Modeling Spoken Here
Bob Hunt — Aeromodeling Editor
"If a club wants to find a new flying site, it will."
In this issue's "Letters to the Editor" section is a submission from AMA member Ralph Cooke. In that letter Ralph raises a few interesting questions about flying sites, their loss, and what could and should be done to prevent such losses.
His letter references a recent column by D.B. Mathews ("Flying for Fun," April 2004) in which D.B. lamented the loss of flying fields and gave some personal thoughts on the subject. If you have not yet read that column by D.B. Mathews, do so now, and also read Mr. Cooke's letter in this month's "Letters to the Editor" before proceeding.
It turns out that much of what D.B. Mathews, Ralph Cooke, and many others have perceived is not what is really happening concerning flying-site acquisition and retention. AMA's director of publications, Rob Kurek, passed Mr. Cooke's letter to Programs Director Jay Mealy, who is responsible in large part for AMA's flying-site program. I must admit that I had similar feelings to Mr. Cooke's and D.B. Mathews' until I read the following that Jay wrote. We should never assume we know something until we have all the facts. Take it away, Jay!
Response from Jay Mealy (AMA Programs Director)
In response to your e-mail dated March 2, 2004, addressed to Rob Kurek, I have been asked to share with you the flying-site situation as it exists nationally.
Before we begin I must point out that in the April 2004 column you reference, there were two statements that were not exactly correct.
- Mr. D.B. Mathews states, "In spite of AMA's considerable efforts in helping local groups retain and/or find flying sites, the total number and the convenience continues to decline."
- I can't address his reference to convenience declining because I am not sure what he means by "convenience." However, stating that the number of flying sites is declining is not accurate. In the previous 18 months the AMA has increased the number of chartered clubs by almost 100, from 2,505 to 2,600. This is not just a sudden increase. We have been steadily increasing that number over the past several years.
- The phrase "flying-site dilemma" is not an accurate description of the current flying-site status based again upon the above-mentioned numbers.
So let's address your concerns, Mr. Cooke.
Working in the area of flying-site acquisition and maintenance on a daily basis, I am seldom, if ever, questioned by landowners—whether national, state, local, or private—about the liability exposure created by Control Line models. In fact, from a frequency standpoint, Control Line flying generates fewer insurance claims than any other aspect of our sport except for Indoor.
On the other hand, I am always fielding questions concerning Radio Control activities and liability from landowners who unknowingly perceive RC as "dangerous." I truly have seen no evidence of liability issues being a deterrent to acquiring or keeping Control Line flying sites.
We currently list 75 clubs that are exclusively Control Line (CL) clubs, with flying sites, with many more Control Line facilities being available at the 296 multiple-use (MU) flying sites we list. A great number of these sites date back many years and are well established in their communities.
As for the number of Control Line and Free Flight participants decreasing, the only gauge I have would be what I see at the annual AMA Nats and, according to those records, FF and CL participation has been on the increase since the Nats has been held yearly at the International Aeromodeling Center. Granted, the years that the CL World Championships is held there is a decrease in CL participation, but that has always been a factor due to the close proximity of the dates of both events. Of course, 2004 will find the CL World Championships in Muncie, and I can tell you we are expecting the largest turnout of contestants ever with the United States being well represented.
Please understand, I have answered your concerns from an overall perspective, or, as I stated earlier, a national level. I do fully sympathize with everyone at a local level when they lose a flying site. It is a dilemma and can be very devastating for the club and its members.
Loss of flying sites is not decreasing our membership or level of participation, but it can have some temporary effects locally. This is the reason the Academy provides the resources to assist with getting and keeping flying sites, from personal and experienced assistance from Joe Beshar and Wes DeCou, AMA’s flying site assistance coordinators, to videos and literature that can be used during club presentations and functions, and everything in between.
Our members simply have to contact us and ask for help. We will work with you to solve the problem, and our track record is quite good. We usually fail if we aren’t involved, and we can’t be involved if we aren’t asked to be.
I must tell you, the single biggest factor in determining the success or failure of a club, its flying site, and/or its existence is its members. Anything the members want to happen will happen and vice versa.
Never have I experienced more appropriate use of the old saying "where there is a will, there is a way" than when dealing with clubs and their flying-site concerns. If a club wants to find a new flying site, it will. If it wants to interest young people in its sport, it will. If it wants to survive, it will.
To better understand what successful clubs are doing to maintain their flying sites and entrench themselves in their communities, please review the "Flying Site Assistance" columns in the January issue of Model Aviation, page 164, and the March issue, page 163.
I hope this note has provided you with more useful information, and should you have further questions, please contact us directly.
Editorial note
We decided to print Jay’s response in this column to underscore just how seriously we take the subject of finding and keeping flying sites, and to show that perception is usually not reality.
Mr. Cooke’s letter was just one of many that we receive that show us that the average member may not be aware of what services AMA performs, what the actual circumstances are in relation to flying-site status, and what he or she can do to help the already substantial growth of AMA and help gain new sites.
As I mentioned earlier, I had similar feelings to those that D.B. Mathews expressed in his April "Flying for Fun" column and to those conveyed by Ralph Cooke. Jay’s response reminded me to ask and become informed before going off in any direction with the wrong information. That’s probably a good idea for all of us to think about. I’d like to personally thank Jay for taking the time to explain the preceding.
Our "From the Ground Up" series will be taking a two-month sabbatical but will return in the August issue. There were a few things in the "Engines 101" installment of that series that required some correction and some explanation, and Frank Granelli is hard at work accomplishing that now. We know how popular that series has become, and we want to get it back on track as soon as possible.
I can be reached by mail at:
- Box 68, Stockertown, PA 18083
- Phone: (610) 614-1747
- E-mail: [email protected]
Model Aviation
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
