What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

See you later E!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you don't read the magazines.....

I never even open the magazines, unless something on the cover catches my interest.

AOPA will let you discontinue the mag. with a $20 membership.
EAA won't do that.
 
For those of you who have stated that you believe that EAA and AOPA are fighting for your interests, have you actutually verified that they are? Have you looked at the 990 filings to see if the salaries they pay are justified? Can you cite specific examples where either group has directly influenced legislation or rule changes? Have either of the groups been completely transparent in reporting their finances to their membership?

Probably not.
 
I too place GA advocacy ahead of all other reasons to remain a member of EAA and AOPA. The AOPA is generally superior in advocacy (vastly so in airports and airspace), but the EAA is expected to lead in a few areas (notably experimental issues) and does.

Safe to say almost all AOPA members would rank GA advocacy #1 on their list of reasons for membership. It is a clear (and successful) brand image, unrelated to any particular aircraft or pilot category.

In my opinion, there lies a fundamental problem with the EAA's course. We no longer have a strong brand image. "All things to all aviators" is not a brand. Sadly EAA has become Airventure, the only thing 100% identified with the EAA.....a carnival, too much of which is of no interest to the core membership.

Numbers do tell a tale. AOPA has 2.5x more members than EAA. The current EAA board is heavily stacked with business people for whom growth is a mantra. In the internal view looking out, the market is obvious. The question becomes "How do we attract the quarter million pilots who are not already EAA members?". The obvious answer is to cater to their interests. You're seeing the result, both at Airventure and in Sport Aviation.

The decision is the correct one if the membership numbers grow significantly. Big membership is good for advocacy. If the numbers do not increase we can only hope for the guts to admit it was a poor choice.

The right choice? I think a member organization should be driven by adherence to a core ideal, much like a charitable or civic organization. Growth for the sake of growth is not desirable if it compromises the core ideal.....which is closely related to the "brand" I spoke of earlier. I think EAA should concentrate on its traditional core (builders, restorers, warbirds, and innovators). Its first priority should be providing the advocacy necessary to keep the passions of the core possible in a tightening society, with the next priority being a place to display the results. Those who are interested in what the EAA core does will join and attend, as they have always done. The rest merely dilute the brand, if you can attract them at all.
 
Last edited:
WOW! there are some really smart people here

I don't have nuthin' to add but when I look at the cover of Sport Aviation fron April 1962 in the "EAA'S LOGBOOK: WHERE WE CAME FROM" on page 136 of the April 2012 issue of Sport Aviation right under the name of the magazine I see:

HOMEBUILT
REPLICA - ANTIQUE - RACING - ROTARY WING AIRCRAFT

I did not add the emphasis on "homebuilt". And, close to my heart, when did racing get replaced by warbirds?

Bob Axsom
 
For those of you who have stated that you believe that EAA and AOPA are fighting for your interests, have you actutually verified that they are? Have you looked at the 990 filings to see if the salaries they pay are justified? Can you cite specific examples where either group has directly influenced legislation or rule changes? Have either of the groups been completely transparent in reporting their finances to their membership?

Just off the top of my head every issue of AOPA details ongoing fights, successes and failures of keeping various GA airports open. I believe they also have updates on various legislative and policy matters they work with, but your question as to the specifics is a valid one, and I will admit I would rather spend my time building and playing guitars, and building my -7, than take the time to research it to the extent that I would have to if I undertook such a task. So I will fully admit I cannot defend my position with specifics you ask for.

Having said that, I have been in many areas of professional and recreational aviation long enough to see a slow and gradual increase in restrictions and complications put on all facets of aviation, and anything or anyone that shows a willingness to slow that process down will get my support, especially if I know they have the money and connections to be even a little effective.

I cannot think of anyone else who might do what I am looking for other than EAA and AOPA, even if what they do is very little and they are overpaid. I do not mean to be snarky, but I feel without the clout (read "money") and connections in government both groups have, there would be absolutely no one with any power to influence those who make policy looking out for our interests as aviators and builders. We are, and will always be, a teeny, tiny minority of the population as a whole, and between the way the media portrays us, and the way the general populace feels about airlines, much less GA - much less Experimental Aviation - I think we would be history in rather short order without those groups.

But you are correct, it's just my opinion. No facts. Worth exactly nothing, not even 2 cents. I do not criticize those who disagree with me, or think less of them in any way. I just state why I support them, and will admit if anyone can show me I am wasting my money and time, I will rethink my position.

So I guess my question to those who feel these groups do not represent our interests, or deserve our support, would be - and no disrespect intended - do you then feel there is no threat of our pastimes being legislated nearly out of existence, as it is in almost every other country in the world, and is there no need for reasonably powerful lobbying groups? Or is there someone better suited to it I am unaware of?

