IMAA Petition

I just went to the IMAA web site and read the petition: *************** 12) Motion by Tom Hammer second by Don Pemberton Motion is made to: Petition
the AMA to refrain from sanctioning Big Bird events. Petition the AMA from using the IMAA rules in sanctioning events that should be the sole property of the IMAA.
Reason: Increase the desirability of the IMAA as a sanctioning body. The IMAA was founded because of a need for someone to develop and foster Big RC Aircraft when no other sanction body wanted to do the job. Now that the IMAA has successfully developed the Big Bird concept into the biggest special interest group the AMA without regard for the IMAA sanctions IMAA clone events removing the basic reason for the existence for the IMAA. Note that the AMA doesn’t do this to other SIG’s such as the IMAC. *************** IMAA sanctioned events are down 13% from last year. This proposal is an ill-disguised attempt to make the IMAA the only body able to hold a "giant scale/big bird" event. It will artificially boost the number of sanctioned events since the IMAA will be the only body able to run a giant event. Why is the IMAA a "desireable" sanctioning body over the AMA? Don't worry, folks, the AMA will never go for it. If this proposal is accepted, it will do nothing more than serve to further kill interest in giant scale. I've always had a problem with the "IMAA members only" restriction, and this is just BS, MS, and PHD. (Bull Sh*t, More Sh*t, Piled Higher and Deeper". I believe large planes and large plane events were in existence long before the IMAA came into being, and now the IMAA thinks they are the only body who knows what the sport, and giant-scalers, want amd need. Hooey! OK, the AMA is prevented from using IMAA rules. What if the AMA prevented the IMAA from using AMA rules? Chaos! Silly boys, the intent or effect of a rule cannot be copyrighted, only the format and/or actual wording. If this petition is passed, the IMAA will quickly go the way of the late, unlamented SFA.
Incidently, Tom and Don seem to be the ones making the majority of petitions and amendment proposals. Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Petition
property of

IMAA
Aircraft
interest
removing
do
sanctioned
Why is

folks, the

nothing
a
and
planes
being,
and
IMAA
Silly
format
go
petitions
When the IMAA events were open they were growing. They became elitist and that changed. Membership used to be over 12,000 and today is below 8,000. I think they are ALREADY headed into extinction and are just using this petition as an attempt to get more AMA members to pay for the IMAA BOD winter vacations to Orlando they call "Board Meetings". However, when the IMAA started the big bird was a rarity rather than the humdrum every day model the ARF has made it.
Just my singed on the edges from the flames opinion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I wonder if its time for a independent giant scale magazine to come back to the marketplace?
Norm Goyers doing "Custom Planes" for the full scale crowd now.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not so sure of that because giant scale isn't so different from the rest of the hobby anymore. I like the "idea" also, but let's face it, ALL of the current magazines (even RCReport who said at one time that they would never review a product worth over $300 or something like that) now has their Giant columns. I think a giant only magazine would fail for the same reason that the IMAA is no longer relevant anymore, and that is because giant scale really isn' t "different" anymore. It's just a part of the large RC family, and giant scale issues, topics, and product reviews and advertising are easily incorporated into "ordinary" RC magazines. Look at HighFlight: If any giant-only magazine had a chance to succeed, it was HighFlight because it's readership is a captive audience. But look at the magazine itself; by anyone's "standard" of magazines, it's a piece of junk and always was from the very beginning. It's nothing more than a multipage newsletter, and the articles giant scalers might consider really interesting are few and far between. It's mostly a bunch of chapter reports to fill space. The only useful feature it EVER offered was to provide inexpensive advertising space for small volume (home based hobbiest) companies to show us the giant-specific products they offered. But HighFlight (the IMAA) screwed THAT up a while back when they hiked their ad rates beyond the reach of just those kind of companies. So while I can guarantee you that I would be one of the first subscribers to a giant-specific magazine, I can't guarantee you that it would hold my interest, beyond what I can get in other RC magazines, enough for me to renew after the first year.
MJC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 17 Jan 2004 13:26:35 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Dr1Driver) wrote:

<SNIP>
Haven't been paying very close attention to the issue of IMAA sanctions, have you ?
Hammer is only about two years behind the times with respect to previous political machinations which attempted to kill IMAA sanctions.
Go read the AMA Executive Council minutes for July 2001, February 2002, May 2002, and July 2002.
While you're there, see who was at the forefront of trying to dispense with IMAA altogether, and then try to fathom why.
As for IMAA restricting events to IMAA members, big deal.
Can't afford twenty bucks a year and you have a giant scale IMAA-legal model ? What's wrong with _that_ picture ?
Drag your giant scale model to an IMAC or USRA event. I'm sure those organizations will let you play without joining.
Don't like what's going on in IMAA ?
Did you _vote_ in the last IMAA election ?
Cheers, Fred McClellan The House Of Balsa Dust http://home.mindspring.com/~the-plumber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, I try to have faith in the leaders. Looks like I'll have to start watching more closely.

