http://www.unitedmodelers.com/

I am not a member of this group but with all the debate I have considered asking my club to accept them as an alternative to AMA.

I've looked into their insurance carrier (GULF INSURANCE GROUP) and the carrier is virtually identical to Westchester Surplus Lines
Insurance Company that is used by the AMA.

Regarding the two hottest topics mentioned in this thread here is what their safety code says:


I know the SFA debacle soured many long time members against alternatives but this does not displace AMA if you charter your field as UMA instead. Both AMA and UMA members can fly at a UMA chartered field. See more information in this overview:



It doesn't have a lot of traction right now but if the AMA EC continues along the path prescirbed by Mr. Brown it could get some.

UMA would be nice and i would go with them the problem is AMA will not recognize them for any of their events etc thats what happened with SFA. The AMA wants to monopolize everything and even though they say everything is due to insurance reasons if you can get an alternative insurance that covers you and your big planes they should be happy since they say it all abt the insurance even though we all know its more for lining their own pockets for their silly projects that only they will ever use.

Joe

So let UMA start there own events, and let everyone fly at them.

Nothing wrong with that but why not have the UMA and AMA go hand in hand and recopgnize each others insurance and memberships for events and such. The UMA will recognize AMA why cant the greedy AMA council do the same.

Joe

See thats why I dont see the UMA lasting it is because the AMA has monopolized this hobby and they know it. Until Local clubs start accepting both memberships they wont last long. What the AMA will do is same as they did the SFA they wont recognize them at any events thus knowing ppl wont get both memberships and watch them turn around and threaten clubs that if something happens at their field and the person wasnt AMA that they will lose their charter no matter that that person may have had UMA insurance that covered the incedent.

Joe

Nothing wrong with having some competition, I just don't think that demanding AMA insurance cover incidents caused by people that don't pay the premium. It would seem kind of like giving a tax refund check to people that never actually paid taxes.

Maybe if UMA started there own events and clubs, and covered everyone that attended as well as the property owners, they could set an example.

I think if they lead by example, rather crying monopoly, they may win some converts, and create a bit of competition.

AMA is an aviation organization, the insurance is merely a benefit. In order to get that benefit you must be a member.

If you read their stuff on their site they do just what you said they should do. I am not saying the AMA pay for anything a non-member does I am saying the UMA will cover the person if something happens just like the AMA will cover someone. The problem comes from the AMA running everything for so long that unless it and other organizations can work together with each other recognizing each others memberships for events etc it can only help the hobby grow for all. but until the AMA will recognize other insurances you wont get members joining the other if they cant compete in nats or scale masters or local events etc without AMA. Most organizations that hold events will recognize other smae type organizations members to their events as thats what makes them so sucessful. the nice thing is the UMA will cover planes up to 100 lbs now if the total membership cost is only like 35 bucks and that covers insurance and all other stuff i guess that means the AMA should not have a prob with the bigger planes because it has been proven that the insurance wont be sky hi. so you see it boils down to 1 thing the EC not caring abt the membership just their old dusty ways not wanting to change anything and using insurance as a reasoning where the UMA proves the insurance aint near what the EC says it would be.

Joe

P-51B - Read the UMA website closely. You will see that they are doing EXACTLY what you propose.

Here is the program as I interpret it-

Charter your club as UMA instead of AMA.

Your club CAN accept either UMA or AMA members and both can fly fully insured at the same location.

UMA insures the site owner and club officers.

Whichever organization the individual has chosen will cover that individual's liability.

If you sanction your event as a UMA event then AMA members can also fly with full coverage.


The only downside I see is AMA not accepting UMA for their events. As I said before it will probably take a move on the part of the EC to add more restrictions for the UMA to really get traction. Should this happen then I could see the turbine and IMAA types organizing under UMA for their events. Most folks in that part of the hobby would probably spend the $35 extra per year to belong to both if it meant less restriction on the big stuff.

Let me see if I have this straight. You are saying that these checkbook modelers who are unhappy about having to pay AMA dues and follow AMA rules are going to pay another organization? Wanna bet? <lol>

I see the real problem as being people's wanting to belong without the willingness to pay the price of membership. That price includes some onerous rules. I think the UMA has a reasonable approach, as possibly the SFA folks did at first. The problem comes when an AMA club tries to have a sanctioned event. Then the UMA guys are excluded or they have to join the AMA.

That is the point where the real grief lies. Not liability, not cost, but the different rule set and an unwillingness to accept the rules of Rome when in Rome. There you go P-51B another one to confuse you! (grin) Read that as "or play by AMA rules at AMA club sites. That is also why AMA has implemented the sanitized membership for chartered clubs and sanctioned events.

