I agree 100%. The prevailing rationalization by the pinheads in Oshkosh seems to be that the mag should reflect the fact that fewer are building aircraft. The reason EAA was founded in the first place was to PROMOTE homebuilding. J Mac and his ilk just don't get this or care to.....Originally Posted by Clarke Tate
You are more than welcome to complain about EAA to your heart's content - it's your right as a member, but when you start calling names you've crossed the line. Keep it clean folks! This has been a public service announcement from your friendly neighborhood moderator...
Maybe there would be less compaining if the gentlemen in Oshkosh would do more listening and less "explaining."
Does the EAA Board and/or staff really listen to the members? I say that not to throw stones at anyone. IOW, as human beings, we regularly solicit input from others, yet we don't always use the information given to us.
Sometimes an organization really needs to have a gut-check from its members to find out the direction to follow. Several Chapters have done just that - after many years, does a Chapter membership prefer to continue/start more project activity, or change/stay as more of a social/educational interest.
Chad (I think it was Chad) mentioned that 2/3rds of the members want to have a more overall view of aviation. Not gonna argue that since I haven't seen the data, but I'd like to know how the data were gathered. As in, how many members are members only because they became members to get the AirVenture discount, vs the "core" members that are out there every day promoting EAA? So....if the 2/3rds "majority" were a result of a poll at AirVenture, could the data have been skewed?
So here's what I propose: Have National do a *serious* poll of its members. I don't care that that would include the AirVenture discount-seekers. Send out a postcard to all members. Allow either a postcard return with your vote, or provide an access code to vote online (one vote per member). PUBLISH the results; perhaps even have a "running tally" so users can view online.
I believe, and I'm willing to be corrected, that those who really care about the future of EAA will get out there and vote, whereas the casual members probably won't (any psych majors can dispute this assumption).
As a result, the Board should make some decisions. Now, getting back to the "do they listen" part of my post, it's very possible that even if a majority DON'T want turbine stories, the Board may have data that indicate that to remain financially viable, we HAVE to include turbine interests. If we that direction is orthogonal to the wishes of the membership, can't we vote-out the Board? Would we WANT to vote-out the Board (and I'm not saying we should) if we KNOW the data that drove their decision?
We just need some transparency, folks. I'd really like to have the innocent belief that core EAA staffers firmly believe in our roots.
I believe that it's important to also include those who are NOT EAA members, especially those who once were.
I think that its a highly valid point to consider that there are thousands who have joined the EAA just to get into AirVenture at a discount. If I'm not mistaken, one would have to be not very bright (I'm being kind here) to purchase a week-long pass and not get a membership. I believe that at that point, the membership is free- the cost savings from non-member fees compared to member fees pays for the membership... and then some.
So the idea that our organization is being tailored to those who only joined to get the discount is a little upsetting to say the least. How many of us would have gladly joined AARP at the age of 40 if it meant Disneyland tickets where discounted? Would that mean that AARP would need to change their organization to accommodate the wants and needs of 40 year olds? Or maybe a better analogy would be for AOPA to accommodate the specifics of homebuilders since many of us are members of that organization too.
...and then there are those who joined the EAA so they could also be a member of the local chapter to have a fun time with their airplane buddies, who don't give a rip about experimental aircraft- like the VAST MAJORITY of the members of my local chapter- these guys joined the EAA as-is, and now it's being tailored to them???
As the editor of EAA's Experimenter eNewsletter I monitor in excess of 120 various experimental aviation email groups (seeking out articles and keeping abreast of what homebuilders are doing), and it's disheartening to see how many active builders are NOT EAA members. It would be my guess that if we could get these builders, and wanna-bee builders, to come back to (or to otherwise join) EAA, our 1/3 number could easily rise to be in excess of 51%.
One last thing. It's probably a given that there won't be any changes to Sport Aviation in the near future- at least none that would strongly favor experimental aviation. The plan for 4-5 years in the making has been to create a general aviation publication, one that could be enjoyed by ALL members, and to relegate the specific information (experimental, ultralight, warbirds, etc.) to electronic newsletters. So if you are complaining that EAA has moved away from homebuilding (made manifest in Sport Aviation), and you are not subscribing to Experimenter, then maybe you should give it a try before solidifying your thoughts that EAA is no longer interested in experimental aviation.
Experimenter IS EAA's homebuilder's publication!
Pat
So the actual builders like myself get an online newsletter but Warbirds, Classic and general aviation get nice slick magazines. My membership expires 9/12. If EAA wants to cater to the general aviation public at the expense of the core membership so be it.
Actual builders still get a slick, award-wining magazine with not less than 25% of it's pages dedicated to the homebuilder, and countless other pages of general interest to your love of aviation. But you also get an electronic publication (Experimenter) with videos (have you seen the Hints for Homebuilders???), web links, specific builder information, as well as news that's in some cases, only hours old, not months old.
And if that's not enough, there is Light Plane World that features homebuilding and some store-bought ultralights and S-LSAs. Also available to you is Bits and Pieces, a Canadian homebuilt electronic newsletter, as well as EAA's weekly newsletter e-Hotline- that's packed with tons of homebuilder's news each week. Here's a full list of all the newsletters available: http://www.eaa.org/newsletters/
What you as an actual builder get is the best of both worlds- print and electronic. But remember, you are a pilot too, AND you like all things aviation related, so even if you feel that some of the articles that have appeared recently aren't relevant to you, they really are.
The amount of information available to the homebuilder, through EAA's various publications (print and electronic) would take a montly magazine the size of the Sears catalog to deliver it all in print each month... and the information contained in it would be three months old when it arrived.
This is germane to the discussion in two ways:it's disheartening to see how many active builders are NOT EAA members.
First, the EAA is far more than SA magazine or Air Adventure. It's a huge resource pool of knowledge that has been vetted and checked for accuracy. Even if the local chapter has turned into a social club or isn't convenient to visit, the web resources are enough to warrant membership for the homebuilder.
When I talk to a homebuilder that isn't a member I point that out as well as the aviation advocacy the EAA does, which is important.
Second, the EAA really should pay attention to the public face it shows. I will probably never go to Air Adventure. It's too far, costs too much money, and features large crowds of people looking at displays for my liking. I understand why it's continuously pimped out - it's a huge revenue generator for the EAA - but at the same time sort of disheartening; one wonders sometimes whether Air Adventure exists to support the EAA or if the EAA exists to support Air Adventure.
When one can take the current issue of Flying and Sport Aviation, remove their covers and find them nearly indistiguishable from each other one wonders if the organizations aren't redundant.
I have found that homebuilders (in the main) eschew the corporationalism of aviation. We're individualists by nature - who else would take the proposition that they can build an airplane themselves that will be as good if not better than that built by a factory?
When SA concentrates on spam cans - especially those foreign to the typical GA pilot (let alone a homebuilder) - there's naturally going to be a sense of alienation....and presents a hurdle for someone talking up the important parts of the EAA.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
Pat, a lot of us have problems accessing the online content - not everyone has a super high speed connection. My office connection is comcast, but I am at the end of the line & it is pretty slow, My parents house is still on dialup, as are probably 50% of the EAA members I know (like most every member that lives in a rural area).
As far as people who join just to get a discount, I know several people who did that, either to fly in the B17 or to attend Oshkosh once, and after the first year they did not renew.
They don't care about their core members, they care about the money.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote