Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 74

Thread: EAA Direction (split from website feedback thread)

  1. #11
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    And who is the most prominent poster in all of those unproductive threads?
    Someone needs to provide a counterpoint and Chad and Hal have better things to do that run around trying to quell arguments that probably won't fully go away for at least another 20 or so years and only then through simple attrition.

    Those of us who take issue with EAA's direction are not going to take our ball and go home, we are going to work to try to change things.
    I don't want that. But lambasting the organization for adapting to change (such as following the transition of a large swath of the builders from rag and tube to metal and composite) or featuring expensive aircraft in their magazines (unless they are warbirds....that's an exception that I don't understand precisely since few if any of us will ever own a warbird such as a P-51). However, I do think that the blaming Mac for all that ills Sport Aviation (when the real problem is a lack of contributions from builders and designers) or misguided attempts to slam a significant part of the homebuilding community are not getting us anywhere. How about hearing some actual suggestions that might be productive and supportive to the folks who are feeling left out but aren't destructive or offensive to those of us who aren't seeing why people are getting so irritated?

    Feel free to do the same, but kindly refrain from referring to our opinions as "crap."
    The "crap" is just this attitude that if you're building something high performance or expensive, that it's counter to the "spirit of experimental aviation" as though it is synonymous with "slow" and "cheap". That's what I cite as crap and warn about as being divisive.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by steveinindy View Post
    If the EAA falters and fails because we all can't learn to play nice with each other and stop letting disagreements over such things as our preferred types of aircraft and the content of a magazine splinter us into factions that make a kindergarten turf war not look petty by comparison, then the "adversaries" (to use the impression a lot of folks have; my own opinion is different at least with regards to the FAA) we really should be worrying about- namely the FAA and Congress- will do some real damage and none of us will get to build an aircraft whether it's a Fly Baby or a $500,000 people mover. Either we stand together as brothers (and sisters) or we figuratively die as isolated fools with regards to that issue.

    steveinindy, you are quite the alarmist...lol

  3. #13
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    steveinindy, you are quite the alarmist...lol
    Not really...
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by steveinindy View Post
    It's pretty frequently claimed that RVs are the most commonly constructed homebuilt these days with about 7500 of them built so far (Sport Aviation: 15. January 2012 et cetera). Someone without an agenda would generally look at that as a good indicator that the market has shifted.
    If one is not considered a builder until their project is complete, I might be inclined to agree. However, I don't think one can accurately infer that number of completions represents what kind of aircraft are being constructed. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

    A 1999 paper published by Attorney Robert C. Owens summarized data from a study that indicated there were four completed kit-built aircraft for every one completed plans built aircraft. The overall completion rate for kit-built aircraft is >60% where the completion rate for plans built aircraft is ~5%.

    From your information source I think we can infer that 1) Van's aircraft/kits are very popular and 2) A good kit greatly improves the builder's odds of finishing his project.

    While while you do your best to minimize the efforts of those building low, slow, wooden, steel tube and fabric airplanes, they are out there. Construction progress for those builders is likely measured in years, not weeks or months. The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.

  5. #15
    Just a friendly reminder to play nice folks. Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion AND is welcome to share it here, as long as you remember to keep it clean and not go about bashing folks for having a different viewpoint than your own.

    Zack

  6. #16
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    While while you do your best to minimize the efforts of those building low, slow, wooden, steel tube and fabric airplanes, they are out there. Construction progress for those builders is likely measured in years, not weeks or months. The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.
    I'm not trying to minimize anything. You need to remember that I have more hours in ultralights than I do anything else at this point so I'm not exactly against the low and slow group (I just feel that it doesn't serve my purposes at this point in my life which is no different than someone choosing a Fly Baby over a Pietenpol or a Lancair over a RV-7). I am simply relying on upon the best evidence available that isn't a decade old although that study is interesting. If you have something more recent, I would love to see it but the most reliable data we have is those aircraft that are completed and registered since that is easily tracked. Perhaps a formal survey of EAA members is in order to settle this?

    The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.
    I agree wholeheartedly. I'm a builder in my book even though I have yet to buck a rivet or do any composite work. I'll even give you a ride in the LSA I designed once I get it built to prove the point. The plans for it will be getting sold to help fund the build of the Goshawk, which is the medium sized homebuilt that meets my current desires.

    Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion AND is welcome to share it here, as long as you remember to keep it clean and not go about bashing folks for having a different viewpoint than your own.
    Sorry Zack. I don't mean to cause controversy.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  8. #18
    Chad Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, WI
    Posts
    502
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.
    This brought me a chuckle this morning Frank!
    Chad Jensen
    EAA #755575

  9. #19
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.
    ....such as when flying at Anniston, right Frank?
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    Absolutely! That ridge refuses to yield to aircraft regardless of traffic requests.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •