Cirrus in Sport Aviation

[Joe LaMantia]

Well I don't have a problem with the article, it's one of many that keep me informed on what is available if I win the lottery. I do actually buy lottery tickets, only the ones with big $$$ jackpots it's very cheap entertainment daydreaming about what I would do with a whole lota money! You can't win one of these without a ticket and most of the money goes to state school funds which are badly needed here in Ohio. Today I flew our club TriPacer for 1.61 hours which cost me $120.75 wet, plus a bowl of soup and a Coke ($6.52). The soup was very good since the weather here is excellent, and all the real airport bums were out taking advantage of Springs' arrival. I may never actually own any aircraft new or old, but dreaming is what got aviation started and it's the only thing that can keep it going!

Joe

[Bill Berson]

Through the decades, the organization expanded its mission to include antiques, classics, warbirds, aerobatic aircraft, ultralights, helicopters, and contemporary manufactured aircraft.

http://www.eaa.org/about/ to read the entire statement.

Yes I know that Dave, but contemporary is defined from 1956-1970. Sport Aviation magazine is NOT authorized by the mission statement to include "advertising articles" about factory new airplanes.


(Copied from current EAA Judging Manual)
VINTAGE AIRCRAFT
ANTIQUE, CLASSIC, AND CONTEMPORARY
I. FORWARD
The purpose of this section of the EAA Official Judging Standards is to lay the groundwork for a viable set of restoration, maintenance, and construction standards against which Vintage aircraft may be judged. The philosophy of these standards must meet two basic criteria. One, the system must be simple. Two, the system must allow consistent and fair competition between common and exotic types.
Throughout these standards will be found the one concept that reflects the opinion of the majority of those individuals contacted during the development of these guidelines. That concept is authenticity. The standards are constructed to encourage the individual to complete and maintain a “factory fresh” aircraft. If the individual’s desire is to deviate from this goal for personal whim, or other reasons, the “cost of not conforming to pure authenticity is known in advance.” A portion of the guidelines pertains to the documentation of authenticity as it relates to the aircraft. The exhibitor is encouraged to prove the authenticity with pictures, letters, factory specifications, or any of the means, which will alleviate the need for “judge’s opinion” in determining authenticity.
The exhibitor may assist the inspection by the judges. Judges will not remove inspection plates nor open panels without the presence and permission of the owner.
II. DEFINITIONS
A. Antique Aircraft
An aircraft constructed by the original manufacturer, or his licensee, on or before August 31, 1945, with the exception of certain Pre-World War II aircraft models, which had only a small post-war production, shall be defined as Antique Aircraft. Examples: Beechcraft Staggerwing, Fairchild 24, and Monocoupe.
B. Classic Aircraft
An aircraft constructed by the original manufacturer, or his licensee, on or after September 1, 1945, up to and including December 31, 1955.
C. Contemporary Aircraft
An aircraft constructed by the original manufacturer, or its licensee, on or after January 1, 1956, up to and including December 31, 1970.

[martymayes]

It's a Flying magazine article by a Flying magazine writer. Guess in case you missed it in Flying magazine, you can catch it in Sport Aviation.

[SBaircraft]

Cirrus has been a major customer, and partner, with EAA for many years. Do they sometimes get special treatment? Of course! I'm not complaining because they help support our organization!

As a younger member, I actually enjoy hearing about modern airplanes, composites, technology and advancements. Older airplanes have their place, but aviation will die if we only promote 1930's technology.

[Kyle Boatright]

Cirrus has been a major customer, and partner, with EAA for many years. Do they sometimes get special treatment? Of course! I'm not complaining because they help support our organization!

As a younger member, I actually enjoy hearing about modern airplanes, composites, technology and advancements. Older airplanes have their place, but aviation will die if we only promote 1930's technology.

If you're looking for modern technology, look in the cockpits and engine compartments of experimentals.

[steveinindy]

If you're looking for modern technology, look in the cockpits and engine compartments of experimentals.

