The BMFA

[leccyflyer]

Posted by i12fly on 17/03/2011 01:12:54:

Most points are covered in earlier posts, but I would like to add a couple of points:

The paltry sum we pay for insurance gives us 2 types of insurance, personal accident whilst pursuing modeling activities (try getting that for the small cost involved, from memory I think it is £2 each), and 3rd party (£8?).

As an afilliated club, the 3rd party also includes committee member insurance. Without this, every committee member is risking there home, savings and everything they've got if they are taken to court by a disgruntled member (and it happens). Try getting cover for that for this sort of money!

If you organise a club (or BMFA) there is alot of work which is unseen by the members, as I'm sure many forumites know. This does mean that other members can concentrate on the enjoyment of the hobby without the hassle. BMFA have lots of hassle liaising with CAA, FAI insurance claims and much more. Don't forget that without the organised body of BMFA lobbying, the CAA would have banned large models and banned FPV outright.

If you organise anything you will be criticised, you can't please everyone.

Last Saturday was a chairman's conference, very informative indeed, but very poorly attended. Note that they have a couple of new people now who will make an impact on club matters in particular. With 36k members, and just handful of full time employees to run the business as well they will be stretched.

I presume you were holding the joke stick, BEB when you compared BMFA with the AMA -who have about 40 employees and goodness knows how many members.

Sorry BEB but I think you're wrong, overall the BMFA do a very important job pretty well.

Excellent post - spot on.

[Steve W-O]

I think we have all been had!

 

I think BEB is on the side of the BMFA, and posted a "provocative" thread so that what the BMFA actually does could be aired.

 

If not, then maybe consideration should be given to changing the "Biggles" to "Bader" (said in fun!!!)

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

No Steve, it might have been a provocative thread - but it wasn't just to flush out all the good work done by the BMFA - the truth is I have serious concerns about the organisation, its approach and most of all its relationship to its membership.

 

I have never denied that it does somethings which are good - indeed I cited organising the insurance and the achievement scheme along with liason with third parties myself in the OP.

 

But for me the view remains that I beieve it is hopelessly arcane in its methods, top-down in its views, completely out of touch with its rank and file membership, basically still living in the 1960's, and far too centred around the activities of a tiny elite of competition fliers.

 

Foilks keep talking about "going to area meetings" but that simply isn't the point for me. Sainsburys make me feel part of the Nectar scheme but they don't require me to go to their Board Meetings!

 

BEB

[Steve W-O]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 08:30:23:

No Steve, it might have been a provocative thread - but it wasn't just to flush out all the good work done by the BMFA - the truth is I have serious concerns about the organisation, its approach and most of all its relationship to its membership.

 

I have never denied that it does somethings which are good - indeed I cited organising the insurance and the achievement scheme along with liason with third parties myself in the OP.

 

But for me the view remains that I beieve it is hopelessly arcane in its methods, top-down in its views, completely out of touch with its rank and file membership, basically still living in the 1960's, and far too centred around the activities of a tiny elite of competition fliers.

 

Foilks keep talking about "going to area meetings" but that simply isn't the point for me. Sainsburys make me feel part of the Nectar scheme but they don't require me to go to their Board Meetings!

 

BEB

 

 

 

I don't think I can comment on them, I have had no dealings with them, and no need to at the moment.

 

My only connection is the insurance, linked to their discussions with the various bodies and organisations that result in suggested practices.

 

I do read the magazine, and after the comments I picked one up on my way out this morning, and just had a look through it, it is the October 2010 edition.

 

The layout is good, it is easy to read, even for topics that are not my interest. There are some very minor points that would result in a cleaner look, and maybe a more modern look for some people, but they would mean no major revamping, and could be done on the present layout very easily.

 

The biggest problem I saw was that the printers had a problem with the cyan run, which did rather spoil the appearance.

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 08:30:23:

Foilks keep talking about "going to area meetings" but that simply isn't the point for me. Sainsburys make me feel part of the Nectar scheme but they don't require me to go to their Board Meetings!

 

BEB

 

I did point out earlier that getting involved can involve as little as speaking to your club rep or contacting the area committee with your thoughts.

 

Hardly a fair comparison between Sainsburys and the BMFA is it, one has a turnover according to a quick check on Google of £21billion give or take and profits of 1/2 Billion or so, the other has a Turnover of about a million and is non profit making, I shall leave you to figure out which is which.

 

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 08:30:23:

But for me the view remains that I beieve it is hopelessly arcane in its methods, top-down in its views, completely out of touch with its rank and file membership, basically still living in the 1960's, and far too centred around the activities of a tiny elite of competition fliers.

It is an opinion and probably shared by some, but certainly not shared by all, so how do you suggest it is changed?

[Erfolg]

I do find some of the arguments put forward for no change both disappointing and predictable.

 

The supporters of the status quo not only defend the present system, but seek to justify the methods of working as the only way. To my mind the present system is out of step with the times,to me it is outrageous that the opinions and views of the membership cannot be heard as a movement. An example where members views are relevant and can at a practical level be heard, is by use of modern low/no cost (to the BMFA) internet voting, on issues such as annual fees. I note that some would welcome an increase, I am sure many more would need convincing.

 

Proposals such as a National Flying site, could be proposed by an individual, with supporting documentation. The membership could be canvassed as to their individual position. If this needed an increase in fee, it could be fed into the annual review of fees.

 

 

It has been hinted that the committee and regional arrangements is acting like a sticky layer, which by accident or design filters out those views which do not accord with those who are members of these bodies, this is a view which I hold. This is a culture where desicions and views more easily flow down than up. The views of the majority should matter more than those of a few, in my opinion.

 

As to those who are to busy to vote or have no interest or an opinion. For you nothing would change other than a majority decision would have been reached.

Working committees do have a place, for specific issues, but are they necessary for all aspects of modelling?

 

Even advocates of committee working do not expect that in a BMFA supported team, that the Team Manager, reaches all decisions by committee. Committees have there place. Nor would addressing all the membership be appropriate.

 

Top down, sticky layer, committee management structures belong in the past or some dodgy National Governments.

 

Why do i not engage with the existing system? To me it is asking me to become part of an organisation which resists change, which almost certainly would cry "loose cannon", isolate, silence, marginalize, cry heretic, burning is the only way to redemption.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Andy Symons on 17/03/2011 09:50:45:

 

Hardly a fair comparison between Sainsburys and the BMFA is it, one has a turnover according to a quick check on Google of £21billion give or take and profits of 1/2 Billion or so, the other has a Turnover of about a million and is non profit making, I shall leave you to figure out which is which.

 

 

Andy - I was contrasting the difference in culture, in philosophy. Large commercial organisations like Sainsburys and Amazon etc. understand the importance of engagement and even support two way dialogue. Just try contacting them and see how quickly they respond. They use their websites, at least in part, to create a dialogue.

 

 

 

Posted by Andy Symons on 17/03/2011 09:50:45:

It is an opinion and probably shared by some, but certainly not shared by all, so how do you suggest it is changed?

Now were talking - but hasn't taken a awfully long time before we get to question 'do you have any suggestions'?

The BMFA has a long and honourable history, it goes back a long way. I remember when it was the SMAE - legally it still is! Let's look back to say the 1960's. In those days not everyone had a telephone, computers were huge things in air conditioned rooms, the internet didn't exist.

 

So if you were running an organisation like the SMAE in those days the only way to do it was via delegates to committees. Your club sent a rep to area, area sent a rep to the national committee.

