BMFA National Flying Centre

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Doug Campbell on 12/05/2015 01:29:42:

There are half a dozen on this thread who very strongly oppose this move and keep re-posting the same anti BMFA/NFC garbage.

 

The BMFA contacted every member at the start of this project and got overwhelming support to proceed. Now it is moving on the dissenters come out of the woodwork and hassle these modellers that are trying to work for us for nothing. Embrace the idea and move on.

Doug, if (as I assume) you're counting me as one of the half dozen then I strongly object to this statement. I am (and have been if you check my posting history) a strong supporter of the BMFA. I'm not immediately aware that any others with similar viewpoints on the proposed NFC are anti-BMFA.

I have no objection to the idea of a national flying centre and would strongly support it if a properly costed proposal which showed it to be viable was presented.

My objections are simply on the grounds that on the scant evidence provided, I cannot see how it can work from a financial point of view. This appears to be the view shared by my area council who, I'm told by our club representative, have instructed its delegate (director) on the NC to vote against moving forward with the purchase at this time.

Edited By Martin Harris on 12/05/2015 12:04:03

[MattyB]

Posted by Martin Harris on 12/05/2015 11:39:19:

Posted by Doug Campbell on 12/05/2015 01:29:42:

There are half a dozen on this thread who very strongly oppose this move and keep re-posting the same anti BMFA/NFC garbage.

 

The BMFA contacted every member at the start of this project and got overwhelming support to proceed. Now it is moving on the dissenters come out of the woodwork and hassle these modellers that are trying to work for us for nothing. Embrace the idea and move on.

Doug, if (as I assume) you're counting me as one of the half dozen then I strongly object to this statement. I am (and have been if you check my posting history) a strong supporter of the BMFA. I'm not immediately aware that any others with similar viewpoints on the proposed NFC are anti-BMFA.

I have no objection to the idea of a national flying centre and would strongly support it if a properly costed proposal which showed it to be viable was presented.

My objections are simply on the grounds that on the scant evidence provided, I cannot see how it can work from a financial point of view. This appears to be the view shared by my area council who, I'm told by our club representative, have instructed its delegate (director) on the NC to vote against moving forward with the purchase at this time.

Edited By Martin Harris on 12/05/2015 12:04:03

+1 - I am for the idea of a NC in principle, I just don't want to see the association bankrupted by a decision based on a sketchy business model that relies on best case assumptions and leaves nothing in the pot for contingencies or emergencies.

Edited By MattyB on 12/05/2015 12:08:52

[Erfolg]

I must admit that BEBs assessment has put forward a view of what the BMFA is, which I have pondered having read the constitution and had great difficulty in understanding what it is.

Yet at this time my concern is a NFC, which broadening the debate could easily derail the debate, which is intended to ensure what ever the BMFA decides to do, is done properly and has broad membership support.

For all its apparent faults the BMFA is the only organisation which represents aeromodellers.

However the ownership of the BMFA doe throw a number of issues. The most obvious who actually owns the BMFA, or what actually is SMAE.

Yet the main question assuming that members do not own the BMFA, as with Friendly Societies, or Mutual Society which I had assumed that the BMFA legally was, rather than a company or a co-operative organisation, why should we bequeath any money, respond to any call for donations. Even the question why should we accept increases in membership?

In my opinion I am prepared to pay for BMFA membership because I not only receive insurance, I also benefit from representation with legal authorities and even get a magazine.

However I would not necessarily be pleased to pay more so the BMFA can increase its assets, at my expense. Then again if it provides a broader benefit to its members (what ever our actual status) i ( a personal view, not my clubs collective view)may be prepared to go along with the idea.

There does appear to be a lot wrong with the BMFA set up at present, although that is not the issue for today. Is this the battle for tomorrow or will many of us decide to give up with the BMFA and just see it as an insurance broker?

