National Model Flying Centre

[cymaz]

My concern is that a National centre of flying might take all the resources and time of the bmfa officials to run it. Leaving clubs to gradually age, wither and die. Then where is the funding going to come from?

I am all in favour of an increase in bmfa fees if the local club flier will get a benefit from them. By all means have a national centre but this must go hand in hand with a strategy to get young people into model flying for the future. The future generation must pay for the National Centre. If the bmfa cannot help clubs in raising young people up through clubs-what is the long term purpose of having a centre?

[Alan Gorham_]

I agree with parts of your post, Cymaz, but disagree with others....

Absolutely there must be a strategy to get young people into model flying for the future.And to me the development of a national centre should be built upon such schemes.

Look at all the young kids having a great time either in the hangar or out on the airfield in the evening during the nationals...

Or when clubs have an arrangement with a school or youth organisation to do some hands-on exposure to modelling and flying.

However, to say that future generations must pay for the National Centre...well I'm not so sure about that. If we don't provide it now, there won't be anything to pay for in the future...

[cymaz]

Posted by cymaz on 10/08/2014 15:56:08:

By all means have a national centre but this must go hand in hand with a strategy to get young people into model flying for the future. The future generation must pay for the National Centre.

 

The young fliers of today will be paying their subs to pay for the running costs of the national centre. The more fliers in the future the less of a financial burden it will be.

I think we are coming from different ends of the debate but fundamentally agree.

Edited By cymaz on 10/08/2014 16:15:42

[Alan Gorham_]

Ok and it's a big debate!

I just think it's sad that at these early, tentative stages so many are saying "not for me guv, too expensive, far away..."

It's not for you the individual, it's for you the body of 40,000-ish model flyers in this country now and however many (hopefully more) in the future. I really hope that if it needs to be funded to start then we are brave enough to meet that challenge.

It just seems that some wish it to be stillborn and are panicking that it won't be built on their own club field.

PS - my own personal experience of club sites is that they are typically a field away from habitation with poor access for members cars (let alone visitors), little or nothing in the way of facilities and are a place where flyers enjoy themselves despite the facilities, rather than because of them.

I feel that if the BMFA can attract funding or publicity for it's new centre as part of a strategy to attract the young then any benefits will trickle down from this rather than from trying to fund improvements at club sites first..

[cymaz]

Alan, you want a top down approach. I would like a 2 handed solution...ultimately we want the same thing. A flying future with young people and a national centre

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

I agree well written Alan

I would love it if a BMFA official actually spoke up myself.

To label folk who would live at a distance from the centre selfish for not wanting to fund it, seems to me a vote loser.

Annual events...rooms too small ? hire a different venue for the night.

Travel to a show, they charge a fee to enter or a tx fee, not a yearly charge, but most importantly Greenacres and Nats I enjoy.

Chinese wage rises, well you've lost me there.

Cards on the table...in BMFA from day one, instructor, examiner, BMFA secretary, now why do I need to do that before I can give an opinion ?

Do I want a National Centre ? I don't know, the online survey was a joke surely.

John

[Tony Bennett]

By all means have a national centre to promote model flying as a sport, but what happens when the younger generation want to take up the sport and go to the local club and find.........................

if you are lucky a shipping container in the corner of an out of the way field with no toilets, electricity, water, etc..

i just worry that a national centre will take all of the funds raised through fee's to keep it going and there will not be a trickle down to the club level.

[cymaz]

BMFA head office have put themselves in the position by asking the question, maybe they won't like the answers.

[Colin Leighfield]

Although there are many concerns, I'm sure that having a National Centre to provide a focus and presence for the hobby must be beneficial in the long term. Whatever the opinions about BMFA might be, we need it to ensure our survival, the local club structure is far too fragmented to ensure co-ordination on key issues and provide the public face that governments insist on seeing before they will allow any credibility. To have a nationally recognised centre as well run by BMFA would surely increase this important credibility factor even further and provide all kinds of possibilities for co-ordination with schools and Further Education as well. Personally, I would like to see it happen.