 

If you, an ordinary member, wanted to communicate with the organisation you spoke to your club rep, if they had some interest/sympathy with your views, and the inclination, they would raise the matter at area. If the area committee was convinced - not by you expressing your views, but my your rep relaying them second hand - the area rep on the national committee would be briefed to raise the issue. Again we have the question of his enthusiasm to do this being coloured by his own thoughts on the idea etc. But let's assume he does. He speaks at national level about your issue, he of course gives his interpretation of the club rep's interpretation of what you said. And they may, or may not, be swayed. Let's say not - and furthermore let say that's because somewhere your proposal/idea/concern etc has "lost something in translation. So the national committee member reports back to area, and eventually your club rep comes to you and says "The answer is no". And this is engagement?

 

Of course the same problem exists going the otherway - if the BMFA at national level did want to know what we as members thought about something - perhaps a rule or procedural change. The only way was back through the maze. Unless they use the BMFA News - but that's got its limitations as well.

 

So, no matter how well intentioned all these people are - the method of communication is extremely laborious and ineffective. But in 1960 there was no choice.

 

However, its not 1960 anymore. The internet and mobile phone network offers a whole pethoria of alternatives. Even alternatives that promote two-way communication.

 

A first positive step would be to capture the email address of every member at renewal time. (If folks don't wish to provide their email address that's their choice, but then then communication requires the willing co-operation of both parties!) With those email addresses the organisation can at last communicate with its membership. Officers at national level can at last speak to grass roots members at no real cost. Are we seriously saying the BMFA can't afford to do this?

 

A second step would be for the organisation to provide some means for us (the grass roots membership) to talk directly to them (the elected national officers) without having to go through two levels of intermediaries. It doesn't have to be anything elaborate a simple clearing email box will do. (Before anyone says it I really can't see all 30,000 members sending thoughts in at once!).

 

If the matter was something larger - a policy issue that the national officers were discussing for example - what's wrong with consultation, not with reps but with the membership itself? A simple polling thread on a forum style software is all that's required - again hardly expensive or complex. Such consultation isn't binding but at least it would show that the national officers do at least take the temperature of grass roots opinion.

 

All this is easy, most primary and secondary schools can do this - its not expensive. But it does require a change in mind set. Away from the "rep" culture with decision making in the hands of the few and towards involvement. engagement and the 21st century.

 

Who knows we might even discover twitter and RSS feeds - perish the thought!

 

BEB

 

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 12:37:01

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 12:39:52

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Well said Erfolg. We cross posted with basically the same thoughts!

 

Long live the revolution!

 

BEB

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Erfolg on 17/03/2011 12:31:41:

I do find some of the arguments put forward for no change both disappointing and predictable.

 

I don't see anywhere where anyone is arguing for "no change"

 

The supporters of the status quo not only defend the present system, but seek to justify the methods of working as the only way. To my mind the present system is out of step with the times,to me it is outrageous that the opinions and views of the membership cannot be heard as a movement. An example where members views are relevant and can at a practical level be heard, is by use of modern low/no cost (to the BMFA) internet voting, on issues such as annual fees. I note that some would welcome an increase, I am sure many more would need convincing.

 

I haven't seen anyone defend it as the only way either, I'm still waiting for anyone to suggest a better way though. The current system works for those that are prepared to use it, and like it or not the only way it will change is by someone using the current system, it's a problem with having a democratic system and a constitution that has to be followed.

 

Proposals such as a National Flying site, could be proposed by an individual, with supporting documentation. The membership could be canvassed as to their individual position. If this needed an increase in fee, it could be fed into the annual review of fees.

 

That can be done now with the current system, try it, get the support from your club members and build the support for it, get enough support and it will happen.

[ken anderson.]

go on BEB....you have opened a can of worm's and a half all right----i've read through your post a couple of times and touched upon some of the other's......i agree with most of your thoughts/writing...i think that the 'BMFA' comes over as a bit of a dinosaur.....and is past it's sell by date etc...but is it?.... and what would replace it?...i remember not so long ago there was another set up i think was called the MFA..(model flyers associattion) ...and as far as i remember - david boddington was involved with it--came in like a breath of fresh air and just a quick after a couple of year's died.....to be forgotten....i dont think there is an alternative...and i like most other flyer's think of the BMFA as the body i'm insured with......the other stuff is for the band of elite/top notch flyer's.......reminds me of another part of our hobby(i'm now frightened to describe flying model aircraft as a 'hobby')in case i get a red card off BEB.....so to end this post i think BEB is prob 80%+ correct.....