Edited By Erfolg on 12/05/2015 12:42:33

Edited By Erfolg on 12/05/2015 12:51:34

[MattyB]

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 12/05/2015 11:05:08:

...So, I would say that the BMFA is doing what it can to ensure that members views are sought and used to guide decisions. If no views are forthcoming then Council, composed of volunteers who give their time for free, have to come to a decision, or as in this case, try and put something together that is well thought out before sending it out to the wider membership. Council has yet to debate the Feasibility Study so asking the membership view on what might be an outcome which is not yet fully thought through might be considered counter productive and draw well deserved criticism for wasting members time.

I see you are still persisting with this point. However, you need to understand it is not whether to progress with the NFC that people are really worried about at this point; it is the purchase of the land. Based on the timeline as they explained in their May 5th update there will be no capacity for the membership to oppose or support the purchase of the land; if full council approve it, contracts will be exchanged on 5th June before anyone outside the full council and area committee chairs has seen the feasibility study or financial model.

Put simply, if as you you state above they are debating "...an outome that is not fully thought through...", should they be going ahead and spending £1.25m of money accumulated from the members on it?!

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I am sure that the LMA and FPV-UK (to name but two) would both be most disappointed to hear you describe the BMFA as "the only body that represents aeromodellers" Erf!

BEB

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Peter, I am not in anyway "mystified" by the body known as SMAE. I am however keen that so-called "members" of BMFA should better understand their real position and the true nature of this company.

BEB

[Erfolg]

I have now had the chance to read a number of postings which were not available to me earlier. I am disturbed.

There does seem to be a view about, by some , that those who do not immediately lend there unequivocal support to a NFC are therefore against.

This view is reminiscent of President Bush, with the invasion of Iraq.

Many of us are not against the NFC, in my case i am not against or for a NFC. I need convincing. I do not like seeing a set of actions which leave me aghast, at the apparent disregard to to many issues to bore you all with again.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/05/2015 12:46:09:

I am sure that the LMA and FPV-UK (to name but two) would both be most disappointed to hear you describe the BMFA as "the only body that represents aeromodellers" Erf!

BEB

 

Perhaps Erf meant the only body to represent the broad spectrum of aeromodellers?

And Matty - I'm fully in agreement with your assessment, other than that it is not simply an investment of accumulated funds but will require substantial borrowing to buy the land - which cannot generate meaningful income without a further substantial investment in infrastructure. Even as a simple flying site for major events, the local authority are already insisting on a relocation of the entrance in order to move it away from the bend in the road.

Edited By Martin Harris on 12/05/2015 13:10:13

[WolstonFlyer]

Following this thread with interest, just adding a comment to get the emails

I am for a NFC but it has to be financially viable and not empty the bank account completely!

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/05/2015 12:48:20:

Peter, I am not in anyway "mystified" by the body known as SMAE. I am however keen that so-called "members" of BMFA should better understand their real position and the true nature of this company.

BEB

I'm mystified by your conclusions BEB - or maybe more accurately somewhat taken aback. They may well be correct but they fly in the face of published information on the BMFA website.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

If you go to an area meeting you get to hear the amount of time these lads put in running events and making a profit whilst doing it and you'll also hear them being critical and questioning monies that have been spent or changes that may have been proposed, so I don't doubt they will speak up when they disagree with something. I've gone to request help funding an open day toilet to be honest so I won't claim to put as much in as these folk, but I do a little bit. Peter says his understanding is The final decision will be subject to a vote at an EGM or AGM, i'll settle for that myself. (I would still prefer a vote as individuals though) If we vote Yes, should any increase in fees come in the future and i'm still Secretary at our club and we get a proposal to source our own insurance, i'll vote against. Anti BMFA garbage ?

John

[Erfolg]

I will be honest, I am mystified by the ownership of SMAE and why, if it is not the members of the BMFA..

As for the representation aspect that I posted. OK, I am mistaken, from many of the articles written by/for the BMFA and many postings here, I had concluded that the BMFA is the only body that CAA for example will officially deal with. Assuming I am wrong, I can only applaud the CAA in being pragmatic and dealing and acknowledging all people and bodies who have an interest.

There is another aspect to this, others could come to represent us effectively if the NFC does come to cause the winding up of the BMFA.

Although i would argue that it is in the interests of many of us for the BMFA to continue (perhaps with reform).

