Nats planning request

[Dave Rolley]

The following is posted for Brenda Schuette, the AMA Nationals Control Line Category Manager.  Please respond to the email address she provides.

Hello there everyone. 

As you know, the 2008 AMA Nationals are now done and over and the planning meeting for the 2009 Nationals is right around the corner.  Even though the number of control line contestants have leveled off over the past few years they are down substantially from the 1985 NATS which was the first one that I attended.  We have seen a few new faces but for the most part it is the same people year after year.  My question to you is what do we need to do to either bring back some of the competitors that used to attend when the NATS traveled around the country or how do we attract new competitors?  Since I do not frequent any of the forums, please e-mail me your thoughts and/or suggestions to blschuette@cox.net.  I would like to present them to the NATS Planning Committee at the planning meeting the last weekend of September. 

Thanks for your help.

Brenda

[Richard Grogan]

She answered her own question.....Put the NATS back on the road!

[peabody]

Another thought would be to raise the dead....

[Bradley Walker]

Lower the price of gas, plane tickets, and improve the economic outlook of the average consumer.

The Nats attendance is directly related to these factors.

Also, the CLPA Nats is too long.  It is nearly a week long now from beginning to end.  Add in drive time and you have nearly two weeks of vacation time for a model airplane contest.

Not everyone has a couple months of vacation every year or is retired.  Many younger people have jobs and families that have to be included in their vacation plans.

[Brett Buck]

Lower the price of gas, plane tickets, and improve the economic outlook of the average consumer.

The Nats attendance is directly related to these factors.

Not everyone has a couple months of vacation every year or is retired.  Many younger people have jobs and families that have to be included in their vacation plans.

   I agree, but I think it's the time more than the expense. At this point, it's essentially impossible to count on being able to fly to the Nationals. So you have to drive. It's a *long* way from the real hotbeds of activity.

   I don't agree it's too long, however. For many participants, it's a two-day contest. If you have to drive for 6 full days, I sure want at least two days worth. Change it to a 2-day contest (say, one day of qualifying and then a Top 20 flyoff), and most people would find the 6 days of driving for two flights even less appealing than now. That's how it got to be a 4-day contest in the first place- because people complained about spending $1000-$2000 to get in one or two flights.

   For stunt, I don't think that the attendance is really a problem, and I doubt that the current attendance is less than it was in the mid-80s. If we doubled the attendence from this year, it's very marginal whether or not the facilities could support it. It was certainly strained to the limit in 2004-2005 with 50% more than this year. Stunt, in the last few years, is close to the largest single event at the entire nationals depending on how you count.

The other events, however, have just plummeted. I won't speculate why, but it's undeniably true. I think it probably reflects the overall decline of the event everywhere, but it may be that there are people flying the event locally but don't for whatever reason decide to go to Muncie. I sure don't see a lot of people flying anything but stunt, even at the NWR and other larger local/regional contests, but obviously I wouldn't go to a big non-stunt contest, so it's possible that they exist but I just don't know about it.

    As long as it stays in Muncie instead of moving around (which will almost certainly never happen), I don't see a lot changing.

     Brett

[Arch Adamisin]

I had an interesting talk with Dr. Sandy Frank at the past Nat's and he told me that AMA would allow any of the special interest groups to move their portion of the Nat's anywhere in the country that they wanted on a one time only basis. So, if you want to move it, you have their permission.
I'd personally like to see the Nats consolidated again, with all disciplines competing on the same site during the same time frame, the way it used to be. To you guys that weren't fortunate enough to experience those old Navy Nat's, you really missed something.
Even if the AMA would move the Nat's bi-annually, or even every third or forth year, that would be something to look forward to. We could all start looking for available sites around the country, if we knew there was a chance the Nat's could happen there. It's very apparent that the city of Muncie doesn't appreciate the millions of dollars that it's received from us boys with toys. Some years ago, I had the privilege of listening in on a Nat's site selection by way of Big Art. Back then, the Nat's brought about 10 million dollars into a community that hosted the Nat's. That's not chump change to a lot of struggling areas. In fact that's a lot of money and a huge bargaining chip when talking to city fathers about a perspective site.

