Hightower Resigns as EAA President/CEO

[Hal Bryan]

Just posted on EAA.org:

October 22, 2012 - The Board of Directors accepted the resignation of President and CEO Rod Hightower today. Hightower will be returning to St. Louis to reunite with his family.

"Maura and I have five children ranging in age from pre-school to college freshman," Hightower said. "When I accepted the position two years ago I believed that we could as a family relocate to the Oshkosh area. But our family and school involvement have increased as our children advance in the schools they, and we as their parents, love. It would simply be too great a hardship on my family to move them to the Oshkosh area."

Jack Pelton, recently retired Chairman, president and CEO of Cessna Aircraft, has been elected Chairman of the Board of Directors of EAA. In his role as EAA Chair, Pelton will guide the organization through the leadership transition.

"I will be working closely with the EAA Board of Directors to ensure a seamless transition to a new leader," Pelton said. "The directors of EAA and I thank Rod for his service. We understand how difficult it is to relocate a family of school-age children."

"EAA, as all of aviation, faces many challenges with the continuing economic slump and the decrease in personal aviation participation. As an association we must remain focused on the original mission of our founder, Paul H. Poberezny, to welcome all members no matter what they fly, celebrate our volunteers, and treat our employees fairly," Pelton added.

[danielfindling]

Great message from the "new" or "renewed" EAA:

"EAA, as all of aviation, faces many challenges with the continuing economic slump and the decrease in personal aviation participation. As an association we must remain focused on the original mission of our founder, Paul H. Poberezny, to welcome all members no matter what they fly, celebrate our volunteers, and treat our employees fairly," Pelton added.

I am hopeful that actions will follow the words.

Daniel

[Mike Switzer]

I am hopeful that actions will follow the words.

That can be interpreted a few different ways, hopefully it means more grass roots aviation that more members might actually be able to afford.

[MEdwards]

Despite impassioned reports to the contrary, Rod Hightower could not convince me or many others that he was an aviator first and a CEO of a large corporation second. I look forward to another go at a renewed EAA that recognizes that its members are members, not customers.

[EDGEFLY]

At this point, most of us don't have any real insight into the demise and departure of Mr. Hightower. Whatever the real reasons are, Corporate dissatisfaction, member unrest, a huge professional growth opportunity or even the unlikely prospect of the stated rationale, the EAA is unquestionably at the threshold of a magnificent opportunity. I urge the board to carefully review candidates to succeed him and find most imperatively, a person with real leadership qualities. The board should take into account how miserably they failed this test in their last selection and ensure that they do not repeat their own error again.

[RickFE]

I must be missing something. What has Mr. Hightower done or not done that I should be happy he is gone?

[Sirota]

I guess all the grumbling since AirVenture (god I hate that name) was heard after all!




Changing of the Guard


back to top (http://eaaforums.org/#top)

http://www.avweb.com/images/top_arrow.gif













http://www.avweb.com/newspics/hightower.jpg HIGHTOWER OUT AT EAA (http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/RodHightower_ExperimentalAircraftAssociation_EAAPr esident_SteppingDown_207552-1.html)
In a surprise announcement Monday, EAA president and CEO Rod Hightower announced he was stepping down effectively immediately. The decision came following a board of directors meeting in which former Cessna CEP Jack Pelton was elected chairman of EAA's board.
EAA spokesman Dick Knapinski said Pelton has not been named the president or the CEO but he will handle the transition from Hightower. Pelton will meet with staff Tuesday.
Hightower said he was stepping down to spend more time with his family, and he plans to move back to St. Louis. Hightower was hired in July of 2012 to replace former EAA president Tom Poberezny.

[flyingriki]

Don't let the doorknob hit you in the butt Rod..... and take your picket fences with you!

[Ylinen]

I had the honor to meet his family at AV this year. His son had just gotten his PPL on his 17th birthday. Very nice family. It is hard to ask a family to move when they get to high school age. Their college futures hinge too much on how they are in high school. I wish him and his family all the best.

