hey kid,
ifn i remember correctly, bud even allows competing vendors to sell their wares on those same closed streets, right along side the bud booth.

Although not particularly germane to the thread topic but since you asked and as a mod you have an apparent clout to skew the tangent and not to answer you would be very rude…so here goes..

"What was the key thing that helped you change the mind of the community?"

First off it was important to show how important it is for the city to have space available for such a safe and worthwhile hobby such as ours. Our hobby truly is a wholesome family oriented activity unlike many other activities today where the parents sit on the sideline. This hobby allows real interaction between kids and their parents. A great thing IMO...far better than baseball...yep I said that! So it wasn't so hard with the right motives and mindset.

One thing we were very mindful of was not to portray the hobby as some dangerous activity that only some qualified (????yea right) AMA member should be allowed to participate in.

"Did someone setp forward wtih the space? Was this an unused piece of land? Please, tell us more."


The place selected was North Side Park. This park was once a baseball complex and a previous city dump that was often used for RC flying since at least back in the early eighties. It was one of my and my friend’s favorite places to fly back then. It still is today.

Thanks for the answer. Some great ideas that. If I do go after the land fill site, I may leverage some of those statements.

Amen to that, Bro. Made me think of my favorite places back then. One was in a rock quarry, not ideal facility-wise. Attraction was rather great people to fly with, no club with attendant roolze and rulers. It's now buried under a housing tract. Another is still there, a decent though rustic slope site with no cleared landing area (back then) - one selected the softest looking piece of scrub to kamikaze into. Best part about it was I could go there with my kids and buds that were either new to model flying or irregulars about it. It is now one of several sites controlled by a members-only club with all the usual baggage. Not that I couldn't join the club, but my particular reasons for liking the site are history.
Sure glad that mean guy, you and a few others were able to preserve your favorite flying place. Especially because you did it by showing people the merits of our hobby/sport and welcomed them in. It seems so much more sensible than, as KE observed, scaring public servants by trying to impress them with eye-widening insurance $$ numbers, and erecting obstacles to keep the people out.

You are giving 'park flyer' definition by demonstration. That definition is clear and comprehensive: a model airplane flown in a park ('park' can be generalized on, I won't) and be accepted by park administrators and other park users. Its physical and operating characteristics need to be adapted to fit the constraints imposed by careful consideration of each park's limitations. No different from any 'traditional' flying site. No AMA chartered club site is capable of supporting all of the vast array of model types flown, nor in many cases to the limits of their capabilities. Not even AMA's own uber-site in Muncie.

Abel

edited out some off-topic stuff with negative tone

Our flying site is not one of the best sites you will ever fly at, but it is one of the friendliest. All types of models flying. Geez, ya just gotta witness it. It is one of those "Old Days" flying sites, fly what ya brung! No one cares, Just Fly, and have fun! Safety is always observed and taught. Not to the point of being anal. (Well, ya know when to do what and not to do what--flying that is).

Anyway, PPP does have the potential of being a great program. The major obstacle will be informing the new pilot of his/her responsibilities of not only to himself/herself but to the general public. Just 'cause you have your AMA card and flying is ok in that park does not limit your liabilities to others. Without a dedicated flying site, disaster looms. The site must be defined, and the park patrons advised of the flying models. Ok, 'nuff.

Ok bud, you called me out. Mean Monte you and I have been friends many years and you know I love ya and I'd do anything for you but I take exception to this particular part of your post. First off, how are park flyers supposed to exist if they can only fly at "dedicated" flying sites? Very few parks have dedicated flying sites. Under your stated contention the park flyers would be in the toilet. I wouldn't want that and I doubt you would either.

Remember, even in this late date, park flyers are second class within the sanctity of the good ole AMA. To mandate designated flying sites would be the same as stomping on the guy’s Slow Stick.

