Tim, Well thought out points. No flame suit necessary. I appreciate you and others sharing your insights.
One very minor correction to your note. The AMA says we should not fly over 400' AGL "within 3 miles of an airport", not just anywhere. I would venture to guess that we in the sailplane community would have the same or less representation in the "new AMA" you envision, then we have now. Why? Sheer numbers. Only the AMA knows how many people check off "soaring" as their primary interest each year on their AMA membership renewals. My guess is that it's about 2-5% of the total membership. My guess is based on magazine ad coverage, vendor product mixes, and club availability for soaring activities. We would have representation that understands sailplanes and who we are. After all, this rep. would be some kind of sailplane pilot, I presume. But that rep. would have a very small % of any vote. Again my guess would be 5%. The ~70% "sport power flyer", who pays his dues just to belong to a club which has a field, would dominate the AMA's agendas. Very small groups, (ala any FAI task) would have virtually no voice, unless the collective leadership thought it important that the USA have FAI teams, and fund them. Regardless of how the AMA is governed, IMHO the "vision of the AMA" had better change fast, just to remain relevant. The fast growing segment of small electrics is creating large numbers of pilots who have no need of a large field, and frankly, no need for the AMA. Much like a lot of slope flyers, and RC car drivers. Note, I did not say these pilots are any less disciplined or frequency aware than the average AMA pilot. I personally know of an informal group of pilots who only fly small electrics. They are more active and getting larger than the long established AMA soaring club I belong to. Many, but not all are AMA members. They are not an official AMA club. They are sport flyers, responsible, and a great bunch of guys. But they don't need the AMA, as they can fly on any 2-3 acres of open land. I wish I could offer a "better vision" for the future of the AMA. Frankly, I cannot. There is already a pressure within the AMA for different membership fees, based on percieved liability. Think jets, vs. DLG's. Dave Brown brought this up in the magazine sometime in the past year. No way the "small electric" flyers will join the AMA if all they do is fly 10-20 oz planes in school ballfields and neighborhood parks. Yet their numbers are tremendous. Yes the existing establishment within the AMA wouldn't stand for that kind of change. Perhaps, eventually, we may come to the state the Brits are in, as David Alchin pointed out. The BARCS, a separate umbrella organization just for soaring. But that's a "different can of worms". :) I can't say wether a large umbrella (present AMA) or many small umbrellas would "better" the respective members of each. Jon Stone RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
