Bigger Issues

[Terry Terrenoire]

And you can save the $25 sanction fee!
The only place this would not be practical would be if the contest were
being held at a non club site, and the additional insurance were required
by the property owner.

Terry T.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:11:38 -0600 "Gene Maurice"
<gene.maurice at comcast.net> writes:
> Ron,
> 
> Why is insurance an issue? If I'm an AMA member, I'm insured. If I 
> hold a
> contest at my AMA Chartered club's field, I'm insured. I don't 
> believe there
> is anything that prohibits us from having a "non-sanctioned" event 
> and still
> being covered, as long as everyone meets the AMA's requirements for 
> coverage
> to be inforce. But that's true even if the event IS sanctioned.
> 
> If I didn't post a sanction at the contest would anyone ask to see 
> it? If I
> advertised non-sanctioned would anyone NOT come?
> 
> Gene Maurice
> gene.maurice at comcast.net
> Plano, TX
> AMA 3408
> NSRCA 877
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 5:18 PM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Bigger Issues
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 19, 2003, at 2:55 PM, Jerry Budd wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think it was because the IMAC people were willing to 
> break
> >> away from AMA.
> >
> > I'd love to hear directly from some of the IMAC community on this 
> this
> > 'cause that's not the story I'm hearing (hindsight being 20-20 
> and
> > all).  I don't want to speak for them (IMAC), could someone who 
> is/was
> > active in IMAC (and was witness to what actually happened) please
> > "back brief" us on the history of this?
> 
> They may have been willing to break away from AMA.  We don't quite 
> have
> the same choices that they did/do.  They don't have a World
> Championships option; we do.  If we want to participate in F#A on a
> World level, AMA is the conduit.
> 
> >
> >> As long as we operate under AMA, we are subject to the AMA rules 
> and
> >> regulations.
> >
> > Understand that we operate under AMA by choice, not by legislation 
> (or
> > even necessity).  NSRCA is a Special Interest Group (SIG) 
> recognized
> > by AMA, but NSRCA is not formally a part of AMA, nor does AMA have 
> any
> > regulatory jurisdiction or direct control over NSRCA. It's an
> > affiliation, not a superior/subordinate type of arrangement.
> 
> True.
> 
> >
> >> My rule change proposal to have NSRCA control the maneuver
> >> descriptions and maneuver schedules was rejected by the AMA 
> Executive
> >> Council.  Short of bolting AMA, I don't think NSRCA has any 
> choice in
> >> this matter.  If that is a demonstration that "we (NSRCA) are 
> willing
> >> to simply lie down and get run over on this by AMA", I guess 
> we're
> >> stuck with it.
> >
> > Only if we choose to be.  We have options;  I just wonder if the 
> NSRCA
> > Officers are cognizant of them and willing to consider them as 
> such.
> 
> 
> I am an NSRCA officer and assume that the other officers understand 
> our
> options as I do.  The first big stumbling block is liability 
> insurance
> for contests.  The second is participation in F3A World 
> Championships.
> We could handle our own rules and contest coordination, probably
> better/faster than the AMA.  Do we have the resolve and will to do 
> it?
> Most pattern pilots probably don't care.  Otherwise, they'd flood 
> the
> contest board and AMA HQ with letters and e-mails about the 
> situation.
> They haven't done it so far.
> 
> Ron Van Putte
> 
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> 
> 
> 
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to 
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> 
> 
> 
=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#