Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

What do you think of the idea of merging with the AMA?

One thing I do know from many years of flying with members from both sides of the border are that Model Aircraft issues don't seem to change from one side to the other.

Thoughts on negotiating a merger? Would make sense with a lot of the issues we get tangled up in and provide more bang for the buck as well as the added influence of belonging to a much larger organization?

Maybe divide Canada up into 4 or 5 new districts within the AMA.

No BS about current federal government politics here. Just some open discussion on the idea as it relates to toy airplanes please.

britbrat

Interesting concept. AsI see it at first glance--

Problems:

1) vested interests
2) nationalism (chauvinism?)
3) perceived loss of Canadian identity
4) different legal environments
5) different insurance environments

Advantages:

1) world-wide clout (is this a real a advantage, or just touchy-feely fluff?)
2) merged rule-sets
3) merged safety culture
4) current MAAC regional politics becomes a non-issue
5) ?
6) ?

Jim_McIntyre

Do we really want to add the AMA politics to our current little fire?

How would Kenny feel about funding Muncie?

The list goes on and on but, my biggest question would be: What problems are you trying to fix?[sm=confused.gif]

The 800lb gorilla joke also comes to mind.....[X(]

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

I suppose the legal end would be the main stumbling block, but probably not a wall.

........as for Ken? I'm sure he'll chime in to tell us his thoughts.

Nationalism, loss of identity?

...whatever. Means zip in the toy airplane world as far as I'm concerned.

britbrat

For you --yes, but I suspect that for many those are problematic issues.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

I know.

Most likely to be used as a flashpoint by those who would hate to even see such an issue discussed. Hopefully we can avoid useless philosophical abstract issues like "identity".........snore

I'm not saying I'd "vote" for such an idea, just curious as I've never seen the idea discussed before.

ira d

Bad idea the AMA is way more restrictive than MAAC and there
insurance is not primairy like MAAC, i dont see where your
members would benefit from such a merger.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Not sure about the restriction differences...................we've seen some pretty stupid safety ideas forced on us lately that make it harder and harder to meet standard. Certainly something to explore.

Yep, our insurance is primary and a huge advantage......................but for how long. I expect the 2nd payer insurance is being explored and will be a necessity if there is another serious accident/lawsuit in the next few years.

britbrat

That's an interesting response from a US flier. He doesn't appear to be too happy with the AMA. Hmmmmmmm.

Ira d -- can you expand on your advice against a MAAC/AMA joint organization?

Jim_McIntyre

This is already the case in many areas. I know there is some discussion about the rest, look for more Canadian events recognised as qualifiers for US events.

That one I don't get, unless you're referring to these issues being ignored even more as these regions become an even smaller minority....

britbrat

If the regions are re-defined, the demographics change --- and in the much larger organization there will be "new" political dogfights that make the current regional scraps shrink into insignificance.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Hey, Jim..............just think; Clowns like me would have less a voice and be less disruptive to the system. There are some out there who would certainly see the benefit there.

.....conversely, small organized groups such as those who would have sold/shut down MAAC headquarters and move it to Tillsonburg for their regional benefit couldn't come close to pulling that off again.

Jim_McIntyre

Another interpretation issue....

That plan made a lot of sense to me even though I wouldn't have received any of your inferred benefits (Oakville is a 45 minute trip for me, Tillsonburg over 2 hours).

I fail to see the need for MAAC to have assets tied up in an expensive piece of real estate with geographically assoiciated high salary costs. You, who are a self declared advocate for change, constantly lamenting MAAC expenses, why do you think the current status quo better serves your needs?

britbrat

I would hardly think that someone who proposes a merger with the AMA is an advocate for the "status quo".

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

.......well, for starters, the business case was a peice of crap and ill-prepared. It proposed the building being built on an active airport with an accompanying museum. Big and not to well thought out left to the whim of government regulations. Looked like it was thrown together with a few beers under the belt. It was a "feelgood" idea based in "romance" once again with little practical reasoning. Not to mention, those advocates held Munci up as the glaring example of what a wonderful tashma hall MAAC could also have.................failing to mention, that AMA had about 180,000 members compared to 12,000 here and owned their own land..........bla, bla.

Just think, those same bunch could contribute to the AMA musem and their archives and have their permanent and central flying site for the big annual events. It's all in place. Hell, even Chad would be happy. He wouldn't have to feel like a turncoat going to Munci for the Nats every year.

Now, if we explore the possibility of a new central headquarters for MAAC where modellers from around the country could converge for annual events. There are endless tracks of flat land West of Winnipeg located on the official geographical centre of Canada that would be perfect for such a Headquarters. Land would be realtively cheap. The TransCanada Hwy runs right past it. AMA recognized the need for a Central location when they built in Munci Indiana??? Why would they go there, instead of Califorina or Florida?????

What do you think?

