biker_ray_pa

unfriendly, I guess.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, and often I am. It seems to me that, in the eyes of the AMA (or at least of the editors of its magazine), that if you don't fly glow-powered kit- or scratch-built planes, that you are somehow beneath those who do. The tone of the mag seems sort of belittling to the newcomer, especially one who is interested in electrics. Some of the articles seem to look down on pre-built and electric planes, and those who fly them. The review for one of the kits even listed, under "pros"..."It's not an ARF!"

I didn't think much else of it until talking to some, uhhh, gentleman from a local flying club (thankfully, not the one I joined). When I commented that I was learning to fly and had built an LT-40, he agreed that it was a good choice and a wonderful plane. When I mentioned that it was the ARF version rather than the kit version, it somehow became a pretty crummy plane that isn't fit to fly with. Then, when I made the mistake of mentioning that I have 3-channel and 4-channel electric birds that I'm learning on, he got downright nasty. Some of his comments....

- "Electric? Those are just toys, maybe for five or six year old kids. You'll look like a fool."

- "Electric isn't very popular and will never catch on. You can't power anything more than a toy with an electric motor."

-(when I showed him the article in FlyRC that dealt with an electric conversion on an LT-40): "That's just crap. The AMA won't put up with that stuff. If you want to fly, fly. If you just want to play and cause trouble, we don't want you. We've had about enough of these punks anyway, and it is time to do something about it."

I understand that AMA insurance is necessary to fly at most fields, so it is an organization I have to join. Question is, is it an organization I would want to join if I didn't have to??

The vast majority of people I have met in this hobby are great folks, but it seems like every one of them who bangs the AMA's drum for them just wants to tell me what a waterhead I am because I haven't built a kit plane and because I dig electrics.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong here.


Ray out

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Ray,
well, I'm going to disagree with you. In the last few months the AMA magazine has started a couple of new articles that are geared directly at the beginners. I really have enjoyed reading these "beginner" articles. And if I remember correctly they have featured electric planes in the last 2 magazines. I think that the AMA magazine is doing a good job of keeping up with the changes in the hobby.

As somebody that has been hit by an airplane, I can tell you that having the "insurance" just so you can fly at a field should be the least of your concerns. Let's face it, in this world "stuff happens". It's pretty easy for a plane to get away from somebody no matter how safely they fly, and it can hit another person. If that happens you can pretty much rest assured the damages are going to top out close the 7 figure range, if not higher. When that happens the insurance will be nice to have.

Ok, I'll get off of my soap box now.

DBCherry

My Feedback: (4)

I really haven't seen a bias in the AMA mag towards glow over electric. Sure the articles and reviews tend more towards glow, because that's what's prevalent out there, and certainly is most prevalent amungst AMA members.

Electrics have only started coming into their own in the past couple of years. Prior to that the power to weight ratio just wasn't competitve with electrics. The advent of NiMH, and more so, LiPoly's cells has reversed that. While still substantially higher in cost for say a 40 size plane and up, electrics can now be competitive in performance.

That "gentleman" you spoke with is a few years behind the times, and a throw back to another generation. They are becoming few and far between. So consider yourself lucky, you've met an honest to god RC Dinasaur!
Dennis-

Knight_74

I've noticed just the opposite in "Model Aviation". A good example is the current "Modeling Spoken Here"
article by Bob Hunt. In it he admitts that at one time he did have such a bias, but finally -saw the light-.

I seldom hear anyone saying you can't E power anything anymore. In fact they seem to have become very common place now. heck, I even have a couple.

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

BRP,
Read a little deeper. The lekky articles are written by the former prez of AMA. Notice almighty DB's concern for the park flyer. Like DB Cherry said I think you found a true dinosaur. Fly the clean bird with your head high. I scare the died in the wool slimers with my lekky F-18.[sm=pirate.gif]

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

Well, I think you're wrong. The AMA mag is for a wide variety of interests unlike any other RC magazine that specializes in a particular aspect of the hobby so some articles may indeed be biased but others are not. If you are reading an article about a scale plane it is important to note if it is an ARF or not.

As for the dinosaur you met, I think you already knew he was not indicative of the AMA or even the club he was from and probably an embarassment to them.

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

You will find this in anything you do. Some have some pretty strong opinions of what is right and wrong. Most will tell you you are wrong. Depends on how you take it. I notice a lot of guys in the hobby that start on ARFs or electrics are sensitive, and no matter what you say, they think you are slamming them.

