ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy

hmm, that is a great idea LCS
RCU could get how many folks to pay, if the kicked STL?

I would start a poll "Would you pay for RCU if it kicked STL?"
but it would get sooooo locked soooo fast

really just a financial thing, the RCU $ from STL is worth more than the $ LCS and I (maybe ohers) would pay to be rid of him.

ORIGINAL: aeajr

That is your interpertation of aircraft. The insurance company may not see it that way.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

Something I just learned, here in California they have deal where if you have multiple insurance policies then any claim is done in proportion to that coverage.

In other words, if you have two policies, say 1 worth $100,000 and worth $900,000 ($1,000,000 total) if you had claim that was to be covered by insurance 10% would be paid by the first policy and 90% by the other. Just another little twist to the insurance story.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

Well, not quite so. I have been chased out several times flying thermal ships. The OC Sheriff deputy was always nice and just simply asked me to leave.

That is the problem, it is MEANT to give laywers more jobs when kids of CostaMesa/Irvine/Newport guys get tickets for stacking cups at the park. It is MEANT to give realtors a place to show homebuyers without a bunch of kids messing up the place. It is MEANT to... oh, wait, we really dont know what the writers MEANT unless we have some other information from them, intent wasnt listed in the ord.

STL, who did you get the MEANT info from... or is one of your Just Made It Up facts that you might have to recant, like in them PB threads..... and dont cite the Sanitation Dept for a soundbite like that thread you called some stray dept for info

Why make All Parks for Quiet Time not sports, when they should have made Designated Quiet Time areas rather than Designated Play areas..... Parks are for reading, not playing sports- you wanna play, go play Inside where homebuyers wont see you urchins in the park

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

You may want to add Houston, TX to that list of CA towns your rattled off. The very first park I found in Texas, Houston: Playing of baseball, football etc. No person shall play any game of baseball, football, golf, cricket, lacrosse, polo, hockey or other game of like character in the parks, except in places set apart and designated as grounds therefor.

Page 6: http://www.houstontx.gov/codes/codes32-1to8.pdf

Like I said that rule is everywhere. It's not meant to restrict anything, it's meant to keep a peaceful balance within the park. I know peaceful existence is a hard thing to believe in this forum. One thing I still can't get over the no molesting the wild animals in Houston, I hope that doesn't happen too often.

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf




Actually, you have only confused the issue further and made things less clear.

As a moderator you should refrain from weighing in unless you are absolutely sure of fact.

Aircraft: a vehicle (as an airplane or balloon) for traveling through the air...Now do we need to define vehicle and travel?

We typically have either a model of an aircraft or a model airplane(scale representation or not)...see the difference? We do not have model aircrafts…we have models of aircrafts. Models travel nowhere and transport nothing. So, our models are not crafts of any sort.

ORIGINAL: aeajr



I am not prepared to risk it all on the chance that you are wrong.

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

As a moderator you should refrain from weighing in unless you are absolutely sure of fact.

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

So you, I guess, just don't fly models unless at an AMA chartered flying field or another location you have written permission...but what if you are afraid of some stipulation in their (AMA’s) policy interpretation that would leave you without coverage in the event of an incident...then maybe you don't fly at all... Where does it end... when you rely on other's interpretation of your responsibilities or liabilities?

Are you confident, that if your model experiences radio interference, goes out of control and hurts someone to the tune of $450,000 of medical damages, not to mention other damages, AMA’s Insurance will pay?

Are you willing to risk it all on that bet?


I am not just intending to be argumentative but we should take responsibility for our actions and always do things to the best of our ability to insure maximum safety regardless of the insurance we have or think we have, whether at the chartered flying field, the park, schoolyard or wherever.

Being responsible goes beyond buying some insurance and thinking we have done the right thing.

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

So you, I guess, just don't fly models unless at an AMA chartered flying field or another location you have written permission..

Are you confident, that if your model experiences radio interference, goes out of control and hurts someone to the tune of $450,000 of medical damages, not to mention other damages, AMA’s Insurance will pay?

ORIGINAL: aeajr


Littlecrankshaft,

What does my being a mod have to do with anything? I base my answers on my employment with Allstate Insurance and the Insurance Institute of America training they provided us while I worked there.

Mods are not in any way constrained from expressing opinions or sharing general knowledge as compared to anyone else. I have other privledges and responsabiliites as a moderator but they have nothing to do with my active participation in the forum and the discussions held here. If it did, I would resign my moderator position.

:-)

Secondly, as a moderator you have a responsibility to give factual and unbiased information to avoid coloring the thread one way or the other. If you give an opinion it should be clear that it is only an opinion and only with great discretion should it be used.

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

So now you are the RCU rulemaker for moderators? Where is the information to support this suggestion? Pot calling the kettle black.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

Since you are so fond of splitting hairs, please indulge me.