Jim_McIntyre

I think that most prospectus (prospecti) suffer from similar issues to the one you describe.

There are several issues here, Probably easier to divide to debate.

First, criteria for a headquarters. Costs including travel should be considered. Accomodations, staffing skill level and availability come to mind. Buy vs. lease, viable lease alternatives, all these and more should be considered.

Now, the most controversial in my mind. Assuming the costs justify the benefits (a separate discussion again)

Assuming that resolved to positive, I think "geographic centre" is not the best criteria, we may want to again visit travel costs, availability of lodging, weather etc. etc.

ira d

The AMA turbine waiver and the 55lb rule come to mind first also the
AMA is a monopoly here in the the U.S. they insure about 98% of
the official clubs and tell the clubs to only let AMA members fly no
matter what type of insurance you may have.

By official i meen clubs that have officers and some sort of lease or
land use aggrement , not in the case when a bunch of guys find a field
and fly untill they are run off.

AMA insurance is secondary to any other form of insurance such as
homeowners are any type of liabillity policy you may have and you
will be asked to use that policy first even though there is hardly any
place you can fly without being an AMA member.

britbrat

At first glance, "demographic centre", rather than geographic centre seems to make most sense -- but the demographic centre is in Ontario & that problem just won't go away in the minds of many. Winnipeg is very well serviced by road, rail & air connections & at second glance is probably a good location -- its only real problem is the relatively low percentage of Canadian modellers that live anywhere near it.

Jim_McIntyre

What problem is that?

... and how many? I'm thinking it's a problem for a small, but rather noisy group.

... and ... I'm willing to compare infrastructures with Manitoba if that were the criteria.

I think MAAC has missed several opportunities when they failed to take action on several abandoned airfields near metro that sold for ridiculously low prices. There was one in Edenvale (just north of Toronto, not far from where Live8 was held) recently, that came complete with a very large habitable building, a bunker, and paved airstrips that was so affordable, I was considering it personally. It was bought for less than I paid for my home (definitely less than the current MAAC headquarters are worth) by an ultralight fan who leases a corrner of it to the Edenvale club... even the small corner they have, basically a taxiway, is quite serviceable, even for turbine aircraft....

britbrat

I can't possibly answer that "Ontario" question any more than you can, but the noise comes from right across western Canada -- right out to the coast -- which is a helluva long way from Ontario.

More infrastructure doesn't mean a better choice, when "enough" infrastructure will do the job. Winnipeg has more than enough.

I'm sure that there are equal, or better, land deals to be had near Winterpig.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

I don't believe "infrastructure" is an issue on this one.

Hypothetically, if such a facility were built in the Winnipeg area, a city of 600,000 could easily handle a group of modellers at any given time. Not to mention, it wouldn't take a full day just to negotiate from the airport to the site. Must face facts that a facility accessed through Toronto is a nightmare. Too many people in too big a rush without adequate roads etc. Sorry, but Toronto sucks to everyone but those who live there. I hate it.

Weather may be the "real" issue, but the reality is, at max, maybe a couple of weeks (many years less or equal) on either end of the season and that may be balanced by the stiffling heat/humidity and polution issues down that way?

Further, it's always suggested that there is a huge numbers difference of members similar to the disparity within the Actual Canadian population. ie: Southern Ont has the majority of the membership.

......I don't believe that is not the case. Combining the numbers from Manitoba/NWO zone westward and comparing relative growth numbers in the association, the story doesn't parallel population picture.

That said, the airport thing Jim talks about sounds, on the surface, very interesting........alas.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

In retrospect;

The debate on a "National Flying Site" that we have entered, and before we bother going too far into "who/where deserves it more", highlights that this issue is very divisive.

The main question is, "Is it necessary?".

My flat out answer is, "NO". The only true benefit to such a facility is a permanent spot for a yearly competition that most members will never participate in. I'll guarantee that such a facility, no matter where it is built, will piss off more members than it will make happy and that being the case; "what's the point?". I believe more harm than good would come to the association from that kind of capital layout. I don't see the need for museums and extensive archives.

We're too few a number and too spread out. We need an office to turn around memberships and look after the day to day business.

To merge with the AMA would provide the benefit to competitors of a central facility that is already in existance. I certainly don't advocate Canada trying to match such a venue.

britbrat

Agreed


I think that we got side-tracked by an argument/justification for moving our current office operations out of Toronto -- I don't think that it was really part of the AMA discussion.

can773

My Feedback: (1)

Ahhh I dont feel like a turncoat :-) actually I am still in Muncie....its *****in hot but had a ton of fun. Finished 11th again but this year took a round off Quique Somenzini (of TOC and international fame)....highlight of my week. I should have won the round overall but a silly overheated brain boo-boo caused me to snap the wrong direction and finish about 45 degrees to early :-(

Back to reality in a couple of days :-)

Jim_McIntyre

Congratulations Chad![8D]