I beat the dead horses all the time they just lie there but i still like the web petition i mean if we get signatures going etc and have a running count they at least will take notice while we beat the dead horses. they will take it more seriously than a few here and there at least this way it will be one voice


Joe

Maybe that will work

Its better than nothing and if nothing else would bring more awareness to the membership. but what would it say and how would it be coded to get the info and do a running count i dont know hehehe its just an idea maybe more ppl will have some input

Joe

It simply uses your own analogy to show that your premise about not having a choice, and "having" to pay more is false.

P-51B,
Wow, you lost me on that one!
Jon

It all confuses me, but it seems right that the AMA should research what flying activity is costing the most in claims and try to recover that expense from the modelers that what to pursue that type of activity. Insurance companies have been doing that for years. A red sports car costs you more in insurance than a VW. A semi-truck costs more then a pick-up. A field closer to a population center has the potential to cause more damage then one out in the country. Lets come up with a complex system that bases your AMA dues on what you fly, where you fly (what club you belong to), how much you fly (AMA events), and how well you fly (hard to do).

Well if you look at it as mentioned above the majority of the flyers fly the funfly/sport type. and a growing minority fly jets and giants. if you look at it the majority with the funfly/sport types is more than likely got the most claims out there due toi shear numbers but the AMA doesnt want to do that study as it would totally contradict what they are saying and that is that the jets and giant scale are a bigger liability and risk when in fact it is just by shear numbers probably the opposite.

Joe

Sorry, but the largest single group of claims have NOTHING to do with flight or airplanes. The largest group of claims are trip and fall type of claims filed by someone for accidents that just happen to occur at the club flying field.

It is my UNDERSTANDING (and it may be wrong) that several of the insurance companies that looked at bidding on our insurance coverage were interested in a loss prevention program.

When you take those two INDEPENDENT statements together, it should be clear that most of us are too careless about things in and around where guests spend their time at the flying field.

Some AMA DVP wants to keep a record of all accidents to determine if we have bad equipment out that. Think about that one for a little while and see the flaws in the basic assumptions and long term nature of any possible questionable benefits from such an activity. First someone has to determine the REAL reason a plane went in. Second someone has to document that the equipment was used correctly. Third the makers of the equipment have to not improve the equipment unless we tell them to do so. I don't think that is going to work.

However, I have suggested (and gotten no positive response) is that we appoint some guy for each district to help try to find a solution. Then we have each club send in pictures with their recharter packet. Pictures of the parking area, pit area, and spectator area. Give those pictures to the guy we appointed in that district.

His job is to see if he can identify problems in the photo. If he sees something that needs to be changed, a letter to the club contact (AND e-mail but NOT only) asking for clarification of the visible issue. If the clarification is unacceptable (the spectator benches are next to the pilot station - way out there but an example) then the club is asked to make specific changes. Another area is rotten bleachers. If they can be seen in a photo, they should be fixed.

Those ideas MIGHT reduce the non flying claims, but like anything else it is just a guess. However, then the AMA could at least claim to have a "Loss Prevention Program" in place and demonstrate its effectiveness. I bet it could reduce those household liability type of claims by as much as 10% IN THE VERY FIRST YEAR! Most of us go the the field to fly and don't really care that much for environs, except for the height of the grass.

Everyone always points out what a bargain the AMA insurance is.

If you have a top quality well known insurer call them and ask about covering your liability while flying an RC plane. You might be suprised.

My local allstate would cover me for less than the AMA membership, of course I'm not welcome at the local club with that insurance - but I was curious. My friend called his insurance agent and they treated him like the plague however.

Currently my AMA membership (which is not 100% insurance) cost more than my liability insurance of 2million dollars on my boat (pure liability not replacement etc..)

Tiered systems....sounds like a major pain to enforce. Sounds like people would get the lowest just to prove they have the insurance/license or whatever till it was time to collect and found to be out the tier etc...

I mean at your local club can you imagine someone having to check what tier your on for each plane you fly that day? Sounds like a logistics nightmare...

Plus what if you fly a friends plane that day and have an accident while it's under your control for just a sec? If your tier was up to 15lbs but the plane you crash and someone files a claim on (your friends plane) turns out to be 18lbs imagine the headaches.

