mongo

My Feedback: (15)

the new issue of "ground control" has an article, suggestions, for integrating commercial operators/operations at your recreational field/site.

franklin_m

Can you post a link and/or a copy of the article?

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

ground control is only up on site through october 2017.
there is a link to an ama blog post about comercial wants to use our field on the modelaircraft.org main page. not sure if it is exactly the same, as i only skimmed it, but similar.

Stickslammer

I went to the AMA site and read about it. As far as "blurring the lines", the only line I see is the one drawn in the sand between "us" and "them" I personally feel that there should not be a line drawn. Like it or not, it looks as though commercial use of UAVs is on the rise and we are just going to have to figure out a way to cooperate. It may lead to new opportunities for some. I`ve never flown a multirotor, but I`d like to try it out. I can`t think of anyone who wouldn`t want to fly R/C and get paid for it. I`m just your Average Joe Recreational Sport Flyer, but the world of R/C in it`s many forms holds an exciting future for us all.

init4fun

So would you now like to explain , exactly , how our 501c HOBBY based organization is gonna keep our tax exempt status in this "brave new world" of COMMERCIALLY flown RC ?

What people who say the things you say are missing , is that the only "lines in the sand" are the ones between HOBBY and COMMERCIAL use of remote control flying devices , and those of us on the HOBBY side want no part in the COMMERCIAL side . WE who built the AMA as a HOBBY based organization want it to STAY THAT WAY , no matter how far the EC goes in pandering to to allmighty COMMERCIAL Dollar . Will there be boatloads of cash for commercial operators ? Of course there will ! Should there be boatloads of cash and human benefit from commercial RC operations that will become more frequent as time passes , HELL YEA I'm all for things like commercially operated search & rescue drones and so fourth ! But ! , , SHOULD we hobbyists be unwillingly cast aside by our own HOBBY based organization in the "Space Race" of this brave new commercial RC world ?

Maybe you haven't yet seen my poll thread ; "Should the AMA go commercial or die" ..........

Hydro Junkie

Stickslammer,
I will be the first to agree with Init4fun's last post. I personally have nothing at stake since I'm not a member but, that being said, any time something commercial is brought into something that's never been so, the activity fails. The commercial interests don't work well with hobby and fun since the commercial interests are there to make money while the hobby side is there for the fun of it. As far as I'm concerned, the EC has lost track of what the AMA actually was created to do and what it stands for. When the AMA starts lobbying for commercial interests, the hobbyists are going to lose their representation and that's against the AMA's best interests, regardless what the EC thinks

rcmiket

Non-recreational pilots want to practice at our field. Now what? | AMA Clubs Blog

Mike

Stickslammer

Since I`m not one of the "Big Cheese" at the AMA, there`s no way I could explain how they are going to keep their tax exempt status. I guess what I mean is that on a club member level, if some commercial outfit wants to use our flying site for practice, than we should be able to accommodate them. In the bigger picture, I did read your thread and my feeling is that if the AMA doesn`t go commercial, they will die. Be it from whatever reason. Maybe because they have lost their way. Since I don`t want to be a poster of mis-informed commentary, I will go back and re-read your thread since there has probably been more input.

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

I might be wrong (usually am!), but in the AMA Blog it states: " The commercial entity should obtain and carry its own insurance coverage. " They therefore can use the club field - right? (with the club's permission I would guess)

If that club "requires AMA insurance/membership" how can they let 'em do that? It is no different if a NON-AMA member has their own insurance coverage - but they can't fly because they lack the "requires AMA insurance/membership"????

I'm confused.....

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

good point there, tailskid.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Just another poorly thought out, knee-jerk, romancing of the drones statement put out by out fearless leaders........

Regards,

Astro

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

Not sure of the logistics of how its done but Lockheed has been doing this for years with their SAE Aerodesign competition. Once a year universities from countries all over the world gather to compete at an east and west AMA rc field. I have been a pilot for a Canadian team for 8 years and the only requirement is that you must be a member in good standing of your country of origins hobby organization. As far as I know Lockheed provides the insurance coverage.

http://students.sae.org/cds/aerodesign/east/

http://students.sae.org/cds/aerodesign/west/

Dennis

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

The SAE aerodesign competition is a great program! It fits in nicely with the AMA Mission statement to further aero modeling. It is NOT a commercial venture, therefore it is a good fit. Any club that has an opportunity to host a SAE aerodesign team should do it!

Regards,

Astro

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

It is by definition a commercial venture.

It is not open to hobbyists in fact students that participate in the hobby have to be careful they are not challenged as ringers and disqualified.

The competition is part of the curriculum at the university/collage level.

Other than the pilots having to be members of their home flying association as qualification to be pilot in command there is no promotion to further aero modeling. The pilots are the only ones on the team with any connection to aero modeling. They are usually recruited by the team for their skill set and unless they are enrolled in the school program as a student they are not allowed to participate in the design or construction of the project. The aircraft are not models of any kind but are miniature aircraft created for specific design requirements. Lifting weight, landing and take off within a restricted distance, limited or specified material lists and restricted engine/motor sizes and outputs.

In the many years I have been involved I cannot remember one student that has gone on to become involved in aero modeling after the competition ends. It is simply one of the requirements to graduate and once complete its time to move on to the next challenge.

Dennis

jester_s1

The concern about the AMA's tax exempt status is unfounded. Many NPOs serve people who make a profit. The NRA, for example, lobbies for hobby shooters and also thousands of gun related businesses and professionals. Nurses, doctors, teachers, lawyers, and many other professions have NPOs that coordinate and advocate for their interests. What makes the AMA an NPO is not that it only represents hobbyists. It's that it puts all its profit back into development of the organization's mission instead of distributing it to shareholders or owners.

Hydro Junkie

Jester, how is the planned blowing of a stack of cash on an indoor facility that has no mission statement or thought out usage, other than making it available to rent out by non-flyers, putting it's profit into the organizations mission?

rcmiket

Since this seems to be a "pet project" of one if not more of the EC council members they don't need to think things though or have a plan. Remember they know more than we the paying membership do and can't be bothered with pesky little details like how to pay to maintain it.

Mike

franklin_m

Based on this curve, it appears that the amount of "profit" to put back into development is declining....

jester_s1

I didn't say the AMA is making all the best decisions with dues money. I said they are putting the money back into the organization rather than distributing it to shareholders or owners. That makes the AMA an non-profit organization which it will continue to be as long as that requirement is met. Whether or not they are making the best choices to advance the organization is another conversation entirely.

franklin_m

No worries. I'm one of those "follow the money" kind of guys. I just did an analysis of their 2015 IRS 990, and staff costs, Model Aviation Magazine, and "other expenses" account for 60% of all AMA's expenses. Just two items, staff costs and the magazine, amount to almost half, 48%, of all AMA expenses. Staff alone represents 24.8% of all AMA expenses, the single most expensive item.

Hydro Junkie

Okay, I can deal with that and the fact you agree that the AMA EC is not the most fiscally responsible group around.

jester_s1

franklin m- That's actually pretty good as NPO's go. Personnel is usually the largest budget item from what I've seen, a much bigger chunk than 25%. It makes sense; we essentially are paying the AMA to work for our interests, and it takes people to do that. That's not so bad for the magazine either, about on par with what a subscription to any other special interest magazine would cost.
I personally am impressed with what the AMA can do with the money it collects from us. I don't think anybody in Muncie is getting rich, and they have historically done a pretty good job of organizing and developing the hobby. I couldn't care less about the national flying site, but the fact that NATS exists creates benefits that trickle down to me in the form of innovative aircraft designs and radios, piloting techniques, and a culture of competition that I do like to participate in at the local level. I appreciate that the AMA has lobbied for our interests in congress. No, they didn't get us everything we wanted (which was nothing!) but at the same time a $5 fee every 3 years and the requirement to put a number on our planes is a lot better than FAA registration and regulation could have been. They spent a lot of money on that, and succeeded in getting the FAA to hear our viewpoint and make compromises that let us carry on with what we do unencumbered. As for the current complaints about drones, the RC hobby is growing faster in that area than in any other by several orders of magnitude. Flying things with cameras and stability systems are here to stay, and they've created a new problem/opportunity for the AMA they've never had before. It's still too early to say if drones are going to be a part of this hobby or a separate hobby altogether. But if the AMA can get it right they do represent the best opportunity in decades to gain new members and bring energy into this gentrifying community of hobbyists. I don't agree with all the AMA's decisions regarding drones, but I applaud them for trying to incorporate them into the "family" that has, traditionally, been very inclusive when it comes to new flying toy technology. I think the AMA gets it right a lot more often than not, and so there is something to be said for keeping an open mind and appreciating people who are honestly working to create a good future, right or wrong.

init4fun

I will try to state this as simply as possible , because it seems that some people still miss the big picture ;

What folks are discussing here is NOT an us VS them WRT hobby use of drones/flying cameras . Yes , WE GET IT , the hobby use of drones/FPV is the fastest growing segment of the hobby and those who want to hobby fly any kinds of FPV should be made welcome provided they follow every aspect of AMA doc 550 , and yes that DOES include obeying the spotter's LOS requirement !

But that's not it , and it's not how great the AMA is or has been in the past , it's about how the AMA appears Hellbent on becoming a presence in the COMMERCIAL operations of these devices , and sorry to any and all AMA apologists , but there is a whole UNIVERSE between HOBBY and COMMERCIAL use of our shared technology . The AMA OWES IT to every hobbyist who BUILT IT to remain firmly in the HOBBY arena of operations and to leave the COMMERCIAL side to a NON HOBBY entity .

So simple even Geico's Caveman can understand it ......

Now , any further "misunderstandings" here will have to be deemed as deliberate

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I don't get it, flying drones is flying drones, right?

JUST KIDDING!!!!!! (I couldn't help myself, cabin fever is setting in!)

Astro

init4fun

Yep , pretty much what the quote below appears to be based on . Gee , I guess we should be honored that our hobby organization has such high goals as to become a player in the commercial arena , and us hobbyists can just go fend for ourselves , right ?