EAA ditches air racing?

[martymayes]

So is it true EAA will no longer be associated with air racing in any form? The AirVenture cup is dead in the water?

[rwanttaja]

After what's probably happened to insurance rates after the Reno accident, I wouldn't be surprised....

Ron Wanttaja

[TimAdams]

Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

[TimAdams]

How ironic is it that Airventure is held at Wittman Field, of course named after Steve Wittman, one of the most famous racers is aviation history!!

[Chad Jensen]

So is it true EAA will no longer be associated with air racing in any form? The AirVenture cup is dead in the water?
As it relates to AirVenture, yes. Air racing as a sport, at Reno, pylon schools, Red Bull...all good.

[martymayes]

As it relates to AirVenture, yes. Air racing as a sport, at Reno, pylon schools, Red Bull...all good.

What kind of support will EAA be offering to other types of air racing? That position is somewhat different from the statement: "EAA will no longer be associated with air racing in any form going forward."

Please correct me if I misquoted you, it's a cut and paste.

[Chad Jensen]

You quoted me correctly...it was my email to Eric that was missing my own words. Support is not the right word. Encouraging the sport is more along the lines of how EAA relates to air racing. It's the same as regional fly ins, we take part, but no longer in an official supporting (sponsorship) way.

[martymayes]

After what's probably happened to insurance rates after the Reno accident, I wouldn't be surprised....

Ron Wanttaja
It's my understanding that insurance didn't change for the 2012 AirVenture cup races. This is a directive from 'the top' to disassociate the organization from air racing. I don't see where a handful of folks racing homebuilts on a straight line cross-coutry course (absolutely nothing like closed course pylon racing) poses a threat to the organization or society. I certainly would think it's an activity covered under the the new EAA vision and mission statements. My question is what segment will be ditched next? Why doesn't the leadership just lay out their ideology for the organization and stop all the piece nibbling?

[martymayes]

You quoted me correctly...it was my email to Eric that was missing my own words. Support is not the right word. Encouraging the sport is more along the lines of how EAA relates to air racing. It's the same as regional fly ins, we take part, but no longer in an official supporting (sponsorship) way.

So its "we're all for it, but NIMBY" ....I got it.

An FWIW, in your own words, what is your personal take on the directive Chad? Or can you say?

[AcroGimp]

I just re-upped my national membership for the first time in maybe 7 or 8 years, and only because it was required in order to join IAC. And then they go and do this. What exactly is EAA's mission? What are they willing to stand for?

It seems more and more to be aiming to be 'AOPA lite' rather than the EAA I grew up with - innovative, fearless, and covering the entire breadth of Experimental Aviation with little to any attention paid to the NIMBY's or to spam cans, bizjets and heavy iron. I haven't been to OSH since '03 - on-field McDonald's replacing the Boy Scouts burger stands, the Eclipse fraud buying the center stage, I mean really, King-Airs and TBM 750's at the world's premiere 'experimental' aircraft fly-in?

When we all try to post-mortem what once was a thriving and vibrant organization, it will be the decisions like this determined to be root-cause.

Begs the question what is next? After the DC-3 fiasco all I see is more and more bully micro-management from an organization that appears to not really know what it wants to be when it grows up.

Very disappointing.

[Chad Jensen]

So its "we're all for it, but NIMBY" ....I got it.

An FWIW, in your own words, what is your personal take on the directive Chad? Or can you say?
I have no idea what NIMBY means...I don't got it. ;o)

Marty, I have no issue with it, I just wish Eric wouldn't have canceled it because of this.

[Zack Baughman]

NIMBY - Not In My Back Yard

[Chad Jensen]

Ah, got it, thanks Zack.

Marty, that's not the case...I really hope the race goes on, and they do their mass arrival as they always have...right in our backyard.