First - there is no such thing as an AMA chartered flying field. AMA does not charter, sanction, approve, bless, ordain, or otherwise recognize flying site in any manner. AMA charters clubs, who may, or may not, have a flying site. Further, the Safety Code makes no mention of permission to fly or not, so written permission is certainly not specified as a requirement.

All the AMA says is that you need to be flying in accordance with the safety code or your coverage MAY be jeopardized. Notice it does not say WILL, but MAY.


Are you certain that it will not?? I am very certain that the policy will be there for me. Why do you think it will not??

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI



Why do you think it will not??

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf


Phaedrus-MMVI

One reason could possibly be confirmed if you were to contact BasinBum ( I think you may know him as Richard D.) and ask him to relay the particulars of an incident where coverage was reportedly, by Richard himself, limited to only $25,000 for an accident between two members that he knows personally and report back hear what you find out.

I think we all would be interested in the results of that incident. If you don't really care don't ask and don't tell.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

Well, you see, I was the expert witness for the defense in this case.

ORIGINAL: SoCal GliderGuider


As one who has a position of representing the members having been appointed by a membership elected DVP you should have been excluded as a witness for the AMA due to an obvious conflict of interest.

ORIGINAL: SoCal GliderGuider


As one who has a position of representing the members having been appointed by a membership elected DVP you should have been excluded as a witness for the AMA due to an obvious conflict of interest.

ORIGINAL: model.flyer

Woiuld you mind explaining what "molest" means to you. Maybe someone can explain the purpose of the ordinance after you do.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI


The plaintiff's attorney brought up that point, so let me share some facts with you (shut your eyes now):

I receive no financial gain from the AMA.
I am not compensated by AMA (well, OK, to the tune of $29 per year which puts me at about 0.02 per hour "pay")
I have no part in the management, decision making, or operation of the AMA.
The outcome of the case would have no bearing on my situation, I would neither gain nor lose anything regardless of how the case was settled.


Based on this the judge allowed my participation and testimony. It appears he was wrong to do so. I can give you his name and you can contact him right away and set things straight. Maybe right after you get done setting the FAA and the City of Costa Mesa straight. You are a busy guy!!!

One other point, it apparently did not matter to the jury either since telling the truth in a dispassionate and professional manner seemed more important to them than the fact that I gladly volunteer my time to help promote the AMA and model aviation.

BTW - you missed another pearl. I was PAID!!! to do this. Plaintiff tried to smear me based on that too. No luck there either.

ORIGINAL: Phaedrus-MMVI

No need for me to contact BasinBum, or anyone else. You see, I happen to know the particulars of that case quite well. I assume you are speaking of the case of the injury at the Sepulveda basin in September of 2004. I can tell you that you do not have the correct information nor do you have the faintest idea what transpired, how, or why. I can also tell you that BasinBum (who I know through emails, etc.) does not have the facts straight if that is what he told you (which I doubt it is).

How do know I this?

Well, you see, I was the expert witness for the defense in this case. I have reviewed all the deposition transcripts (16 of them), medical reports, interrogatories, motions for discover, and other related documents (this is a stack about 4 feet tall).

I gave an 6-hour long deposition in the case, and I provided testimony in court in front of the judge and jury. I met with the defendant, completed a site walk of the accident scene, met with the lawyers and other experts involved in the case (human factors expert among them), and spent a good deal of time preparing for my deposition and court testimony.

I feel fairly confident when I say that neither BasinBum, nor you, or in fact anyone else on this forum, have a more intimate knowledge of this case than I do. BTW, he does not know either of the parties involved in the case.

So, if you are basing your conclusion that the AMA policy is not effective on what you think you know about this case, then I suggest you find a different example. In fact, your example is that the injured person DID get coverage from AMA, by way of the medical policy. He then attempted to recover a very significant claim against the defendant up to the limits of the defendant's home owner's and AMA policies by suing him. The plaintiff was unsuccessful and recovered nothing in the case. It was neither the AMA nor the defendant’s homeowner’s company that did this. It was the 12 people good and true on the jury who came to the conclusion.

Had the jury found in favor of the plaintiff, then both the home owner's and AMA policies would have been on the hook proportionate to the size of the award and their relative coverages (as I detailed above).

So when I say that I am comfortable that the AMA policy will be there and that it works as advertised, I say it from a position of having actual knowledge of the particulars of this, and other cases. It is not based on what I was told by some guy who knows a buddy who read on the internet that he heard about.........

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

Thank you for the insight. Just one question if I may. In what capacity were you involved that qualified you as an expert witness for the defense?

ORIGINAL: model.flyer

Well, STL, apparently you are going to choose to ignore this issue, which you raised. Most of us probably have visions of a coyote being chased by a trainer, or hawks being driven from a thermal by a sailplane, or things along those lines. We can only wonder where your mind is.