Now it is up to the EAA board to decide how they want the future of EAA to be. I hope some strong candidates come to selection. Lets hope the best years of EAA are ahead.

All the best Rod.

[kscessnadriver]

I see this as a forced removal, by the ever deafing roar of the few who think EAA should be nothing other than homebuilts. And if that's the case, I may elect to not renew my membership. I'm disappointed to see him go, it seems like he was doing a good job at increasing the income for the organization and putting it on a path to continued expansion in GA in general, rather than sitting in a niche corner that will continue to decline as the population gets older.

[Bill]

"Infirm of purpose!' to quote Shakespeare, if Hightower departed for the stated reasons. Its incredibly hard to believe that a successful businessman would undertake such a change as the move to Oshkosh, which is a delightful town, without the support of his family. If he did, then it calls his judgement and common sense into question.

I also have a hard time believing that the "roar of the few" stampeded the EAA board into booting him. We'll probably never know the real reason for his departure.

Let us hope, though, that the next CEO wouldn't feel the need for an assistant to handle the CEO's branding.

[Joe Delene]

Never had any issues(bad) with him myself.

[Hal Bryan]

Guys - no personal attacks. There's no reason this can't stay civil.

[flybuddy]

It's understandable that the "personal" reasons rationale be used to reduce divisiveness BUT if you can't plan ahead and manage your family how the heck do you plan ahead and manage a large organization? Best of luck in future endeavors.

[Aero]

I'd let my membership expire. When I saw that Jack Pelton is the new boss today, I renewed.

I've been very impressed by Pelton.

[mikeno]

In my humble opinion Rod Hightower's priority was not with experimental aircraft or homebuilders or any of the things that made EAA the strongest aviation community in the world. The first indicator was a piece he wrote early in February 2012 and said if you hadn't flown formation or aerobatics you were not an aviator, only a pilot (this is not a personal attack Hal, read the article). That statement in and of itself probably excluded 75% of the membership from his elite club of "aviators". I knew when I read that article that Mr. Hightower was better suited to a tailored flightsuit with nary a single spot of oil or grease or mustard that us plain old pilots have.

[phavriluk]

Perhaps those of us who would applaud other departures from the organization and Sport Aviation in particular will have their hopes realized....

[kscessnadriver]

In my humble opinion Rod Hightower's priority was not with experimental aircraft or homebuilders or any of the things that made EAA the strongest aviation community in the world. The first indicator was a piece he wrote early in February 2012 and said if you hadn't flown formation or aerobatics you were not an aviator, only a pilot (this is not a personal attack Hal, read the article). That statement in and of itself probably excluded 75% of the membership from his elite club of "aviators". I knew when I read that article that Mr. Hightower was better suited to a tailored flightsuit with nary a single spot of oil or grease or mustard that us plain old pilots have.

So the simple act of not having an experimental plane or building one should exclude us from the EAA then, is what I'm reading between the lines. That's the number one reason I feel like EAA is trying to alienate a big portion of people, and a reason I'll have to strongly think about before renewing this winter.

[Kyle Boatright]

So the simple act of not having an experimental plane or building one should exclude us from the EAA then, is what I'm reading between the lines. That's the number one reason I feel like EAA is trying to alienate a big portion of people, and a reason I'll have to strongly think about before renewing this winter.

EAA was moving away from its core mission. That didn't go over well with the people who joined EAA because of its uniqueness. The analogy would be a football game where they cut the game to 20 minutes and had a 3 hour halftime. You participate in EAA because of the unique things it offers, just as you attend a football game (primarily) to see the game, not to watch the halftime activities.

[kscessnadriver]

EAA was moving away from its core mission. That didn't go over well with the people who joined EAA because of its uniqueness. The analogy would be a football game where they cut the game to 20 minutes and had a 3 hour halftime. You participate in EAA because of the unique things it offers, just as you attend a football game (primarily) to see the game, not to watch the halftime activities.