Respectfully,
Damon
 
So I guess my question to those who feel these groups do not represent our interests, or deserve our support, would be - and no disrespect intended - do you then feel there is no threat of our pastimes being legislated nearly out of existence, as it is in almost every other country in the world, and is there no need for reasonably powerful lobbying groups? Or is there someone better suited to it I am unaware of?

Respectfully,
Damon

The biggest threat to GA is the cost of flying. I don't believe anyone is trying to legislate GA out of existence, but I do see that the government sees GA as A. an unnecessary budgetary burden or B. as a new source of tax revenue.

As for the alternatives...I can tell you that there is one congressman that does more for GA than both of these groups combined, and I believe its far more effective to support pro-GA members of congress. I have a friend who advises this particular congressman on many GA/FAA-related issues.
 
Just want to point out to the whole "EAA doesn't care about homebuilders crowd" that I posted a few months ago that I'm doing an hour radio show every day at noon on EAA Radio during Oshkosh. I solicited people to submit the stories of their builds to me and maybe we'll have them on for one of the 15 minute segments to talk about homebuilding. Got VERY few responses.

I'll have no trouble finding plenty of people to interview to put a face on homebuilding an aviation -- all I have to do is toll the grounds in the evening. But the situation is symptomatic of the way we are. We want things to change; we just don't want to do a heck of a lot to contribute to that.

Ever been an EAA chapter newsletter. It's the worst job for most chapters because, despite constant pleas, you almost never get anyone to submit anything -- a story, a tip, anything.

But, boy howdy, do they ever have opinions on what everyone else should do to cater to them personally.

I'm bored by it now. If people want to stay... stay. If people want to go. Go.

Just find something else to talk about.

Me? I'm going to go do a pitot/static test and then work on my flight testing phase -- both thanks to articles I read in the last two months in Sport Aviation.

BTW, this entire issue this month was about safety issues, including Ron Wantajaa's (I know I spelled it wrong) significant article on the causes of homebuilt accidents. But that has nothing to do with homebuilders, i suppose.
 
Last edited:
The biggest threat to GA is the cost of flying. I don't believe anyone is trying to legislate GA out of existence, but I do see that the government sees GA as A. an unnecessary budgetary burden or B. as a new source of tax revenue.

As for the alternatives...I can tell you that there is one congressman that does more for GA than both of these groups combined, and I believe its far more effective to support pro-GA members of congress. I have a friend who advises this particular congressman on many GA/FAA-related issues.

I agree with you that most likely no one has an particular agenda of legislating GA out of existence, but always adding more regulations and making it more complicated for us to build and fly is one reason it is more expensive to fly now than it used to be. Compare the regulatory structure on building and flying your own airplane back when EAA was first founded, and the way things are now. My point is, it's death by 1000 cuts, over time it will become too burdensome and expensive for the vast majority of us to fly, much less certify a home-built aircraft and thus we will be "legislated out of existence". It will all be done with the good intentions of keeping the skies safe, and the general public safer, of course. But the end result will be the same, we will be done. It's happening slowly, but happening nonetheless.

And I also agree that supporting pro-GA members of congress is the most effective way to fight this. I am under the impression that is exactly what the lobbiests of the EAA and AOPA do. They know who to talk to, who weilds what powers in what commitees. I admit I have absolutely no idea on how deals really get made, or influence is used in Washington by lobbiests or any special interest groups, but it has been my experience in life that money is a good tool in convincing people of your point of view, and more money is better. Maybe I am too cynical, but it's how I think, anyway.

I certainly respect anyone that feels the EAA does not represent their interests, or has any interest in their views, DanH makes some great points about the dangers of leaving your core group behind as you grow. I don't feel like my congressional representatives really listen to me, though I let them know how I feel about things from time to time, so I can sympathize. I guess for me the bottom line is money talks, and I feel that supporting a group that has both some money and the ears of influential people is the best way for me to protect what I hold dear.

Perhaps if I had been more of a part of the "old" EAA I would be more dissapointed in the way things are now. I spent most of my recreational aviation time with the IAC, not the EAA, and think it's still going pretty well there, both in listening to the concerns of members, as well as addressing the many threats to our sport. Its true participation is down these days, including mine, unfortunately, and you would be correct in saying that is the direct result of increasing costs. I also know the IAC formed after some of the members of the ACA were dissatisfied with the way things were going there. Things change. If enough people are unhappy with EAA that they see they are losing members, especially many long time members, instead of growing, perhaps they will take notice.
 
If enough people are unhappy with EAA that they see they are losing members, especially many long time members, instead of growing, perhaps they will take notice.

