Are the Chalets really the problem?

[Sirota]

Sorry for the long post but now that I'm home and had time to consider whether I should write this or nor, I feel compelled to share my thoughts about the "Chalets".

EAA has the right to provide and sell these "high roller" amenities as they see fit. But the location used this year was too conspicuous and fed the feelings shared by many that EAA leadership has lost touch with many of the members and is moving the organization away from membership services; that the membership is there to serve the association instead of the other way around.

EAA, I urge you to send out a membership-wide survey to find out if the direction you're moving is what the membership wants. Make it a fair survey. We all know that a good statistician can shape questions to evoke the response you want to hear. At the very least, don't go out of your way to alienate those that think this is a membership driven association. The Chalets could have been located so they were more discrete, didn't take away homebuilt display spaces, or block the sight line of such a large portion of the flight line and air show. But the Chalets are just a symptom of what many believe is a bigger problem. Is EAA still the organization we all love and respect?

Respectfully,
Dave Sirota

[rosiejerryrosie]

Dave, A survey is not really needed. The increase or decrease in membership over the years will answer the question loud and clear....

[Kyle Boatright]

Dave, A survey is not really needed. The increase or decrease in membership over the years will answer the question loud and clear....

20 years ago, the vast majority of EAA members were genuinely interested in EAA and Sport Aviation, and had some sort of involvement with the organization outside of the big show. Since then, they have priced Airventure where it is cheaper to "join" EAA and purchase tickets to AV than it is to just purchase tickets. Now, membership is inflated by a substantial count of people who simply drive in to the airshow and have no other affiliation with the organization.

[turtle]

20 years ago, the vast majority of EAA members were genuinely interested in EAA and Sport Aviation, and had some sort of involvement with the organization outside of the big show. Since then, they have priced Airventure where it is cheaper to "join" EAA and purchase tickets to AV than it is to just purchase tickets. Now, membership is inflated by a substantial count of people who simply drive in to the airshow and have no other affiliation with the organization.
That would be me.

It was cheaper to renew my membership than to pay full price admission for my wife and me for two days. Not to mention any camping on field requires membership, or else your stuck with paying $200 a night to a gouger for a $50 fleabag room provided you booked in January. If not for AV, I wouldn't be a member at all, as the local chapter and the EAA itself is of little benefit to me. I just wish there was a way to cancel a membership, no refund expected, so I wouldn't be counted when membership was tallied.

I'm not a "high roller" so the new EAA is not for me. They block my view flight line with tents for rich and privileged people and stop me from visiting the museum by closing it down for a high rollers dinner (over $1000 a plate I was told). What the hell does my admission and membership buy, a chance to bask in the greatness of the entitled?

[RV8505]

That would be me.

It was cheaper to renew my membership than to pay full price admission for my wife and me for two days. Not to mention any camping on field requires membership, or else your stuck with paying $200 a night to a gouger for a $50 fleabag room provided you booked in January. If not for AV, I wouldn't be a member at all, as the local chapter and the EAA itself is of little benefit to me. I just wish there was a way to cancel a membership, no refund expected, so I wouldn't be counted when membership was tallied.

I'm not a "high roller" so the new EAA is not for me. They block my view flight line with tents for rich and privileged people and stop me from visiting the museum by closing it down for a high rollers dinner (over $1000 a plate I was told). What the hell does my admission and membership buy, a chance to bask in the greatness of the entitled?


Your membership and airventure entrance fee doesn't pay for rental of a port a potty for 3 day so if your so unhappy with airventure don't bother to come and grace us with your presence. You have been whining on several threads on how unfair things are but what have you really brought to the table besides yourself.

[steveinindy]

They block my view flight line with tents for rich and privileged people

I can't see how they block your view unless you're standing right up against them. They aren't that tall and most of the airshow crap is done high enough to be seen over them. The only thing you'd miss by them being there would be the last half-second or so of an airshow performer leaving a mark on the history of Oshkosh that only the NTSB could fully appreciate (let's hope that never happens)


stop me from visiting the museum by closing it down for a high rollers dinner (over $1000 a plate I was told).

Two things:
1. Aren't those normally held after the museum would normally be closed for the evening? I've been to a couple of them over the years (on someone else's dime or as an escort for a veteran, etc) and it's always late in the evening (8 or 9 pm) by which time most of the "real EAA members" (which is the attitude I'm picking up from you regarding your opinion of your corner of the organization) are busy with other activities or are well into the night's drinking at the bar.
2. If they are paying $1000 a pop, don't you think they should get the museum opened to them after hours? If I offered you a thousand dollars to rent out your living room for the evening you'd probably take it and tell your kids to get the hell out. How is that any different since they are both private property? The difference is that the museum is rented out and you don't see any direct benefit from it.


ou have been whining on several threads on how unfair things are but what have you really brought to the table besides yourself.