     Arch

[dave shirley jr]

I'm a little qurious where this was posted or how it was gotten ahold of?
for instance why doesn't brenda send it to all the email addresses that the AMA has for all of us , or why not send it to the SIG. you know, "PAMPA".
i will be emailing her but it would be nice to know where this originated
Dave jr.

[Mike Keville]

One thing Brenda might want to do at that meeting is ask them to modify the Nats entry form by deleting "Classic Stunt".  Classic is of course an unofficial, PAMPA-sponsored event.  The $10 entry fee is collected on-site by PAMPA personnel . . . despite the fact that the AMA asks for the same amount with that entry form.

In the past 2 or 3 years we had several contestants arrive just before flight time, thoroughly convinced they were already entered.  Imagine their surprise when they discovered they were not (despite year-long announcements and reminders about "registration ONLY at the L-pad pavilion").

[Paul Smith]

Nats scheduling:

Actually, for a major contest, travel Saturday and Sunday, competing Monday through Friday, and return travel Saturday-Sunday is the best possible use of time.   Only the farthest corners of our country are outside of two-day driving range.  $4.00 gas didn't kill Brodak and Sig.

Nats Location:

Muncie is a good approximation of middle America, short of having the contest on a wind-swept desert. (OK sometimes it's a wind-swept grassy field). A lot more centrally located than the old "Navy Nats", Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Dallas, Chicago, etc.  AMA's past-Navy efforts at lake Charles and Washington State weren't all that "central".

AMA Field is nice.  They cut the grass and bring you water.  The Boy Scouts sell good food. Thank God and Hardy Brodersen for Muncie.

[SteveMoon]

I sent Brenda lengthy e-mail and she responded the same day, which was great.
I told her that, personally, I like going to Muncie for the Nats. To get out of the
Texas heat and go to a small town for a week in the summer is a real treat. I also
told her that we try to take full advantage of the flying site. We chuck HLGs every
night and usually bring along an RC park flyer or two. Why not take advantage of
such a great site? I really don't think that turning the Nats into a traveling show will
increase overall attendance. It may increase it in regions that are near the location,
but it would likely decrease in regions far from the location. I'm sure Pasco is a
good example of this.

On the downside, I told her how I am always amazed that there is absolutely zero
publicity about the Nats and AMA in general in the Muncie area. I've been to the Nats
every year it's been in Muncie and have never even seen a billboard for the AMA/Nats.
It seems to me there should be 2 (one in each drection)billboards on I-69 as it nears
Muncie extolling the virtues of the AMA site and especially the museum. Indiana is loaded
with great museums; Indy Motor Speedway, Auburn-Cord-Dusenberg, Studebaker museum,
and others. For those that spend their summers roaming the American highways, going
to museums, parks, and monuments I am sure the AMA Museum would be a great
point of interest. Simply getting people there would be a great first step.

As mentioned earlier we spend a lot of money in Muncie. It would seem that if the AMA
could illustrate this fact to the govt. of Muncie effectively, then the two could work
together to promote the site and facilities.

Later, Steve

[Bradley Walker]

Nats scheduling:
 $4.00 gas didn't kill Brodak and Sig.

True.

[Bradley Walker]

I too like Muncie as a town, and I love the flying site and watching other types of modeling, but the traveling Nats would be super cool.

I never got to do the traveling Nats.  I would like too.

[Gene Martine]

    You might want to be careful what your asking for. Its bad enough that RC almost takes over the entire AMA site!
Been there on Wednesday before competition to use the site and couldn't because of RC flyover!!!!! We finally got on the site Friday afternoon.
Gene 

[Paul Smith]

The old Navy Nats was great.

