Do you think through your statements before you make them? Are you advocating that location of FRIAs be non-public and thus not available to pilots of manned aircraft?

Will FRIAs be added to sectional charts?

Just because something isn't on a sectional doesn't mean it's non-public.
Examples: NOTAMS aren't on sectionals. TFRs aren't on sectionals. SIDs aren't on sectionals. Approaches aren't on sectionals. A great many navigation fixes aren't on sectionals.

But you knew this given your voluminous knowledge of toy planes and all things aviation as a result...

So you’re telling me that there is no FAA requirement for FRIA locations to be made public.

No ... suggest you RE-READ what I said:

Does not change the fact that the FAA does not require FRIA locations to be made public. Just the same as the FAA does not require insurance to fly toy airplanes.

Please cite source supporting your assertion ... for it appears they intend to make them public:

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...fdca9292ea.png

BFD, that FAA is going to spend tax payers money to create a database. Wouldn’t that mean that the AMA doing the same thing would be redundant?

We are adding an "approved FRIA" icon to the club search results as well as sanctioned event listings.

this actually sounds like a sensible approach

”Bless your heart”

In your time tested pattern, when you can’t support your assertions (that it wasn’t public info), you try and change to concern over redundant info …

LOL, I just enjoy throwing your BS back in your face.

But wait a moment, just a few minutes ago you said that the information would be out of date by the time you left for the day. So which is it, that it's NOT too much work nor unable to keep up with adding FRIA icons to clubs and events, but it IS too much work and unable to keep up to add the same info to a summary table?

Sounds like you're making up reasons as you go.

So I'll take the as an admission that you can't support any of your assertions herein...

It’s a free country, think whatever you want SterlingD. Just remember to log onto the AMA web site to take your TRUST test before yours expires.

Can't support your assertions above, so yet another attempt to change the subject.

And you need to think about costs. You should actually encourage people to take the trust test on other sites, because each use costs those other sites money rather than AMA. But why not? I'll take your advice and use the AMA site instead and cost them some money.

They make it back in the 6-8 sanctioned events I support each year. Thanks for the reminder, I need to make sure the CD for the upcoming sanctioned event has filed for an altitude waiver. I especially enjoy that additional privilege to the NAS as a member of a private dues collecting organization.

Perhaps in the near term, but I play the long game. And given that AMA's principal source of money, membership revenue, is down 28% over the last 20 years and that trend continues, the problem of special privileges for members of a private dues collecting organization will be self correcting. Funny you should mentioned sanctioned events, revenue from those is down 32% over the last 20 years. So you better get to work!

Well yes Commander Obvious, I think everyone is aware that model aviation is less interesting than it once was. We’ve discussed reasons for this many times but your broken record continues.

However clubs across the country host events such as this to cultivate any interest that some may show.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...4b4212730a.png

The only thing that keeps repeating itself is the AMA's financial performance.

Another interesting tidbit. The IRS considers "Program Expenses" to be those that directly support the mission of the organization. Everything else, fundraising, staff, admin, etc. is called non-program. Interesting, that for the better part of the last 20 years, AMA's NON-program expenses have been steady, while the program expenses have been falling. Then all of the sudden there's a big jump in NON-program spending, while program spending dropped sharply. Take home message? Their own IRS990 filings show the AMA is prioritizing spend on bureaucracy (non-program) rather than its core mission. And the EC has approved this change!

You just keep working ... I'm sure this will stem the tide.

If only they had listened to the esteemed Franklin Mellot the nation’s foremost authority on aviation safety/financial analysis they could have been saved.

I can almost imagine the annual “ Franklin Fly In “ hosted in Muncie with the largest turnout in AMA history. Maybe president Biden could have declared it “ Franklin Aviation Day “.

Well, quite possibly true at least based on my track record. My last two clients have saved not less than 4x what they paid for me. And my current client is on track to make an additional $100 million in revenue over the next 12 months as a result of a project I did for them. And that's on top of saving over $25 million in OPEX (24% savings) on the project I'm working right now.

It couldn't do much worse than their annual National Day of Model aviation. Last I read there's a whopping 30 or so clubs participating?

Of course the truth sometimes eludes you, right SterlingD. I could post those screenshots if you need a reminder.

Truth? How about AMA expenses exceeding revenue in 13 of the last 20 years, with net loss of over $3 million.

Boy, that EC is doing a great job running the organization ... into the ground!

Flite Test and Horizon Hobby had their RID modules on display at the EAA AirVenture this year.
They are about the same size and look like they use the same components.Their prices are nearly the same as well.
They are both self-contained, plug and play so there is no need to add antennas or anything else.
This is what the average model airplane pilot wants.
The price is still a little more than I would like but as of today either one is the most attractive option for me.