EAA Mission & Vision Statements

[Kyle Boatright]

These are quoted from the EAA's website:

EAA Mission – "EAA is dedicated to serving all of aviation by fostering and encouraging individual participation, high standards, and access to the world of flight in an environment that promotes freedom, safety, family, and personal fulfillment."

EAA Vision – "Responding to its members needs and society at large, EAA will have expanded beyond current activities and developed new programs to be widely recognized as the premier aviation association in the world. As a result, EAA will have a significantly larger membership made up of traditional core interest groups, as well as new members representing varied aviation interests. Improved and increased individual participation and volunteerism will exist among all members and their families. The organization and its management are structured to enhance the culture, quality, and credibility of EAA and its activities, as well as the organization’s continued growth."


Does anyone know when these statements were updated? They are very much in-line with the new magazine content.

[KDoersom]

Maybe one of us should start a new aviation association the AAA Affordable Aircraft Association. I joined EAA because they seemed to have more of it than AOPA, now not so much.

[Kyle Boatright]

Maybe one of us should start a new aviation association the AAA Affordable Aircraft Association. I joined EAA because they seemed to have more of it than AOPA, now not so much.

It would be better to change the organization's current direction. There is a lot of good in the EAA, but it is moving (IMO) in a direction that is surprisingly disconnected from the organization's roots.

[Chad Jensen]

I don't know the answer Kyle, but I'll see what I can learn this week about it.

[melndav]

It would be better to change the organization's current direction. There is a lot of good in the EAA, but it is moving (IMO) in a direction that is surprisingly disconnected from the organization's roots.I agree. Change is inevitable, but the new direction as well as the new management sure scares me about our future. Many discussions here about how to "meet the needs of the majority of the membership and appeal to a broader range of members...." In an effort to reach everyone I am concerned we are leaving those who made EAA what it is behind. I can't help but wonder how long it is before we drop the "experimental" in EAA all together "to better represent the mission of our association to grow ALL areas of aviation....."

[Bill]

What's the point of having a second AOPA? The mission statement of AOPA is "The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), a not-for-profit individual membership association, effectively serves the interests and needs of its members as aircraft owners and pilots, and establishes, maintains, and articulates positions of leadership to promote the economy, safety, and popularity of flight in aircraft.


We preserve the freedom to fly…"

The EAA mission statement in the original post sounds like a rephrasing of AOPA's to me. I'm a member of both, but if they're duplicating their purposes for existence, why should I pay for two when one will do?

[steveinindy]

moving (IMO) in a direction that is surprisingly disconnected from the organization's roots.

Maybe that's just the natural progression of an organization oriented towards a type of technology as the original generations die off and take their focus on their era's type of that technology with them. I mean, we do have a historic side to the EAA but the last time I checked this wasn't the HAA (Historic Aircraft Association) or the US Ultralight Association (USUA) or the Light Sport Aircraft Association (LSAA) or the Modified Car or Lawn Mower Engine Powered Aircraft Association (MCLMEPAA). It's a big enough group to be all inclusive but you'd never guess it by the attitudes of a lot of folks on this forum who seem to think that those things are all the EAA should be focused on.

Hey, if they want to take people's money in exchange for a few articles about thinks that didn't come out of someone's garage, hey it keeps the "experimental side" funded. I find it rather humorous that the same folks that gripe about articles about TBM-850s or whatever it was are the same ones who get all drool covered when there's an article with glossy pictures of FIFI or some P-51. Last time I checked those where neither built in someone's workshop or "affordable" by anyone but a multi-millionaire's standpoint. The only difference between those and a TBM-850 is about 60 years. So would articles about the first generation of Learjets be OK? I mean, they are after all historic.

So if we want to get back to talking only and featuring "affordable aircraft", let's ground Aluminum Overcast and the Trimotor, stop inviting the P-51s, FIFI, the Air Force F-16s, C-5s, C-17s, F-22s, the guy who does the night airshow in the Twin Beech and all of the other expensive toys that most of us could never get our hands on to Oshkosh. I mean, after all....these aren't what the EAA is all about according to the posts on this thread. Why give so much emphasis to things that came out of commercial factories? Apparently, that's not what Mr. Poberezny envisioned....

[/sarcasm and soap box rant]

[Frank Giger]

Steve,

EAA Mission – "EAA is dedicated to serving all of aviation by fostering and encouraging individual participation, high standards, and access to the world of flight in an environment that promotes freedom, safety, family, and personal fulfillment."

Emphasis mine.

I'm looking at the non-experimental stuff to be a means to an end - to best serve the namesake of the organization the tent must be large.

Take the money from Lear and use it to defend (Lobby Congress) the guy who built his own plane on a budget to have access to airspace, no user fees, and protection from unneccessary regulation and I have few gripes.

Stipulating that aviation has always been (and always will be) expensive, trying to make it accessable to the greatest number of people should be the primary driver. And that means homebuilt and simple single engined spam can aircraft for the bulk of us.

Centering efforts on twins and turbines with cockpits that make the Space Shuttle blush with envy is hardly promoting access to the world of flight.

[dewi8095]

[QUOTE=steveinindy;9334] I find it rather humorous that the same folks that gripe about articles about TBM-850s or whatever it was are the same ones who get all drool covered when there's an article with glossy pictures of FIFI or some P-51. Last time I checked those where neither built in someone's workshop or "affordable" by anyone but a multi-millionaire's standpoint. The only difference between those and a TBM-850 is about 60 years. So would articles about the first generation of Learjets be OK? I mean, they are after all historic. [QUOTE]

An all too accurate analogy for us critics. Steve, not being overwhelmed with experimenters' attitudes, frequently sees things more sharply than some of us. Experimenters, however, do their best to replicate the experience of flying those aircraft out of their price range by building look-alikes. The replica trend is very evident in the WW I era aircraft. Who knows, maybe someone will be building scaled down TBM-850s down the road.

Don

[melndav]

Maybe that's just the natural progression of an organization oriented towards a type of technology as the original generations die off and take their focus on their era's type of that technology with them. I mean, we do have a historic side to the EAA but the last time I checked this wasn't the HAA (Historic Aircraft Association) or the US Ultralight Association (USUA) or the Light Sport Aircraft Association (LSAA) or the Modified Car or Lawn Mower Engine Powered Aircraft Association (MCLMEPAA). It's a big enough group to be all inclusive but you'd never guess it by the attitudes of a lot of folks on this forum who seem to think that those things are all the EAA should be focused on. So if we want to get back to talking only and featuring "affordable aircraft", let's ground Aluminum Overcast and the Trimotor, stop inviting the P-51s, FIFI, the Air Force F-16s, C-5s, C-17s, F-22s, the guy who does the night airshow in the Twin Beech and all of the other expensive toys that most of us could never get our hands on to Oshkosh. I mean, after all....these aren't what the EAA is all about according to the posts on this thread. Why give so much emphasis to things that came out of commercial factories? Apparently, that's not what Mr. Poberezny envisioned....[/sarcasm and soap box rant]But that IS where we should be focused. That and a number of other areas that aren't represented anywhere else. EAA was founded because there were no real organized resources for homebuilding. Over the years Warbirds, Antiques, Aerobatics, and Ultralights were slowly brought into the fold for similar reasons. There simply were not any other groups of like minded people to share knowledge and information in those areas of aviation. In an effort to cater to everyone, EAA has forgotten that, while on a huge scale, it is basically a niche organization. It's not that those of us in that niche aren't interested in IFR proceedures, corporate turboprops, and GPS systems; most actually are, it's just that we can already go to so many other places to get the information. It's kind of comical that the TBM article touched such a nerve with folks, but it serves to illustrate the point perfectly. A strikingly similar article on the TBM-850 appeared in the May issue of Flying, and I doubt that anyone had anything negative to say about it. Simply stated, that's what Flying writes about. That and IFR proceedures, GPS systems, etc. Outside of the occasional news blurb it's so rare that homebuilts, P-51's, the Tri Motor, Aluminum Overcast, or FIFI ever appear in the print of Flying, AOPA, or Pro Pilot because those organizations know the target audience of their readers just as they know the interests of their membership in the case of AOPA. They don't write about those things because folks go to EAA and Kit Planes, The Experimenter, and, in the past, Sport Aviation for that type of media. I wonder what the reaction would be if Pro Pilot ran an article about a Volksplane......

[scottf]

Maybe I am alone in feeling this way.

I am a member of most of the divisions (warbird, vintage, acro). Thru the years I have volunteered at Oshkosh, (heck have either attended and or volunteered for over 20 years straight), donated my time for the B-17/trimotor program, done presentations for many different chapters - by any measure I have been a committed and active member.

It is Mr Hightower's privilege to make the changes he wants to both the people and the goals of the organization. Unfortunately, these changes have left me wondering if my time and money would better be spent elsewhere. The magazine now holds little interest for me, while Mac is a great writer, my interest is in experimental aviation. I would much rather read about how people make their own stuff, scrounging if you will, the way Paul P used to. I want to read about peoples ingenuity - I am sorry to say I could care less about high tech avionics or Lane Wallace's musings - just not my cup of tea. This is why I dropped flying magazine years ago. Honestly I spend way more time looking at "Kit planes" these days, "sport aviation" I usually glance thru than throw away. Mac, I am not trying to mean here - just honest.

My most important concern is government advocacy - keep our freedoms to build and fly without crazy restrictions, fees and laughable regulations. Sorry to say but AOPA is way better than EAA on this... Warbirds advocacy can only be described as laughable these last few years. Maybe these are just my impressions, maybe wrongly taken, but I don't feel EAA is doing very well for the community on this front.

Oshkosh in the last few years has become something different - as a friend of mine is fond of saying he is waiting for the "tilt o whirl" and carnival games to show up in aeroshell square. I now have to seek out those with homebuilts and other aircraft that interest me, they are still there but FAR from the main focus anymore. I remember when this was the convention and we did fine in the money dept.. now we are told that in order to survive we have an airventure that it a cross between trade show and some type of sporting event with members being charged prices to match. I am not grousing for the good old days here - I am just to the point if I want to attend a glitzy event, maybe I should just go to a real one.

I could bore you all to death by going on and on, but suffices to say that I am just not seeing any reason to stay with this organization anymore. When Paul ran EAA - it was fun. In the days of Tom things were OK too, I did not agree with everything he did, but we still had a sense of community. I think, at least for myself, this has now reached the tipping point. With the evident change in mission and the way I feel a lot of good people have been treated VERY badly as of late, I just don't really need to renew my memberships this year.

The thing about it is that Paul P built a following, a whole lot of good will, people donated crazily of thier time and money for the EAA based on that. The EAA has entered into an arena where they are embracing a different crowd. I somehow doubt that those they are catering to are going to be as generous - better consider changing your business model to accomdat that cause people with Challengers and Gulfstreams do not pay to camp in a muddy field once a year and work for free.

Plea to Paul P. are you really sure you are liking retirement that much??? It has to be boring and things obviously get scewed up when you are gone. Like how Tom was treated? Or Joe? Or Steve?. Remember the plaque that used to be in the vending area of the museum - it talked about how we should treat people, the one that used to be next to your fathers picture? Paul I know you hung it there for a reason. C'mon, don;t allow what you built turn into this .

[steveinindy]

Stipulating that aviation has always been (and always will be) expensive, trying to make it accessable to the greatest number of people should be the primary driver. And that means homebuilt and simple single engined spam can aircraft for the bulk of us.

The thing is that I still see them doing that.


Centering efforts on twins and turbines with cockpits that make the Space Shuttle blush with envy is hardly promoting access to the world of flight.

Well, you use stuff like that to attract kids and young adults and then get them interested in something more reasonable as a start. Showing pictures of Fly Babies (sorry Ron....she's a beauty but not going to catch the eye of a lot of teens), Nieuports and Cubs isn't going to snag the attention of average teen or twenty something. So what you do is get their attention with something that does and then point out that you work your way up to that by starting with a reasonable experimental or one of the "spam cans". I'm not one for "bait and switch" normally, but if it gets more people on the side of flying, we need to do whatever we can.

Those cockpits are not at all uncommon in anything but the small bugsmashers (and are starting to become that way even in that group for some reason). That said, the Shuttle is a lousy example. The avionics on it are trumped even by the laptop I am writing this on.


Well I guess the organization has finally evolved beyond me





Non-static groups that last more than a single generation tend to do that. That goes for political parties, clubs, families, etc.