That's the big problem I see with folks who whine about the "direction" of the EAA. They are plenty willing to b***h vociferously about things but aren't willing to do anything to improve things either locally or nationally. The lack of initiative to correct the perception that local chapters don't have anything to offer is what will destroy the EAA, not the rental of a few chalets or the "high rollers". The "high rollers" may bank roll AirVenture and keep the lights on to a certain degree but without mature and constructive input at the local levels or people contributing to the magazines with their knowledge (assuming that they have any to contribute which is something I seriously doubt with regards to a few of the "poor, poor pitiful me" posters on here) then what is one to expect but a decline in the direct utility of the organization?

In other words, the folks who whine loudest without offering a solution are usually the ones who are most to blame for the decline of the chapters and other things that are dragging the EAA down.

[Mike M]

what have you really brought to the table besides yourself.
i think that was the point. without the rank&file members, what happens to EAA? what will it cost to hire the jobs now done by the volunteers? without the homebuilts that were the building force, will EAA become another Paris Airshow? or will it be just that much better? better for who? or is that for whom?

[wonka]

Good point about the museum...This was my 15th Oshkosh..I bring my kids with...my youngest son's favorite part about OSH is the museum....but even he commented this year when we were, on Sunday, trying to get into the part of the museum with the WWII stuff (particularly important to us since my father in law, who flew on B24's in the pacific) passed away a few months ago...and it was again roped off. My son said, "this part of the museum is ALWAYS closed for something".... this was at around 2:30pm on Sunday, so it was closed off to the public long before museum closing hours...come on EAA....

[Treetop_Flyer]

My son said, "this part of the museum is ALWAYS closed for something"...come on EAA....

Not sure where you're from, so this might not be feasible, but you do realize that your membership gets you free admission to the museum year-round, right? Why not take a weekend sometime not during AirVenture and then really get to enjoy the museum? Just a thought, but it might not work for you depending on where you live.

[wonka]

I've thought of that...but we live in the Chicago area...a bit too far to just hit the museum, since we are there already for AV every year.

[Treetop_Flyer]

Ahh...that makes sense. If you need a little more enticement...you might consider going up in January for the annual Ski-Plane Fly-In. You could see the museum and see some aircraft you might not normally see operating on skis. That might make it a little more worth the drive.

[RV8505]

i think that was the point. without the rank&file members, what happens to EAA? what will it cost to hire the jobs now done by the volunteers? without the homebuilts that were the building force, will EAA become another Paris Airshow? or will it be just that much better? better for who? or is that for whom?


The point I'm making is we all need each other and Paul also said that at the Annual meeting. Rod is new to the job and has heard the members concerns and I think he will do a better job trying to find balance.

[Dave Stadt]

I've thought of that...but we live in the Chicago area...a bit too far to just hit the museum, since we are there already for AV every year.

We are in the Chicago area and drive up several times a year. It is not that bad of a drive even for one day. There are several events during the year that make it worthwhile to spend a weekend. The Eagle Hangar has always been used for evening events during AV. It is the largest indoor venue on the grounds. It, the Founders Wing and the three venues at the Nature Center are in use nearly every evening. I believe all the planes in the Eagle Hangar are moved out during AV so even if you were to get in you would be missing a large part of the experience.

[Dave Stadt]

Ahh...that makes sense. If you need a little more enticement...you might consider going up in January for the annual Ski-Plane Fly-In. You could see the museum and see some aircraft you might not normally see operating on skis. That might make it a little more worth the drive.

The Ski Plane Flyin is a great grass roots event..been going for years.

[wonka]

Ok, so have "evening" events in eagle hanger...but keep it available to regular people until museum closing time.

[RV8505]

Ok, so have "evening" events in eagle hanger...but keep it available to regular people until museum closing time.

They move all of the planes out and there are only a few displays. There is not much to really to see. It is all back in place on Sunday the last day.

[Dave Stadt]

Ok, so have "evening" events in eagle hanger...but keep it available to regular people until museum closing time.

Doesn't work. It is a major effort to set up for each event and cannot be done with people wandering around.

[mazdaP5]

I was in Oshkosh the Friday before the convention, and the planes from the Eagle Hangar were already outside for the week.

[wonka]

They move all of the planes out and there are only a few displays. There is not much to really to see. It is all back in place on Sunday the last day.

It wasn't in place on Sunday...we were there..sunday in the afternoon, around 3pm or so...and they had roped off eagle hanger. "employees only"

[RV8505]

It wasn't in place on Sunday...we were there..sunday in the afternoon, around 3pm or so...and they had roped off eagle hanger. "employees only"

On the last Sunday of Airventure? If not, I'm sorry. I saw they put everything back in. Were the planes in the hanger?

[MEdwards]

People had reservations about the new chalets before the event, and EAA staff moved to reassure them:


This wipes out a large part of the homebuilt parking.


Not really. It's about 12 spots.


No, not a large part. 12-15 spots.Having walked the area, counted rows and spaces, and compared them to last year's aerial photo, my count is that the actual number was 24 spaces lost.

Not "a large part of homebuilt parking." But why was EAA staff's estimate off by a factor of two?