That is my hope and my motivation behind not renewing.
 
Just want to point out to the whole "EAA doesn't care about homebuilders crowd" that I posted a few months ago that I'm doing an hour radio show every day at noon on EAA Radio during Oshkosh. I solicited people to submit the stories of their builds to me and maybe we'll have them on for one of the 15 minute segments to talk about homebuilding. Got VERY few responses.

I'll have no trouble finding plenty of people to interview to put a face on homebuilding an aviation -- all I have to do is toll the grounds in the evening. But the situation is symptomatic of the way we are. We want things to change; we just don't want to do a heck of a lot to contribute to that.

Ever been an EAA chapter newsletter. It's the worst job for most chapters because, despite constant pleas, you almost never get anyone to submit anything -- a story, a tip, anything.

But, boy howdy, do they ever have opinions on what everyone else should do to cater to them personally.

I'm bored by it now. If people want to stay... stay. If people want to go. Go.

Just find something else to talk about.

Me? I'm going to go do a pitot/static test and then work on my flight testing phase -- both thanks to articles I read in the last two months in Sport Aviation.

BTW, this entire issue this month was about safety issues, including Ron Wantajaa's (I know I spelled it wrong) significant article on the causes of homebuilt accidents. But that has nothing to do with homebuilders, i suppose.

Well put Bob.

Folks this is basically the same conversation we had last fall. Nothing wrong with that, but I want you all to know that regardless of how many times we talk about this or similar topics, I am listening.
 
...Ever been an EAA chapter newsletter editor. It's the worst job for most chapters because, despite constant pleas, you almost never get anyone to submit anything -- a story, a tip, anything.

But, boy howdy, do they ever have opinions on what everyone else should do to cater to them personally.

I'm bored by it now. If people want to stay... stay. If people want to go. Go.

Just find something else to talk about...

Well said, Bob. That's the way I feel.

I've been an EAA member 19 years and an AOPA member 28 years, and don't regret either membership one bit. If I drop either membership, I won't post here that I've not renewed.

This thread is close to having served its purpose, which is apparently to let people vent their gripes. It certainly doesn't have much to do with building or flying an RV.
 
So, do we have any actionable items here?
Seems that some are calling for a boycott of EAA and/or AOPA. Personally I won't make that choice. It does not fit my mission or my situation to do so.

If anyone has a better idea on how I can make a difference given my busy life schedule, I am all ears.

When tough decisions need to be made, the content of your character shows. Look back on sloshkosh. Homebuilts were allowed to land while the factory built planes had to find another airport.
 
aviation ..... a lot like music, and cars, and .....

I think Dan makes an excellent point here..........The right choice? I think a member organization should be driven by adherence to a core ideal, much like a charitable or civic organization. Growth for the sake of growth is not desirable if it compromises the core ideal.....which is closely related to the "brand" I spoke of earlier. I think EAA should concentrate on its traditional core (builders, restorers, warbirds, and innovators).

...but the CORE has changed, you have to admit. Every one of us that has a GPS in the cockpit has willingly moved with technology that was never a part of our core. Likewise, when a guy who started out making surfboards ( ok, foam & fibreglas planes) now is building spaceships, you have to admit that our world is moving in a new direction.
When your local radio station found that not everyone wanted to listen to Rock & Roll, and then Country, and then Hip-hop, and then R & B, what happened?
When the demographic and population justified it, a new station sprung up.
We are at a crossroads where the home-builder and the jet jockey are sometimes the same person, but more likely each needs their own association.
Here on the RV forum is an example of that happening already. Who would ever think that 14,000 people would be focused on one aircraft type? That's more than the entire EAA membership in the early 60's.

Welcome to the future....it is now.
 
...

Ever been an EAA chapter newsletter. It's the worst job for most chapters because, despite constant pleas, you almost never get anyone to submit anything -- a story, a tip, anything.

...

Well yes I was. I put out 10 pages every one of the 12 months. Throwing an open invitation to the chapter doesn't work for sure. You have to search out the stories and put the newsletter together in a way that is well organized with fresh information.

What cooled me about EAA Chapters, is the Young Eagle eliteists, the dedication of every activity to some form of eating and the complete lack of interest in flying as a group activity.

I had planned many flying trips for our group in California. When I retired to Arkansas I planned a trip to Bowling Green, Kentucky with group rates on accomodations, ground transportation, a conducted special tour of the National Corvette Museum and the Corvette production line in the factory. I think the cost was $55 per person. In spite of some positive lip service not one solitary sole from the chapter made the trip except for Jeanine and I. There are just some incompatibilities of us human types and I am completely incompatible with the EAA chapter mold so I recognized that and dropped out but the EAA as a national organization is another thing altogether. I think I'm there for the duration. My image of it is pure and that is enough for me.