They don't write about those things because folks go to EAA and Kit Planes, The Experimenter, and, in the past, Sport Aviation for that type of media.

Then people need to stop wasting their time whining on here and write the articles they want to see in Sport Aviation, etc. Standing on the street corner, screaming at the traffic that "the end is near" doesn't accomplish anything.

[Bill]

I'm not one for "bait and switch" normally, but if it gets more people on the side of flying, we need to do whatever we can.


Have we become so desperate that we have to resort to emulating the tactics of used-car salesmen? Its not an honorable thing to do and most of use will have no part of it.

[steveinindy]

Have we become so desperate that we have to resort to emulating the tactics of used-car salesmen?

It's not desperate. It's basic marketing. If the person can't afford the more expensive option, you introduce them to the less expensive one.


Its not an honorable thing to do and most of use will have no part of it.

...and how precisely is running an organization into the ground to satisfy the remainders of the first and second generations of members any less honorable? Last time I checked, organizational seppuku was not considered an honorable practice in western cultures.

[Floatsflyer]

This is for Scott and everyone else on this and the EAA Cuts threads who have eloquently expressed that EAA has evolved beyond them and no longer represents their homebuilding, amateur built interests:

You should seriously checkout and consider joining a long established and very well respected Canadian organization called the Recreational Aircraft Association(www.raa.ca (http://www.raa.ca)). It is 100% about amateur aircraft building and is everything and more that you remember EAA being about under Paul.

Full disclosure: I am not a member or officer of RAA nor I might add do I have or have had any interest in building an airplane. I'm a pilot and an aviation freak and that's why I joined EAA and have been going to Oshkosh for years. Because no where else on this good and sometimes crazy earth can I see, talk and touch in one place every facet of aviation, every category of aircraft, every era of aviation, almost every type of aircraft imaginable. In 2007, I was so thrilled and bowled over to actually see with my own eyes a restored flying 1919 Dehaviland DH4, once flown by Lindberg, taxing in from the runway to the vintage area. I mean come on folks, where else could I have seen such a sight but at Oshkosh. And then to be able to follow it to its tie down and talk to the pilot/restorer for close to an hour. Wow!!! Heaven should only be half as good as Oshkosh.

[kmacht]

I completely agree with Scott. EAA is no longer about experimental aircraft. There isn't one mention of the word experimental, homebuilt, or kit plane, on both the home page of eaa.org or listed in the mission or vision statements. If that doesn't say something about what the orgaizaiton is or what they are striving to be I don't know what does.

I keep hearing that they need to cater to the masses. I wonder what the masses would look like if they didn't include the people who bought memberships at the end of each July in order to get the discounted admission to airventure.


Personally I am done with EAA for a while. There isn't anything on their website or in the magazines that I can't get for free elsewhere online. I won't be attending airventure this year so keeping it for the discount admission isn't there either. EAA promised a few years ago that their advocacy / time / money spent for LSA would be worth the depature from their core of experimental aircraft by making flying more affordable for the masses and less restrictive for those with existing medical conditions. That turned out to be a giant flop.

So for me I don't see any benefit to staying with EAA. If I want a goverment advocate I will go to AOPA. If I want a magazine with more building articles I would subscribe to kitplanes. If I just want a bunch of building advice, tips, tricks, etc there are a dozen forums out there for just about any plane I can think of. Until EAA or some other organization decides to step up and start supporting homebuilders again as their core mission I will be letting my membership lapse and putting my hard earned money towards things that actuall provide me with a benefit.

Keith

[steveinindy]

Personally I am done with EAA for a while. There isn't anything on their website or in the magazines that I can't get for free elsewhere online. I won't be attending airventure this year so keeping it for the discount admission isn't there either.

Bye. Best of luck to you in whatever you decide to do from this point forward. :)

[Chad Jensen]

This is a copy and paste list that I have on my computer for uses such as this, but in response to Keith, whom I would love to see rejoin, I wanted to post it. If nothing else, beyond homebuilding, I've always felt that giving my $40/year to EAA was more than worth it just support the Young Eagles program.