What is its core mission then? Because what people say is experimental is nothing like it was back when EAA started, best I can tell. People actually experimented, changed things, designed their own plane. Now its one company with more than 50% of the planes flying out there, built to cookie cutter specifications, often by for profit builders. How is that experimental, it isn't. It's circumventing the regulations, IMO.

The real problem, is there is a identity crisis with EAA, no clear mission. Make the mission clear and let the cards fall where they fall.

[martymayes]

So the simple act of not having an experimental plane or building one should exclude us from the EAA then, is what I'm reading between the lines.
Not sure what lines you are reading between but nowhere does EAA say they are limited to homebuilts. It's about grassroots aviation. Recently, it's been less about grassroots aviation and more about elitist.

[kscessnadriver]

Not sure what lines you are reading between but nowhere does EAA say they are limited to homebuilts. It's about grassroots aviation. Recently, it's been less about grassroots aviation and more about elitist.

First, all the people complain about certified stuff being here and there, and the high dollar contributors getting better perks. Then they go off about how EAA should go back to its roots, which is homebuilts. I think people forget that it takes money to run an organization, and if big sponsors get some perks to go along with large contributions, so be it. That's the way the world works. Aviation an elitist community. The idea that everyone can afford to fly and own an airplane is absurd. Its a middle to upper class activity. Always has been, always will be.

I see EAA at a crossroads, they can either do what they need to do to survive and potentially thrive. Or they can appease the old timers who want to go back to the "grass roots" of experimental, and let the organization die with the old timers. Which is it going to be?

[Bill]

I see EAA at a crossroads, they can either do what they need to do to survive and potentially thrive. Or they can appease the old timers who want to go back to the "grass roots" of experimental, and let the organization die with the old timers. Which is it going to be?

An example of Aristotelian logic at its worst. There are an infinite number of possibilities, each with its own probability, not two.

[kscessnadriver]

An example of Aristotelian logic at its worst. There are an infinite number of possibilities, each with its own probability, not two.

Not the way I see it. Young people simply don't get into flying, unless they do it for a career. Those who do it for a career generally don't want anything to do with GA, much less the EAA types. So, how do you propose keeping the organization alive, as the old timers pass on, with no new blood? Have to do something to get new, younger types involved and I feel that's the direction Hightower was going.

[mikeno]

So the simple act of not having an experimental plane or building one should exclude us from the EAA then, is what I'm reading between the lines. That's the number one reason I feel like EAA is trying to alienate a big portion of people, and a reason I'll have to strongly think about before renewing this winter.

If I believed that, I would be guilty of the same logic Mr. Hightower used. Don't read between the lines. I have no criteria except that EAA management listen to the membership not the elitists.

[martymayes]

Have to do something to get new, younger types involved and I feel that's the direction Hightower was going.
How many younger types joined EAA in the last year as a result of the new "direction?"

[kscessnadriver]

If I believed that, I would be guilty of the same logic Mr. Hightower used. Don't read between the lines. I have no criteria except that EAA management listen to the membership not the elitists.


Ok, got it. Listen to the people who don't contribute much money to run the organization. Seems like to be, we would be in the same spot, if they raised the dues to truly cover the cost of running the whole organization, rather than giving a little bit to the "elitists"


How many younger types joined EAA in the last year as a result of the new "direction?"
Couldn't tell you, and now we won't since it appears they want to change direction.


Long and short, EAA needs to pick a direction to go and stay with it. Hopefully, they do that quickly, so I know if I want to spend the money to remain part of an organization that may or may not want to include me.

[RV8505]

Don't get spooled up Cessna! EAA is for everyone and that won't change! No matter what anyone says!

[kscessnadriver]

Don't get spooled up Cessna! EAA is for everyone and that won't change! No matter what anyone says!

But its not, as it looks that everyone wants to chase the "elitists" out, not that I'm not sure who they are. I would say that by definition, anyone who flies is an elitist.

[RV8505]

Don't worry my friend! It will be ok!