But they were based upon a sponser who contributed full size air bases, barracks, hangers, chow halls, and hundreds of "volunteer" workers.   Unfortunately, that's history now.  AMA's efforts to continue the rotation at contestant expense weren't as good.

An AMA "traveling show" type of Nats, financed by entry fees would be prohibitively expensive.  Like the Indy 500, the Daytona 500, The Masters, and the Kentucky Derby, it is where it is.

[Bradley Walker]

    You might want to be careful what your asking for. Its bad enough that RC almost takes over the entire AMA site!
Been there on Wednesday before competition to use the site and couldn't because of RC flyover!!!!! We finally got on the site Friday afternoon.
Gene 

I never minded the fly overs.  I never understood the big deal.

Flying models kind of goes with the whole modeling thing...

[john e. holliday]

You guys/gals forget that the reason the NATS is so big or spread out over several weeks is because of RADIO CONTROL.  Also we don't have the big open sites for free flight like they used to.  That is an event we don't get to see during control line week anymore.  The different control line events that lack participants is because of us.  I myself have not pushed the grandaughters to get them ready for a NATS.  How many adults are working with young people to get them ready for competition.  I myself also like the one location for a NATS as now I know where the restaurants are.  There is also knowing the town a little better.  No I didn't get lost all those times, I was just site seeing.  Granted Stunt has the big turn out if you count all the unofficial events.  At times I wish AMA would go back to official events only.   I do not think that stunt has to worry as I read about reagenal/local meets that have good turn outs.  Go back to the days of the Navy NATS and compare to today.  All the events have become specialized as far as equipment and cost.  But, as stated before, it is amazing how many local people I meet every year that don't know we are there.  My ramblings,  DOC Holliday

[peabody]

When the Nats and Team Trials began being held in Muncie on an permanent basis, I thought that a whole bunch of "less good" fliers were going to miss the Nats experience because they weren't local.
It seemed stupid, too, that those that wished to participate in the Team Trials would have to journey twice in side of three months.
I proposed (several times actually) that PAMPA run the National Championships in the years that the Team Trials were held. Figure five regions (Northwest, Southwest, Mid-South, Southeast and Northeast) and hold the Nats in those areas.

I believe that there could be a roving Nationals and that the semi-annual return to Muncie would be cool.

 

[Bradley Walker]

An AMA "traveling show" type of Nats, financed by entry fees would be prohibitively expensive. 

What are you talking about?

Why are you assuming a traveling Nats has any expenses at all.

I could have a Nats down the street from my house in the parking lot I practice in.

In Dallas we have several private airports, drag strips, multiple entertainment facilities, arenas, etc etc

All have more asphalt or concrete areas than the facilities in Muncie.

I had a contest in Norman, OK in the parking lot of Lloyd Noble Arena (where OU plays).  We used a tiny corner of the parking lot.  We still had more space for practice circles than they have at Muncie. 

It cost nothing....

Please stop talking about money.  Model airplane contests do not pay to use facilities.

[Richard Grogan]

Nats scheduling:

  AMA's past-Navy efforts at lake Charles and Washington State weren't all that "central".

AMA Field is nice.  They cut the grass and bring you water.  The Boy Scouts sell good food. Thank God and Hardy Brodersen for Muncie.

I don't recall the Navy having anything to do with the Lake Charles Nats(Thats a new one, I was there). The NATs were held there because the LARKS (Lake Area Radio Kontrol Society) wanted it there, persued it and got it. It was held at Chenault Field, a former USAF facility. It is a fine example of "if you want something bad enough, persevere and you shall recieve". I doubt there are local clubs today willing to make that kind of commitment and get involved with local goverment and business planning to promote such a task of magnatude. I bet if everyone did their homework and looked into it, they'd find there are facilities available in all of the districts, and with those findings approach the AMA with the list.

 And heck, that might expose model aviation to other parts of the country! Heaven forbid!!

I know that's a pipe dream though, as its too easy to just conform to"what it is"...or maybe, we be LAZY!