I'm not expert but I would beleive the biggest factors in how much a settlement will be in an accident is not model size/weight/speed but RATHER who you hit, and what state you hit them in. All else being equal you hit the wrong person it could cost 100X more than hitting someone else with the same injuries.

I just had a long detailed post with what I thought to be valuable input, but i lost it. I'm gonna sum it up short now.

I see the AMA v. UMA like Microsoft v. well the rest of the software companies. You have a group that owns the market, feeding you whatever they feel cause they can. You have competition (that is prolly old members who were fed up ) trying to give a new heartbeat to the industry and they're not welcomed because they want to get rid of the 1950's mentality of flying. In order to get the AMA to understand we need to talk to them as "whole chartered clubs" not individual people. these ware what make up the AMA. the fields that fly under their flag.

I had more valid grumblings but won't waste your times. For now I'm still in 60-120 size A/C but when the time comes for be to put that big ***** bomber up in the sky (my ultimate goal).I'll be damned if some private group is gonna tell me i can't fly it cause it's heavier than they allow - the US gov ain't complaining and neither is the UMA. If we could just get a fly-in or 2 with UMA sponsership and lots of big birds...

I should shut up - I'm new, young and don't know my ass from my rudder controls (or so the senior club member told me last night at the meeting)

I agree I approached my club and was told the following:



There is no point in discussing the insurance issue any further because as I said before, at present the Club and The property owners require AMA insurance irrespective of what other insurance you have. So if you fly at our site, you will have AMA insurance. Period.

they dont want to change anything or go against the AMA and most of the old timers are .40 to .60 sized trainer fliers that dont see the need for bigger faster aircraft even at the .60 size. It is that Mentality that holds the rest of us back and gives the AMA all the power they need to dictate what we can or cant do.

Joe

Funny...rude of him...but funny.

I heard a story once. It was about a proud mother who was watching a parade through town. Her Little Johnny was in the band. She said, so proudly, as the band marched by "Don't they look great? It's too bad that the rest of the band can't stay in step like Johnny."

so jr, yer idea of the ideal ama is a buncha mind numb robots marching in lockstep to whatever the leadership has in store??
i kinda prefeer the independant thought idea meself.

Well, here are some simple facts

1. AMA elected officials do not get paid. They do have a small expense account to cover their districts.

2. The cost of insurance per member is under $15 per year.

3. Half of the claims are for clubs involving 'trip and fall' fall type accidents. the other half is model related claims.

4. The policy covering the landlord has none of the exemptions that clubs and members have. (Such as: an auto accident involving spectators might be covered for the landlord.) See the club charter package on the AMA site for more info. UMA does not protect the landlord on the type of liability claims that the AMA covers.

5. Dave Brown admits to having been beaten up over differing insurance rates. Here is part of the reason why. If you take half of what is paid in insurance premimums by members and set aside half for 'trip and fall' accidents, that leaves about $7.50 per member to be tiered. What would you do? have the guy that flys indoor rubber pay $1 and the guy with a jet pay $12? It would take more effort to administer it than it is worth, not to mention the problems that would appear at the club level. Is one guy having a dues of $51 and another having dues of $63 really worth the effort?

6. Bob Violet may want higher weight limits, but, from statments on his web page, he knows it is not likely.

7. It was said that Jets are a fast growing segment of the AMA. With less than 750 jet waivers issued, the last time I checked, it had better be experiencing a huge increase. When you consider that the AMA membership is been about 170,000, if the jet numbers don't increase from .4%, they are a dead issue. The jet guys seem to be getting a whole lot more consideration than any other AMA group that comprises .4% of the membership.

So, Mongo, I guess my point is that I do not want a tiny, non-elected, fraction of the membership dictating the rules. Come to think of it, the EC has only a slightly smaller fraction of the membership than the Jet Jockies do, and the EC is elected.

Ghost Rider has the more reasonable approach. Prove that the rules and waivers are not necessary. The EC has looked at this type of information before and made changes. Giant Scale Racing seems to come to mind.

JR

Well JR if what your saying is true that half are trip and fall accidents and maybe half model aircraft which I would bet most are from .60 size aircraft then wheres the problems with the large planes come in? to mee it seems a good portion arent even plane related at all thus all these restrictions they want to place on the jet and giant scale planes have nothing to back them up thus there should be no problem increaseing the limits. Matter of fact the smaller engined planes and trip and fall guys sb paying more not the jets and giants since the majority of the claims seem to be from them.