[Bill]

But its not, as it looks that everyone wants to chase the "elitists" out, not that I'm not sure who they are. I would say that by definition, anyone who flies is an elitist.

Are they going to chase themselves out? By your definition, "everyone" is a member of the "elitist" set. If they chase them out, the result is the null set.

[Jim Hann]

I live in St. Louis and I know where the Hightower kids go to school. I sat next to them at our Chapter Christmas banquet in 2010. I'm guessing that they couldn't find a school of similar pedigree any closer than Milwaukee or Madison. I also know that Rod told us he had sold a business, so I don't think money was any sort of obstacle for him. In other words he could just go home and be a housedad.

My $0.02, YMMV.

[Jim Clark]

Our founder did more to define our mission years ago when he said "We're not about airplanes, we're about people". Our chapter uses that as our motto just to remind us we're a social organization whose members share an interest in all things aviation.

[dewi8095]

I had decided to let my membership lapse at the end of the year. Might need to renew now to see which way the organization will go.

Don De Witt

[BBARTONB]

Maybe it's a new begining,for the EAA.Maybe we can get more in line with the original mission,people not airplanes.Of course both go hand in hand.

[Bob Collins]

My (extremely good) source says Mr. Hightower was escorted from the building yesterday. People don't quit their jobs on Monday. I think one sign that things are changing at EAA is if these sorts of news releases treat us like something other than children needing a cover story to protect us from mom and dad's divorce.

Now, then, now that he's gone, what's the plan. And, "let's make it 1970 again" isn't a workable solution.

[kjb]

I for one am glad to see a direction change. EAA needs to find a path that looks to the affordable average guy aviation. While IFR flying, formation flying, and turboprop aircraft are interesting they are way to far out of reach for 90% of the organization. Therefore 90% of the effort of the organization should be concentrated on us in the real world. That includes building aircraft, maintaining older aircraft, stick and rudder skills and recruiting friends and family to enjoy the world of aviation with us. The more unaffordable we make things seem with Airventure and with SportAviation the more we chase many people away. Rod may not have been the right fit, I wish him well, and I hope that EAA finds a direction that can benifit the Experimental and Recreational aviation most effectively.

[Mike Switzer]

And, "let's make it 1970 again" isn't a workable solution.

I'd be happy with 1990 or even 2000. I have been reading back issues of the magazine from the web site - it can be very enlightening.

[Rick Rademacher]

Oh how I wish that Springfield, Ohio had been chosen as the home for the EAA rather than Oshkosh when they moved from Rockford. As I live only 15 miles from Springfield, I would have enjoyed participating at EAA at a higher level. The President of EAA has to be a part of the Oshkosh community. To reside in another state can’t work for anyone!

[rv9av8tr]

Like everything else; education, cars, houses, etc, hobbies like flying
have become disproportionately expensive. I got my PPL in 1971 for $660
as a high school student working a summer job. I was able to pay for
an entire year of college working a summer job. Try that today!! The
result is an incredible economic force that has changed the face of how
most of us knew the world "back then".

I joined EAA in 1981, attended my first Oshkosh in 1982 and built my
first airplane (Long-EZ) from 82-85. EAA then was about homebuilts,
antiques, classics and a little bit about warbirds. I drool over a
beautiful Fairchild or Staggerwing as much (or more so) than a
homebuilt. For me, that is the core of EAA, promoting innovation in our
garages and keeping our aviation heritage alive. These economic forces
have clearly made that much more difficult than in 70's-80's, but that
is what draws me to EAA. AOPA has a different mission and place, and
just as important as EAA in it's own right, but I think they have been
blurring their missions. I think EAA & AOPA can work synergistically to
help all corners of aviation, but lets focus on our missions.

Long live EAA & AOPA... in their own camps and together.

[Joe LaMantia]

OK where to start?