All I can say is fly what you want to fly. Thats why the hobby is so great. There are so many different avenues you can go, or you can fly many of them. I enjoy planes, helis, electrics, gliders, and yes, I even have a couple ARFs in the shop. If you listen to all the people telling you that you are doing it wrong, you will never have fun. Just enjoy what you want. Its all good.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Hadn't really noticed it in the magazine. But I am new to the electric scene, so I probably wouldn't have noticed.

If you want unfriendly and biased, just look to the electric guys, you will find stuff like this quite a bit;

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

I know what you mean P-51B. I have never understood why they have to act like that. And it's not just the electric guys that do it. I also see heli vs. planes, electrics vs. glow/gas, 3D vs. sport flyers, and on and on and on and on.

As far as I'm concerned we are all the RC community. IMHO (and will probably stir up some controversy with this statement) the ones that are putting down other types aren't very secure and need to be putting down others to make themselves feel good. I'm not a head doctor so I can't back that up, but that's my feelings. It's one thing to make a few harmless jokes, but it's a very bad thing to have a deep hate for others. this just isn't a good thing to be doing, IMHO.

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I think what you are seeing guys is that the cheaper toy RC type planes are attracting a lot more kids than we have ever seen. It used to be that because of the price and commitment, the kids that came into the hobby were a lot more mature, but now days, we get all kinds of them, and they won't realize for many years yet that they don't know everything. They just shoot off at the mouth, more so because it is on the net and they are not realy accountable for what they say. Have you seen the posts that one kid put up about killing animals with his RC planes, or the one that thought the firebird was the end all RC airplane.

It takes all kinds. All we can do is help the ones that really want the help, and filter out the rest.

famousdave

My Feedback: (61)

Its a good rag to read while I'm sitting on the throne.... that's about it IMO.

DP

ballgunner

My Feedback: (1)

I'm 81 years old and have been building since 1934. RC since the advent of the Logictrol Little Red Brick. The best thing that you could have done was to turn your back on the "expert" on all things modeling. Being fairly new to the hobby how could you have known what a @#&((^%$(*& he was. I've tried all aspects of the hobby except 3D. I'm just not that good a pilot. Do your own thing and avoid this guy at all costs. AMA represents all aspects of model aircraft types including indoor rubber. You may not be interested in some of the columns but there are others who pay their dues that participate in different disciplines. I first started electrics in the days when a good nicad weighed 17 OZ. It was still fun. I assembled one ARF - an LT40 but managed to crunch it. Very good trainer type. Do your own thing and have fun. That's what hobbies are all about whether it's modeling, stamp collecting or tropical fish.

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

All of us have to remember that the AMA will be driven by the interests of its members. Sure, it will always promote the various areas of aeromodelling, especially working with the rules for competition events, but if the majority of AMA members eventually wind up flying micro-sized electric indoor RC airplanes, then the AMA will change to reflect that. Just give it time. It all depends upon what the majority of members want.

If the AMA isn't doing what you want, then send in those cards and letters. If enough people see things the same way, then the AMA leadership will eventually respond. Yes, there's always going to be a bit of inertia, because the organization is large, and trends move somewhat slowly through it. The leadership has been involved in most stuff from a few years ago and aren't necessarily up on the newest things, but they do respond.

The magazine will also reflect what its readers want to see. Those who write in with good ideas and well-written discussions of different points will be read. Get a lot of similar viewpoints, and the the magazine will change to reflect that. It's all numbers.

Off the soapbox.

bax

CRFlyer

actually, I see just the opposite. To me, it seams the AMA is pushing electric in favor of glow. And I for one am very concerned about it. While electric has a place, and if you enjoy that aspect of the hobby, then go and enjoy it. I personally am ONLY interested in "wet" powered models, and I sincerely hope the AMA does not count us wet flyers out.

Jimmbbo

FWIW, I think the mag fairly represents the overall membership with respect to article distribution.

And as far as the cretin you mentioned, just like people, every organization has an a**hole... My $.02

Cheers!