[Alan Gorham_]

John

The BMFA Officials have invited this survey and then the attendant feasibility study to be written by an independent consultant so that they have no guiding (biased one way or the other) input as yet. The proposal came via the membership so the BMFA will carry out the will of the majority which seems fair enough to me. There's nothing for any of them to say yet...

The consultant is being paid by Doodsons, the BMFA insurance brokers so it's not costing BMFA members anything.

John, bear in mind that Chacksfield House the BMFA HQ in Leicester was secured years ago as an office plus a board room type premises. I do know for the last few years a small but growing archive has been created there of modelling heritage items pending a place to display these. I think pressures of space plus the number of attendees at the Council meetings I mentioned before has meant that the boardroom is feeling a bit too small sometimes.

Given that the HQ has running costs associated with it, is it not reasonable to assume that to ensure best value for these costs, that it should be utilised as much as possible for it's intended purpose?

I am sure I recollect that this archive has now grown and requires external storage space so that's an extra expense.

The BMFA does have to rent venues for things like the AGM, club chairman's conferences etc but I am sure some will be grumbling at these extra expenses being paid for out of their subs, so moving to a place that could stage national or indeed international comps, training weekends for examiners and instructotrs, promotional events, AGMs, Council meetings etc would be a one-stop shop.

Re the increasing wages in China thing, then yes I'll try and expand on that....The survey results showed that around as many respondents wanted a national centre for no subs increase as those who wanted it but would pay.

Well, looking at forums and at my local clubs it seems that people are finding it very affordable in the current climate to have a blingy computer radio, many or several models all geared up and flyable, cheap and easy to get engines, ARTFs, electric motors, batteries and everything else made in China. So it seems that it's becoming an established thing to spend the hobby budget on a new plane, or a new engine or a new Tx......

Meanwhile, let's all moan if the BMFA put £20 on the subs for the next 10 years to pay for something.

I know that you were a modeller in the 1980s when times were tougher and most if not all of flew predominantly smaller, cheaper, less complex models and we all had less of them too (sweeping generalisation...dons tin hat!)

Now imagine in 5 or 10 years time all our modelling gear becomes pro rata as expensive as it was in the 1980's.

Is it better value to spend say an extra £20 a year now for a few years to fund something that if done right could protect and promote our hobby in this country or is it better value for many of us to keep buying equipment and models while we age and the hobby dies.

Also, one last point, imagine if BMFA subs were already £50 per year for the service they currently provide and the National Centre was not even a twinkle in it's Daddy's eye. My guess is that most would still pay that small cost in order to fly and would probably find it good value as well as being a drop in the ocean compared to what they currently spend over the course of a year on their hobby.

[ken anderson.]

ah but don't the majority of "radio control modellers" join the BMFA only because they have to-to get 3rd party insurance......and how is a "national centre" going to encourage "youngster's" ....when most of them have far better (in their eye's) interest's........ my opinion is the majority would be paying for the centre to be used by the minority...

ken Anderson ne....1 opinion dept

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I would oppose this tooth and nail - in my view it is a terrible idea. But sadly, it seems a small cabal at the heart of BMFA are determined to push and push until they get their "white elephant". They have been working on this idea for several years now - steadily ignoring the fact that 90%+ of the membership don't want this!

Personally I believe this is much more about a few individuals wanting to create a "legacy" of their time. It is, I believe, much more about self-agrandisment than it is about bringing more people into the hobby or providing a facility for the majority of members. As a proposal it is again, sadly, further proof, if any were needed, of just how chronically out of touch with the average member this dinosaur of an organisation really is.

If this is pushed through on the back of this jerry-rigged "survey" I for one would start to push very hard indeed for our club to dis-amalgamate from BMFA. I suspect I would not be alone in that. The BMFA need to reflect that most of us only put up with them as a convenient source of insurance - and they are very far from being the only such source.