Joe

all of what you stated is old news jr. and i did not call any of it into question, just yer thinly veiled allegory reffrence to "beeing out of step".

It would appear that it was not old news to all, wouldn't Mongo?

JR

ProfLooney

We are all the 'trip and fall guys'. These are liability claims that are generated by the fact that we get together and fly. A couple of examples of real claims:

A pilot brought his toddler out on the line with him and told him to sit in a chair. The child squirmed and fell from the chair impaling himself on some re-bar that had been left sticking in the ground.

Another club was in the process of erecting a windsock and it was partially built. It was propped up until it could be finished. A child was playing around it when it fell, crushing him.

These are not pretty incidents, but, they do illustrate the liability that WE create. Although these examples are with children, the claims are not all with children. If you go back through MA and read Dave Brown's column for the last couple of years, you can find more examples.

These claims are also the reason that the liability insurance for the site owner is so important, and that the difference between the coverage by the AMA and UMA is a critical difference. It is also the reason the reason that the assets the AMA has built though the years are important. It's not just collecting assets for the sake of doing so, but, to protect your butt and mine.

JR

JR i think ya missed my point. the point being we all are trip and fall guys so if they are using the claims as an example of why the giant scale and jet guys would cause the insurance to double then they are nuts. and for the flying claims we all know what group them claims come from. I am not saying the jets and giants dont have their share but the majority come from the smaller planes.

Why are they constantly blaming the giant and jet guys for any insurance increases they would have if they raised the limits when obviously they are either non flying related or sport flyers causeing 90% of the accidents? it just doesnt make sense that Dave says the giants and jets would cause double the insurance because of the liability when they arent the ones making the claims. As for the UMA I was just pointing out the fact that they cover planes up to 100 lbs (which i think is way large without a waiver i think 60-65 lbs sb the max limit period as you can build a lot of nice giant planes or jets within them specs) and covers turbines with a lot less restrictions for less than the AMA insurance costs. Thus my point being if they can cover that without gargantuan insurance rates the AMA should be able to also. especially if an insurance company wants to keep the AMA's business that prob makes them a small fortune every year. I am an insurance agent and there are a lot of insurance companies which would be willing to cover the AMA at a reasonable cost IF and thats a big IF the AMA would do a little research and haggleing.

Joe

ProfLooney

Why don't you give Carl Maroney at HQ a call. You might be able to make yourself a buck or two and save the AMA some money at the same time. Get the information from him and submit a quote. That's what insurance agent's do, right? From what I have seen Carl is always willing to listen and be helpful.

Let us all know how it works out.

JR

I would be happy to but i am not in property and casualty im in life and health or I would. I do financial advising and one of the things you need is life and health license not property and casualty but insurance all works the same. Maybe he should contact the same company that the UMA is dealing with and work out something with them. UMA may not have all the coverage the AMA wants but the company they deal with may have something since they seem to be getting their feet in the door with this type coverage so would more than likely be willing to negotiate. figure at $15 per member for insurance times 170,000 members that comes to a hair over 1/4 million a year. I dont know too many companies that wouldnt be willing to negotiate coverage.

Joe

The commercial policy is about half of the $15 per year. The rest is the self insurance that the AMA does. On top of that, it is a manuscript policy that allows the AMA to write the coverage to tailor it for the individual clubs and landlords. This is something that is rather uncommon, as I understand it. Now take into account the fact that you can't use the 170,000 figure since it includes junior members that are charged a dollar a year, plus or minus the magazine.

Prof,

That is 2.55 MILLION Dollars, not a quarter mil..............

opps read my zeros wrong but it is still a ton of money and i am still sure the AMA could get a comprimal insurance that would cover an increase in jet and giant size without raising costs but i guess they can use the insurance as a reason so as not to increase anything and to keep the same stale rules in place instead of doing what members want. like i said sooner or later they will come around or some other organization will get large enough to pull enough ppl away they wont have the hobby monopolized. and yes they do have a monopoly right now not for the general average flyer but for those that like to compete or go to flyins etc to chat with other flyers with the same interests. but we can all hope that those ppl that complain but dont vote will get off their butts and get the old farts out. either way over time they will eventually leave one way or the other and the younger generation will gain control and bring the hobby up to date

Joe