[Scott Jenkins]

Gentlemen,

Having a thousand acres of concrete to fly on really is not the main problem
of taking the Nats back on the road. It is the threat of liability, when the owners
of that chunk of concrete you want to use relate that you will be required to have
several million dollars of insurance to cover any mishap for the duration of the contest.
Then see how the use of those concrete expanses vanish before your very eyes.

      

Scott

[Brett Buck]

What are you talking about?

Why are you assuming a traveling Nats has any expenses at all.
Please stop talking about money.  Model airplane contests do not pay to use facilities.

   Running the traveling NATs cost *fantastic* sums of money and ran at a loss every time they did it. The main reason it will never return to traveling is cost - it's much cheaper to run it at Muncie than it is to move it around. If we insisted on a traveling NATs the way it used to be it would get cancelled entirely.

     Brett

[Brett Buck]

AMA Field is nice.  They cut the grass and bring you water.  The Boy Scouts sell good food. Thank God and Hardy Brodersen for Muncie.

   The Muncie site is FAR better than any of the rotating NATs I went to. FAR better. But that's not the issue - with the inability to travel by air, the hotbeds of activity (PNW, CA/AZ) are just prohibitively far away for many potential participants.

    In any case, I still don't think she is referring to stunt, it's one of the biggest individual events at the nationals including R/C and FF. The other events are the ones that are hurting.


      Brett
   

[RC Storick]

One thing that has been mentioned is the lack of advertising. Its not just a local thing (however it would be nice to see some local adds) its national adds. I think if they went on a campaign to make it more enticing to the other modelers around the country it would help. Of coarse there is the cost of a week in Muncie. I like the Muncie NATS but its only 5 hrs away for me so I can see the point of travel. If it was truly central US it would have been in my back yard in St.Louis, center of the US for at least shipping.

Now back to the AMA. I had heard they didn't care on way or the other about holding the NATS. It was more of a nascence to them. Someone better wake up. Just as NASCAR and NHRA drive the auto industry so does the NATS for modelers. They have cut out NATS coverage in the MAG (bad move) and no advertising.

Just my 2 cents

[Doug Moon]

wouldnt it work out to about the same number of competitors but just different faces if it traveled?  I mean when it goes west many more from the west show but far less from the east show and vice versa.

I have been under the impression, and have been told by several who have been around the stunt block, the Navy nats and the judging were one of the main reasons stunt began to decline.  Then PAMPA came and a more solid set of judges came about, due to training and judging clinics.  PAMPA promoted the event to the people who quit coming and it started to slowly gain again.  Now there is a set site with a set time and usually a set of judges.  One has a very good idea of what to expect personnel wise and level of execution wise, not weather wise.  Now you want it to go back to the (not so good) old days??  I dont follow.

Yes it is a huge commitment to go to the nats.  But as they say, if you want to be national champ that is part of the game.  I dont think the time frame will change any time soon.  It is not a two day contest as has been said.  It is a 4 day contest.  Sunday for appearance and the Tuesday and Wednesday for qualifying rounds.  That is a 4 day time frame at least.  But, it is what it is and that is fine by me.  I plan to attend again soon.

Brodak and Sig are a weekend contest.  They wont suffer as much at the hands of the economy like the nats will.  It is alot easier to make a long weekend even in tough times as opposed to the nats.  The nats will take a beating long before the weekenders will.  Brodak and Sig are also no trying to determine the national champion in Jr Sr Open and Advanced.

[Doug Moon]

One thing that has been mentioned is the lack of advertising. Its not just a local thing (however it would be nice to see some local adds) its national adds. I think if they went on a campaign to make it more enticing to the other modelers around the country it would help. Of coarse there is the cost of a week in Muncie. I like the Muncie NATS but its only 5 hrs away for me so I can see the point of travel. If it was truly central US it would have been in my back yard in St.Louis, center of the US for at least shipping.