Cockpits? Yes.
Engine compartments? Not so much. Other than the variably successful (in some cases, laughably questionable) "modification" schemes, I haven't seen anything modern and practical in the engine compartment of an experimental. In fact, a lot of the "modification" schemes are decades old themselves and are based on technology that has its roots in the 1930s. In many ways a VW engine hasn't been significantly changed since before Ol' Adolf ventilated his skull while holed up in a bunker surrounded by Soviets.

However, I think SB's comment was aimed more at those who are wanting to see classic homebuilts (the various Cub clones and other ragwings, etc) and nothing else. People will gripe regardless about what is in Sport Aviation simply because of differing interests. You have the old timers who want what they grew up dreaming of, you have the young folks who want the latest technology, those who see the airplane as strictly a "Yippeeee!" toy for $100 hamburger runs and occupying traffic patterns and those of us who see aircraft as a means to an end for practical purposes (in other words, as a tool). The problem is that most of the groups want to give no ground. In my case, I don't give a crap one way or the other. I like looking at classic birds. Does it mean I will ever buy one, build one or fly one (unless someone else is footing the bill for it)? Probably not but at the same time I learned long ago that marching in lock step or refusing to move gets us nowhere that is fun nor desirable.

[steveinindy]

Well I don't have a problem with the article, it's one of many that keep me informed on what is available if I win the lottery. I do actually buy lottery tickets, only the ones with big $$$ jackpots it's very cheap entertainment daydreaming about what I would do with a whole lota money! You can't win one of these without a ticket and most of the money goes to state school funds which are badly needed here in Ohio. Today I flew our club TriPacer for 1.61 hours which cost me $120.75 wet, plus a bowl of soup and a Coke ($6.52). The soup was very good since the weather here is excellent, and all the real airport bums were out taking advantage of Springs' arrival. I may never actually own any aircraft new or old, but dreaming is what got aviation started and it's the only thing that can keep it going!

Joe

If I hit the lottery, I could do a lot better than a Cirrus. I would start by paying the EAA to have a separate magazine for the low and slow crowd and one for the rest of us just so these stupid "OMG! BURN THE HEADQUARTERS! THERE WAS SOMETHING NOT HOMEBUILT IN SPORT AVIATION!" threads. Then again, if you did away with these threads you'd cause this forum to wither and die....

[Joe LaMantia]

Well Said Steve!

I danced around that issue, on purpose. If these guys read Jack Peltons' one page editorial they would at least have a clue regarding what EAA represents today. If all they want is articles on homebuilding then read the "Experimentor" and join a Chapter where all the action is anyway. I probably wouldn't buy a Cirrus either but CubCrafters has some really nice modern Cub types if you loaded!

Joe

[Kyle Boatright]

Well Said Steve!

I danced around that issue, on purpose. If these guys read Jack Peltons' one page editorial they would at least have a clue regarding what EAA represents today. If all they want is articles on homebuilding then read the "Experimentor" and join a Chapter where all the action is anyway. I probably wouldn't buy a Cirrus either but CubCrafters has some really nice modern Cub types if you loaded!

Joe

I have plenty of respect for Jack. But I think the continued path of EAA away from its core is a mistake.

If the trend continues, we're going to have AOPA and AOPA Lite (with a good airshow). Is that inspiring enough to bring new people into aviation? If we're going to maintain or grow GA (and we probably won't, if we acknowledge the reality of today's society), we need to inspire 10 year old kids so they want to be 20 year old pilots and so they will make the investment of time and money to reach that goal. Selling point to point transportation in a Cirrus or a Pilatus isn't going to do it. EAA needs to sell the fun and excitement of aviation. Not 30 pages per issue of "How not to kill yourself". Not "For only $600k, you could have one of these too.". Fun and excitement.

Without passion, GA and EAA are in for a continued graveyard spiral...

[miemsed]

You do not need to build a plane to have passion for aviation. The thrill of flight is just as great for flying point to point as it is for flying a home built if you just love to fly. I know a number of young people who love flying and have no interest in building a plane. I also know some who would love to build a plane. EAA is doing well to include both.