it and he built later, there has to be laws of primacy that will protect you.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by P-51B
Now that we have the "rest of the story";

1. Talk to a lawyer, I'm not sure the airport can complain if you were known to be there, and it is not a public strip.

2. While the strip is operational, I believe the AMA rules state a 400' altitude max for flying, not that you won't fly at all. (There is a public R/C air strip in Salt Lake City within 3 miles of the Salt Lake City Airport that is often on the approach pattern, no problems yet. Also, my club in Virginia is within a mile of a private strip...take that back we fly on a private strip, that is one mile from another private strip...no problem. There is also a club in the DC area right near Dulles Airport)

3. Since it is not a public airport, maybe he has to get overfly rights from you (back to the lawyer thing)

Closing thoughts...trees grow naturally.... [/QUOTE

P-51B,
Well said sir, well said.

Tangle with lawyers and the FAA, not the AMA because they cannot change HIS operations only yours.

C_Watkins

My Feedback: (10)

I guess I'm still lost.
The tangle is with the AMA, the way I understood it.
THE AMA is who is demanding that he sign the agreement, or lose site coverage, even though
all flying is over the land of the site owner, and not over the neighbor's place.

Do I not gather that the AMA want's the flying field landowner to sign this agreement, else
they will pull coverage? In effect, siding with the neighbor, whose property isn't in the club's
overfly area, even? Sounds like the AMA is being the badboy here, sorry.
(Well, sounds like the neighbor is... with the AMA backing him up solidly)

I don't think if *I* owned the field (5 acres in the middle of 300), that I'd be so
hasty to sign a "you can never do anything with your property" agreement, either.
Forever is a very long time.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

I wonder if we AMA members will end up having a dues increase when this club takes the AMA to court for breach of contract...or whatever legal term applies to yanking coverage from a club in good standing???

C_Watkins

My Feedback: (10)

Who knows. Seriously though... if the AMA was interested in helping the flying site, instead of
threatening the landowner with yanking coverage, it seems they would be checking out the other guy.
It sounds like his landing strip could be questionable, if someone looked hard enough.
You can't just throw up a runway, and expect that all your neighbors will never
develop their property, and sign agreements stating such. It's laughable, at best.

I can't believe the AMA is siding with the guy, personally.
Bullying landowners into relinquishing property rights... is this what my dues pay for?

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I am guessing from the sounds of it that the AMA is going off of miss information. They made this out to be an airport from the sounds of it and it is not. It is a private landing strip. If the owner of the full scale strip called the AMA and started making threats, the owners of the model field sould make sure they understand what they are dealing with. As I said before, get a hold of the local FSDO and have them answer some questions. Sounds to me like he is breaking more than one FAR with what he is trying to do, but then I only have part of the story.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

This must be Errol Severe? The Air Cadets Museum? I know the fellow a bit, I am sure you can work this out.

Hossfly

By "Sledge"
>>>>>>>>>
"The agreement the AMA wants me to sign written by the offending neighbor has nothing to do with safety. It demands that I agree never to never develop my 300 acres now or by any future owner. And allows him to overfly my property forever and the AMA demands that I agree. Why?? "

"Why" escapes my feeble mind, however in my feeble opinion, the only one more stupid than those that ask for such an agreement is one that would agree to such.
If anyone asked me such, after I got through laughing, they would know in no uncertain terms what they could do with such a request. 'No development of 300 acres' is about the most asinine request that a total idiot could make, much less those highly educated *professionals*. IMO those pros. must be some of the "educated derelicts" that Calvin Coolidge spoke of in his topic "Persistence".

Gordo-ProBro

Hey Sledge,

When can I come fly with you guys? I'm thinking we ought to have a regional fly-in, and see what's really up, and we'll all speak up for our rights to the AMA!

Could you scan this "agreement" and post other reproductions of what evidence you have? No offense, but if we are all gonna rush to your side (and I am) we should see that there isn't lots left unsaid here!

I'm for the flag pole, let me know and I'll get some guys to come help put it up! We're just over in Tulsa.

Gordon

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

just one more in the long list of reasons to be dumping sandy frank in this election cycle.

please
will some thick skinned intelegent individual step up and ask for nomination.