[Erfolg]

I have just been thinking. Why should not members be entitled to be against a NFC?

Surely that view is every bit as valid as those who are intuitively in whole hearted support?

I have had members of our club express a view that is against, I believe that they are totally entitled to such a view. More over not one of them expressed a view that those in favour should be silenced or abused in any way.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Martin Harris on 12/05/2015 13:14:27:

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/05/2015 12:48:20:

Peter, I am not in anyway "mystified" by the body known as SMAE. I am however keen that so-called "members" of BMFA should better understand their real position and the true nature of this company.

BEB

I'm mystified by your conclusions BEB - or maybe more accurately somewhat taken aback. They may well be correct but they fly in the face of published information on the BMFA website.

I don't believe that they do Martin, I think that while all the words on the website are true - they have been very carefully choosen and should not be simply read at face value and invested with their most obvious meaning.

BEB

PS Take a look at this. They have 8 million "members" - they are one of the UK's most progressive "organisations". No mention of the 'B' word (business) or the 'C' word (company) - but do you seriously think they are not a business?

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/05/2015 14:14:50

[Colin Leighfield]

BEB is absolutely right with his point that BMFA is not the only body representing our interests. However, LMA etc. are sectoral interests and we are best protected and our fundamental rights defended by a broad single body which unites us in the largest number. Ideally then the other associations should be affiliated and this maximises our authority and potential "clout". I have assumed that they are?

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/05/2015 14:10:34:

PS Take a look at this. They have 8 million "members" - they are one of the UK's most progressive "organisations". No mention of the 'B' word (business) or the 'C' word (company) - but do you seriously think they are not a business?

But RAC "members" don't have elected/nominated member representation on the board via clubs and area councils either.

My hope is that the BMFA is operated as a business on behalf of its members but I'm not going to argue either way as I don't have the expertise. Perhaps an informed representative of the BMFA would care to comment?

[Erfolg]

Even when things are very similar, they are of course slightly different. It is the similarities which are the important aspects, the differences often just distractions from the general principles.

In the case of the NFC, I do think that the inadequacies of the present arrangements have been highlighted. From the voting structures to poor communications to members.

Once the the issue of a NFC has been resolved, perhaps it is time to think about improving the performance of the BMFA with respect to its ordinary members.

[cymaz]

Posted by MattyB on 12/05/2015 07:21:50:

Cymaz, what was the result of the vote at the meeting you attended? Did your area support it? And how was the gap between the reserves and purchase price being made up - a mortgage?

Edited By MattyB on 12/05/2015 07:23:40

The vote was held by the Cornwall sub Area. Seven clubs attended. There were two votes held

• Do you generally support the idea of a national flyong centre? Carried
• Do you support the purchase of Laws Farm? Rejected

[MattyB]

Posted by cymaz on 12/05/2015 17:09:41:

Posted by MattyB on 12/05/2015 07:21:50:

Cymaz, what was the result of the vote at the meeting you attended? Did your area support it? And how was the gap between the reserves and purchase price being made up - a mortgage?

Edited By MattyB on 12/05/2015 07:23:40

The vote was held by the Cornwall sub Area. Seven clubs attended. There were two votes held

• Do you generally support the idea of a national flyong centre? Carried
• Do you support the purchase of Laws Farm? Rejected

Interesting - that is the second area committee to take that line. We can only hope the rest are similarly sensible.

[Erfolg]

The North West Area has taken a similar line. They have decided not endorse the current site.

There was a full and honest debate, constrained by the two members who are recipients of the study being bound by a secrecy agreement. One who had reservations presented a critical assessment of the proposal and document, the second gave a positive assessment. Both presentations of were madewith  a degree of passion which did indicate it was a true declaration of their positions and what content could be revealed.

A fact that I was unaware of is that the BMFA estimate the total cost of the project is £6m.

There is apparently a vision of the infra structure that a NFC would contain. apparently available on the BMFA site. Which is an archive, exhibition/indoor flying area, museum, office space,a library. All to be open to the general public.