 

my view........ken anderson ne..1. home of the HTP.

[Ultymate]

How some of you guys can either say the BMFA is only for the elite in the hobby or is doing nothing for anyone else but the elite is beyond me. You need to get off your tushes and find out what is going on or attend some of the events.

Back in 2001 I was asked to go with a party from the local village primary school who had entered a team of year six pupils in the event organised by the BMFA down at Cosford. We had a brilliant time down there flying rubber powered stuff indoors against hundreds of other kids from different age groups, there were scout troops there Guides Brownies and many many schools as well. All timekeepers and observers were BMFA volunteers. Here's three photos of the day to give a flavour of the event which we concluded with a visit to the museum and A Mc Donalds on the way home. Our party were the kids in red uniform their two teachers in blue and our allotted observers in beige

 

 

The highlight of the day for me was watching a young disabled lad in his wheelchair being given a go with an electric C/L model during the lunch break the smile on that kids face was amazing the only sad part was I didn't have my camera to hand at that moment.

At the risk of repeating myself I know the BMFA or parts thereof are not perfect but some seem very willing to knock what they know sod all about.

Edited By Ultymate on 17/03/2011 15:39:32

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 12:33:34:

Andy - I was contrasting the difference in culture, in philosophy. Large commercial organisations like Sainsburys and Amazon etc. understand the importance of engagement and even support two way dialogue. Just try contacting them and see how quickly they respond. They use their websites, at least in part, to create a dialogue.

 

I understand that, but I fail to see how the culture and philosophy of huge multibillion pound companies, companies that exist primarily to make a profit for their shareholders, is relevent to what is in effect a very small non profit making volunteer ran association. It comes across (and I know this is not what your saying) as "Well if Sainsburys and Amazon can do it, why can't the BMFA?"

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by ken anderson. on 17/03/2011 14:51:36:

go on BEB....you have opened a can of worm's and a half all right----i've read through your post a couple of times and touched upon some of the other's......i agree with most of your thoughts/writing...i think that the 'BMFA' comes over as a bit of a dinosaur.....and is past it's sell by date etc...but is it?.... and what would replace it?...i remember not so long ago there was another set up i think was called the MFA..(model flyers associattion) ...and as far as i remember - david boddington was involved with it--came in like a breath of fresh air and just a quick after a couple of year's died.....to be forgotten....i dont think there is an alternative...and i like most other flyer's think of the BMFA as the body i'm insured with......the other stuff is for the band of elite/top notch flyer's.......reminds me of another part of our hobby(i'm now frightened to describe flying model aircraft as a 'hobby')in case i get a red card off BEB.....so to end this post i think BEB is prob 80%+ correct.....

 

my view........ken anderson ne..1. home of the HTP.

 

 

Thing is Ken I'm not looking to replace the BMFA - and re your post Ulty - I've already said on two occassions that I acknowledge it does some good stuff. And I began by saying this isn't (for me anyway) a "kick the BMFA" exercise. Honestly.

 

All I want is for the BMFA to be a dynamic, thrusting, modern organisation that is responsive to its grass roots membership. To be a body that exploits developments in modern communications to renew itself and engage with its membership. Is that so unreasonable?

 

But all we get is "there is no problem", "work within the system", "its democracy" etc. Well, in my view; there is, its too slow and unresponsive and it isn't! (its representative democracy maybe, but not true democracy!)

 

BEB

 

PS Won't be "red carded by me Ken for calling it "a hobby" - now if you were to call it a "sport" (a description incidentally I've hardly ever heard anyone outside of the BMFA use!) matters might be different !