Secondly who is supposed to decide/take responsibility what is an appropriate flying site size or what the separation should be for such activities? You? Me? The other guy? Consider, most fields are only separated from the “looming disaster� you refer to by only a few seconds of travel by a model...our site is no different. Heck you probably remember the Metro field on interstate 20/80. They flew right beside one the on of the busiest highways just about forever until housing development encroached. Even though a particular site is defined, disaster is only just beyond the tree line and those beyond the tree line have not been advised...We can't keep fooling ourselves...park flyers have as much right to fly in the park as a 100# lady does walking her Doberman.

Look, the bottom line is that each and everyone one of us should be held accountable for our actions or lack of action...at some point we need to stop this facade of making others responsible for us. If you can fly whatever, wherever, safely, go right ahead...if you can't... don't…simple…

The thread goes full circle back to where I think if more intelligent size and speed limits were in place, PFers could coexist with other park users with much less risk involved. Ever seen a 12 oz Formosa with a brushless put on a "anti gravity" show? What more could you ask for? There is a whole world of planes and power choices from ultra floater, 3Der, semi scale, etc. that can be flown with much less potential for harm than the ".15 size" planes that are the current limit.
Let the 100# lady with the doberman worry about her own responsibilities.

Think it's about time you sit down and take a look at the [link=http://www.modelaircraft.org/UserFiles/PPP-SiteBooklet.pdf]PPP program package[/link], so you can be on the same page as the people that support the program. It's chock full of questions and answers, forms, marketing materials and videos so you, the modeler, can take approach your local parks dept director and perhaps get your own field and club at your local park. Check it out, it's free to download. And if you ask nice, they'll mail you the complete package. But don't forget to take a [link=http://www.modelaircraft.org/UserFiles/PPP-SiteManual.pdf]look at the manual too.[/link]

C - The other guy. Again, revert to the PPP program guide. It's loaded with information you pass along or present to your local parks director to see if its in the best interest of their park and their park owners (taxpayers) to start their own PPP flying site, whom just so happen to be the people that decide on behalf of their members (taxpayers). If you would have said D - God, I would have went for him, he makes all decisions for us anyhow, but he wasn't listed, so I jumped back to the mortal decision maker instead.

It's really not that complicated LCS. It's been going on for years .... but now it's easier, targeted ... and now cheaper! Oh and most importantly, supported by the EC and 300 AMA members for all your Q&A's.

Okay LCS. Your points are valid. But on the other hand, how did anyone learn to fly? Diaster loomed the very first time anyone tried to fly. I remember my TRI-Star all over the place except where I wanted it. Yes, it was at a dedicated flying site. But then again, in ND, I flew wherever was convenient. After all what ya gonna hurt, a sunflower? I am just saying use the "Reasonable Man Theory." See ya tomorrow at the swap-meet.

The real problem is the AMA is trying to define park flying...for us as well as others outside of AMA's control. There really is no way to win by this strategy...a better strategy would be to scrap this PPP stuff and educate all of us better ways to get park flying established wherever possible. Maybe give current clubs incentives to foster new park flying sites or allow fledgling park flyers in their ranks of the current clubs. At many club sites, enough extra space exists to allow an area just for park flyers. The club can decide what size, weight, membership fee etc. is appropriate at each site.

In more urban areas the AMA could wave the fees associated with chartered clubs and their site insurance premiumns (????) for some period of time to help them develop new sites in parks. Maybe reduce the required minimum initial size of “park clubs� to two or three members instead of five. But either way, remove AMA stipulations of size, power and speed so that each and every new park site can be developed to a maximum potential for the particular site. Some sites may be good for only for 10 ounce or less models while others can be full blown, with turbine jets but have no limit to how small a model can be. The only criteria for special AMA considerations would be that it is a new site within an actual park and that the park authorities officially outline the use in regards to size, type or whatever. AMA would look to insure the formal acceptance of the club by the park system.

All AMA memberships should be the same cost for each member or all should be tiered depending on type of model flown. This tier for park flyers is simply wrong no matter how you look at it.