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 10/08/2014 17:39:52

[PatMc]

Why don't those in favour of a National Model Flying Centre set up a company, raise the funds to buy a site, hire staff, organise the administration & visitor facilites etc then run it as a commercial enterprise.

Let the BMFA look after the memberships interests as it does now without trying to lumber it with a white elephant.

[Colin Leighfield]

Ken, the membership profile tells you that we have a lot of members who started as kids when the country was very "air-minded" and kept on going up to the present day and others who dropped out as they grew up, then came back as their kids in turn grew up and they wanted to renew fond memories. There is a range of younger adults from those families and a sprinkling of youngsters who generally are family connected as well. There are very few who come in from the outside because the profile of the hobby/sport is so low and has no strong favourable image.

This is a recipe for continuing decline and if not eventual extinction, certainly poorly supported and not justifying much in the way of trade for manufacturers, shops and importers. Let alone retaining flying sites.

If we really want to re-generate aeromodelling and give it an attractive profile that is recognised and likely to attract wider interest, a National Centre, well managed could play a big part in achieving it. The National Motorcycle Museum has done something like that and because it also functions as a conference centre and venue for events, has become widely recognised, respected and also income earning. Properly done, with the right facilities built in, a National Centre for us could be self-financing and perhaps generate enough income to expand our activities.

It requires a degree of vision and new thinking, let's face it, the only people that we can blame for making little or no favourable impressions on younger people must be ourselves, it's nobody else's fault. Time to dump the prejuduces and pre-conceptions we all tend to nurse and look to the future. We could make it a lot better if we become a bit more open minded, (Including me).

Edited By Colin Leighfield on 10/08/2014 17:57:25

[PatMc]

How will a NMFC attract wider interest ?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I'm afraid I disagree Colin!

I do not believe that the future of this hobby rests with attempts to recruit more young people. Yes of course we should welcome with open arms and carefully nurture those youngsters that do show an interest, but I am afraid we cannot simply buck major social changes. Society is fundamentally different from when we were young. Modern youngsters are simply not interested - we do not "push their buttons"! If we pour major resources in that direction we will simply fail and waste a very great deal of money doing so. We cannot reverse history!

So, does that mean inevitable decline? No I do not believe it does. We have done two age surveys on this site and the results were very interesting. The two surveys were, I think, 3 years apart. They both found that the average age of respondents was around 57. That is a very interesting result because it indicates that while yes we are a "silver hobby" we do not appear, on average, to be aging. Why?

Well I think you only have to look at the new membership joining most clubs - predominantly they are 50-something males whose kids have recently flown the nest, progression in work is perhaps less a lower priority for them than it has been in the past, they are starting to look towards retirement and for the first time in their life they find themselves with a little more free time and most importantly and little more disposable income. So, a new hobby crosses their mind. So many of them say the same thing "I've always fancied having a go at this - now I have the opportunity"

If we want to grow our hobby - and of course we do - then I believe that this is our target demographic today - not young people. It is these 50-somethings we should be looking to capture.

Are they likely to want a National Flying Centre? I don't believe so. They are much more likely to be impressed by a few more "creature comforts" down at the local flying club.

So, in my view, if BMFA really want to boost membership they should be investing in local clubs, target advertising the silver surfers and supporting clubs in ensuring that they have the environment and facilities that would attract such people.

BEB

[Tony Bennett]

agreed.