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 12:33:34:

A first positive step would be to capture the email address of every member at renewal time. (If folks don't wish to provide their email address that's their choice, but then then communication requires the willing co-operation of both parties!) With those email addresses the organisation can at last communicate with its membership. Officers at national level can at last speak to grass roots members at no real cost. Are we seriously saying the BMFA can't afford to do this?

The database does contain members email addresses, how many bother to let the office know when they change their address is any ones guess though, so you will then need to gather those email addresses every year, currently the renewals system (through a club which is a large percentage of them) is designed to be as quick and easy as possible so as to make the life of the club membership secretaryies as easy as possible, asking them to ensure they collect an up to date (and accurate) email address every year will add a lot of extra work to those volunteers.

 

I know from my work helping administer just the classifieds site that many fail to enter even their own email address correctly when registering, which usually leads to an email (often quite rude) complaining they haven't received their activation email and blaming poor admin.

 

It is my opinion that for important communications to the members you need to ensure it gets to as many members as possible, with no option for opting out and very little chance of members not receiving it, at the moment I cannot see a better way than through the BMFA news, in conjunction with a revamped website. So I would argue that there is a vehicle for those "in power" to cummunicate directly with the grassroots. I'm not saying that it is the best way, but at the moment probably more reliable than the alternatives.

 

 

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 12:33:34:

A second step would be for the organisation to provide some means for us (the grass roots membership) to talk directly to them (the elected national officers) without having to go through two levels of intermediaries. It doesn't have to be anything elaborate a simple clearing email box will do. (Before anyone says it I really can't see all 30,000 members sending thoughts in at once!).

Email, telephone and post are 3 I can think off, all of which work pretty well in my experience. Do remember though, and this is why your sainsbury/amazon reference doesn't relate, those elected officers are unpaid volunteers, so while all 36000 aren't going to email in at once to say the chairman, but say for example only 10 do every day, is it reasonable to expect an unpaid volunteer to read and respond to all 10 emails every day? That perhaps is a good reason for having those intermediaries, they help spread the workload.

 

I haven't come across anyone within the BMFA that is resistant to change, but change for change sake is invariably a mistake, any change has to be for the better, it has to improve communications and be more reliable than what is currently in place, it also has to be affordable and achiveable within the framework of a relatively small volunteer led non profit making organisation.

 

Personally I want to see the website improved with RSS feeds for those that wish to subscribe to them, but the BMFA news needs to remain the primary resource for information dissemination as it will be most likely to get to the largest majority of members.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

As I said earlier Andy - just like the BBC spokesperson! "No there's nothing wrong, its you members that don't understand/use the system, no need for major change."

 

Well, maybe the BMFA should take a look through this thread, ignore my ramblings, but just consider how many folks have said "its just a means to get insurance" - that's how engaged they feel, that's how fragile the BMFA's hold on them is - an insurance broker. The problem is - other people provide insurance too.

 

The word "dinosaur" to describe the BMFA has been used more than once - not by me but by others. Well today the BMFA is big, and feels strong, able to face down its critics. But dinosaurs were big and strong too, and they didn't adapt either. Look what happened to them.

 

We're not going to agree on this one Andy, you obviously think that with a little tinker here and there and it'll all be fine - I think a more drastic revamping of the whole culture and basis of the organisation is needed. Time alone will tell which one of us is right.

 

BEB

[Lazygit]

A few points briefly.

 

Sainsburys may make you feel special and loved by feeding you Nectar, but it's for their benefit. They want to know who's buying what and where. Then they target the advertising. They are after your money.

 

I have the impression that in the past couple of decades the government have been trying to give the impression they are dynamic, thrusting, responsive, having kicked out the old order. What do we have instead? A bunch of pretty faces for the cameras and some new slogans. What was the point of the expensive reshaping? It certainly wasn't for the benefit of voters.

