|
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: JasonP As an individual If you are flying at a county field with no AMA Charter in effect and no specific county rules about trubines or anything else such as noise levels, etc then you can legally fly at the county facility without breaking any City/County laws. As a member of the AMA which is essentially a liability insurance, Flying a turbine without a waiver is not allowed anywhere. In case of an accident, Amongst other things, your Insurace/AMA will decline any claims under the pretext of breaching your AMA/Insurance agreement. |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: JustABigKid Jason, do you mean that if I fly a turbine at an unchartered field without a waiver, and have an accident, that the AMA would drop my insurance altogether? I understand that they wouldn't cover the turbine accident, but I don't understand what you mean by "flying a turbine without a waiver is not allowed anywhere". Would the AMA refuse me a future waiver or membership? Just think about how many club facilities, events., etc you may lose out on in future (for ALL RC models, not just turbines) if the AMA decided to make an example of you by declining future membership. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: rolsen12 You do know that the AMA insurance is not worth the paper it's written on. Regardless, I don't really care about the AMA insurance since it is secondary / tertiary to my home owners and my Personal Umbrella Policy ; I didn't join AMA because I needed insurance, I joined it because I needed access to flying fields, and that's extremely hard to do around here without having AMA membership. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
I have submitted a question to the AMA Support Center to clarify this issue, but it sounds like I won't be flying my jet until I get the waiver (except on Buddy Box)...
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: JustABigKid Jason, do you mean that if I fly a turbine at an unchartered field without a waiver, and have an accident, that the AMA would drop my insurance altogether? I understand that they wouldn't cover the turbine accident, but I don't understand what you mean by "flying a turbine without a waiver is not allowed anywhere". Would the AMA refuse me a future waiver or membership? |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: JustABigKid Jason, do you mean that if I fly a turbine at an unchartered field without a waiver, and have an accident, that the AMA would drop my insurance altogether? I understand that they wouldn't cover the turbine accident, but I don't understand what you mean by "flying a turbine without a waiver is not allowed anywhere". Would the AMA refuse me a future waiver or membership? Just think about how many club facilities, events., etc you may lose out on in future (for ALL RC models, not just turbines) if the AMA decided to make an example of you by declining future membership. Gordon JasonP |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: JustABigKid I have submitted a question to the AMA Support Center to clarify this issue, but it sounds like I won't be flying my jet until I get the waiver (except on Buddy Box)... e.g see http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_35...tm.htm#3864227 … I got an answer from the AMA saying that you CAN temporarily OPT out of their insurance ; within a few days I got a second answer stating that the original answer was wrong |
RE: Waiver question
Exactly what I find frustrating in general about our legal system - any question regarding an exact interpretation of the law gets a response of "it depends" from lawyers... [sm=cry_smile.gif] Sorry, off topic... :D ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: JustABigKid I have submitted a question to the AMA Support Center to clarify this issue, but it sounds like I won't be flying my jet until I get the waiver (except on Buddy Box)... |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober This is what I had meant Gordon, AMA is only insurance. If the State or City ordinances that oversee the facilty are ok with it then anyone can fly there without a turbine waiver. I would like to see the AMA try and stop someone from doing this. Bravado on the forum is easy ... let's see it done for real ;) Gordon I see no reason to call the AMA and tell them you are going to fly a 100lb plane, I think most of us know they will tell you what they feel is in their best interest. Also I think we all know if it can be proven that we were not abiding by the safety code the AMA does not have to pay any claim we may submit. But on the otherhand what ever we fly while we are at a non AMA site the AMA has no way to control that. |