[Eric Witherspoon]

On the last Sunday of Airventure? If not, I'm sorry. I saw they put everything back in. Were the planes in the hanger?

I also was there on (closing) Sunday afternoon. I had seen that part of the museum before, so I was more there to see what might have changed. Instead I took the opportunity to walk across the field to the "Kidventure" area and saw a LOT of stuff I'd never seen before. In fact, probably way more stuff than was in the closed part of the museum. They have 2 hangars of 1920's - 1940's airplanes that have been donated to them over the years, plus a small hangar dedicated to Pietenpol, and a rather larger hangar dedicated to Wittman, and yet another one that had dozens of engines and some pre-1920's airplanes.

So to heck with the "high roller" room in the museum. Walk across the field and see the bunches of other stuff that's over there. Just because the big tent says "Kidventure" on it doesn't mean it's only kid stuff over there...

Back to the original subject - if Chalet's bring in some money, fine by me. If there's a problem, it's the mattress vendor, the front-porch-swing vendor, the shoe-insert vendor, the "magic" bracelet vendor - ok, so they might be bringing in some "needed" revenue and help to fill up the halls, but if I ran it, maybe put some criteria on who can display - if you're not directly aviation related, then maybe there's some extras that need to happen - your booth costs more or you're simply not allowed in. What would I do with the "extra space" (if I really had a say)? I'd start putting actual airplane vendors inside, starting with the kit manufacturers. Why them? Because they are most likely to not have a pile of money for a massive portable display structure, and are also more likely to display either airplane parts or incomplete aircraft (to show how they go together). As such, they seem to suffer the most with mud and daily rainstorms. I see the photos & reports from the other light-aircraft shows around the planet, and a lot of them seem to be finding indoor venues.

[martymayes]

Back to the original subject - if Chalet's bring in some money, fine by me.

Well, it would be interesting to see how much revenue the chalets brought in, especially since occupancy was on the low side. Wonder if that will be published anywhere......??



Yes, KidVenture is cool, spent a lot of time there with the kids during past AV's.

[RV8505]

I also was there on (closing) Sunday afternoon. I had seen that part of the museum before, so I was more there to see what might have changed. Instead I took the opportunity to walk across the field to the "Kidventure" area and saw a LOT of stuff I'd never seen before. In fact, probably way more stuff than was in the closed part of the museum. They have 2 hangars of 1920's - 1940's airplanes that have been donated to them over the years, plus a small hangar dedicated to Pietenpol, and a rather larger hangar dedicated to Wittman, and yet another one that had dozens of engines and some pre-1920's airplanes.




Back to the original subject - if Chalet's bring in some money, fine by me. If there's a problem, it's the mattress vendor, the front-porch-swing vendor, the shoe-insert vendor, the "magic" bracelet vendor - ok, so they might be bringing in some "needed" revenue and help to fill up the halls, but if I ran it, maybe put some criteria on who can display - if you're not directly aviation related, then maybe there's some extras that need to happen - your booth costs more or you're simply not allowed in. What would I do with the "extra space" (if I really had a say)? I'd start putting actual airplane vendors inside, starting with the kit manufacturers. Why them? Because they are most likely to not have a pile of money for a massive portable display structure, and are also more likely to display either airplane parts or incomplete aircraft (to show how they go together). As such, they seem to suffer the most with mud and daily rainstorms. I see the photos & reports from the other light-aircraft shows around the planet, and a lot of them seem to be finding indoor venues.

What you don't understand is that they have banquets all week, Lifetime member dinner, Young eagles dinner, Warbird dinner. The gathering of eagles dinner to raises money for kindventure and aviation youth programs. I think it is worth closing the museum for a few days.


I agree totaly with the beds and stuff. Do us all a favor and send your post above to Rod!

[eyeno]

I purchased admission to the Aviators Club so I guess that makes me a "high roller" for this thread. The ticket was expensive but I was glad to pay it for the chance to be able to get out of the heat and get some food that was better than most of the choices available elsewhere. I probably didn't get full value for the money I spent but I don't resent that as the revenue goes into the EAA AirVenture pool which helps everyone.

BTW, the sightlines for the daily airshow were terrible from the chalet area (aircraft in front blocked the view of low level performances) so I spent each afternoon out along the crowd line with everyone else.

[steveinindy]

Not "a large part of homebuilt parking." But why was EAA staff's estimate off by a factor of two?

Because it's an estimate and reasonable people expect those to be off. Also it might be that they took up twelve normal aircraft parking spaces and not the "wing-tip to wing-tip, can't walk between the planes, how many college freshmen can you cram into a phone booth" stunt you see at Oshkosh over "prime" parking spaces.


BTW, the sightlines for the daily airshow were terrible from the chalet area (aircraft in front blocked the view of low level performances) so I spent each afternoon out along the crowd line with everyone else.

Yeah, exactly. That's always been my impression is that the crowd and the parking has been an obstruction to the visibility of the "low level" or "taxi by" aspects just as much as the chalets are being accused of being. Besides, most of the airshow stuff happens at more than 100 feet off the ground