BMFA - Is the 'A' for apathy?

[Martin McIntosh]

I went to a BMFA (then SMAE) AGM once. It seemed to be more about the later black tie and tailsuit dinner dance afterwards than modelling.

What really irks me is the magazine. Although much improved lately it seems to devote a disproportionate amount of space to things like free flight/rubber power/control line/indoor free flight etc. Many of us have dabbled with these but just how much of it do you see at model clubs? Probably never for most members.

It also tends to promote these disciplines as the face of model flying. No wonder that the public in general just see us as a load of nurds.

Having said that, I do not in any way wish to critcise the work they do securing sites, radio frequencies, sorting out general legislation, the achievement scheme etc.

[Olly P]

Erfolg,

The point I was trying to make was my involvement in local commitees for sports, andtherefore the position from which I speak, I mean in now way to get in a 'I've been on more commitees than you' arguement.

That aside, I think the point raised above about the magazine/flyer is valid - at least the bit about the magazine style - why are the BMFA posting out a mag, when I and many others would be happy to recieve it as a PDF document, and save me storing it!

Olly

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Oh dear - the mag! Now I have previously contributed to this thread and I hope that folks, correctly, surmised that generally speaking I'm quite supportive of BMFA and I'm certainly grateful for the important work done by volunteers to keep things running smoothly.

But I'm afraid that positive view does not extend to the mag - in short I see it as simply dreadful. Its produced to very low standards, poor quality paper, cheap printing, lousey photography and we haven't even started on the content!

It is not in the slightest bit representative of the interests of the vast majority of members. It focuses far to much on tiny minorities and the competition scene which most flyers have no interest whatsoever in.

Far from being a beacon and flagship for our hobby it is frankly an embarrassment. I'm with Olly 100'%, if this is the best the BMFA can do in terms of a mag let's at least keep it private and circulate it via email. Use the money saved to produce an annual, quality, publication that reflects some credit on the hobby - something we would be proud to show the general public, the sports council, local authorities etc. To achieve that I would suggest that production of such an annual be contracted out to professionals such as MHS or Traplet or some similar organisation that can produce quality publications to a deadline. But don't, whatever you do, try to do it in-house!

BEB

PS - I did say in my previous post "don't get me on the subject of the magazine"!

[Martyn K]

I like the mag. I consider myself primarily as an aeromodeller and secondly an RC Flyer. I have taken part in many aspects of the hobby over the years (please dont call it a sport) and I like to read what is happening in other disciplines.. It is the only magazine anywhere that is all encompassing and long may it continue.

However, I agree that production could be better and I would support an e-version (preferably a downloadable PDF than can be shared) rather than using an online e-reader.

However, please bear in mind that it is a 'free' mag and clearly produced at limited cost probably using volunteer contributors. Would you like your BMFA subs to rise by £20.00 pa to pay for an RCM&E clone 6 times a year?

I will now disconnect while the flames die down...

Martyn

[Olly P]

Martyn - That is the point, even with volunteer contributors the mag costs to produce, a PDF version would be effectivly zero production cost (In terms of printing and materials)

I like the fact it covers all areas, but as BEB said , the costs could be better used on en E version with a better focus and more 'public friendly' face....

[Bob Cotsford]

I wonder how many people would actually bother to open an E-version? I know several modellers who don't like using computers (me included!) and a few who don't own one.

[Greybeard]

Posted by Olly P on 29/11/2012 14:09:57:

Martyn - That is the point, even with volunteer contributors the mag costs to produce, a PDF version would be effectivly zero production cost (In terms of printing and materials)

I like the fact it covers all areas, but as BEB said , the costs could be better used on en E version with a better focus and more 'public friendly' face....

You are assuming - incorrectly - that all members are able to receive emails/pdf's or do you think that the BMFA should supply members with computers out of the £36/year?

It could be my imagination but it feels like this thread has now been running longer than Coronation Street.

Edited By Greybeard on 29/11/2012 14:19:05

[Olly P]

Fair point Greybeard/Bob, I have always lived/work around PC's and am therfore used to it, perhaps an elective system then? at least some cost could be saved??

[Bob Cotsford]

next drawback - the BMFA site (especially classifieds) is dog slow as a rule.

If the web site was half reasonable, then it should be relatively easy to have a page on there where members could opt out of hardcopies and supply an email to receive pdfs. Similar to the member's profile page on most forums.

[Olly P]

Bob - I think the whole BMFA site was covered earlier in the thread - it needs a full overhall and improvement. You could also tie it to the members database on sign-up??

