Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 116

Thread: Doe Mac McClellan Write For EAA?

  1. #31
    Mayhemxpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia
    Posts
    800
    We know that people who can make changes in EAA read what is posted on the forum. We have seen changes because of it. With that in mind, I want to be on record as saying that I think Sport Aviation is great and I look forward to it coming in the mail every month (whatever time in that particular month that happens to be.)

    I agree that Mac's column seemed better placed in Flying than SA. Do I think that SA magazine suffers from it? No! (But I do think that Flying definitely lost something when Mac and Lane left.) Not everything in every -- or perhaps any -- issue interests me. Not everything speaks to my particular special interest area in aviation (that is, if I could ever be so narrow as to say that I have a particular "special interest.") On the other hand, there is a great deal in each issue that I find fascinating. But again, I think that EAA is MUCH more than JUST E-AB.

    Keep up the good work!

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhemxpc View Post
    I think that EAA is MUCH more than JUST E-AB.

    Keep up the good work!
    I don't think anyone has suggested that EAA should be limited to EX/AB. However, I will point out that the magazine is "Sport Aviation," not "Piston Twin IFR" or "Turbine Single" magazine. Those articles and columns are so far removed from what EAA is about, including them in the magazine is a real puzzler.

  3. #33
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Floatsflyer View Post
    To make a fair assessment analysis of the pros and cons of EAA membership, you should first get a clean piece of paper. On that paper draw a line down the middle. On the left side jot down all the benefits(perceived and actual) of membership. On the right side jot down Mac's writing in SA.

    If you honestly choose the right side as your reason for membership cancellation then you are figuratively cutting off your nose to spite your face.
    I understand that you know what benefits I receive from EAA better than I do, but Mac is simply one cog in the wheel of the direction of EAA. I just chose not to roll with that wheel anymore.
    Ryan Winslow
    EAA 525529
    Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Omro, WI
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by jjhoneck View Post

    The mag is nice, and always provides good bathroom material -- but if it went away tomorrow, I would still belong to EAA.

    Exactly!

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    EAA basic membership is the immense sum of $40. So Ryan, if you save $40, what are you going to spend it on? Maybe ICE FISHING ILLUSTRATED?

    Seriously, if the magazine really is not your taste at all , you can probably get the membership and ask them to skip the mag or donate it to your local FBO or dentist office or lunch shop.

  6. #36
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    197
    EAA membership could be $5, but if it's not something I wish to support, then I wouldn't spend that either.
    Ryan Winslow
    EAA 525529
    Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction

  7. #37
    TedK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pax River MD
    Posts
    365
    Sometimes I think Mac is a blessing in disguise. He occasionally says something that motivates me to action.

  8. #38
    miemsed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyfalcons View Post
    EAA membership could be $5, but if it's not something I wish to support, then I wouldn't spend that either.
    If you do not wish to support or be involved with EAA, why are you here. Just wondering.
    States visited with my Piper Challenger




  9. #39
    Mac has a current article in this months Sport Aviation titled "En Route Risks". He states that E-AB aircraft are under represented in fatal weather accidents. He then goes on to express his "obvious opinion" that E- AB aircraft fly mostly locally as to the reason they are not crashing as much as certifieds. Also, since they fly mostly locally they won't generally aviate if the local conditions are poor or windy. After reading that I actually flipped the magazine over to double check that I was reading EAA Sport Aviation.
    IMO, the reasons that E-AB has less fatal weather accidents is:
    * exp planes are generally better equipped to deal with weather as they are not as encumbered in adding state of the art equipment as certified a/c are.
    * exp pilots tend to have more experience
    * how does he think all those E-AB aircraft get to Oshkosh?
    I live on an air park where 20 years back everyone had certifieds, now nearly everyone here owns higher end experimentals. In just the past week several of my neighbors had made flights in home builds of over a thousand miles. Also, gusty crosswinds are the norm here and doesn't impact our flying much. Mac is clearly not in his element when stating opinions on aircraft he has very little experience with.
    Last edited by flybuddy; 11-15-2013 at 08:08 PM.

  10. #40
    Mayhemxpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright View Post
    I don't think anyone has suggested that EAA should be limited to EX/AB. However, I will point out that the magazine is "Sport Aviation," not "Piston Twin IFR" or "Turbine Single" magazine. Those articles and columns are so far removed from what EAA is about, including them in the magazine is a real puzzler.
    Kyle, You have a good point. As I said, his articles seem better suited to other magazines and I enjoyed them very much in Flying. My point is that I do not think his articles in SA detract too much from an otherwise great and evolving layout. But you know what else? I believe that I am very much part of EAA and I believe in all of the things it does. I also happen to own a piston twin and I fly it IFR. It happens to be an O-2A and I do not feel that flying it is at all, "removed from what EAA is about."

    I will be happy to suggest to Mac (through this forum) that he might try to understand his audience a bit better. For example, in this month's article, it is all well and good to remind all of us in the sport aviation community who fly IFR of the risks in a circling approach (as though one is likely to forget how hard it is in benign conditions during an annual IPC.) That could apply to me and it could just as easily apply to a friend of mine who flies IFR in a very nicely equipped RV-8. In describing how to meet those challenges, he should describe things in a broader context than just a fully modernized B-58 (or heavier metal.)

    Chris Mayer
    N424AF

Posting Permissions

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