[TimAdams]

Better update this website with a banner across the top. Something along the lines of "We are running from the lawyers with our tail between our legs, RACES CANCELLED!!!!"

http://www.airventurecup.com/

[Chad Jensen]

That's part of the problem Tim...that's not EAA's website. We don't own it, and the content is there without EAA knowing about it.

[Chad Jensen]

Okay folks, this is the official statement release from EAA about the race and it's future that is going to the forums and media right now. I have to go back in to a meeting, but will be back online shortly.




FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE




EAA STATEMENT REGARDING AIRVENTURE CUP RACE


EAA AVIATION CENTER, OSHKOSH, Wis. — (May 11, 2012) — EAA is stating the following in regards to the annual AirVenture Cup race, which has been the matter of some public discussion concerning the race’s future:
• EAA did not cancel the AirVenture Cup race.


• The AirVenture Cup organizers opted to cancel this year’s race.


• A group of EAA volunteers founded and have organized the race for more than a decade. The race completes its competition outside Oshkosh, with the competitors then flying together for a mass arrival during AirVenture.


• As part of the race, EAA does assist race organizers with volunteer benefits and exhibit space.


• Since last year, there have been discussions with race organizers on better defining the event and its relationship to EAA, including clarifying name and branding elements.


• EAA encouraged organizers to continue the race and will continue to offer race organizers volunteer benefits.
.
About EAA AirVenture Oshkosh
EAA AirVenture Oshkosh is “The World’s Greatest Aviation Celebration” and EAA’s yearly membership convention. Additional EAA AirVenture information, including advance ticket and camping purchase, is available online at www.airventure.org. EAA members receive lowest prices on admission rates. For more information on EAA and its programs, call 1-800-JOIN-EAA (1-800-564-6322) or visit www.eaa.org. Immediate news is available at www.twitter.com/EAAupdate.
-30-

[flyingriki]

regional fly ins, we take part, but no longer in an official supporting (sponsorship) way.

That's really nice Chad. Proud of that are ya?
Talk about a continual turn in the wrong direction.....

[Chad Jensen]

Actually no, but thanks for asking. Quite the opposite really. I wish it were different, but when EAA got sued and lost from a crash that killed a guy years ago, EAA got out of the regional fly-in sponsorship's. It's been that way for a while now. Nothing continual about it.

[hydroguy2]

Tough spot you've been placed in Chad. Best of luck.

I am an EAA member, EAA is business and has tough decisions that need to be made. I support EAA. BTW I am also a RACER and don't like the decision but will still support the EAA.

[flyingriki]

Actually no, but thanks for asking. Quite the opposite really. I wish it were different, but when EAA got sued and lost from a crash that killed a guy years ago, EAA got out of the regional fly-in sponsorship's. It's been that way for a while now. Nothing continual about it.

And continuing to run from things will just make the atmosphere worse and more susceptible to stupid lawsuits. As the old saying goes, if you're not part of the solution - you're part of the problem. The ostrich approach never solved anything. Another sad day for the ?AA....
If RARA used the ?AA approach we'd never see another race. What if every organization ran scared from every little burp in life, what would that do for society as a whole? No, your organization is making some very poor decisions that have nothing to do with Experimental Aviation and everything to do with survival of Airventure (which even your spell checker doesn't recognize!!), used to be called Oshkosh....used to mean something. Flame on you 'head in the sand' types. I know, ignore it and it will go away, ignore it and worse will never happen, yeah, yeah , yeah.....

[MEdwards]

EAA's statement is disengenuous. It starts in the middle of the story by saying the race organizers, not EAA, cancelled the race. But even Chad admits that something came before. He says, "I just wish Eric wouldn't have canceled it because of this." It appears that "this" in this context was EAA's withdrawing its support or its connection with the race. The statement ignores that fact, and is therefore deceptive.