Things EAA offers and does for the homebuilder:

Chad Jensen, Homebuilders Community Manager: Chad is your personal contact at EAA HQ. Our resident homebuilt expert, he is willing and ready to help in any way he can. Contact him directly at 920-426-6806 or by email at cjensen@eaa.org

Government Protection: You may believe that this is unnecessary or that if EAA wasn’t there, some other group like AOPA would make sure you still have the opportunity to build an aircraft. This is not the case.
Here are a few items in this area:

-FAA 51 percent rule: upholding and maintaining the standard so that homebuilders can still have the freedom to build what they want, and to keep production facilities at bay.

-Access to airports: A few years ago a FAA FSDO in California had the bright idea to ban Experimental Amateur Built aircraft from operating at four southern California airports. EAA got this reversed.

-FAA Dashboard: The FAA senior team reviews fatal accidents by segment every month and their performance is linked to this data. When amateur built accidents occur, they look to EAA to address the problem. Luckily for us we have programs like Technical Counselors and Flight Advisors that we can use to keep the FAA from implementing additional requirements to “fix” the problem.

-Local support: Example- Jacksonville, Florida passed an ordinance banning the building of aircraft on your property. EAA’s vice president of industry and regulatory affairs went to Jacksonville to meet with chapter members and to facilitate strategies for repealing or changing the ordinance.

Hints for Homebuilders: One of the best and most popular offerings from EAA. One new video a week is uploaded to the EAA video site, with tips to help you become a better, more informed amateur aircraft builder. With 250+ videos already produced, it’s a vast amount of information, and we will continually add to it.

Webinars: We generally offer at least one homebuilder-related webinar a month. These are fantastic resources, and they offer a variety of speakers to access your living room or office for a presentation at convenient times.

EAA Forums: A giant step beyond what we had at Oshkosh365. The new forums are fast and reliable, and are growing at a wonderful pace. A special forum exists specifically for homebuilder’s to discuss their issues and share ideas.

Homebuilders Headquarters on Facebook: Another online resource for people to meet and exchange information. Announcements from HQ will always appear on this page when it involves the homebuilt community.

Sport Pilot/Driver’s license medical: Example- At some point, you’ll probably decide to fly your homebuilt without maintaining a 3rd class medical but instead using your driver’s license. This would not be possible without EAA’s government work on Sport Pilot. We made sure the rule included homebuilts. (Note: This alone would pay for your dues each year as a medical costs $90 where I live, plus you’ll never be turned down!)

Sport Aviation Magazine: I believe we have a solid magazine-it’s changing, but it still includes everything it always has on homebuilding. All of the added content makes it appear as though the homebuilt stuff is disappearing. Would I like to see more homebuilding content? Absolutely. But I will say, even as a homebuilder, I like the other stuff as well. If you have specific story ideas or want to contribute an article, I would email our editors, most are pilots too and, like many of us, they were EAAer’s for years before coming to work here.

SportAir Workshops: Two day courses that take you from “0 to 60” on building an aircraft. Courses on fabric covering, composite construction, sheet metal, TIG welding, gas welding, and electrical wiring are offered.

Museum: We preserve significant items from the history of homebuilding. Many of our displays are key pieces of history in the homebuilding movement, and they offer a look at where homebuilding started, how it changed, and who helped us get to where we are.

Homebuilders Hall of Fame: Again, preserving and recognizing the icons of the movement. Ed Fisher is this year’s inductee.

Media: When a homebuilt crashes anywhere in the country, we will often get the call about “are people really allowed to build their own aircraft” from the media. We handle these calls on the behalf of all homebuilders, NOT AOPA. (Do you remember the John Denver accident?)

Promotion of the movement: AirVenture is the single, best opportunity to grow homebuilding. Many pilots arrive at AirVenture thinking homebuilders must have super-human abilities. Once they take a workshop, see how many flying homebuilts are out there, they realize they can become homebuilders too. Some arrive thinking a homebuilt aircraft can’t be as good as a Cessna but then they see row after row of high quality aircraft and realize many homebuilts may be better than factory built aircraft.

AirVenture also creates a market for kit manufacturers and suppliers to see their products. Without EAA helping to support the community of homebuilders, these companies would find it difficult to exist.

AirVenture Forums: The forums area brings together a wealth of experts on every topic of homebuilding. My biggest problem with forums isn’t looking for one to attend but trying to figure out how to attend two at the same time!