Consider the disasters waiting to happen if they did not have those requirements. Whose rules would YOU follow and why? Here is the real meat to chew on. Whose rules would club officers be asked to enforce, on whom, and why. Just look at the UMA rules quoted (8 and 16).

If the rule sets were similar and the expense of not following some rule not so severe, there might be a way to make the two communities merge. Since that is not so, all the rhetoric in the world is not going to make it happen, no matter what we want to do. In other words, the two organizations must have similar rules or there is no bridge that can be traveled.


Just my opinion, but somewhat educated.

How come everyone that has a turbine or a large plane people consider checkbook modellers? I am sure there are a lot of people like myself that are not very well to do but do side work and save up money to buy a little at a time. sure there are those that can drop 5 grand for a plane without blinking but i would bet a majority of the people out there with big planes etc just save for a while til they can afford it.

Joe

This attitude that has become prevalent in RC is what's getting us in trouble to begin with. It's not that we don't WANT to pay more, it's that we HAVE to pay more, just because some bureaucrat says so. Just like taxes, dues and insurance slide down the slippery slope to larger and larger numbers. Once raised, they rarely ever go back down.

If it meant I pay double AMA dues just because my airplane weighs 27 pounds, I'd for damn sure join AMA for my 9 pound helicopter, and UMA for the airplane, and still save $23. Plus, I will have the satisfaction of not giving the AMA more than it deserves.

People are willing to pay the price of membership. They pay sometimes outrageous club dues and initiation fees, field improvement assessments, and event fees. Then they pay the AMA. Not to mention travel and lodging expenses. I don't know how you manage your bank account, but for most people, every little bit counts. That's part of being responsible. If we all just paid what the "man" said, anytime, our dues would be over $100 a year already, just under the auspices of "paying the price of membership".

BTW, your electric, phone, and water bill just went up $5 a month. Hey, calm down, it's the price of membership. It's just a measly $15 a month, surely you can swing that! Just be sure to save up for next year's hike, too.

Yeah, I could pay $98 a year AMA dues, no problem. Does my wanting a VALID reason to do so make me unfair, and unwilling to pay the price of membership?


Erich

Absolutely ! The AMA did something or other that was good for us, a long, long time ago, and because of that ancient history they are considered by some folk to be unimpeachable.

Gordon

A couple points here. The reason we are hearing so much about the weight and turbine rules these days is because the barriers to entry for the NORMAL modeler are decreasing. These are not "checkbook modelers" as you unfairly stereotype them. I can speak for myself as an example. I recently got into turbines. I am not a rich man. I sold a collection of about 20 planes that I had built up over the last 10 years along with items from other hobbies to purchase two airframes, engines, sets of servos, and accessories. I added some income from side jobs to build up the turbine fund. I then set out to research all my available options. I ended up purchasing everything I needed for two complete turbine planes for under $2,000 each including the engines. That's a lot of money for sure but if most modelers who have been in the hobby for a decent length of time truly take an inventory of what they have then I doubt that is out of line. There are more like me out there. Heck right now on RCU you can purchase a ready to fly turbine trainer for $2300 here:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...361&forumid=10

You can build that airframe yourself for under $500 and save up for servos and engine.

That plane weighs about 17lb, flies under 140 mph, has a wing loading of under 25 oz/sq ft, carries about the same amount of fuel as a large gas plane, and the airframe is plywood with sheeted foam core wings. I can go fly a $7,000 54lb 170 mph gas burning warbird right now with no instruction or waiver and be fully insured. If I touch that thing in the air without a waiver (even on buddy box) then I'm uninsured under the AMA system. If UMA can treat them both the same why can't AMA?


Second point - I am NOT saying that anyone is unhappy about paying the AMA. I am unhappy about the rules that have been made and the prospect that they want to raise dues under the auspices of a higher insurance risk. They restrict a narrow band of the hobby while other more dangerous aspects are left unchecked. The AMA has more exposure as an organization from the individual who buys a $300 trainer rig and proceeds to "train" himself than they do from the experienced modeler who wants to get into giant scale or jets. As Max Stanley sort of said "The Trainer is the safest airplane in the world: it can just barely kill you."

When the price of membership includes restrictions on my activity without facts to back up the reason for those restrictions then yes I have a problem. If the UMA can offer this coverage without the restrictions, then why is it a problem for the much larger AMA. Does our EC lack a good negotiator? I don't think so. I think there is more at work here than insurance rates and potential liability.

The rules between AMA and UMA are mostly similar. A club would have to enforce the UMA safety rules if they are a UMA chartered club. If an AMA member were participating then that member would be responsible for abiding by the more restrictive rules just as they are when flying alone or away from a chartered club.

Keith Hollifield
AMA 5220300

Keith and Joe,

Your basic premise is not wrong except for one little item. Modelers who save up a little at a time also learn to fly while checkbook modelers have a significant disdain for safety, and that can be seen in their equipment maintenance ethics. Not all big bird or turbine guys are checkbook modelers, but enough to be a significantly observable group. THey constantly get and keep my attention at various flying fields. Modelers who save up to invest in that kind of equipment usually also get the flying skills necessary to enjoy the fruits of their labors.

Sorry if I have failed to previously define that term properly, as it is NOT a broad brush. I build and fly large scale birds, the most recent is a 30% Cap 242 that I worked on getting engine and stuff for about a year.

Now as for the problem with the restrictive rules that seem to have no basis, elect decent VP's and you have a start on correction of some those apparently ignorant moves. Currently the only choices seem to be to throw the baby out with the bath water or bear down and deal with it while we (all of us reasonable folks) figure out some sort of solution. The SFA and UMA are symptoms of that.

You may have noticed (most didn't pay enough attention to see it happen) but for the last few years the AMA has been a reactive organization rather than a proactive, pro modeler, pro hobby fraternal type of organization as implied in it's charter. What that means is that we seem to have a whole raft of rules and regulations just to have them rather than having them make sense. That has happened because WE have allowed some who prefer to play power politics to run things while WE went flying (THAT charge is a very wide brush because it includes ME!). If you question that look at the last 2 elections and see what the number of votes to membership was.

This is NOT an indictment of the entire bunch, because there are several of them who believe in what the AMA was supposed to be and work hard for all modelers. There are also several who want to give that impression but if you look closely what can be seen is a definite direction that is toward self reward rather than organization building. Unfortunately there are a lot of loud people who would rather whine than address the real issues. Frequently they get all the grease while the hobby takes a hit. That is what the real issue is all about.

Communications is a real good example because it was said to be the root of all evil in the past. It has not gotten better and in come cases has gotten much worse. As an example I have a DVP who claims to communicate with his membership and yet in his last 3 district wide communications, he missed a lot of folks and I was one. I forwarded a note complaining that I was left out again to him and his AMA Fellow cohort who seems to be "in charge" of Internet things for the district. They both reacted with a full frontal attack, assuming there was something unpleasant being said rather than a logical look at the problem. The DVP even launched an ad hominem attack on my AMA club by telling me that my club officers decide who is the AMA contact. Oh, I forgot to tell you I have been club treasurer for 7 years.

I see the real bottom line here as a pair of problems. The first is that it seems that the AMA Fellow is allowed to hack up e-mail so that it looks like it came from the DVP (so EXACTLY WHO IS communicating with the membership? That may be the most serious problem in that it raises the question of who really is the AMA DVP, the guy we elected or the one who has taken the power of communications?

The second problem is the one I originally noted, many are left out of that communications channel. Many ISP's block things that are hacked or appear to be hacked to prevent the spread of nasty stuff. Guess what happens to the hacked e-mail sent out by the AMA Fellow? So the long and short of it all is that I am NOT the only one these guys are missing with their broadcasts but they are too concerned about being questioned to look at, much less solve the problem. The Fellow's last comment, after some testing, was that is MY ISP's problem. He seems to have completely missed the fact that something is wrong in the way he is doing business and lots of AMA members are being left out due to his communication management practices.

If you can figure out how to muzzle these kinds of power players and we might have a real organization again. Note that the ballot box did not put the Fellow in power before you hurry back with a fast Band-Aid solution in this election year.

To be honest and above board, both of these folks insist I am a paranoid attacker whenever I ask questions. That has not been my intent, but since I seem to ask questions they don't like it is difficult to tell WHERE they really are coming from most of the time as their responses are more often than not offensive. I have even offered to find them someone who will attack them regularly if that is what they feel the need for as it is clear to me their approach is tunnel vision negative to the hobby. They both seem to suffer from NIH.

However, I think you guys can go figure it out as you have done a good job on other things.

As for insurance being used as the vehicle to raise dues, I think that is over. Any further increase is clearly the power players taxing us rather than solving problems. There is a political party that has proven that throwing money at a problem does NOT solve it. I only hope the AMA learns that lesson before they "tax" the hobby out of existance.

Something that is often missed and overlooked it seems is that though the AMA is claiming the heavier planes are what will cause all the problems, I have yet to see them make comments about the large IMAC type planes possibly causeing problems too. Now I am not bashing them just using it as a valid example. Every day you see a lot of the people into IMAC and if you notice the majority of the planes seem to be in the 27% 33% and 40% range. NOW can the AMA say that those planes are any safer that a turbine or a plane at 55 lbs or bigger? I think not! Most of those guys seem to like to hover those things anywhere they can usually just over the runways. they fly them doing some faily dangerous maneuvers which a split second distraction can cause something major. Now I am not saying all people arent experienced enough to do it but I see more and more people (usually young kids) buying or building these large planes and rushing right out trying to do 3D. Now if the AMA is so worried abt planes being dangerous and raising insurance costs and liability why have they not said anything about these type planes which are obviously more of a danger than any jet or giant scale plane could be since these guys are basically flying these planes in a Radical and more dangerous Manner.

Just something else to ponder on why are these large aerobatic planes any safer than jets or Giant Scale Planes. I think that would be a good email for Dave I wonder what his response would be on that one? Maybe because they are under 55 lbs they are very safe planes no matter that the overall size of the plane is no different than most giant "scale" planes

Joe

After reading this thread and others like it seems to me that most of the current AMA leadership is very self serving and mostly interested in feathering their own nests.

But they are not to blame for this! The AMA does hold elections and the last time I knew everyone has a vote. Look at the total votes cast, very small percentage of total membership.

To me this means that the majority of the people are content with the way things are.

If you do not like this do like the largest club in my area, over 200 members. They are not AMA chartered, buy their own insurance, and have dues (which includes the insurance) less than the AMA dues.

The very small percentage of the clubs membership that want to go to AMA events just buy an AMA membership.

I used to have houshold insurance with a national firm till my agent blamed an increase on all the losses in Florida. I switched to a regional firm for less money and better coverage.

One big thing you missed here is that water is a necessity, electricity is considered a modern necessity, and the phone is optional just like your decision to participate in the hobby or join AMA.

Frankly, there is no reason to need to calm down, since you could choose to buy bottled water, or carry a bucket from the creek, chop some wood to cook and heat with.

But if you desire to have a pipe run to your house to bring you nice clean water at the turn of a faucet, then you have made the DECISION to accept the $5.00 increase. See that a DECISION made by YOU!

Perfect example of people making a decision, and crying monopoly.

much better analogy this time!!

I'm sure there's a point in here somewhere...can someone tell me what it was?

Erich

If you will change the conclusion from 'feathering thier own nests' to 'building their own empires', I might sign up for this one.

Joe,

The entire point of my earlier comment was to show that liability has little to do with the level of AMA dues.

Some want heavier planes, some want faster planes, non seem to be willing to address the basic issue which is to get an EC interested in the hobby instead of AMA management. I know one of the folks who used to be a modeler who now says his hobby is the AMA and its operations.

Seems to me like we have more than one on the EC with that as their a priori. Problem is we cannot find effective representation without taking a modeler out of the hobby. Check and see how many weekends your DVP has 'free' after family days (Xmas, New Years, anniversary, birthday, Easter, and one other day), required meetings are taken out of his weekends. Then take the number of clubs in the district and figure out how many he can visit if he NEVER flys. THAT is our problem and I don't exactly know a great answer to it.

I see an even bigger problem than that and that is getting the membership to vote. if the same people vote all the time it is hard to affect changes in the AMA EC and others if the same guys vote for the same people all the time. seems funny you have a minority of AMA members running how the rest of us enjoy our hobby. its kind of hard to bring the AMA into the 21st century when you have a 17th century mentality running it and non interest by most of the membership.

Joe

People don't vote it they don't perceive a difference or that their vote matters. Got any clues on how we motivate them to vote? I have seen lots and lots of guys go down the tubes over that one.

Actually the more important thing is how do we recruit folks for the DVP job when taking it means they can't fly for fun? Right now that seems to mean we are at the mercy of whoever is willing to do the job and for whatever reason they want it.


Nuts! I on charge and tomorrow the air is in for a beating!

only motivation is if we hammer the guys at our local clubs which in effect at some clubs is beating a dead horse. as for the DVP first place we need to really start is the EC and HQ if we cant get them changed changing the DVP wont help much.

Another way to get the EC to listen is to set up a website with an online petition where people can sign their name and AMA number. then we get it to the EC demanding they listen to the membership. it is doubtful if they will listen but if we have a site like that and get everyone we know to sign it it may work. it would be easier doing something like that online than getting people to send in a piece of paper.

Joe

Ahhh,
The EC is made up of DVP's.

That is the Executive Council is made up of District Vice Presidents.

Petitions don't work as well as good ideas. Good ideas get snatched up and on rare occassion even given proper attribution.

I am suggesting it is time to beat the dead horses.