I'm not arguing EAA's right to associate or disassociate itself as it sees fit. It's possible it was the best business decision for the association. But EAA's spin doctors seem to be working overtime again, and that leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

[Chad Jensen]

No deception...I just haven't had a chance to post the "because of this" here. It goes back to the AV cup webmaster putting EAA's logo and staff names on their website without permission. EAA objected, and he said he would cancel the race if he had to remove it. That is the back-story that no one saw because the email I sent to him, which is now all over the place, didn't cover that because it was already said in another string of emails. In the context it was written, and who it was written to, it made sense.

[Burtles]

when EAA got sued and lost from a crash that killed a guy years ago, EAA got out of the regional fly-in sponsorship's. It's been that way for a while.Chad, this is incorrect on two counts. First, EAA won that court case. Second, EAA removed its name from the regional fly-ins but maintained its support through sponsorship agreements that included marketing support and financial contributions. These were in place for several years but have now been canceled by EAA. Removing all EAA support is a serious blow to these grassroots events (all of which were started by EAA).It seems the focus is on O$hko$h.

[steveinindy]

Better update this website with a banner across the top. Something along the lines of "We are running from the lawyers with our tail between our legs, RACES CANCELLED!!!!"http://www.airventurecup.com/ There is/was a race involving Oshkosh? Hmmmm.....this is the first I've ever heard about it. That said, there are better things to spend that event's budget on such as the Young Eagles St cetera.

[Burtles]

EAA's spin doctors seem to be working overtime again, and that leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

I couldn't agree more. An EAA representative wrote to the the AirVenture Cup chairman as follows: "With direction set from the top, and in light of the general public concern for anything related to air racing, EAA will no longer be associated with air racing in any form going forward."

The spin doctors are doing all they can to divert attention from this statement. Why? Because it's very damaging. As a member I expect EAA to stand up for my aviation interests, to educate and inform "public concern" if it exists. I do NOT expect EAA to roll over and disassociate itself from whatever part of aviation is under scrutiny!

[Chad Jensen]

Guys, no one is trying to put a spin on that statement. I won't comment any further on the race itself until we have a teleconference with the organizers, but I will comment on the statement you quote because it's mine.


My email to Eric was in the context of AirVenture only. It was not necessary to restate everything that went back and forth for the last three weeks. That's why all of this makes no sense to anyone. Everyone in the world that read that email (which should have never happened) had no background to go from, and why would they? Private emails posted with no context or background are worthless. Air racing won't happen at AirVenture is all.

[rwanttaja]

Chad, this is incorrect on two counts. First, EAA won that court case.
*Eventually*. EAA and the fly-in lost the initial judgement (IIRC, it was for $8,000,000), but got it overturned on appeal. The case was dismissed on its merits; there was no decision that EAA national was NOT responsible. So basically the precedent was set that EAA's level of support made them a partner and thus liable for the actions of the fly-in.

Wanna bet it cost EAA a bundle of bucks to defend against the original lawsuit and then file and win the appeal?


Removing all EAA support is a serious blow to these grassroots events (all of which were started by EAA).

Say what? You're saying, for instance, that Arlington was started by EAA national? Bull. They were started by individual EAA chapters.

The issue boils down to how liable EAA should be for the actions of its individual chapters. If EAA Chapter XXX holds a fly-out to a nearby airport and one of its members crashes, should EAA national be a co-defendant in the resultant suit?

The answer is "no," but the fact is, it will be. This is why EAA extends its insurance to cover certain chapter events *as long as given criteria are met*. They'll cover a chapter fly-out, but prohibit certain activities as part of it (flour bombing, etc.).

The fly-in problem is just an extension of that. Big public events like these can generate lawsuits quite easily (volunteers getting hit while parking cars, someone breaking a tooth on a food item, etc). EAA has established policies to minimize the chance of the national organization being named as a co-defendant at events where EAA national has no control. One way to do this is to ensure EAA's name isn't included in the event publicity or documentation.

Ron Wanttaja

[steveinindy]

Wanna bet it cost EAA a bundle of bucks to defend against the original lawsuit and then file and win the appeal?


Probably more than the original verdict to be honest...

[Bill Greenwood]

The accident at Reno, was much more than "every little burp in life".
It was a major disaster, to those of us who knew Jimmy and to those who knew any of the 10 killed and dozens severely wounded. It reminds me of some of the times in auto racing where a car has gone into a crowd.
We all love high performance planes like a race Mustang, but not more than the human life.

And whether we like it or not, liablity is a real factor to be considered by EAA or any other organization. Racing has been a small part of EAA, it can't be the dominant thing.

[steveinindy]

The accident at Reno, was much more than "every little burp in life".
It was a major disaster, to those of us who knew Jimmy and to those who knew any of the 10 killed and dozens severely wounded.

Thank you for pointing that out. Several of my friends were among the folks who responded to that debacle and they will forever be scarred by what they witnessed that day.


We all love high performance planes like a race Mustang

Those things are only a Mustang in the same way that Dale Senior's car was my mom's Monte Carlo.

[spongebobiwan]

The world is changing. The types of incidents and greater number of incidents that now trigger long drawn-out and costly court cases, in the past were not always even considered to be candidates for such a thing. I think that's why they were called accidents, and treated as such. Not any more. Now somebody always have to be found to be "at fault" and therefore financially responsible.

EAA has to protect the organization (EAA) or else the potential exists for the end of EAA. Kind of like amputating a limb, but to save a life. Certainly not pleasant or without pain, but from a standpoint of survivability, necessary. Nobody really likes to do it, nor wants to do it, but if it comes down to doing it or not surviving, the decision becomes a little clearer. Just a sign of the times I'm afraid, IMHO.

[vaflier]

The world is changing. The types of incidents and greater number of incidents that now trigger long drawn-out and costly court cases, in the past were not always even considered to be candidates for such a thing. I think that's why they were called accidents, and treated as such. Not any more. Now somebody always have to be found to be "at fault" and therefore financially responsible. EAA has to protect the organization (EAA) or else the potential exists for the end of EAA. Kind of like amputating a limb, but to save a life. Certainly not pleasant or without pain, but from a standpoint of survivability, necessary. Nobody really likes to do it, nor wants to do it, but if it comes down to doing it or not surviving, the decision becomes a little clearer. Just a sign of the times I'm afraid, IMHO.I have to disagree !!!!!. When you back down from a fight that is unjust then you are seen as weak and will have to keep backing down forever. If you stand and fight when you are in the right then you will become know as a company that is not going to just pay someone for a frivilous law suit. As a result you will be sued much less often. It is the same as the school bully when we were all kids, if you back down once they will pick on you forever. But punch him in the nose and even if you lose you will be left alone. You have to stand and fight on principle and by the same token stand and face the music when you are wrong. We have so many baseless law suits just because people know that big companies would rather settle than go to court. Easy money.

[Kyle Boatright]

The world is changing. The types of incidents and greater number of incidents that now trigger long drawn-out and costly court cases, in the past were not always even considered to be candidates for such a thing. I think that's why they were called accidents, and treated as such. Not any more. Now somebody always have to be found to be "at fault" and therefore financially responsible.

EAA has to protect the organization (EAA) or else the potential exists for the end of EAA. Kind of like amputating a limb, but to save a life. Certainly not pleasant or without pain, but from a standpoint of survivability, necessary. Nobody really likes to do it, nor wants to do it, but if it comes down to doing it or not surviving, the decision becomes a little clearer. Just a sign of the times I'm afraid, IMHO.

If that was the message EAA was communicating, it would be one thing. Not that the racers would like it, but everyone understands risk and liability.

However, other than an initial private e-mail that was leaked, the reasons EAA has given have focused on "Improper use of the EAA logo" and other seemingly petty issues, given that EAA and the Airventure Cup race have a long history. It appears that the EAA pushed more and more of the responsibility for the event to the race organizers over the years that the current staff in Oshkosh doesn't have much institutional knowledge about how and why the event is organized the way it is today. This lack of institutional knowledge led to the EAA effectively yanking the rug out from under the organizers. That may get fixed after a flurry of behind the scenes activity, but it probably shouldn't have happened in the first place, and even if EAA wanted to separate from the event, the time to do that was last fall, not 10 weeks before the event.