RE: Waiver question
the AMA has no way to control that. Jason P |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober This is what I had meant Gordon, AMA is only insurance. If the State or City ordinances that oversee the facilty are ok with it then anyone can fly there without a turbine waiver. I would like to see the AMA try and stop someone from doing this. Bravado on the forum is easy ... let's see it done for real ;) Gordon Come on Gordon, your being ridiculous. How about for something a little more "common". How about for a 18lb. model doing 150 mph? |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: ianober ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober This is what I had meant Gordon, AMA is only insurance. If the State or City ordinances that oversee the facilty are ok with it then anyone can fly there without a turbine waiver. I would like to see the AMA try and stop someone from doing this. Bravado on the forum is easy ... let's see it done for real ;) Gordon Come on Gordon, your being ridiculous. How about for something a little more "common". How about for a 18lb. model doing 150 mph? Uhh.... hello.... It has nothing to do with "common" - the whole point here is to see what the AMA's position is on someone deliberately busting the rules and claiming that "it's OK coz I wasn't at an AMA chartered club's site. Flying unwaivered without a buddy-box is busting the rules ; 100 lbs is busting the rules ; 300 mph is busting the rules, etc. Unless your position is that the AMA is OK with you busting one rule at a time, but not two simultaneously, then surely the optimum way to test the theory is to get their attention by telling them you're going to bust several rules at the same time... ? Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
Gordon
Non AMA event Non AMA Facility What part of NON do you not understand?? |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: ira d I think we all know if it can be proven that we were not abiding by the safety code the AMA does not have to pay any claim we may submit. But on the otherhand what ever we fly while we are at a non AMA site the AMA has no way to control that. BTW, don’t confuse the message with the messenger. What I am relating here is my experience of the topic based on numerous consultations I’ve had with the AMA, NOT how I’d like the insurance etc to work. Personally, I’d love for us to be able to “opt out” of AMA insurance at will, ratehr than dealing with the way the system is set up right now. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
AMA insurance is no different than any other insurance out there. If you don't follow their rules they won't cover your claim, simple as that. As far as them banning you for life from their coverage and all that other nonsense spread in this forum, they would have to have grounds for that sort of thing, not just hearsay evidence. So fly to your hearts content on your own property and burn the whole place to the ground if it tickles your fancy, the AMA can't do a thing about it and would care even less.
|
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: pattratt Gordon Non AMA event Non AMA Facility What part of NON do you not understand?? Do you think that all AMA members fly only at AMA chartered club sites, or at AMA sanctioned events ? If so, you are seriously mistaken. Many AMA members do not belong to any club, and consequently the AMA insurance is set up to cover you regardless of where you are flying. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
One thing that has not been mentioned. Any crash especially one causing a fire may put the future use of any field in jeapordy. The owner, be it the city, county, or Corp. may chose to close the field if they see it as causing a danger to the public or it's property. This may be even more true if they determine that the flyer wasn't qualified or didn't hold certain credentials within the organizations who might govern him, such as the AMA.
|
