Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 116 of 116

Thread: Doe Mac McClellan Write For EAA?

  1. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by WLIU;39582...

    Personally, I find the stories about "this guy screwed up and died", or "I really scared myself so don't be me" unpersuasive. When I speak about safety I try to tell folks how my many bad friends found themselves in a jam aloft and worked their way out of the grasp of Murphy or Mother Nature to make a safe landing, or at least a landing that they could limp away from. My belief is that explaining successful coping and aeronautical problem management techniques and strategies is a [U
    lot[/U] more useful to our peers than simple "don't fly there" messaging.

    Best of luck,

    Wes
    THAT is an extremely useful approach. Have you had a chance to read Durden's "The Thinking Pilot's Flight Manual"? Seems to have an approach similar to yours.

  2. #112

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    24
    I feel as if I was treated very fairly at those times when Mac has answered an email of mine to Sport Aviation, and at all hours of the evening, too. That fella works long hours for the EAA, and I thank him for it. But (there's always a 'but' in comments like mine) the general topics Mac covers in Sport Aviation do not, in my opinion, belong there. Flying, yes, AOPA, yes. Ours, no. While respecting and welcoming the various interests of general and experimental aviation, I think the EAA needs to work its own side of the street, so to speak, and not do the other fellow's job for him. If Mac's bizplane articles can get an audience in publications that pursue that clientele, good for him and the publishers. But I think that publisher should not be the EAA.

  3. #113

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    24
    I just read Rob Erdos' comments about his conversation with Mac over the content of Sport Aviation, and by implication, the future of EAA as seen through the eyes of the good and the great. I've gotten the impression, over the last few years, that the EAA good and the great know what's best for the organization and the role of the membership is to shut up, sit down, and bring money. The emphasis, of course, is on the 'bring money' part. I get the impression that as seen by 'leadership', the organization is more important than the membership. I regard those collective attitudes as the means by which the organization will lose its reason to exist. I think it is not correct that the EAA wants to be the focus of influence for GA in general, there is another organization that does that. I think we need to be the voice of the homebuilder, warbirder, restorer, historian, and recreational pilot. That's plenty enough to do. We don't need to try to thoroughly cover every element of general aviation, and won't do a good job at it; the tasks are too many with too many conflicting goals to successfully be addressed around one table. My opinions.

  4. #114
    TedK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pax River MD
    Posts
    365

    If not Us, then Who?

    I am sympathetic to those who cherish EAA's legacy and their concern that EAA's tent is growing too big.

    A couple of thoughts:

    EAA has grown from its original roots of homebuilding and experimentation. It now includes builders, restorers, warbirds, aerobatics, light sport, kit building and experimentation. It grew its scope without abandoning anyone.

    There are things that AOPA probably ought to be doing that EAA is. I have high hopes for Mark Baker and AOPA, but I am skeptical of their ability to regain a populist legitimacy.

    IMO, EAA remains more of a member focused organization than AOPA. While EAA isn't perfect, it's organization structure favors staying in tune with its membership. AOPA seems to be more of a business that is interested in helping its clientele.

    I am in favor of EAA being the big tent of personal aviation. If that means opening the tent wider, like it did to foster Sport Pilot, then so be it. It probably ought to be called the Personal Aviation Association, but somehow that sounds too much like "me, me, me..." Add Interests as they develop without forsaking existing interests.

    I would urge everyone to join both EAA and AOPA, participate, and nudge both organizations toward safeguarding personal aviation.

  5. #115

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    24
    Ted, I agree that we ought to join both organizations, for nothing else but to add to the weight of the head count of each. And I do maintain membership in both, but the EAA offers members opportunities to contribute hands-on, which I think is a tremendously rewarding way to do some active good, and is unique to the EAA.

  6. #116

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    161
    I don't read much from Mac.... His articles seem to drip disdain for anything other than IFR flight and the newest (read: expensive) gimmick.

Posting Permissions

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