[danielfindling]

Are you blaming the liberal or conservative lawyers? Trial lawyers or defense lawyers?

In Henry VI, Shakespere's character thought if he could disturb law and order he could be king. My plea: Come on, enough trashing the lawyers and return to talking flying. Isn't there enough poliitcal &$&$ in the news. EAA cited branding as a basis for the disconnect. Enough political rants and forgive me for mine. Chad mentioned the Arlington verdict for EAA not supporting regional fly-ins years ago. In Arlington, EAA was initially found partially liable for not providing adequate fire protection equipment on site at the fly in. Apparently, the death of an RV pilot was caused in part by EAA's alleged failure. (e.g. To provide fire trucks not fire extinguishers - the pilot died after the portable extinguishers were emptied and fire trucks were . . .). I know nothing about the merits of the Arlington case except to say, if the facts as I recited are true, liability seems just (especially to the deceased pilot's family). Inherently dangerous activities and assumptions of risk are part of life. In fact, the law let's people do both without liability. However, if you place other people in danger, or don't do what you are required to (e.g. Provide the proper fire equipment) you can be held responsible. Shakespere respected lawyers. You can too!

[steveinindy]

Shakespere respected lawyers. You can too!

It depends on the size of the check I get from them how much I respect them. ;)

[Frank Giger]

What a stupid and unfortunate chain of events to this cluster "fudge."

Let's see if I get this right:

The race is ran - organized and orchestrated - by one organization.

They place a supporting organization front and center as a co-sponsor.

The supporting organization has no authority over the organization and orchestration of the event; they only provide support, and object to being identified as having more to do with it than they actually have.

This is known as responsibility without authority, and is a really bad place to be in.

The actual responsible organization then objects to sole responsibility and says they will cancel the whole event if the supporting one doesn't accept an untentable position.

They cancel the event.

The organization that supported them through volunteers and PR is blamed for the cancellation.

Uh, what?

This is no different than if Coke or Sporty's or any other company provided goods or services either gratis or at a reduced rate and found that they had gotten top billing as being responsible for the event. They'd probably do more than send an email - they'd send a cease and desist letter via registered mail or courier.

If the race organizers had put the EAA as a supporting organization along with all the other vendors there would probably not be an issue. Calling it the AirVenture Cup and featuring the EAA front and center puts the EAA firmly on the blame line for anything that goes wrong. Personally I think letting any event where the EAA isn't directly in charge be called an AirVenture anything is dangerous territory, as it's a trademarked brand for the organization.

[danielfindling]

What a stupid and unfortunate chain of events to this cluster "fudge."

. . .Calling it the AirVenture Cup and featuring the EAA front and center puts the EAA firmly on the blame line for anything that goes wrong. Personally I think letting any event where the EAA isn't directly in charge be called an AirVenture anything is dangerous territory, as it's a trademarked brand for the organization.

Well said Frank. This is also referred to as imputed or implied authority under an agent/principle analysis. An agent can sometimes bind a principle without authority to do so. If the agent (race organizers) have implied or imputed authority to act on the part of the principle (EAA) they can legally bind the principle even if they do not have actual authority. Therefore, EAA could be held liable by allowing the inference that they are the race organizers.

[Burtles]

Following this logic, EAA Chapters should be afraid, very afraid.

[Jeff Point]

What a stupid and unfortunate chain of events to this cluster "fudge."

Let's see if I get this right:

Your conclusions make sense based on your stated facts, unfortunately the facts you present are not accurate. The race was started by a (then) EAA employee (and volunteer when no longer employed by EAA) and was managed from the first by him and a group of volunteers. This volunteer group met with and reported to someone at HQ (the actual person has changed over the years) and EAA has had control over the event since day one. Most of the actual decision making and management of the event was done by the volunteers who ran it. In this way it functions in much the same way as most of Airventure- the EAA paid staff make the very high level decisions but most of the nuts and bolts operational stuff is all handled by the volunteer corps, who in turn report to the paid staff.

There are certain people within EAA management who have wanted to kill the race for many years. Those forces were held in check during the previous administration, but with the recent changes the balance of power has shifted. For them to say this is just about the unauthorized use of a logo (which they have been authorized to use for years) is just spin. The race was cancelled because EAA management wanted to cancel it, and anything beyond that is just spin. Having said that, developments over the past couple of days indicate a willingness on the part of EAA to rethink this decision, and discussions are underway. We'll see what comes of it.

[RV8505]

The world is changing. The types of incidents and greater number of incidents that now trigger long drawn-out and costly court cases, in the past were not always even considered to be candidates for such a thing. I think that's why they were called accidents, and treated as such. Not any more. Now somebody always have to be found to be "at fault" and therefore financially responsible.

EAA has to protect the organization (EAA) or else the potential exists for the end of EAA. Kind of like amputating a limb, but to save a life. Certainly not pleasant or without pain, but from a standpoint of survivability, necessary. Nobody really likes to do it, nor wants to do it, but if it comes down to doing it or not surviving, the decision becomes a little clearer. Just a sign of the times I'm afraid, IMHO.

It is what it is!

[steveinindy]

What a stupid and unfortunate chain of events to this cluster "fudge."

Let's see if I get this right:

The race is ran - organized and orchestrated - by one organization.

They place a supporting organization front and center as a co-sponsor.

The supporting organization has no authority over the organization and orchestration of the event; they only provide support, and object to being identified as having more to do with it than they actually have.

This is known as responsibility without authority, and is a really bad place to be in.

The actual responsible organization then objects to sole responsibility and says they will cancel the whole event if the supporting one doesn't accept an untentable position.

They cancel the event.

The organization that supported them through volunteers and PR is blamed for the cancellation.

Uh, what?

This is no different than if Coke or Sporty's or any other company provided goods or services either gratis or at a reduced rate and found that they had gotten top billing as being responsible for the event. They'd probably do more than send an email - they'd send a cease and desist letter via registered mail or courier.

If the race organizers had put the EAA as a supporting organization along with all the other vendors there would probably not be an issue. Calling it the AirVenture Cup and featuring the EAA front and center puts the EAA firmly on the blame line for anything that goes wrong. Personally I think letting any event where the EAA isn't directly in charge be called an AirVenture anything is dangerous territory, as it's a trademarked brand for the organization.

Yeah, that was pretty much my thoughts about this whole debacle. It's sour grapes and the pessimists and naysayers group that hangs around this forum have latched on it as "evidence" of some grand conspiracy by the EAA to do away with the imagined heyday of homebuilding history. Honestly, the whole thing reminds me of the oddballs on shows like Ancient Aliens trying to stitch together unrelated events to support their beliefs.

[Old Timer]

Honestly, the whole thing reminds me of the oddballs on shows like Ancient Aliens trying to stitch together unrelated events to support their beliefs.

And I see me at least one ostrich with his head buried in the sand.

[steveinindy]

And I see me at least one ostrich with his head buried in the sand.

I see one person who needs to remember that I don't see a problem with the approach the EAA is taking. There's a difference between being oblivious and being aware of what is actually going on. Organizations do not survive by pandering to every vocal minority faction with an agenda or being recalcitrant simply because of historical ideals.

[Old Timer]

On what basis do you claim to speak for the majority?

[steveinindy]

On what basis do you claim to speak for the majority?

Same question to you.