[ken anderson.]

hello Colin-I agree with most of your post-I started off in the early 60's with a 1/6d woodpack/keil kraft/airfix/jet-ex and cox and can's of diesel.....the youngin's(majority) don't want to know-we oldin's are dinosaurs in most of their eye's - fair enough there are exception's to the rule........but in our club of 130+ we are lucky to count about 4 max young member's - the rest are dad's army apprentice's........ and I cant figure out how arguing over the point that a national centre will rejuvenate the membership age profile.... so asking me( a BMFA)member to shell out for something I don't see the point of is wasting my time and there's - and I don't think that the majority of members are bothered as well.......as pat has said-if the people who run/are the BMFA feel the need for a centre---- let them go and seek private finance to do it----- and run it as a stand alone business......if they try to make the membership fork out towards it-I think they may lose a fair few members......I realise that there are lots of ways of looking at the subject...but I don't think that saying it will encourage the 'kid's' is valid...(my opinion)....

ken Anderson....ne...1 opinion dept.

[Dave Hopkin]

A National Center could (perhaps) be run as a commercial venture (along the lines of the National Motor Cycle Museum) there is not reason why a National Aeromodelling Museum could not be part of it too... we have museums for everything else so why not?

Design in some good quality conference centre facilities and most of all market the facility on a commercial basis

As a Museum there might be scope for external funding too

As far as bringing the youth into the hobby (and that's vital) then the BMFA should be facilitating/promoting link=ups with existing youth organisations (the ATC is a prime candidate) that could be a win/win relationship too

[Mark a]

I think your spot on there BEB, at my club there's not many young flyer's most of us are middle aged or over and nearly all new members are of that age group.

Mark.

[Peter Beeney]

Alan,

I’d have thought that the costs here might actually be fairly considerable. Is the BMFA actually saying that it might want to purchase somewhere like RAF Barkston Heath? I know not how big this site is, but I do know that a lady paid a farmer £35, 000 for three quarters of an acre just to park her horse on. That was back in 1998, I’m sure this figure has at least trebled, or more, perhaps by much more now. I realise there is no comparison at all, and obviously prices differ greatly from place to place, but just what is a few quid extra (say double) on the subs actually going to be capable of buying? A sensible idea of what is in the frame might be an idea, with a fairly accurate estimate of the purchase price to go with it. Then everyone would know what might be expected.

With regard to youngsters and model flying I feel this has been re-cycled before. I’m of the opinion it’s not just modelling that has a shortage of young starters, it also applies to many other activities. Society is changing, and fast, whether we like it or not. I’ve been assisting beginners of all ages for many years, so I can say I have an ongoing interest and some experience, but now I’m not concerned if in the future model flying becomes extinct. Nothing much I can do about it anyway. I doubt if I could even pay youngsters to become interested in aeromodelling nowadays.

I’d side with BEB here, too. The self-indulgence attitude seemed obvious right from the Centre of Excellence days. Then it was a nice new flash building to accommodate all the administrative duties in luxury, but not being able to fly any model aeroplanes… How crackers is that…
I’m sure our landlords would also accept an alternative insurance cover, provided we we able to prove it with some documentation. They naturally have no interest in the BMFA at all, apart from the insurance. Might be a a bit irksome at the time, but I’m sure it could be done.

PB

[Tony Bennett]

there is not much point in getting anyone into the sport/ hobby if the local club facilities are woeful and inadequate.

until we can have clubs like they have in America and other countries, we are on a hiding to nothing getting and keeping members.

[PatMc]

David why do you think it's vital to bring youth into the hobby ? If a young person is interested by all means support & encourage them but a good % will disappear within a short time perhaps to re-appear in later life.

BTW all the evidence I've experienced shows that the ATC isn't a particularly good candidate organisation for recruiting would-be aeromodelers.

[PatMc]

What is a "Centre of Excellence" that several people have mentioned ? How would it figure in model flying activites ? What benifits would it bring to the hobby ?

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Whoa there fella's there are loads of good clubs with good facilities and parking etc, the members themselves see to it. What's a feasibility study ? ask the members...we have a magazine and club secretary's, not that difficult surely. Do I think someone has an agenda, yes I do, is there a danger of clubs leaving the BMFA and buying insurance elsewhere. yes I think so. Not hearing from officials because there is nothing to say yet ? the online poll and published result suggests otherwise. Hows about a RCME poll. (or have you had one)

John