Jim

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

Wow! I got took way out of context with my slimer comment[X(]. It was a joke!!![sm=spinnyeyes.gif] Most of my stuff is .40 size glo both scratch buit and ARF. I do like Lekkys tho and have been slowly adding them to the hangar. P-51 you and I cross paths enough you should know better[]. My point is the same as the others, hold your head high and fly whatever makes you happy.[sm=thumbup.gif]

I know how BB feels now. (another attempted joke)

DaveB

I have found that the AMA magazine is better than ever. I do agree it does seem somewhat slanted toward glow, but after all, probably most subscribers are glow fliers. I will likely let some of my other magazine subscriptions expire because they have become so heavily slanted towards the park flyers and electrics. I am not saying that's a bad thing, it just isn't where my interest lie.

DaveB

Cyclic Hardover

My Feedback: (3)

My only complaint is the District 5 VP "Dr" Sandy Frank. I rarely if ever see anything regarding New mexico in his column month after month, years after year. I only read things from Texas or some event at AMA headquarters.

They have anentire magazine for headquarters related things yet he fills up our space with it. Articles are give to the local assistant to the assistant who is a ghost also.

As far as electrics, you ever seen a H9 Marie converted to electric that goes 100mph? I have. Fly that around the guy.

hookedonrc

Snoop - Actually it is District 8 and I have the same complaint about Dr. Sandy Frank. You don't see much Oklahoma references in there either. It seems he tends to be blind about the total of his district. OH..and I am tired of the black and white photo collages that he uses. You can't see much in them. I would prefer a few good photos that I can really enjoy.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Hooked,
Yes, I totally agree with you too. Not only do I dislike that he uses so many photos in his article, but that he uses the photos so he doesn't have to write up any text.

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

Well I don't think you can single out Sandy Frank on that one, none of the EC members write anything of import on their page. People used to jump all over Jim McNeil for his "snaps" but I think the other EC members are now doing the same thing. I can't say that I blame them much, writing anything important might have some controversy attached and that could only lead to alienating some voters. Pictures and fluff will keep Hooked mesmorized so he can enjoy a few good pictures untill it's time to send in his ballot. After all the other pictures in the magazine some shoddy black and white photos of some freeflight event in Bumfk Epypt on the last ten pages seem like a huge waste to me.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Sorry if I took you out of context, and yes I have a sense of humor (before you ask![:-][sm=spinnyeyes.gif]). It just seems that when I first got into the hobby everyone was into "model aviation". It didn't matter if it was control line, or RC, or freeflight. But it seems lately, to me anyway, that there has been a move toward the "hobby Nitch". Electric flyers calling fuel planes "slimers", guys who build out of plastic calling themselves "spadders", heli guys calling fixed wing flyers "plankers", people thinking the AMA is about insurance...and on and on. While some good natured ribbing is always acceptable, and often needed (but in a forum can often be mis-construed), it just seems that it has become more of an "us vs them" hobby, rather than being about model aviation and our enjoyment of it.

I agree with you 100%, fly whatever makes you happy. [sm=thumbup.gif] (But, be ready to explain it to me in case I haven't seen it or tried it yet! ) I fly mostly glow, have recently gotten into gas, and am currently getting into electric. All of them have their pros and cons, and each is enjoyable.

The AMA magazine has a lot of various aspects to cover, and I think they do an O.K. job of doing so. Could it be better, of course.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Ok, this is a bit off topic, but not really!!! This has been a small pet peeve of mine for a bit, and I'm going to use this discussion to get it out. And it does apply somewhat, it's about an aspect of the hobby as it relates to the AMA. I know that there are aspects that the AMA supports that a lot of us may think are not needed, but even the lesser known parts of this hobby are still part of what the AMA does. But the AMA stands for Academy of Model Aeronautics, which means that if it's a model and it flys then it belongs in the AMA's realm. If that is the case, why did the AMA put in a model boat pond in at the headquarters in Muncie? And it's not for float planes either, they have a pond set out specifically for boats (at least that's what I've read in Model Aviation, several times).

Inquiring minds want to know?

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks for feeling my pain.

Jim Thomerson

As I understand the present editorial policy, which may be changed in the future, the magazine is primarily oriented toward helping the beginning RC flier, whether IC or electric. This includes an emphasis on ARF's and kit reviews, and lessened coverage of freeflight and controlline. Also less coverage of competition events. I am now willing to listen to arguments that Model Aviation should be optional. There is also a move toward putting material formerly included in Model Aviation only on line at the AMA website. I wonder what percentage of the AMA membership this serves?

Jim