I agree with Jim Clark that EAA is a social organization founded around interest in aviation. I've been a member of several chapters over the years whose membership varies from backyard mechanics to "high flyers" who own Bonanza's. Small chapters tend to be pretty "tight" with the same leadership year after year and take on the personality of that leadership. Larger chapters mean more people and that always means a bit more "politics". You can usually judge the focus of a chapter and how you fit in a couple of meetings. Now as far as EAA HQ is concerned we have this very unique situation, a small group that has exploded in size do to the Fly-In. It's become the biggest aviation show in the world and that wasn't the objective of the founder back in the 1950's.

EAA and aviation in general is facing the impacts of "globalization" and rapid technology advances like this "blog". Change is one of the most difficult challenges facing management in any organization, people resist change. So we have 4 pages and counting of people venting their frustrations. This is a normal reaction to yet another change. EAA has a huge membership and it's doubtful that any "leader" will be able to make everyone happy. Let's look at the future of GA and EAA and accept the fact that "growth" will be slow at best in the USA. We have shipped a huge piece of our economy overseas and we're struggling with the impact of that fact along with finding a way forward. No Politics here Please! We've had a lot of blogging on that subject and it's clear we are divided into camps. The impact of division is not helpful in finding solutions.

Here's one of many future outcomes. Aviation and EAA focus globally and recognize that China wants to expand it's aviation community to include GA. That is already happening on the business side, EAA could try to establish grassroots chapters in Asia. Maybe we could have "sister' chapters, the internet would allow all kinds of international contact and it fits with EAA HQ leadership. I'm sure the CEO of Cessna will have something to say about that possibility. Another outcome will be yet another survey of the membership which will yield the same results, everybody shouting "my way or the highway".

OK Rick, moving to Springfield would be Great! I could attend AirVenture every year and it would be a day trip from Sidney. I had about 12 years of that when I lived in Hartland, WI and drove to OSH! The facilities at HQ are wonderful, and if your close you can really use it's resources.

Joe
:cool:

[Bill Berson]

EAA is not just home builds. But there needs to be limits. I would say EAA should restrict to the interests of experimenters, home builders, kit builders, older airplane restorers, warbirds restorers and even people that experiment with turboprops.
In other words "mechanic types."

EAA should never cater to factory new turboprops ( see recent $900,000 turboprop article, for example) or factory new airplanes of any kind. New airplanes don't need experimentation or restoration.
It is a conflict of interest for EAA to associate with commercial aircraft companies as other magazines do, and that is the problem.

[kscessnadriver]

EAA is not just home builds. But there needs to be limits. I would say EAA should restrict to the interests of experimenters, home builders, kit builders, older airplane restorers, warbirds restorers and even people that experiment with turboprops.
In other words "mechanic types."

EAA should never cater to factory new turboprops ( see recent $900,000 turboprop article, for example) or factory new airplanes of any kind. New airplanes don't need experimentation or restoration.
It is a conflict of interest for EAA to associate with commercial aircraft companies as other magazines do, and that is the problem.

So you want to throw the money out that supports the organization thru advertising and other mean. How do you propose to run the organization then.

[Wilfred]

I have been an EAA member for around 25-years, and will likely continue that no matter what happens with the coming changes.
My regret is that, like other large organizations, money is a pressing problem always. I belong to AOPA and AARP, and those organizations also are always pressing for money. In their web sites and their publications EAA, AOPA, and AARP are loaded with credit card offers, wine clubs, watches, and other stuff all designed to produce income. I guess its necessary in a way, but the emphasis moves toward making money instead of the fundamental purpose of the organization. Current economic conditions may make this necessary, but it is a sorry thing in my view. I am dropping AARP after getting over a 230% increase in homeowners insurance from an AARP 'pushed' insurance company. I am also watching AOPA and may drop them unless some changes in their organization is made...its a tough world !

[FlyingRon]

I think you'll find that Rod had a lot of animosity from not just the homebuilders, but also vintage, IAC, ultralights, (can't vouch for wardbirds). Perhaps some of it is deserved, and some of it just because he's in charge when things are going bad (sort of like blaming Obama for everything that's wrong in the country).