Now back to the AMA. I had heard they didn't care on way or the other about holding the NATS. It was more of a nascence to them. Someone better wake up. Just as NASCAR and NHRA drive the auto industry so does the NATS for modelers. They have cut out NATS coverage in the MAG (bad move) and no advertising.

Just my 2 cents

Roberts,

One thing to remember is MA goes out to every modeler in the AMA, something like 150K!  I am with you they should really pump up nats ads and ESPECIALLY in that publication.  It would be free in that case.

Then afterward bring back the nats issue.

[peabody]

Brodak is certainly NOT a weekend contest.....
The costs that our AMA incurred were for getting their personnel to a Nats site, lodging and feeding them and for moving the necessary "props" that some events require (speed cages, r/c pylons and cages, etc.).
Stunt is unique in that all the Academy does is collect money (half the entry goes to the Academy) and provide electric and water to the site (oh yeah, they print the judges shirts, too)...PAMPA pretty much provides the rest.....
Stunt could easily be moved to Brad's parking lot, or to a California site or wherever and the results e-mailed to the AMA.
I thik that exposing ational level flying to local types does a lot to grow the sport.

[Bradley Walker]

Having a thousand acres of concrete to fly on really is not the main problem
of taking the Nats back on the road. It is the threat of liability, when the owners
of that chunk of concrete you want to use relate that you will be required to have
several million dollars of insurance to cover any mishap for the duration of the contest.

We have several million dollars worth of insurance, through the AMA.

The AMA can easily provide proof of that insurance.  I did just that very thing to get permission to fly on private property near my house.  The AMA sent the land management company a copy of the insurance rider as requested.  No problem.

Call the insurance specialist at the AMA.  The AMA can provide special insurance if required at additional cost I believe, but it is not significant.  The AMA is expressly there to provide insurance services to modelers and provide insurance for contests.  This is nothing new.

Look.  People have events all the time on private property.  Modelers have events on private property all the time.  Insurance is not expensive for events like ours and certainly not out of the ordinary.

Even if insurance money were an issue, that is what SPONSORS are for (oh yah, we do not use those).

[Bradley Walker]

   Running the traveling NATs cost *fantastic* sums of money and ran at a loss every time they did it.

Define "fantastic" to the nearest thousand please. 

Also, I want to know what cost so much.

Wasn't the Nats like the WHOLE Nats.  Like, indoor facilities required as well as concrete, open fields, etc etc.  You know for indoor rubber, RC, free flight, control line, etc etc

I could imagine this would INDEED require a massive facility.

A stunt Nats would not require anything but a parking lot and a tent.

[Bradley Walker]

I have been under the impression, and have been told by several who have been around the stunt block, the Navy nats and the judging were one of the main reasons stunt began to decline. 

The Navy Nats were much larger than the later ones, so I have no idea how you would define "decline".

Control line was the dominant form of modeling at the time. 

[Doug Moon]

I define decline as people not coming because they perceived the judging to be lame and JSO pretty much left meant that you were driving across the country to not be competitive.  Maybe it was after the NAVY nats that the real decline started but it did happen JSO only and poor judging were two of the major culprits of the decline.  I thought this was common knowledge.
 

[Trostle]

(clip)

Control line was the dominant form of modeling at the time. 

The magazines used to provide a tabulation of entries by category and by event at the Nats.  By whatever terms you measure Control Line as "the dominant form of modelying at the time", I am not sure what "time" or period you are referencing.  However, as I recall the magzaine tabulations for various Navy Nats, Free Flight had by far the greatest number of total entries.  In fact, the entry for 1/2A Free Flight would exceed or at least approach the total entries in all Control Line events.  Maybe Control Line was "dominant" by some other measure, but certainly not by Nats participation.

Keith

[Bradley Walker]

I should have said "one" of the dominant forms of modeling.  My point was that it was certainly more than it is now (RC being the dominant form about 20 to 1). 

Bob G. said that in the early 1970's they were selling more Top Flite G. Noblers in one month than all of the stunt kits probably sold all year counting every vendor in the country (I do not have exact figures, this is just an estimate).