Bob Axsom
 
...but the CORE has changed, you have to admit.

No, not really. Kits have merely expanded the core. Building remains building, restoring is the same, warbirds are warbirds, and innovation is still the reason for the word "experimental" in our name.

I want you all to know that regardless of how many times we talk about this or similar topics, I am listening.

Chad, I have three questions please.

First, can you explain why an EAA Oshkosh Grand Champion has to write his own two page article, while the Director of Publications takes four sections and eleven pages for rehashed subjects you could find in any aviation magazine?

Second question.....Why is it necessary for both you and Jeff Skiles to spend seven pages of column space defending EAA's "all encompassing" new direction?

Third question....who paid for the DC-7 time and fuel?
 
Third question....who paid for the DC-7 time and fuel?

Did SA have a DC-7 included? If so, very cool. I haven't read all of these re-hash threads again. I'd rather read about a DC-7, than 1/2 of a Volkswagon engine, anyday. In the meantime, I don't have a subscription anymore. But it's not because I'm boycotting, or anything like that.
 
If you want a fun fly-in that is put on by pilots for pilots, come to the Triple Tree Fly-in September 5th through the 9th.

Just about anything can land at SC00.

Not sure what this thread's focus is...maybe just to air some festering gripes. I'll add this to the mix:

My favorite fly-in was years ago before the thought entered my head that I could build or even own an airplane. I was a member of a club that fortunately had a wide variety of aircraft from J-3 and Aeronca to Cessnas to V-tail Bonanza. Anyway the fly-in was literally that: no airshow, no fire-and-explosions BS, no vendors, not even advertised except by word-of-mouth. It was on a dichondra field that the owner, a member of a local EAA club, would open once a year to aircraft for the fly-in. The club held a BBQ and baked goods and that made money for them, the only economic activity for the event. Imagine the fun of flying in to an unmarked field, landing a J-3 on a dichondra field and watching all the other aircraft. More homebuilts and taildraggers than spam-cans. Wander the edge of the strip gaping and gawking at the variety of airplanes. Then a BBQ lunch with home-made baked goods. On leaving I'd always do a few extra circuits to enjoy the grass field--many others did the same.

Those were the days, but the owner died, the son wanted nothing to do with planes landing on his commercial dichondra field and it came to an end. C'est la vie! It never could have remained the same because everything in America is "follow the money". EAA, like everbody else is following the money. I appreciate their homebuilding videos and their advocacy to the FAA so for $40-$50 a year I'll remain a member. As for the magazine, whatever, I subscribe to Kitplanes but only a couple of articles in that interest me each month.

Nothing is perfect except at least with the plane you build you can make it as perfect as you want. And with that, I'm back out to the garage to build that perfect airplane :D
 
What cooled me about EAA Chapters, is the Young Eagle eliteists, the dedication of every activity to some form of eating and the complete lack of interest in flying as a group activity.

I feel your pain. I dropped out because the chapter was more about talking politics than planes, violating my cardinal rule -- No politics. No religion. No primer.
 
Chad, I have three questions please.
Sure thing Dan...

First, can you explain why an EAA Oshkosh Grand Champion has to write his own two page article, while the Director of Publications takes four sections and eleven pages for rehashed subjects you could find in any aviation magazine?
We don't require anyone to write their own story...but many times that story is best told by the owner/builder/winner. The opportunity is there for people to tell their story. That's what we want to see in the features on EAB's. If someone has a story to be told and they don't want to write or can't provide, then by all means, we have people that can and will cover the story. It's a two way street.

Second question.....Why is it necessary for both you and Jeff Skiles to spend seven pages of column space defending EAA's "all encompassing" new direction?
Jeff and I write completely independently of each other. I can't comment on the what and why of Jeff's column, but for mine, I had a moment if inspiration one evening a couple months ago, and decided to write it down. I sent the article to pubs, and they liked it. Simple as that. There was no other defensive motivation or incentive to sell "new EAA". No one told me or asked me to write that piece. I spent four hours of my own time one evening in my office writing it.

The feedback I've had on that column has proved to be overwhelmingly positive from people feeling the same way. There are plenty that don't, but that's fine too.

Third question....who paid for the DC-7 time and fuel?
Good question...and one that I can answer with certainty. EAA wasn't out a single penny on that story. The Historical Flight Foundation paid for all fuel for Jeff and Sully to participate in the FUNDRAISER flight. It was not done as part of an EAA initiative to get Sully and Skiles typed in it. It was a fundraiser flight for the HFF, and they were able to use their names to draw attraction to the flight.

Jeff paid for all other expenses personally.
 