As for direction, long before Hightower showed up the EAA was "Sport Aviation" not "Experimental Aviation" and it's been a delicate balance between the various aspects. However, I agree, not all PERSONAL aviation is sport any more than my Toyota is a racecar, a classic car, a custom car, etc...

[rleffler]

So you want to throw the money out that supports the organization thru advertising and other mean. How do you propose to run the organization then.

Ugh..... This is becoming more like the presidential debates with every posting. People arguing over their personal assumptions with the benefit of knowing all the facts.

A fair number of members want Sport Aviation articles to return to a previous era in support of a more grassroots type of aviation. I'm all in favor of that. This doesn't exclude vintage aircraft from the major manufacturers. I personally don't believe that will alienate any of the major sponsors. If they want to purchase a full page add for their latest business jet let them. Sooner or later there marketing staff will realize that isn't the best bang for their buck and move on. Let the content be driven by the organization's key mission. I don't think advertisements in Sports Aviation is a major funding source for the EAA. I would be surprized if it actually offsets printing and mailing costs.

Also, nobody has mentioned anything about limiting the participation of the major aircraft companies displays that are west of Phillips Conoco Square. I personally have no issue with them displaying their latest wares. I think if they are kept separate in that area, then you aren't going to get complaints from most vendors. It was only when the real estate between the taxi way and the runway was taken over, that members became agitated. The chalets may be a necessary evil, but more though probably needs to be put into their location.

I also don't have any problems with jewelers, mattress companies, cookware, etc types at Airventure. Just keep them in the Fly-Mart and out of the major exhibit buildings. The economy is tough everywehere. We need to keep costs inline to attact the maximum amount of vendors to show off their wares. I know of several major players in the homebuilt market that can't afford booth space. What a pity that is. If we have to trade off the air conditioned portable toilets or some other luxory item to keep expenses down, then let's do that. We can't continue to operate like the federal government and spend to a point in which members can't afford to participate.

I am aslo hopeful that the Board insists on more volunteer member participation in planning Airventure and other EAA activities. I think the lesson was learned this past year the impact of attempting to dictate change without consenus. I for one, am willing to volunteer my time to assist in the rebuilding wherever I can or am needed.

bob

[raytoews]

I have to jump in here.
I like EAA the way it is, have ever since I joined back in the 70's.
I like the articles about putting a new panel in an Aztec, or about a Pietenpol, or about Glacier Girl, it's the diversity. Is a 1.2 million dollar Evolution a "homebuilt"? Probably not but I sure like to read about it and dream about it.

I'm disappointed the Managment didn't have a proper succession plan in place. A squadron leaders first job on taking over is to groom his successor.
When I read Mr Hightowers resignation this morning my first thought was "oh no, here we go".
This is not why I joined EAA, it's about airplanes.
Despite, I will not cancel my membership. You only have credibility when your inside.

Ray

[nfdlpilot]

I wish Mr Hightower good luck in his future, and I thank him for his service to the E.A.A. I'm sure it took some sacrifices.

That said, I like airplanes and flying, and now after 20 years of being an E.A.A. member, building. I get satisfaction from belonging to this group and reading the magazine and attending the big show, and chapter meetings.

This new development doesn't change that.

Curt

[Green Goggles]

I wish Mr Hightower good luck in his future, and I thank him for his service to the E.A.A. I'm sure it took some sacrifices.

That said, I like airplanes and flying, and now after 20 years of being an E.A.A. member, building. I get satisfaction from belonging to this group and reading the magazine and attending the big show, and chapter meetings.

This new development doesn't change that.

I agree on ALL accounts.

I am anticipating my next magazine as much as ever, and anticipating the next AirVenture as much as ever.

Here's hoping for a smooth transition to new leadership.