[Trostle]

I define decline as people not coming because they perceived the judging to be lame and JSO pretty much left meant that you were driving across the country to not be competitive.  Maybe it was after the NAVY nats that the real decline started but it did happen JSO only and poor judging were two of the major culprits of the decline.  I thought this was common knowledge.
 

Doug,

It is not clear what data you are using to speak of any decline in Nats CLPA over any period.  By all reports that I remember and from my experience, during the early to mid 60's, Open stunt would have 40 to 60 entriies.  In the late 60's to early 70's, Open stunt would have 40 to 60 entries.  These periods included the Navy sponsored Nats and then when the Navy dropped their sponsorship (after 72 or 73?), the AMA had a "traveling" Nats to different parts of the country.  Participation at those earlier Navy Nats as well as the later traveling non-Navy Nats was sort of dependent on location.  For example, the West Coast Nats, whether Navy or post Navy had the lowest turnout overall including CLPA.  After PAMPA took over managment of the Nats CLPA event in 1974, CLPA Open entries seemed to continue to be in the 40 to 60 range.  Now, with the combined Open and Advanced categories, total entries are generally in the 60 plus range and sometimes might approach 80.  

Junior and Senior participation has probably declined significantly from what it was in the early 60's.  However, the decline has been from a maximum entry of probably fewer than 12 or 15 in either category in any year.

I do not have specific data to back up these numbers, but I venture these numbers or more accurate than a blanket statement that there was a "decline" in Nats CLPA participation in any period and then trying to ascribe some reason for that unsubstantiated decline.

Keith

[Brett Buck]

Define "fantastic" to the nearest thousand please. 

Also, I want to know what cost so much.

Wasn't the Nats like the WHOLE Nats.  Like, indoor facilities required as well as concrete, open fields, etc etc.  You know for indoor rubber, RC, free flight, control line, etc etc

I could imagine this would INDEED require a massive facility.

A stunt Nats would not require anything but a parking lot and a tent.

 I suggest you do you own research on the exact cost - the budget was regularly published in AMA News for years. Try 1995.

    But the costs included - payment of AMA personnel to travel, cost of transportation of equipment (an 18 wheeler, as I recall) cost of materials (scoreboards, etc), costs of providing food vending, local emergency services, payment for venue rentals, payments for additional site insurance, on and on. As I recall, the NATs lost, regularly, on the order of $10-20,000 a year. 10 people to travel for a week or so = $10,000 just for hotel and per diem.

   The NATs cost was a continual source of argument inside the AMA and with the sport flier community. It was quoted as a cause in the SFA debacle. 

    Yes, you could hold a stunt contest in a parking lot. It wouldn't be free - local contest budgets, near as I can tell, are in the $500 range for a one-day local. And rest assured it would cost something for the rental. And you aren't putting on a local stunt contest- you are putting on virtually every event in the rule book. It was extremely difficult and costly.

     Brett

[Brett Buck]

Control line was the dominant form of modeling at the time. 

    Dominant? 1/2A Gas has been one of the the largest single event and FF Gas (all classes) has been the largest category since the 30s. More recently (not in the Navy years, since it was not practical until after the Navy stopped) R/C Soaring has been doing pretty good. In 2004-2005, C/L stunt appears to challenge both, depending on how you count. I don't think even R/C pattern, which was a big deal in the mid-late 70's, ever beat FF Gas as far as NATs entries go.

   Most of the "decline" to which you refer from the Navy NATs days is from the drop in FF modeling, which dominated the entries from the beginning until probably the early 70's. C/L events other than stunt have of course plummeted in recent years. You may have a point if you say that C/L held the hobby together between Sputnik and the early 70's when R/C took off in earnest, but stunt had been very steady, according to those who were present at the time.

   Once again, I am not going to do your research for you, but I suggest looking at "Do You Speak Model Airplane?" by Dave Thornburg for an accurate history of the NATs, and also this website:


http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats/regstats.aspx?yr=2007


 for more modern data.