I feel your pain. I dropped out because the chapter was more about talking politics than planes, violating my cardinal rule -- No politics. No religion. No primer.

I currently belong to my third EAA Chapter. It is a great chapter and I am very happy as a member. I looked at another chapter in this area before joining the one I now belong to.

I also belonged to two different chapters when I lived in MN. The first one did not meet my needs or expectations and the second one did. Every chapter is different, and I migrated to the ones that met my needs. Nothing wrong with that in my book.

A good friend once advised me that "For every pot, no matter how bent and blackened, their is a lid that will fit it" If I recall, he was talking about a mutual friend and his struggle with his love life, but, well............I guess the metaphor works here.:D
 
if you are referring to the 40 ship fly over, that is correct, it won't happen this year. The fears of airplanes flying over the crowds is high since Reno, and all of those involved on the safety team have decided to nix the over flights this year. Falcon flight will still be there, and expect an announcement very soon from HQ about another highly anticipated performance!

I am very disappointed that there will be no 40-ship at AirVenture. Disclaimer: I fly formation, have an FFI Wingman card, and one of the items on my bucket list was to fly over Wittman Field in the big RV formation. But more than that, the 40th anniversary of Vans Aircraft Company deserves something big and tangible. And what would make more of a splash than 40 RVs – homebuilt planes -- flying overhead in close formation?

I’m afraid that without the 40-ship, the Van’s celebration will be underwhelming like last year’s 100th anniversary of Naval Aviation at AirVenture. There were a bunch of Navy static displays painted in “throwback” paint schemes which were nice, and the 1911 Curtiss Pusher was great, but if there was much more than that I missed it. They needed all the US Navy planes in the air and it didn’t happen. The same way the Van’s 40th anniversary needs planes in the air. They should have the 40-ship, Team RV, Falcon Flight, and –I’m sure they will have this – fly-by’s of all the RV models. But again, the 40-ship would be the grand finale. I was there in 2009 and can attest to how impressive the 37-ship was. Even the taxi out and four-ship takeoffs were exciting!

I understand the decision was made for “safety”. But all of the participants are FFI qualified, and they get together before the show to practice and rehearse. I was a career Naval Officer and the FFI procedures, briefings and professionalism are as good as anything I saw in the Navy. They do it as safe as it can be done.
 
Last edited:
We don't require anyone to write their own story...but many times that story is best told by the owner/builder/winner.

If we were speaking in person my response would start with a "B" and end with an exclamation point.....but here I'll just say it's certainly a new editorial position.

As long as any of us can remember, Grand Champions, both Kit and Plans, have been SA front cover features. A senior contributor interviewed for and wrote the article. In this case the senior magazine guy was busy writing about how stupid it was to fly nap-of-the-earth in his Mooney. Contrast with Jack Cox.

...I had a moment of inspiration one evening a couple months ago, and decided to write it down. I sent the article to pubs, and they liked it.

Don't doubt it one bit.

EAA wasn't out a single penny on that story.

Recall I mentioned "Don't assume"?

Nothing is free. The HFF was looking for promotion and cut a deal; they pay the bills in return for placement. It's how the magazine business works. Commercial magazine space isn't much different from supermarket shelf placement. Prime space is compensated. And there lies my point.

Members (distinctly different from "readers"] should be aware of that fact in this new age, because the system all too often generates articles in return for advertising dollars. Unlike the nice DC-7 article, they may not be articles of benefit to the core.....a shame, since SA is still a member magazine.
 
You are Editor

One of the things I like to do with people in my day job is a game called, "You Are Editor."

It's an opportunity to get past the vague "media stinks this and media stinks that" and try to get to constructive ideas.

Let's play YOU ARE EDITOR (cue game show music)

It's June 2012 and you've got 138 page magazine to put out.

You've got 8 commentary/opinion pieces to assign.
You've got 5 MAJOR feature pieces -- 5 pages including sidebars
You've got four items for the "flightline"
You've got all the home builder stuff -- tips and stuff -- but don't worry about those because from what I read here, they don't really exist

OK, start assembling the issue. Maybe we can "group source" it.

and, yeah, I know... the RV-1 will be suggested. That one was easy.

Oh, and don't forget to keep everyone happy.
 
One of the things I like to do with people in my day job is a game called, "You Are Editor."

It's an opportunity to get past the vague "media stinks this and media stinks that" and try to get to constructive ideas.

Let's play YOU ARE EDITOR (cue game show music)

It's June 2012 and you've got 138 page magazine to put out.

You've got 8 commentary/opinion pieces to assign.
You've got 5 MAJOR feature pieces -- 5 pages including sidebars
You've got four items for the "flightline"
You've got all the home builder stuff -- tips and stuff -- but don't worry about those because from what I read here, they don't really exist

OK, start assembling the issue. Maybe we can "group source" it.

and, yeah, I know... the RV-1 will be suggested. That one was easy.