My personal view is, if this information is available, which I do not doubt, it needs to be prominent, not scattered across the site, not requiring extensive searches.

There was a discussion with respect to how real this estimate is. Most peoples life experiences indicate that estimates are rarely high, and this is also very true of cooperate projects. There are some indicators that this project would not be an exception to the general observation.

The location was also examined and discussed. There was a general consensus for probably the majority of the members in the North West the location as presented was not attractive for anything other than a very special event or occasion.

I think that the vast majority were concerned about the lack of information with respect to projected expenditure and income, linked to a NFC.

Both of our presenters who had access to the study document were severely constrained by what they felt to be at liberty to discuss in detail. This restriction I do believe is most unfortunate, personally I am at a loss to understand why.

There is one negative that I fear, those who get to vote on the council, are not all representatives of the regions, some sit as specialist positions, where there was an indication that one at least whose vote would be made  irrespective of the views of ordinary members.

 

 

 

Edited By Erfolg on 13/05/2015 11:22:09

Edited By Erfolg on 13/05/2015 11:35:30

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

To obtain community funding our club had to match the £1400 we where granted either with monies or work/hours, this was done at £11.50 an hour, you soon reach that figure when you start totting volunteer hours up. How lottery funding or other funds work I have no idea. There are an awful lot of volunteer hours put in by BMFA people at all levels, might that mean we could get a big grant ? why the secrecy ? it could be something to do with terms of land purchase law or we have a surprise coming, I have no idea. why mention this ? we are looking at funding so why not.

Soon be Saturday John

[Steve T]

Well I will throw in my twopenuth although they will need far more finance than that. I like the idea, I am not for or against, like several others I need convincing. I'm normally far too optimistic but in this case I can't get my head around how this could possibly be a financial success, hard as I try I can't find enough people, even in my imagination, with time off during the week, most are working people. Those out of work should not be able to afford to visit regularly during the week. Those of us retired tend to keep a tight grip on expenses. Well, that leaves weekends! If the vast majority only attend at weekends we then get overcrowding, can't win here. And no matter what the location is, the midlands are a 2-1/2 hour each way drive for me. No matter how successful this venture turned out to be I would probably only visit two or three times a year. Anyone have an even vague idea how many pilots we have have, BMFA members plus others around the U.K.? Aero modelling is not on the same level as fishing, football, cycling or doing the Hokey Cokey whilst drunk at a wedding. What do you think?

[Dave Hopkin]

Posted by Steve T on 13/05/2015 13:20:22:

Well I will throw in my twopenuth although they will need far more finance than that. I like the idea, I am not for or against, like several others I need convincing. I'm normally far too optimistic but in this case I can't get my head around how this could possibly be a financial success, ...<snip>...... What do you think?

That's one of the things I have not seen, a sustainability plan (assuming all the implementation funding happens) - how is the center going to pay for itself - I would love to see something like the NFC but not at the expense of creating a millstone round the BMFA's neck

To be honest I cant see how anywhere near enough funds could be generated from visiting sports flyers, unless the cost of flying there was extortionate (which would be self defeating) - yes there are the Nats and other shows (LMA, FPV?) that might be encouraged to use the facilities - but that will only be for a handful weekends a year - so where are the running costs coming from - I somehow dont think and aeromodelling museum is going to cause traffic jams of traffic queuing to get in can you?

[Steve T]

I am trying so hard not to be negative, but well said Dave, my thoughts exactly.

[The Wright Stuff]

Posted by Dave Hopkin on 13/05/2015 13:28:36:

so where are the running costs coming from - I somehow dont think and aeromodelling museum is going to cause traffic jams of traffic queuing to get in can you?

To be honest, I can only see how this would be self-sustaining if the longer term scope for activities was upped massively, but I'm not sure how this could be done without further investment. It would basically have to be a family day out, with activities for the children, entertainment for the wife, and enough going on in terms of exhibits to justify a sufficient entry fee... sort of a cross between a UK 'RCHotel' and a mainstream attraction (like the Leicester Space Centre, for example)...

...while I would be quite happy if this was the end result, I don't really see a route to get there...