RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

When the PPP was first proposed I was leery of the idea of tiered membership. I just couldn't see how it could work unless the Park Pilots were restricted to Park Pilot Only flying areas. I can understand the resulting confusion when mixing PPP members and Open members. I am not against the PPP in theory, but I can just imagine being the Safety Officer of a club with dozens or hundreds of members and trying to remember if this pilot or that pilot was restricted to Park Flyers. Maybe PPP members should wear a big "P" on their shirts and Open AMA members a big "O":)

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

I have not been hiding behind any smoke screen. I have stated the same position since we first heard of the proposal to have something such as this, and that has been about a year and a half ago. I made the same response to the e-mail that I received from Joyce Hagar in the early Spring of 07. There is no smoke screen. Anything of the kind only exists in your imagination. I have always been right up fornt with my feelings regarding this venture.

Now let me ask a question of you; Why would anyone join an association or group that did not allow you to have a voice in how that group or association would be governed? The PPP membership can't nominate anyone, nor can they cast a vote for anyone. If that does not make you second rate, please tell me whot would it take to make you feel that way?

Bill, AMA 4720

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Fella's can any one of you tell me of anyone you know or have seen that has taken a Stryker and actually SLOWED it down. Everyone I know that has or had one wanted to make them even faster than they were out of the box.
Mistake maybe who cares the fact and only fact is that a Stryker and looks from the pic two other planes in that catagory are ILLEGAL as PPP.
That is a fact. We all know the capabalities of these type planes. All of us know. The guys in the pitcure know also. The man taking the pitcure
and the governing bodies of MA know this. FACTS.
We can look at no one knows how fast that plane was or is but the FACT is we do know. So why is there any discussion about being legal anyway or anyhow. If it were a legal plane I am almost posititve that at least one of the members of that club logs onto RCU. Or the photographer or someone from
AMA that has some say so over the PPP. But not one has chosen to say anything. Why is that? Cause it is an ILLEGAL PLANE no question. IT can probabaly be flown as legal. Who is going to buy a Stryker and not open them up? The rule is supposed to be I would say not capable of 60 & under two lbs. I can't think of one good reason anyone would defend the AMA or MA for putting this particular pic of the VERY FIRST PPP CHARTERED CLUB. The Vegas whatever, and use this pitcure for it.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Kid C
They are not claiming the Stryker is PPP.
They are claiming that non-PPP may ~club-legally~ be flown at the PPP club.

They are climing the PPP Chartered club is not PPP Only,
and they are basing that claim on....
hmmmm...
what is that based on again?

Oh, This is a good one:
Someone here actually proposed that the Stryker was flown elsewhere
but brought to the club just for the picture... it wasnt flown and wont be flown at the club


No KidC, nobody is trying to claim the Stryker is PPP leagal,
they are claiming the PPP Chartered Club is not a PPP Only club and non-ppp planes (like glow&gas) can fly there.

<+>
But that is a good point, We all know a Stryker isnt PPP legal.
Just how out of touch with electrics is MA to not know... Strykers have been around years,
and not see anything wrong with that pic?

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

..

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

804....Motives? Honesty?
How's this, I don't want to see anyone get hurt by some PPP sponsored idiot flying a 100 mph Stryker over a playground full of kids. I don't want to see the AMA promote that possible outcome. I don't want any pea-brain who looks at that photo to be able to associate a Stryker with the PPP, period.
I don't expect you to remember this, but my stance on the PPP was to give it a trial run if it wasn't too much of an economic loser to implement.
No one with even a teaspoon of foresight should be surprised by this Stryker deal.
Just like watching a train wreck in slow motion, you know it's coming and all you can do is watch.

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

Um, maybe they choose to for the quarterly rag, cheap insurance and the ability to fly with some AMA chartered clubs. Perhaps they don't really give a rat's arse about the bigger picture. Evidently a number of people, including some of this forum's most anti-AMA gadflies, have made that choice. 93% of the open members don't nominate anyone, nor do they cast a vote.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

..

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Guys,
This is about MA showing a Stryker at a PPP club.

We have plenty of other threads for whether AMA should have a 2nd class serf tier
purposely bad enough to make folks want out of it & buy Open,
argue that there not here

Lets stick to PPP and Strykers in this thread

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Holy cow, Kid, who cares. This is a tiny aspect of of a reasonably conceived but excruciatingly badly implemented program that seems modeled after the plot of 'The Producers.' Can't you hear it now..........'springtime for Hitler'.......???????? It is going die and I am very confidant and hopeful in that outcome, as that will be merciful for the future of model aviation. Hopefully the Munchie marketeers won't do irreparable damage to too many of the PF ilk with such schemes as selling the dangers of PFs to municipalities in order to create a market for selling their sole-source insurance hooey to wannabe users of municipal facilities.

Abel

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

Let me answer your question first. Why does anyone do anything? Because they want to, for their own reasons. Danged if I know why. I only know they make their choice and live with it. Kinda like asking, why would anyone want to fly only stick-built Wacos. Search me.

The only way I would feel second rate, is if both membership levels cost the same, but one had less benefits. Or, if I wasn't told the lower priced one had less benefits. Neither is the case, so no problem.

Now, to your first point.
It is well documented in many of these threads, your, shall we say, less than enthusiatic feelings toward Arfs, Rtfs, electrics, and by extension, electric arfs and rtfs, and, those who fly them. Since these are the planes park-flyers use, would you have us believe your concern is really for the "civil rights" of parkflyers, or that a picture of a Stryker is really going to mislead people into thinking the program is not what it says it is?
Or, could it be that parkflying is against everything you stand for, modeling wise, and that it is something you never had available to you in your "formative years". You don't understand the attraction, it's not really modelling, it is too easy, and you just plain don't like the idea.

Hence, the "smoke-screen" comment.

I firmly believe this to be the case, and I sure don't see how your record on here can show otherwise.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Idiots and pea-brains... Wow! No further comment needed on that one.

No one wants anybody or anything flying over a playground full of kids, at 100mph, or 10mph. AMA, nor anyone else I know is promoting anything like that.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Of course folks want foam PFs to fly over folks at the playground.

Lets see what some clowns shot vid of [link=http://www.zagi.com/media/ZagiFixxWebClip1.wmv]Video[/link]Video
ooops, my bad... that wasnt some YouTube clowns on their own, that is the official Zagi Website video page Video #1
Pay particular attention to 12sec and 25sec. Safety in the eyes of a Parkie, the first video you see at the manufacturer vid page.

Gotta love them Parkies,
well, unless you are the one INSURING them, then it aint so lovable.


- - -

I dont use them. As a PPP member, I use white glue ($.25 school sale) to hold balsa I cut, and iron on some doculam... stick some servos in, jam a motor on the front, and throw that bellylander at 15*

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

KE, that video is proof that PFers are harmless......I didn't see even one person get killed.
When the first kid playing in the park does get killed by a PFer, I hope 804 isn't there to tell his parents, "BFD".

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

One word answer: Nope.

Multi-word answer: There is absolutely no rule that a Park Flyer Model must be an ARF,RTF. You can actually build one from sticks, and yes, even a Waco could qualify. Of course, that would mean that you would have to become a modeller, which is something that you have demonstrated by your multitude of posts that you either can't or won't do. So here we are at the same stalemate. You are in this for the sport aspect, while I am in it for the hobby aspect. I can't honestly say which is correct, or if there is a correct position or not. We don't agree (obviously), but the main difference is that I don't attack you every time you post your position. Can you say the same? Oh, and as to the power choices, I choose I/C, and you choose electric. Just another opposing choice. I used to have an electric model airplane, and I guess it could be called an ARF. It was a Stanzel Lightning Bolt. You should look that one up.

Bill, AMA 4720

Bill, AMA 4720

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Really ... what voice did you use to oppose the PPP program in the first place? How did you vote your opinion for that proposal??? By AMA's own numbers more people opposed the PPP than approved it .... what governing system are you talking about? Oh and ask Hoss about the nomination process and your vote for AMA President and DVP is pretty much pre-determined. The AMA is a governing system like your an ambassador to the organization. Both sound cool on the AMA's website, but even that is fluff too. You pay your dues and you get your benefits, that's the system, both regular and PPP.

And it seems to me that PPP's are getting the FULL attention of the AMA, what do they need to vote about? They get all the perks that fit their shoe at half the price of regular members. Whose complaining about it ??? 1 single PPP member complaining .... only 1. I have yet to see 2 PPP members complaining about their membership benefits and their "disability" of being able to cast a vote.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

When is somebody gonna break down & just call the Vegas PPP club shown in MA and settle this?
I dont even get MA, so dont look at me.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Having only read about half of this thread I’ve learned that a PPP club in the AMA eyes is still “chartered” club just all the rest but they checked the box that said our general interest is in park flyers. Correct?

The whole crux of this thread is somebody like me can read that blurb on page 9 that the AMA has its very first Park Pilot Program Club and assumes that this also means, just like the membership, there charter limits planes too. But right there in the photo is two members holding planes that easily exceed the speed limit.

Whether it violates the charter and club bylaws or not, the general perception is it does.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Yep, those are some clowns alright. I wouldn't recommend emulating them. Looks like the situation would be better if they were flying in a manner more consistent with AMA rules. Like at a Park Pilot club

Oh wait, you aren't in favor of that. I forgot.

More smoke. That video means nothing except, like you said, some clowns.

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

Stick, I know all that. Be real. The PPP is geared toward beginner pilots, and they are not going to be building from scratch. Hopefully they won't be buying Strykers, either.