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober This is what I had meant Gordon, AMA is only insurance. If the State or City ordinances that oversee the facilty are ok with it then anyone can fly there without a turbine waiver. I would like to see the AMA try and stop someone from doing this. Bravado on the forum is easy ... let's see it done for real ;) Gordon Come on Gordon, your being ridiculous. How about for something a little more "common". How about for a 18lb. model doing 150 mph? Uhh.... hello.... It has nothing to do with "common" - the whole point here is to see what the AMA's position is on someone deliberately busting the rules and claiming that "it's OK coz I wasn't at an AMA chartered club's site. Flying unwaivered without a buddy-box is busting the rules ; 100 lbs is busting the rules ; 300 mph is busting the rules, etc. Unless your position is that the AMA is OK with you busting one rule at a time, but not two simultaneously, then surely the optimum way to test the theory is to get their attention by telling them you're going to bust several rules at the same time... ? Gordon So then why doesn't the AMA require all Turbine sales to require a waiver? Thats where it can only be regulated to some degree. If I lived in BFE and put in an field in my backyard on MY 200 acres or whatever, I would be pretty pissed of the AMA said that I couldn't fly turbines there without their permission. They cant do that!!! Bottom line, AMA is there for protection and minor regulation, not enforcement of flying everywhere. Thats all I was saying. |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: ianober ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc ORIGINAL: ianober This is what I had meant Gordon, AMA is only insurance. If the State or City ordinances that oversee the facilty are ok with it then anyone can fly there without a turbine waiver. I would like to see the AMA try and stop someone from doing this. Bravado on the forum is easy ... let's see it done for real ;) Gordon Come on Gordon, your being ridiculous. How about for something a little more "common". How about for a 18lb. model doing 150 mph? Uhh.... hello.... It has nothing to do with "common" - the whole point here is to see what the AMA's position is on someone deliberately busting the rules and claiming that "it's OK coz I wasn't at an AMA chartered club's site. Flying unwaivered without a buddy-box is busting the rules ; 100 lbs is busting the rules ; 300 mph is busting the rules, etc. Unless your position is that the AMA is OK with you busting one rule at a time, but not two simultaneously, then surely the optimum way to test the theory is to get their attention by telling them you're going to bust several rules at the same time... ? Gordon So then why doesn't the AMA require all Turbine sales to require a waiver? Thats where it can only be regulated to some degree. If I lived in BFE and put in an field in my backyard on MY 200 acres or whatever, I would be pretty pissed of the AMA said that I couldn't fly turbines there without their permission. They cant do that!!! Bottom line, AMA is there for protection and minor regulation, not enforcement of flying everywhere. Thats all I was saying. Once you ARE an AMA member, that changes and the AMA does have something to hold over your head. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
Gordon
Please do not take this personally but your statements are going well beyond just being a "Messenger!" <<Which part of the AMA insurance do you not understand ?>> The part where you claim they can take "punitive action" against me or my AMA membership as a result of my flying a turbine aircraft without a waiver at a non AMA flying facility, holding a non sanctioned AMA event with a non AMA approved weight and or non AMA approved power to weight ratio size and speed. <<Do you think that all AMA members fly only at AMA chartered club sites, or at AMA sanctioned events ? If so, you are seriously mistaken.>> That was "NOT" what the discussion was about and you know it!! <<Many AMA members do not belong to any club, and consequently the AMA insurance is set up to cover you regardless of where you are flying. >> This is true only if you abide by their Waiver system and saftey rules that govern Turbine activities with the EXPECTATION of having THEIR insurance! The example here was focused on those individuals who were NOT going to abide by those rules, were not going to be flying at a AMA sanctioned event or site, and were NOT EXPECTING to be covered by the AMA insurance in the event of an accident. |
RE: Waiver question
It is unreasonable IMO for the AMA or anyone else to think just because
you are a AMA member you cant fly certain types of models when not at a AMA chartered site. IMO I dont think the AMA cares what you do as long as you dont file a claim with them if you arent supposed to. As far as them being dragged into a suit seems like it would be a easy case to beat if they could show the AMA member was operating outside the safety code especially if the member admitted to such. |
RE: Waiver question
I have been flying turbines for almost 5 years now. and I have my AMA turine waiver. most of the fields i fly my turine at are NOT AMA fields. but we stll play by the rules. we used the buddy box when i was first learning how to fly turbines.