Oh, and don't forget to keep everyone happy.

Forget the 8 opinion pieces. They are gone from my magazine. Rod is welcome to do a "State of the EAA" column on a monthly basis. That's it as far as columns go.

The 5 feature articles are pretty easy. I think I have suggestions below for 8 feature articles, some of which could be condensed.

First, there hasn't been a feature article on a SnF or Osh champion aircraft in a while. Start there with an article on a Contemporary or Classic Champiion aircraft that is a capable X/C aircraft and has 4 seats. Then an article on the Grand Champion Warbird or Homebuilt.

Do an article featuring the Stewart Systems water borne paints. Dig deep into the chemistry, talk to both satisfied and disappointed users. Stewart Systems or some other water borne system is probably the wave of the future. We need some independant reviews of the product.

Go back into history and dig into the Rutan Catbird. One of the more interesting aircraft never to generate a feature article in the magazine.

How about an article on the grand plan for the convention site. It is always mentioned in a sideways manner, but details are not offered.

Let's throw in a feature about fuel efficiency, given that avgas is becoming ugly expensive. What can a pilot do to tweak his or her aircraft to maximize its efficiency?

EAA specific information. I'd love to see a story about EAA's new focus on transparency in finances and direction, plus the improved policies and procedures around electing the EAA board.

Then, let's talk ADS-B. What are the real implications for most of us and what are some economical paths forward for those of us who need access to the airspace where ADS-B will be mandated? Is the best course of action just to wait and see what shakes out?

Additionally, there used to be Chapter Event articles. They were a good source of ideas for generating interest in local chapters. I don't remember any of those articles recently. Let's add 'em back. The EAA is about the people at the bottom of the organization, not the people at the top.

How's that for a start? ;-)
 
Might as well throw my 2 cents in....

I give EAA $30/year for the membership + camping, tickets,t-shirts and some food totaling about $500 for the whole year.
What should I expect in return? Never really thought of it....always felt like I was getting a 100X return being with my family, friends and awesome airplanes.

As for the magazine, it is great for me. It gives me a great balance of articles to read on a trip or at home. Unfortunately, Google killed the "builders tip" sections. It is fun to read about a skill or technique from time to time. Even Van recognized it and cancelled the RVATOR. This website has more knowledge in one year than 50 years of SA magazines, why even try to compete with that?

I am OK getting rid of the "E". I think our planes (RV's) shouldn't be called "Experimental" since they are better than certified aircraft. I am tired of explaining the differences and it probably is not the greatest branding. Lets keep the freedom but change the name, that is something I agree with.
 
Sorry to hear that Bob...if you are referring to the 40 ship fly over, that is correct, it won't happen this year. The fears of airplanes flying over the crowds is high since Reno, and all of those involved on the safety team have decided to nix the over flights this year. Falcon flight will still be there, and expect an announcement very soon from HQ about another highly anticipated performance!

I led a teleconference this morning with those involved in the RV activities, and believe me, DVG day (Monday) is gonna be cool!

Chad,
Nix the over flights?
I can't believe this has happened.
Unbelievable. Why go??
What's for next year....show videos of airplanes flying:confused:

Mark
 
BEEEEEP.

You failed the "keep everyone happy" part. I like RV-8 builder Lauran Paine Jr., and I swoon over Lane Wallace with a fair amount of regularity.

See, I see flying as something more than a technical endeavor. I see it as a passion. You just got rid of the passion and that's fine if that's not your thing.

But I have a hard time believing that 800,000 people who travel to Oshkosh every year would agree.

At the heart of this never-ending debate is the reality that people want EAA to be just for them. It's a completely unrealistic expectation. We have to figure out how to get stuff that interests US in there while acknowledging there's stuff that interests other homebuilders that we might not care about.

I do find it a bit interesting than people in this thread say they haven't read SA in months and then declare there's nothing in there of interest to the homebuilding community. How can that possibly make sense?

And again, I'll point out that in a month in which Ron Wantajaa -- RV guy, by the way -- had an article on experimental aircraft accidents and fatalities -- people are STILL saying there's NOTHING in SA that's for them. The whole recent issue was about safety. How does that not apply to all of us?

Personally, I don't CARE about the grand champion at Oshkosh. Those people aren't like most homebuilders. Give me an article about properly installing washers, or flight testing a homebuilt, or mastering the paperwork of getting an experimental registered. Or give me a story about the guy who built an airplane just on determination and doesn't feel the need to park in the last row at Oshkosh (OK, that's not really possible, those guys really ARE the forgotten members of EAA. :*) )

All of those subjects, with the exception of the last one, have been in SA in recent months.