I'm only claiming to speak for myself and my view is that the EAA is doing its best to meet the wants, desires and needs of a broad population and accommodate as many folks as possible (Paul's old saying that there's room enough for everyone). My contention that the various factions are minorities is an educated guess since most pilots are not air racers, aerobatic types, etc. Simply look at the number of members in the "main" EAA versus the various specialty clubs. If everyone is so dedicated to whatever little faction you wish to point out, then why aren't they members of the club for it?

The difference in opinion seems to largely break down (anecdotally) along age lines. The 'old timers' (no offense intended) seem to want to see the good ol' show with lots of daring do and classic light aircraft and showcase their love for the mystique of aviation. Those of us under the age of say 40-50 want to see aircraft that we identify with or want to fly and those tend not to be the Piets and other antiques except for the warbirds. We don't tend to have the same form of love for aviation (the 'mystique' versus a love for a fun form of transportation) and we are a little more focused on the latest technology so it tends to grate on the nerves of our parent's generation of pilots.

They don't seem to realize that there is room for us all here but resources are limited so not everyone is going to get their way. Failure to realize that the EAA is a business (and businesses have to make tough and sometimes unpopular decisions to survive) is at the heart of this entire mess. Sometimes we are going to not like the decisions that have to be made (example in my case: the Warbirds taking that chunk of parking to let the reenactors have their little encampment; that space could be used much better to showcase something really aviation related) but in the wash it all balances out.

Let's all stop bitching at one another and play nice. No one is out to run anyone else off so long as they can stay civil. We're all airplane geeks and so it's about time that we stop bickering and realize we either live together as friends or perish apart as fools.

[Burtles]

No one is out to run anyone else off

I believe this whole discussion began with EAA saying that owing to public concerns it wanted to disassociate itself with air racing of all kinds.

[prasmussen]

....... so it's about time that we stop bickering and realize we either live together as friends or perish apart as fools.[/QUOTE]

I think Ben Franklin said something very similar a few years ago. Smart man he was.

[Frank Giger]

Following this logic, EAA Chapters should be afraid, very afraid.

Yes, they should - and shouldn't.

A chapter can't do stuff that isn't approved by National and keep their charter, but in the end National is going to be held liable for anything a Chapter does before then.

Look at all the rules for YE flights - they're there for a reason. If a Chapter doesn't follow them and someone gets hurt, both the Chapter individually and National is liable.

Similarly, National could come down and state that a function a Chapter wants to do can't be labeled as an EAA event or associated with the parent organization. An extreme example would be a chapter fundraiser calendar featuring naked women posing next to aircraft. Clearly the EAA would not want their trademarks anywhere on it.

[hydroguy2]

....... would be a chapter fundraiser calendar featuring naked women posing next to aircraft........

what, where are those I missed those....:) my shop needs a calendar

[Zack Baughman]

I'm only claiming to speak for myself...

Those of us under the age of say 40-50 want to see aircraft that we identify with or want to fly and those tend not to be the Piets and other antiques except for the warbirds. We don't tend to have the same form of love for aviation (the 'mystique' versus a love for a fun form of transportation) and we are a little more focused on the latest technology so it tends to grate on the nerves of our parent's generation of pilots.


Admittedly, this is completely off topic from the thread, but I just have to comment about this particular post. ;) First you claim to speak for yourself, then you paint a huge demographic with a very wide brush. I'd just like to point out that there are plenty of us "under the age of 40-50" who DO indeed love the antiques (especially Piets) and DO indeed love aviation BECAUSE of the romance and "mystique" of it all. :cool:

THAT being said, I completely, absolutely, 100% agree with the rest of your comment. "We're all airplane geeks and so it's about time that we stop bickering and realize we either live together as friends or perish apart as fools." You hit the nail on the head with a 10lb sledgehammer!

[prasmussen]

Very happy that EAA staff like Chad and Zack can dive in and say pretty much what they feel. Says something about the EAA that can't be said about a lot of other organizations. BTW, do we need another thread to discuss issues like who the EAA represents and where we are headed? Seems important and that might draw in a larger group.