Since I am an AMA member, i am covered anywhere I fly as long as I follow their rules. each member of AMA has their own policy, so where ever you fly and are flying within AMA rules you are covered. ( this goes for AMA and NON AMA fields). now, if you want to fly at a NON AMA field with your turbine, with out a waiver, AMA will NOT help you towards any mishaps you may have. just make sure you have homeowners. It is very simple, you want AMA insurance? then you have to play by their rules. Mark |
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: pattratt <<Which part of the AMA insurance do you not understand ?>> The part where you claim they can take "punitive action" against me or my AMA membership as a result of my flying a turbine aircraft without a waiver at a non AMA flying facility, holding a non sanctioned AMA event with a non AMA approved weight and or non AMA approved power to weight ratio size and speed. <<Do you think that all AMA members fly only at AMA chartered club sites, or at AMA sanctioned events ? If so, you are seriously mistaken.>> That was "NOT" what the discussion was about and you know it!! <<Many AMA members do not belong to any club, and consequently the AMA insurance is set up to cover you regardless of where you are flying. >> This is true only if you abide by their Waiver system and saftey rules that govern Turbine activities with the EXPECTATION of having THEIR insurance! The example here was focused on those individuals who were NOT going to abide by those rules, were not going to be flying at a AMA sanctioned event or site, and were NOT EXPECTING to be covered by the AMA insurance in the event of an accident. Gordon FYI, I enclose a sample email from Carl on this subject: The only change I have made to it, is to set bold on two sentences to highlight them below From: Carl Maroney Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 2:12 PM To: Gordon McConnell Cc: Joyce Hager Subject: RE: Insurance Question Just so there is no misunderstanding, the policy does not specifically exclude coverage for any willful violation of the safety code. The "intentional acts" exclusion may come into play if the violation is willful, reckless disregard to the point of almost assuring an accident. We do not want to exclude any and all safety code violations since some are minor and do not deserve denial of coverage. The opt out term is certainly open to your definition. We are reluctant to use the term since it implies that if an AMA member "ops out" they are free to fly in any manner they choose. We said earlier, insurance is not about safety, and safety is not about insurance. There is never an acceptable excuse for an AMA member to intentionally and recklessly disregard the safety code on the basis that they opted out of AMA insurance coverage. Any member acting in that manner should be suspended or expelled, not just suffer temporary lapse of AMA insurance during the violation period. Reckless disregard for safety should never be tolerated by the club, safety officer or other AMA members. If a serious accident occurs it is much more than a matter of insurance, it is about the image of Aeromodeling and the AMA members who participate in Aeromodeling. In the sense that participating in an event that is conducted in violation of the safety code or other AMA rules is opting out, we agree that to do so would have the effect of opting out, except that in some instances the opting out may apply only to individual members and not the group as a whole. The policy definition of "aircraft" excludes UAVs unless a special waiver is granted by AMA, and that waiver is granted only for educational research purposes to accredited educational institutions upon application to AMA. And even then, the educational institution has to provide evidence of insurance coverage, so AMA insurance is only secondary, at best. AMA and MAAC have an agreement that when AMA members fly in Canada, even if they have joined MAAC, they must fly by the AMA safety code. However, as in the US, violation of the safety code in itself does not necessarily mean no AMA coverage. The earlier examples you provide were willful and reckless disregard for safety. That may bring the action within the intentional acts exclusion. Whether the safety code violation is sufficient to result in denial of coverage can only be determined after an accident occurs and the insurer conducts a claim investigation. While this may seem confusing, we and the insurer, at our request, want to have some flexibility in determining if the violation, or any other aspect of the activity, is reckless and dangerous to the point that denial is justified. The simple answer is: If the member wants to be assured of AMA coverage (subject to the standard policy exclusion and limitations) then all flying should comply with the AMA safety code. If the member chooses to violate the code, AMA insurance may or may not cover the member for potential liability. Unfortunately we cannot make it black and white, it depends on the facts of any given accident.. In summary, regardless of the insurance coverage issues, we cannot condone, and clubs and other AMA members should not tolerate, willful and reckless disregard of the AMA National Safety Code. We hope that such actions will be reported to AMA and that the members engaging in such activity realize they may be subject to membership suspension and possible expulsion. Carl P. Maroney Special Services Director |
RE: Waiver question
This was a good topic. I would like to thank all of you for the inpute. The last question is this: I must have 5 supervised solo flights with a waiver holder and some buddy box work according to AMA. How many of you guys meet this requirement? if you do not then you will not be covered by AMA right??? Would anybody like to come to Savannah Georgia and fly with me. I should let you know that I have been flying for 18 years and I have 15gal of Jet-A through my Babby Boomer so I hope I will not scare you on the Buddy Box!!!!! LOL
|
RE: Waiver question
ORIGINAL: chipperg This was a good topic. I would like to thank all of you for the inpute. The last question is this: I must have 5 supervised solo flights with a waiver holder and some buddy box work according to AMA. Gordon |
RE: Waiver question
So what if you fly a turbine at a private area with no AMA and no waiver? Let the fur flying begin.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:10 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.