AirVenture Workshops: These tend toward introductory material. We do have the engine workshops plus the Aeroplane Factory (where full construction occurs). We are always open to suggestions on how to improve.

Chapters: I’ve been a member of two different chapters and each one provided me with great friends and technical resources. This didn’t just happen; I had to make an effort as well. What you get out of chapters often reflects what you put in. I’ve gained a tremendous amount of knowledge from my chapter affiliations but I’ve also shared my knowledge as well. I'd encourage you to do the same.

Chapter Fly Ins: Look at any listing of events, and you’ll find EAA Chapter Fly Ins & pancake breakfasts all over the list. Don’t you think it is a better world with activities like this?

The price of supporting the movement is $3.33 per month; less than the price of a fancy cup of coffee.

[Treetop_Flyer]

This is a copy and paste list that I have on my computer for uses such as this, but in response to Keith, whom I would love to see rejoin, I wanted to post it. If nothing else, beyond homebuilding, I've always felt that giving my $40/year to EAA was more than worth it just support the Young Eagles program.

-- snipped --

The price of supporting the movement is $3.33 per month; less than the price of a fancy cup of coffee.

Amen, Chad. Very well said. EAA will continue to get my $40/yr and VAA will continue to get my $36/yr for the foreseeable future. As a "younger member" (full dusclosure...I'm 31) and VP of my local chapter, I feel that more than ever we need to be reaching out to the younger generation...however that may be accomplished. I was once a twenty-something dazzled by composite construction and glass cockpits (still am dazzled actually). But now I proudly fly a '57 TriPacer that is the third love of my life (behind my wife and my Beagle). That's not bait and switch...it's me learning over time what a goldmine vintage aircraft are. People will come around if you let them.

Again, well said, Chad. Keep up the great work and give me a holler if you ever need another passionate aviation enthusiast working over there at HQ. ;)

-- Dave --

[steveinindy]

EAA will continue to get my $40/yr and VAA will continue to get my $36/yr for the foreseeable future. As a "younger member" (full dusclosure...I'm 31)

I'm another 31 year old from whom the EAA will continue to receive dues for as long as both organization and I have life left in us. That reminds me....I need to renew!

[Bill]

It's not desperate. It's basic marketing. If the person can't afford the more expensive option, you introduce them to the less expensive one.



According to Wikipedia, "Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud), most commonly used in retail sales (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail_sales) but also applicable to other contexts." If you meant simple marketing tactics, why didn't you say so? Don't, instead, use an emotionally-loaded term like "bait and switch" which has all sorts of negative connotations to most people and expect them to guess at your true meaning.

[steveinindy]

That's not bait and switch...it's me learning over time what a goldmine vintage aircraft are. People will come around if you let them.

Agreed. Bait and switch was a poor choice of words on my part. I may dream of building my little turboprop to haul myself and several friends/colleagues around at high altitude and speed but two of my favorite planes remain L-birds and the PBY Catalina.

[RV8505]

We all must be bored! To bad we all can't go down to some hanger and get the grills out and talk this all out!

[Treetop_Flyer]

We all must be bored! To bad we all can't go down to some hanger and get the grills out and talk this all out!Yeah, there's not enough of that going on anymore. Just hanging out at the airport is one of my favorite activities...there just seem to be less and less people there every year.

[RV8505]

At our last Pancake breakfast we had 175 people and anout 30 airplanes. We had all kinds of people coming and pitching in ! It was great. I learned from my good freind Sean you can cure alot of I'lls on a airport with a grill. Two things hold true, You can't argue when your mouth is full and we all like to eat.

[steveinindy]

At our last Pancake breakfast we had 175 people and anout 30 airplanes. We had all kinds of people coming and pitching in ! It was great. I learned from my good freind Sean you can cure alot of I'lls on a airport with a grill. Two things hold true, You can't argue when your mouth is full and we all like to eat.

Agreed. That said, anyone who wants to come over for dinner is always welcome at my apartment. I like to cook and look for excuses to do so. Maybe we could settle a few differences that way.

[Mike M]

What's the point of having a second AOPA? I'm a member of both, but if they're duplicating their purposes for existence, why should I pay for two when one will do?

i asked myself that question. i no longer do that. if it weren't for chapters, i wouldn't be here anymore, either.