Can do.

I can, and I do, simply to be able to fly in the majority of "giant scale" events in my area. The IMAA has done nothing fror me that the AMA couldn't do
.>Drag your giant scale model to an IMAC or USRA event.
I have no desire to enter those types of events. I'm not in competition, just flying.

No.
Yes, and I will in the next, too.
No one in his right mind wants the IMAA to be the only body able to sanction "giant scale" events, or to be forced to join the IMAA to fly in same. This petition is simply a poorly disquised effort to boost IMAA event sanctions, memberships, and (bottom line) revenues. Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 17 Jan 2004 23:20:13 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Dr1Driver) wrote:

Not disguised at all.
The item plainly states the objective - "Reason: Increase the desirability of the IMAA as a sanctioning body. The IMAA was founded because of a need for someone to develop and foster Big RC Aircraft when no other sanction body wanted to do the job. Now that the IMAA has successfully developed the Big Bird concept into the biggest special interest group the AMA without regard for the IMAA sanctions IMAA clone events removing the basic reason for the existence for the IMAA. Note that the AMA doesnt do this to other SIGs such as the IMAC. "
That last sentence is a bit telling, don'tcha think ?
Cheers, Fred McClellan The House Of Balsa Dust http://home.mindspring.com/~the-plumber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think the key point here is that the IMAA is the ONLY Sig that dictates you must be an IMAA member to fly in IMAA/AMA sanctioned meets. Does IMAC, SAM, NFFS, LSF, VRCS . . .etc. require membership to fly in meets they sanction via the AMA? I think not.
Red S. AMA 951, IMAA 18939

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, Red, but none of those SIGs are adequately professional so as to provide their own Sanction service. None have their own coordinators, they simply let AMA (someone else) do that.
As far as I know only PAMPA (CL Stunt) and IMAA publish their own magazine. IMMA reserves a significant amount of their mag for the membership, i.e. Chapter Reports.
I belonged to SEVEN (7) SIGs up until the first of '03, simply to support their existence. Only PAMPA and IMAA provided a magazine. Others provide simply somewhat of a newsletter, except the RCCA which has a column in RC Excellence.
IMAC is POed about the tail touch, JPO is POed about the DB overriding the EC's vote for the new rules. RS is POed about the members retaining JM as a VP.
IF YOU GUYS DON'T LEARN TO MASS YOUR FORCES AT THE LOWEST LEVELS, YOU DON'T STAND A SNOWBIRD'S CHANCE IN _ELL OF GETTING ANY VOTES-YOUR-WAY IN THE AMA ELECTIONS.
The EC knows all too well the secret of winning: DIVIDE AND CONQUER. You people who let personal desires override common sense and common effort are the reasons that AMA is not on a great surge with people like F. Tiano as Pres., myself as EVP and your bud already in the D-5 slot.
SUPPORT EACH OTHER or you ain't seen nothin' yet for what is planned in the future, like random drug testing before flying. It is being spoken of.
Horrace D. Cain ************************ "A Liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money." -- G. Gordon Liddy     
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Cain,
I was told you were a sore looser. Now I believe it. Either that or you're running scared for some reason.
Lighten up! It ain't worth it! Trust me! I know!
Chuck

provide
that.
magazine.
their
Excellence.
EC's
DON'T
people
Pres.,
the
he
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are free to believe as you so desire. By the same token I probably won't take too much of your advice and "trust"? Ha! You must be a comedian, yet I bet you also maintain your day job.
Running scared? From what? Adequately financed for many years to come, have a good flying facility with Life membership in the club, and relatively in good health for an old-timer like me.
Thanks for your concern.
HC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Getting rid of the IMAA as a SIG is not the answer in my opinion. The IMAA members have to shake up the organization and elect some leaders with some vision and understanding of what the IMAA should be doing to enhance its value.
I see the IMAA in the same light as the Vintage R/C Society, Model Engine Collectors Association and National Electric Aircraft Council - all non-rule book SIGs. Purpose - to promote activities and share information. NOT TO EXCLUDE others from their activities.
One option the AMA might look at is to prohibit such exclusions as a requirement for SIG status.
-- Red Scholefield AMA 951 IMAA 18939

IMAA
a
getting
giant
value
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
MJC, Sorry but I really did not start that, it is a widely published on this forum self stated fact by him. Just ask Herb Winston because I am sure he can point you to the specific quotes which are a matter of public record.
Red, I think you have a good idea with the prohibition and I agree with you. Thank you for putting some serious thought into the issue.
Jim Branaum AMA 1428
Six_O'clock_High Target snipped-for-privacy@Guns.com

to
reach
giant
member
it
a
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
OK Red, I'll buy that. It makes a lot of sense because then the IMAA would be back to promoting the hobby instead of limiting it.
MJC

to
reach
giant
member
it
a
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.