As park flyers grow, so will the hobby and the AMA if cultivated correctly. If not…well we had our chance. Let’s get back to promoting the hobby first…the AMA will be ok.

It would be a lot easier to contact park administrators and ask to fly
'Styrofoam planes flying less than 40mph making less than 88db noise'
than convincing them it is a good idea to have
'60mph 2lb carbon fiber silent missiles, or less'
and hope none of them knows about 10k 8x3 APC props making handburger.

Heck, folks dont want to get beaned by a 60mph tenisball, less a steel post propshaft & nut

Maybe we should define ParkFlier as any plane the operator will stop the prop by hand when asked.
60watt 5k 10x8 orange fwippy, no problem
300w 8x3 APC.... uh, how much medical insurance was that again?

Seems we could very easily made the AMA PPP be what already exists as SlowFlyer,
rather than just 60mph electrics to hurt random folks in parks.



<edit: I had a Y in styro earlier... really, I did>

Hey Dion, thanks for the links. Very informative. I read between all the lines.

Abel

This seems to be a good point that hasn't really been brought up here before.

Sure it has ... in about 20 other types of context as well, perhaps more.

But what LCS doesn't seem to agree is that the AMA is not trying to educate "us". The AMA has already done that job, otherwise they wouldn't have gotten "us" in the first place.

Great job AMA ... I know what a parkflyer is and I know how to start up a club of any size and dimensions ... great job ... kudos, I get it!

This time the AMA is trying to capture the "them", not the "us" with the PPP. The them are the ones that don't want to be part of a club of noisy planes and expensive clubs. They are a different creature who don't want the complexity or the overkill. They are out there .... and they will then be an "us".

Just how many models would be excluded if we had 50mph rather than 60mph?
Seems they have made more than a few Zagi's (& clones) over the years, easy 70+ brushless, they in or out?

And are those 51MPH+ models the ones we want to put into parks?
([link=http://www.zagi.com/media/Race1.wmv]zagi website movie [/link]with oh-so-safe PF pylon race)
([link=http://www.zagi.com/media/ZagiFixxWebClip1.wmv]Nice slow park zagi movie[/link]... 20' right over folks in small park)

We heard Muncie just looked at what manufactures have made & set the limit to that... guess they never heard of fast zagi. Unless they did put their own limit on, which means they had to put some thought into setting their own limit... which they claim they didnt.

Muncie did make up thier own limits without much process or admission.
And now AMA is telling park admins what a PF is, but saying it comes from the manufacturers.

What a load of manure. I can tell you from first hand experience and without a doubt that a very high percentage of the park flyers want to go on and fly more complex and higher performance models. Your thesis is severely flawed. I have witnessed many park flyers become larger model flyers. What is not available/educated is the means, by the nature of the framework, as it commonly perceived within the AMA…this PPP stuff will only bolster a more convoluted structure.

Less complex…what a joke! The answer has always been here but most do not understand it properly and apparently you are one of those.

EXACTLY! Once they GET IN, they either upgrade ... or continue to only enjoy parkies, yes that makes sense. But here is a newsflash ... parkies growing .... AMA shrinking. FIRST you have to get them in, you can't educate someone you don't have. Is the AMA supposed to spend our money on national advertising? About 5 minutes worth of ads on prime time TV and the AMA is out of business. The PPP IS A STRATEGY to educate.

Yeah LCS, I don't get it. Either do the EC, Muncie and the 300 assistants that signed up to help PPP's. You're the only one that understands how it all works. If you felt that strongly about how the system works, you might want to run for EC and show us how it's done. So far JC and DM have been rather impressive.

Well if the parkflyers want to go and fly larger models then they will be required to purchase the full membership. It is their option.


I never plan to fly larger models unless I am out at the farm were insurance or ama is not required by me. Out there is have 100s of acres of privately owned land that is owned by my family to fly over.