     Brett
   

 p.s. Looking at the numbers for the data at the AMA link above, I think I see the issue in black and white. While stunt has been very steady (at 70-80 entrants in J/S/O/Advanced) over the years since 1998 (ignore 2004 as an anomaly), the other events have really gone down. As I said on SSW, that's a very interesting tabuation of data.

[Howard Rush]

Combat was really big for awhile-- sometimes bigger than 1/2A FF, as I recall.  Open combat had 135 contestants in 1972, the last Navy Nats.   

[Brett Buck]

It is not clear what data you are using to speak of any decline in Nats CLPA over any period.  By all reports that I remember and from my experience, during the early to mid 60's, Open stunt would have 40 to 60 entriies.  In the late 60's to early 70's, Open stunt would have 40 to 60 entries.  These periods included the Navy sponsored Nats and then when the Navy dropped their sponsorship (after 72 or 73?), the AMA had a "traveling" Nats to different parts of the country.  Participation at those earlier Navy Nats as well as the later traveling non-Navy Nats was sort of dependent on location.  For example, the West Coast Nats, whether Navy or post Navy had the lowest turnout overall including CLPA.  After PAMPA took over managment of the Nats CLPA event in 1974, CLPA Open entries seemed to continue to be in the 40 to 60 range.  Now, with the combined Open and Advanced categories, total entries are generally in the 60 plus range and sometimes might approach 80.  

    And in 2004, depending on how you count, it was on the order of 120.  The lowest I have seen was in Lubbock in 1994 -  I think there were 28 in Open and 30ish in Advanced.

    This year (without the Brazilians) were were back to the sort of number we had traditionally gotten  - mid-low 70's, I think, total and not counting OTS/Classic where a lot of people doubled up.

    I wasn't present back in the 60's or early 70- how were combat, racing, carrier entries at their peak?

     Brett

[Brett Buck]

Combat was really big for awhile-- sometimes bigger than 1/2A FF, as I recall.  Open combat had 135 contestants in 1972, the last Navy Nats.   

   As opposed to 3 or so (in fast), in 2006. That's what probably prompted the original question.

     Brett

[Chris McMillin]

I'm a little qurious where this was posted or how it was gotten ahold of?
for instance why doesn't brenda send it to all the email addresses that the AMA has for all of us , or why not send it to the SIG. you know, "PAMPA".
i will be emailing her but it would be nice to know where this originated
Dave jr.

Dave,
I got an email from Brenda directly. I assume that she sent it through PAMPA or AMA lists.
Chris...

[Bradley Walker]

 I suggest you do you own research on the exact cost - the budget was regularly published in AMA News for years. Try 1995.  

I am not the one that made the statement with the ** around the *cost*, you are...

Again, it is irrelevant to know the cost of a total Nats.  A stunt Nats requires simple facilities in caparison.  Finding an equivalent to the Muncie control line stunt facilities would not be difficult.

That being said there is no reason in the world the stunt Nats could not travel.

[peabody]

Actually Brad, the reason is that the Academy would lose a significant chunk of change that contributes to the follies occurring elsewhere on the site.

[Dave Rolley]

I'm a little qurious where this was posted or how it was gotten ahold of?
for instance why doesn't brenda send it to all the email addresses that the AMA has for all of us , or why not send it to the SIG. you know, "PAMPA".
i will be emailing her but it would be nice to know where this originated
Dave jr.


Dave,
I got an email from Brenda directly. I assume that she sent it through PAMPA or AMA lists.
Chris...

Very simple answer...  The message was posted as a favor for a friend that does not participate directly in the forums. 

Why the forums rather than direct email?  The forums reach far more folks than those that have their email's registered with the AMA or any specific SIG.

Dave

[Howard Rush]

I have found that if you are willing to volunteer to do something, the AMA is very helpful.  I'm sure they would give you a list of things to be done and their costs if you ask.