Our Club newsletter is distributed by email to those who want it and post for those who prefer. it keeps postage cost down if nothing else.

Olly

[WolstonFlyer]

The website would need a membership system with members login that allows a choice between electronic or postal communication etc, or perhaps you would specify when you renew each year.

I am sure there are some ways to save money by using different systems but also still provide access access via via traditional methods.

IT development does require a considerable budget as I am well aware (working in IT) you could easily spend 25k on a membership project like that.

[Martyn K]

I wasn't advocated an e version only, if that wasn't clear sorry. My preference would be to receive an e version. Paper copies would be sent to those who want it/opted for it.

Martyn

[Alan Randall]

The mag that people appear to want is the one that this forum is attached to, RCM&E or RC***world etc. The BMFA can never hope to emulate or compete with such commercially run magazines, so why try. It does it's best to try and do a roundup of the things that BMFA members are involved in, and I bet there are a fair few old codgers who, even if they fly only RC, still like to spend a few minutes reading about the sort of things they did as lad.

Due to the cost of the magazine, I think it would be worth the BMFa conducting a poll of its membership on the future / format of the magazine. As a side issue, it would be interesting to see what the turnout is. Ie. the number bothering to vote compared with the total membership.

[Martyn K]

I wonder if anyone with some form of Authority is actually reading this thread. If not,can someone who knows someone give them a nudge please as there is more interest in the thread than the AGM.

Martyn

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

A good point there Martin, in two way though:

1. Contributions to this thread - and both scale and content - I think disprove the basic premise of the title - ie we are not apathetic about the BMFA.

2. The forum, as a more modern form of communication, at least engages more people - far more than the BMFA are managing to engage with the AGM anyway.

Any lessons for the dear old BMFA there do you think?

BEB

[Peter Beeney]

With regard to generating some actual interest in aeromodelling for people outside of the sport/hobby, would this not be better coming from the BMFA that is collectively all the clubs? Or, at least, all the affiliated ones. The thread seems to be saying that the BMFA should be doing this, but also inferring that the BMFA is somehow a separate body. The BMFA that is collectively all the clubs seems to be saying that the BMFA that is the ruling body should be doing more to encourage beginners, whilst in some quarters they themselves are very effectively doing exactly the opposite. At least in my opinion, that is.

But there is for and against on both sides, I guess. As an example, for a long time the ruling body BMFA has quoted at every opportunity how much effort was spent on obtaining the frequency bands, and I have not the slightest doubt this is perfectly true, but looking a little closer it seems to me the 27 MHz band was a free-for-all, provided you kept to certain regulations you could even make your own gear. I think a lot of of the Citizen’s Band users did just this, and didn’t even bother with the rules! So it was the manufacturers making the kit that were all important. Likewise with 2.4, the manufacturer does all the hard work, I guess; I’m not sure that anyone needs any permission at all to use any radio here, it’s all at your own risk. The 35 MHz band was a bit different I believe, but as I understand it, it was part of a block of frequencies controlled by the military; and still is, I believe they can take them back if they want them. But that’s unlikely, I’d say, not really enough bandwidth for FM for a start, but it suits us with only wanting to send low power signals containing little information. I think it has very little other users, I monitored the channel spread, plus others either side, for a long time, and I never found anything! If we had to bid in auction, and then pay for some frequencies I think we would soon fade away!

I’ve recently read, in this thread, or perhaps somewhere else, that sales of radio model gear have risen sharply in quite a short time. If this is true, and these are largely new buyers, then they are not joining clubs. I’d say the vast majority of clubs are affiliated and so these people would therefore be joining the BMFA, no choice. But the BMFA stays relatively static, a few leave and a few join, but it must comprise of a large block of the same members. Which might now explain how and why the average age of the BMFA membership is gradually rising. But there must, at some point, be a finite finish to this, too…….

On the subject of the News, as I said, from our example shown by our club members, I don’t think really any type of alteration will ever make much difference, if it’s never going to be read very much anyway. Maybe we as a club are out on a limb, but to get any idea who reads it you need to ask the club members. I do it by asking questions on some of the contents, and as I said, it seems that very few bods bother to read it at all.

Perhaps society is changing? Maybe aeromodelling, along with other activities, will eventually disappear. Other pastimes may take their place. Some evidence is pointing in that direction already; and I’m not overly concerned now anyway, there’s nothing much I can do in the present that will affect how people will behave in the future.