The PP program is a stepping stone for those that might chose to stay in the hobby longer.

Like it or not it is a good thing for everyone.


I have no idea why some people have to cry and whine about this. It does not effect you nay sayers in any way shape or form other then possibly bring more members into your group that are flying smaller electric or quiet powered models.

If some of you guys are so concerned about safety at the parks etc, then just do what it takes to welcome the PP program members into the fold at the local club fields with their PPP membership.

Another option is that if you guys are so upset about this program, you could just drop your ama membership all together and go find your own private place to play with your larger toys.

I am a PPP member,
it affects me very very directly.
(very)
If folks want to play the "Doesnt Affect Them" card, fine, all youse AMA'ers stay out of us PPP guys discussing PPP.
See, now that doesnt seem right does it: Maybe talking about PPP is something everyone can do, not just the ones in PPP or just the ones out of PPP.


Back to the topic of PF definintion:
Well if the parkflyers want to go and fly larger 6oz FreeFlight Rubber models then they will be required to purchase the full membership. It is their option.

So we get the circle,
a) 'Nobody is stopping the PPP guys from flying anything, they can fly rubber if they want'
b) 'If they want to fly larger they have to pay the full $58'

Lets pick one & stick to it.
Either they have to upgrade to $58 to fly non PF models ( 6oz FF Rubber / 33% gas Yak ) or they dont.
The PPP PF definition is clear that both of those are not PPP approved.
But a 25mph zagi flittering around 20' over peoples heads in an itty-bitty park is A-Ok[sm=thumbs_up.gif], cause someone (other than a couple of 14year olds with bad judgement) decided to put a vid of that on the official PF Manucaturer website.

Hey Jimmy, how much 'park' does this 'ParkFlier' model need?
Well Timmy, maybe we can fly it in this postage stamp park, they do it in the manufacturers video.... just ignore the other people using the park.
Great Jimmy, lets get the bigger one that goes 59, cause we cant go 60 unless we pay $28 LESS FOR $1 YOUTH STANDARD AMA!!!!!
Wow Timmy, thats swell.
Swell indeed Jimmy.

After almost 60 years flying, I haven't seen anybody get hurt being hit by any kind of plane. I once did get hit by a SAM 1/2A Texaco ship in glide, about 14 ounces, gliding at maybe 20 mph. Two of us standing side by side talking got hit by it at the same time. Barely felt it.

Someone setting in the pits at a nearby field was hit by a large scale plane. Almost killed him.

People have been killed by being hit by out of control planes of may sizes. Heck, about the time I went into the USAF in 1964, there was a dissapearance that turned out to be a murder. Wife shot her husband - - with a Daisy pump BB gun. One .17 cal BB from close range into the temple. Something doesn't have to be big and heavy to injure or kill.

Various safety organisations don't even list this sport/hobby in their statistics. Golfing is overall more dangerous. That is generally near the bottom of the list. We usually don't show up on the statistics.

A baseball was mentioned early in this forum. Googled the weight. 5 to 5 1/4 ounces. Interestingly enough, a major league catcher for the local team was being interviewed on a local radio station a couple days ago. Says in spite of the padding on the glove, every pitch HURTS.

Fact is, pitched baseballs, 5 ounces at 60 mph and higher, have broken bones, and even killed people. Once at a fast pitch softball game, I got hit twice in a face protector. I think I was in a state of mild concussion. Mildly sick, dizzy, and a major 2 day headache. I was amazed when I read an article in one of the health and safety mags I get as one of my side jobs with my company. It seems as many as 12 kids, catchers, in little league, hot stove, and high school and even college baseball are killed every year, in spite of chest protectors, by having their hearts stopped by getting hit above the sternum.

Seeing as how most flyers have enough brains not to hit someone, or even fly close to others, but accidents (and sometimes stupidity) happens, I'd vote for something a little more conservative, like maybe 18 ounces and 40-45 mph for the park flier definition.