 

Having internet voting will not get get considered views, it will be a lot of kneejerk reactions I could go on.............

 

 

[Tony Smith 7]

Just out of interest, what do the BMFA and others object to about FPV UK's codes of conduct? They explain their take on the legal situation on their web site, and they're definitely saying that the PIC needs to maintain visual contact.

[Ultymate]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 16:41:38:

As I said earlier Andy - just like the BBC spokesperson! "No there's nothing wrong, its you members that don't understand/use the system, no need for major change."

 

Well, maybe the BMFA should take a look through this thread, ignore my ramblings, but just consider how many folks have said "its just a means to get insurance" - that's how engaged they feel, that's how fragile the BMFA's hold on them is - an insurance broker. The problem is - other people provide insurance too.

 

The word "dinosaur" to describe the BMFA has been used more than once - not by me but by others. Well today the BMFA is big, and feels strong, able to face down its critics. But dinosaurs were big and strong too, and they didn't adapt either. Look what happened to them.

 

We're not going to agree on this one Andy, you obviously think that with a little tinker here and there and it'll all be fine - I think a more drastic revamping of the whole culture and basis of the organisation is needed. Time alone will tell which one of us is right.

 

BEB

BEB I've traveled around many clubs competing at events and the feeling I encounter is that a lot of people don't want to get engaged be it at club level or with the BMFA, they merely want to gain access to the clubs facilities and use them to their own ends, nothing wrong with this at all but it does little to forward the hobby the club or the BMFA.

As a general rule in life I've found if you put nowt in you'll get nowt out.

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 16:41:38:

As I said earlier Andy - just like the BBC spokesperson! "No there's nothing wrong, its you members that don't understand/use the system, no need for major change."

But I haven't said there is nothing wrong, there are and always will be areas where improvements can be made, unfortunately there will be disagreement as to where they are and what those improvements could be, I am suggesting however that things aren't nearly as bad as the picture your painting, however I am listening but as yet no one has made any credible suggestions as to what the drastic revamping of the whole culture and basis of the organisation that you call for could be.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Can I just say - off thread slightly but valid I feel - this thread is a first class example of how we can debate strongly held views in a reasonable manner on this forum. On many other forums this would have degenerated into a slanging match.

 

So a big thank you to my "opponents" for an up lifting and civilised airing of the issues.

 

BEB

 

PS I'm still right though

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Tony Smith 7 on 17/03/2011 17:03:21:
Just out of interest, what do the BMFA and others object to about FPV UK's codes of conduct? They explain their take on the legal situation on their web site, and they're definitely saying that the PIC needs to maintain visual contact.

I don't think the BMFA particularly object to the FPV Uk codes of conduct, it's more the other way round as far as I can tell, the BMFA produced some quite sensible (in my opinion) guidelines as to how to enjoy FPV both legally and with BMFA insurance, it appeared to me at least that it was some of the FPV community that weren't happy with that so they went there own way, fair play to them and why not. Though screaming that the CAA had banned FPV flying when they patently hadn't dented their credibility somewhat to my mind. However we are in danger of drifting off topic with that discussion.

[Ultymate]

Your perfectly entitled to my opinion

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Ultymate on 17/03/2011 17:33:35:
Your perfectly entitled to my opinion

 

 

LOL

 

BEB

[Andy Symons]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/03/2011 17:30:42:

Can I just say - off thread slightly but valid I feel - this thread is a first class example of how we can debate strongly held views in a reasonable manner on this forum. On many other forums this would have degenerated into a slanging match.

 

So a big thank you to my "opponents" for an up lifting and civilised airing of the issues.

 

BEB

 

PS I'm still right though

Well in everything apart from what you type anyway!!

 

On a side note but related with regards to the issue of forums, whilst we are having a sensible and reasoned debate on here, it will only ever be a snapshot of the views of a very tiny minority of the forum users and as such isn't representative of anything apart from the opinions of us few individuals.