By the way, the fuel efficiency article was in May 2008.
The Rutan Catbird, originally featured in 1988, was mentioned in the June 2011 issue (and should've had a link to an online article EAA wrote)
In this month's issue, there WAS a really good discussion of ADS-B and what we should do, but it was actually a Garmin ad. Still, I found it full of great information. It's a start and it will lead me to seek more information, specially when I should sell my non-ADS-B airplane. :*)

I think it's important to utilize ALL of the communication tools that EAA has, that includes electronic newsletters and the videos (there was a good 6 minute piece on an '09 grand champion plans built that comes to mind). I'm pretty sure, though, that a few of those recent layoffs were in that department.

But, yeah, less Mac McLellan would be OK with me.
 
Last edited:
Chad,
Nix the over flights?
I can't believe this has happened.
Unbelievable. Why go??
What's for next year....show videos of airplanes flying:confused:

Mark

Seriously? The only reason you were coming to Oshkosh is to see 40 airplanes fly in formation? It's just the 40 ship formation that isn't going to happen. Falcon Flight is still going to fly on two days as far as I am aware.

There are many RV-centric activities planned (air and ground), and a special announcement is on it's way for yet another RV-themed attraction coming to AV this year.
 
It saddens me that more people haven't sat in the back of a pickup in the parking lot of Ardy and Ed's at the end of the runway watching the planes fly over.

An RV formation? Nice, but that's not Oshkosh.

Ardy and Ed's? THAT's Oshkosh.

and Oshkosh isn't about the things you expect to find. It's about the things you don't.
 
... or sat at Friar Tuck's after a long day of walking the airport to enjoy a nice, greasy "Little John" and onion rings.

I discovered a long, long time ago that "Oshkosh" is more than the airplanes. It's people. And not just EAA people, either. I've made life-long friends who live in Oshkosh. I've watched them grow up, get married, have kids, change jobs ... all in one-year updates.

Yeah, EAA is changing. Yeah, "Sport Aviation" is becoming just another aviation magazine. I don't know how many more years I'll take the time to go to Oshkosh, but until I lose my interest in aviation, I'll keep my membership active even if I don't particularly care for the direction the EAA is going. For the lobbying, for the friends I've made, for the help I've received from fellow builders ... it's been a great return on my investment.
 
Seriously? The only reason you were coming to Oshkosh is to see 40 airplanes fly in formation? It's just the 40 ship formation that isn't going to happen. Falcon Flight is still going to fly on two days as far as I am aware.

There are many RV-centric activities planned (air and ground), and a special announcement is on it's way for yet another RV-themed attraction coming to AV this year.

Chad,
Ok, I overreacted. It was late and I was tired.
Oshkosh is about the people. More so each year as I make new friends.
But I have always enjoyed the flyovers. Not just the RV's, all the planes.
I don't agree with this, but I'll wait and see how it turns out.

I hope this year is the best ever!
Thanks,
Mark
 
Chad

Ever since the recent EAA management changes, particularly with Chad Jensen in his new position, I've felt that things are looking up at EAA for the homebuilder/experimental side of things. I was quite glad to see one of "us" in EAA management, and I think it says EAA isn't forgetting us.
brian
 
Thinking of canceling Osh trip

After a week at Sun N Fun I don't think we will be at OSH. Nothing new to see and no real deals from the venders. The night air show was great. The day show was the same thing. Housing at OSH is a lot of trouble. Few hotels and pricing is out of line. I would like to see EAA support more regional shows and them maybe the big show would be something to look forward to. I like may others spend a lot less time reading SA. For what it cost to belong to EAA and what they do for the chapters I will stay with them.
 
Check out this web site http://www.airventure.org/ and tell me what you see, or don't see at the top.

That should answer a lot of questions.

I saw a Cub. It seems that a lot of "homebuilders" like Cubs, since it's been imitated with so many,many versions from plans, kits, and ready to fly. It seems quite fitting to me. A plane for all reasons...

L.Adamson --- would buy a Huskey (kind of like a Super Cub) if I ever win a lottery
 
I think Bill is talking about the Airventure 2012 banner at the top of the page that shows a bunch of Bonanza's and no homebuilts are obviously visible in the picture.