In general, I think that overall very little is ever going to change, it would take a massive effort to coordinate for a start, and I don’t really see how this is going to happen.

PB

[Alan Randall]

In answer to Martyn K, Andy Symons is one of the guys at the end of the phone if you ring the BMFA with a problem. As he has contributed to this thread, he is obviously aware of the content.

As far as Peter's stats on the increase in sales of radio gear, I wonder what this covers, all modellers radio gear, or just that sold by the main suppliers, as you can pick up 2.4ghz toy helicopters etc all over the place, but few buyers would even dream of joing the BMFA.

So far as reading the BMFA mag is concerned, I know a number of fliers that don't read any mag, or book for that matter. All they want to do is fly models.

Out of a club of around 150 members we usually get about 25 turn up at our monthly meetings, no matter what we put on, because, again, all they want to do is fly. If this is the general attitude to the organisation of their own club, why should they have enthusiasm for the BMFA.

Finally, the BMFA HQ is, I believe, a relatively lean organisation, which should surely temper our expectations a little. Unless we want to pay for a larger organisation that meets the asperations of a few and is ignored by a larger majority.

Edited By Alan Randall on 29/11/2012 21:27:43

[Erfolg]

It would not surprise me that all, that a lot of sales reported are at the small end. I personally do not see them as toys, well not in the disparaging terms some view these small models. Rather than see this end of spectrum as being of no interest to the BMFA, perhaps these modellers should be seen as no differently as CL, FF and many other sections. Perhaps a bit of wooing?

I do accept that a very small group that we modellers represent, will always have difficulty in supporting a BMFA, which is other than a small head office. I totally accept the view that the BMFA cannot afford to be at the cutting edge of IT. However the well developed IT products should be used in a timely manner, both to contain costs, and produce a more effective way of delivering a service. Using well developed products ensures that the costs, what can be developed, in what time frame, allows a robust business case to be developed.

I personally see the mag with a lot of potential. The coverage of the many facets of the aero modelling fraternity is a good concept. The general reporting of results however, is generally of a very, very, limited interest, in my opinion. I would like someone to put on their PR hat on, and use the mag to inform of all the good works that the BMFA does. Every time I see a review in a model mag, I can see the hand of PR, it is not something alien to modelling.

One thing which I do find strange, is the policy of the BMFA of not commenting on discussions with respect to the BMFA. Rather relying on proxy supporters who are, it has to be said, well briefed, putting forward good arguments. Even the most toxic of brands, are not afraid to speak out in their own name.

[Martin McIntosh]

I seem to be good at opening cans of worms on these forums.

I am glad to see the support for my views on the magazine. Perhaps someone at the BMFA will take note. A periodical like Aeromodeller was a much better place to air the lesser known disciplines of the hobby which I appreciate require equal to or even greater skills than R/C.

I try everything from ARTF micros, gliders, quads, vintage, aerobatics to large scale but they are all R/C!

Regarding an e-format mag., this has got to be the way to go. Only 4/80 of my local club still receive the newsletters by post, PC owning or not.

[Rob Jones 2]

The hobby has changed, whether we like it or not. It is a bit like arguing about where to site phone boxes in the age of mobiles.Pointless.Glow is being overtaken by brushless, building by foam and plastic.However much we may dislike this, it is the march of progress.Parkflyers will predominate rc flying ( I mean the people, not the planes), and insurance will have to chase them.Todays flyers have the income to buy RTF edfs and do not need club support.And they will fly without insurance.

[Nightflyer]

I think a number of aspects are covered by others but after some 35 years in aeromodelling from what I have seen at the AGM's is that aside from the interest shown by key movers ie committee members, trade, and flyers at the forefront of our hobby that aside from distance and the high cost these days trravelling about that the following have had an impact:

1. hobby has changed a lot over the years with fewer model aeronautical engineers, and more 'hobbyists' and buy and fly members who have less time or interest in the matters of managing and safeguarding the hobby.

2. the number of forms of model flying has expanded and hence arguably has increased the scope of the organisation and maybe diluted some of the body of interest in some areas.

3. in general I think that even at club level (and in life in general in other activities) there are fewer hands on people than used to be (personally those people who do put themselves forward are the ones who make the hobby, and those that don't should not complain if they are not happy, collectively we can make or break the hobby).

The BMFA is our national body and voice and without it fighting our corner over the years, we would be in a far weaker position over flying fields, frequencies, professional standing, competency, etc.