And I haven't attacked you, just stating my opinion based on many PPP related posts by you.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Wellllll...
Its gonna be monday soon,
and we can wait for STL or 804 to get the proof that we are wrong: Get the local club rules allowing NonPPP at the club.

Thats all it takes for them to win this threads debate.
We can keep bickering, or they can just cite the rule they propose exists and it lock the win for them.

Of course,
all it would take to shoot them completely out of the water,
and prove the club is indeed breaking PPP rules with that Stryker
is for someone to find that vegas clubs rules and show they are PPP Only.

I cant believe it is that difficult to find out what the rules are at a club,
for those that get MA and the club info there in.


No more of this rehashing an 8 month old arguement with no new data.
Joyce's mythical Urban PPP clubs still dont exist.

RE: [Awaiting Approval]
 

804

I respectively disagree. AMA's PPP exists primarily to tap into an already booming and very developed facet of our hobby. AMA's goal is self serving IMO. Park flying has been around long before AMA's attempt to define it and the subsequent errant projection of some need for AMA to fly in parks. No matter how much AMA would like; AMA cannot take credit for the park flying enthusiasts’ growth. That aspect of the hobby was/has been perfectly healthy without AMA’s pills. I can only hope AMA’s greed will not be detrimental to one, if not the only, facet(s) of the hobby that has the potential to carry all of us on into the future.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Dion,

To plow this field once more; Early in 2007, I received an e-mail from Joyce Hagar, telling me of the plan that the AMA was considering, to enable those who only want to fly small electric model aircraft to have an opportunity to belong to the AMA, at a different membership level, and asking my opinion on this. That is an e-mail that several long term members of the AMA received from her, so I was not alone in the receipt of such. My resoinse was exactly what you have seen here in these forums. In short, I am totally against any tiered membership program. This ground has been plowed over and over, and still my position is the same as when it began. Yours has changed. I remember when you were the, "Shining Kingit", who was attempting to, "Urbanize", the flying of small model aircraft, and promised that you were going to have a Central Park site. You stated that you had the ear of the New York City Parks Board, and that it was going to happen. I guess you have selective memory, because every time I ask you about it, the subject is immediately changed. This is a relavent question, since such a location would be in the best interest of the PPP group.

As to my voting for or against this issue, you should be fully aware that no open member of the AMA was given any opportunity to cast such a vote. My response to Joyce, and several (more than 2 or 3) conversations with my DVP, fell on deaf ears, and now we have a seperate and unequal group of members within our association.

When the AMA was formed in 1936, how long did it require for the first club to be chartered? How many were chartered within the first 8 months? I don't have the actual numbers but you can bet that it was far more than one, and each with more members than the Las Vegas group of PPP flyers.

If by joining a group in New York City, you were to lose your rights to vote in public elections, would you look at this in the same light? You may not cast the same importance on belonging to the AMA, as you do with your constitutionally guarenteed rights as a citizen, but in reality, what's the difference?

By the way, Your assistant either didn't call and leave a message, or if he did, my assistant did not think that you were important enough for me to return the call. Sorry bout that.

Bill, AMA 4720

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Stick

You touch on a very relevant point IMO.

It is unfortunate that STL can't deliver what he promised us. We knew that his promises would not pan out...there isn't any real resources to draw from.

Stick I know from everything that I have read in your posts here that you do not enjoy the park-flying scene or ARFs...that is fine and believe me I support your particular interest as much as any other facet of our hobby. With that being said; I would be a great supporter of the AMA’s PP initiative if it was to magnanimously help acquire flying sites for modelers such as the park-flyers…but alas it is not. Yes, I would support an effort to acquire places for park-flyers to fly without the need of those that directly benefit to be AMA members or AMA secondary members. From those ranks our hobby could get some needed exposure and the public could learn what a fun, safe, and worthwhile activity our hobby is.

AS it stands now we will just spin our wheels and go no where…gas and tires are expensive and I wonder what the return on our investment (PPP) has been so far…IMO those numbers would change a few minds that are reluctant to see the downfall of this program.

RE: Is the first Chartered PPP club violating the rules?
 

Mine has never changed Bill, just because my effort was unsuccessful, so far, does not mean I do not support the AMA's continued initiative of the PPP, not even by a longshot. I wish the AMA and those who utilize the PPP the greatest of all success in their efforts. The AMA is not seperating those whom they don't have in the first place, just like my cup of coffee is half full.

A wonderful idea, but the AMA is already ahead of you. They make ALL of their documentation and 70 years of proven information all available on their website. Now take that freely available information and start a club which is not an AMA club. Go find some guys, collaborate, find some cheap primary flying insurance and go. Now of course the AMA could have made all of this information locked out to members only, but they didn't. What more can you ask for?

As far as you wondering the "investment" in the PPP program, doesn't matter, you're not a stockholder. Your rates remain fixed for the time being, thats the perk of thinking the AMA is a for stock company, when in reality you're just an annual membership subscriber.