Skylor
 
I see NO experimentals on that front page, nor the words "Experimental Aircraft Association." The closest they get is the modified aerobatic aircraft and the abbreviation E.A.A.
If you get the right banner and wait for the numbers 3&5 to flick by, and look at their "win a cub" link, you can see a cub 4 times.
Again, correct banner and number 4 and the Harrison Ford video link give you 4 P-51s.
Or you can get 8 t-34s
Or 4 "Airshow specific" planes
Are you catching my drift? The only TRUE experimentals I could find were in the background of the "Brown Arch" banner. THE BACKGROUND!
I think I have adequately vented.:p
 
I see NO experimentals on that front page, nor the words "Experimental Aircraft Association." The closest they get is the modified aerobatic aircraft and the abbreviation E.A.A.
If you get the right banner and wait for the numbers 3&5 to flick by, and look at their "win a cub" link, you can see a cub 4 times.
Again, correct banner and number 4 and the Harrison Ford video link give you 4 P-51s.
Or you can get 8 t-34s
Or 4 "Airshow specific" planes
Are you catching my drift? The only TRUE experimentals I could find were in the background of the "Brown Arch" banner. THE BACKGROUND!
I think I have adequately vented.:p

Ding, ding, ding...

We have a winner.

BTW, LA, the picture of the Cub, while a great airplane, is not a home built.

PS. Pressing function key 5 (F5) refreshes the screen and you can cycle through all the banners.
 
Yep

There's no doubt about it. The core HAS become a sidebar. :(

Still goin to the show though. God help me, I do love it so.......
 
You guys are a half day ahead of me on the new banners...we just launched two new ones. Keep hitting F5, they're there...

;)
 
We don't require anyone to write their own story...but many times that story is best told by the owner/builder/winner. The opportunity is there for people to tell their story. That's what we want to see in the features on EAB's. If someone has a story to be told and they don't want to write or can't provide, then by all means, we have people that can and will cover the story. It's a two way street.

Chad,

I just marked my 23rd Anniversary since I started building my RV4 and as many years of EAA membership. The old stickers that came with your membership card had Experimental Aircraft Association written out. Homebeuilders or Experimenters weren't mainstream, we were an anomaly in the overall Aviation scheme, yet Sport Aviation was our mantle and a mainstream voice and you might say printed justification..

With the advent of Dick VanGrunsven and the RV series and sheer numbers we are now becoming the mainstream and everyone else is a sidebar. Unfortunately Sport Aviation isn't reflecting the same level of interest as Kitplanes, in my humble opinion. My last few issues have been ho-hum in comparison. I'm considering subscribing to the IAC mag next renewal. That said, where does EAA go from here? Hopefully not a loss of it's roots, or a good publication.

I for one like the E...

V/R
Smokey
www.fly-4-life.com

PS:Again, great meeting you last summer and stealing your airplane!
One needs to look no further than the T-18 Tiger Tales newsletter to see how the RV group used to be.
 
Last edited:
so, say, for those few who can stomach the rigors of Oshkosh, anyone interested in having a little get-together?

[ed. Now you're talking, Bob! That tent thing last year was pretty low stress (big yellow balloon above it). Wherever I'm in.... dr]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello.

I deleted your recent VAF post about __EAA___ for the following reason(s):

_x_ Civility / Tone
__ Not RV-related
__ Commercial promotion by non-advertiser
__ Mod/Policy bashing
__ Politics / Government
__ Illegal video clip
__ eBay / Barnstormers / etc. (classified-specific rules at: www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=8208)

The posting rules are explained in greater detail at: www.vansairforce.net/rules.htm

If you feel the need, please direct comments regarding this to the owner of the site (Doug Reeves). His contact info can be found at: www.DeltaRomeo.com

Thank you.
Doug Reeves (site owner)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BTW, LA, the picture of the Cub, while a great airplane, is not a home built.

I'm an old guy. I know. However, it sure is copied a lot by homebuilders.

As to the originations of Piper, Beech, Cessna, and a whole lot more, I've read all the history. I'm very good at reading. Okay..........I usually skip over the Volks & Corvair conversions....

Notes 1: Please put my down for Warbirds, Connies, 787 Dreamliners, Airbus 380's, the tri-motor, lot's of factory built seaplanes, factory stuff from the 20's, 30's, 40's..............as just some of the aircraft I enjoy, or would enjoy... seeing at OshKosh, in addition to the homebuilts. A favorite pastime, is to visit a WWII warbird rebuild company in Idaho. A few other friends are personally restoring a Douglas Invader.

Note 2: I don't think much of these "agenda" threads.
 
Aerhed, if Chad is being used, it is by US!! He seems to be doing what he can, when he can. Why would you ridicule a guy for trying? He certainly can't please everyone even if he was Captain of the ship called E.A.A.

I'm not sure exactly what your post meant but I for one can vouch for Chad's character. His heart is in the right place and his position requires a delicate and tactful approach. He's been in there less than a year and I am grateful to have his sort of character rubbing elbows with the brass of this organization. Give him the respect and chance he deserves!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top