[Bill]

In all this mishmash of opinions, let's not forget the EAA employees, who have been battered by layoffs and now the uncertainty of the (perhaps) unanticipated transition to new leadership after only a couple of years to adjust to the just departed leadership. They have done a commendable job of keeping EAA going throughout all of this. I think we need to express our appreciation, as EAA members, for their perseverance through these hard times and the excellent job they have done in keeping EAA a responsive organization, open to all interested parties, during this time.

Thanks for all you have done.

[Bill]

If you go to the Oshkosh Northwestern at http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20121023/OSH0101/310230145/Hightower-resigns-EAA-president?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE&nclick_check=1, there's a more complete article on Hightower's departure and comments by John Monnett and Mac McClelland on the whys and wherefores of his departure.

[Burtles]

Guys - no personal attacks. There's no reason this can't stay civil.

If Mr Hightower had followed this advice, he would still have a job.

[martymayes]

comments (http://comments) by John Monnett and Mac McClelland on the whys and wherefores of his departure.
Interestingly, Mac claims it was a residency requirement, where Monnett says it was the change in direction.

[Mike Switzer]

Interestingly, Mac claims it was a residency requirement, where Monnett says it was the change in direction.

I have friends who HAVE to live in St Louis to keep a job in their chosen field (engineers & management at a major aviation company). They would leave the really pitiful St Louis area schools & take their families to Oshkosh right away if there was a job there for them.

[Bill Berson]

I agree with John Monnetts comments.
The question is:
Why is Mac " I only fly IFR" McClelland left to run EAA?

[Hal Bryan]

Just to be extra-clear, Mac is not running EAA. Jack Pelton was elected recently as our new Chairman of the Board, and he has stepped in to act as an interim leader during this transition phase. Mac remains the VP of Publications, and is a member of our senior leadership team along with people like Chad, Sean Elliott, etc.

[Patrick Donovan]

As background, I've been an EAA member for 40 years. I'm a Century Club member and Lifetime member.

I have met and talked to Rod several times and believe he did what he considered to be in the best interests with regard to EAA. As with every high level management turnover in an organization, there will be changes; if nothing else due to fresh eyes seeing problems that were missed before. "Flattening" an organizational structure is a time honored corporate technique, and yes, some times that means people are let go particularly if the last organizational change was 30 years ago. When Rod's replacement comes in, everyone should expect similar realignments/changes.

With the pilot population declining and at least maintaining EAA membership numbers a major goal, I think Rod was attempting to broaden the interest base to include more of the current and future pilot population. For evidence look at the current version of "Sport Aviation." The current style is the same as "Flying" and AOPA's "Pilot." A laudable goal in my opinion, although I must admit I really dislike the current "Sport Aviation" style and McClellan's column content is generally a waste of valuable printing space.

I've often wondered were EAA was headed when Tom Poberezny was in charge. Rod's "Sport Aviation" October article (page 72) is the first time I recall having seen the strategic plan and such financial information for EAA. This great article is strictly the result of Rod's corporate background in my opinion. I suggest everyone re-read it because it still outlines what EAA is all about and where we need to go.

My very best wishes to Rod and his family.

Pat Donovan
Chapter 186 and 1387
Comanche owner
RV-9 builder

[Flyfalcons]

They could have at least tried a different excuse than "I need to spend more time with my family". That one's been a bit overplayed. Maybe Mac can spend more time with his family too? As much as we love reading about IFR procedures in a Baron in a magazine called "Sport Aviation" and all......

[CarlOrton]

They could have at least tried a different excuse than "I need to spend more time with my family". That one's been a bit overplayed. snip
Don't discount that too much, Ryan; family pressure can exert a HUGE impact to an executive's performance. With all of the stuff going on in today's world, disrupting HS-aged kids *is* a very big deal. Yeah, yeah, he shoulda/coulda figured that out *before* he took the position, but sometimes the family can be a big cheerleader on a moment's notice, clouding the picture.

Someone else said that the Monday departure was telling. Well, I just figured that he returned after a very good and/or very sobering weekend with the fam and decided that he really *did* need to remain in St Louis.

I speak from personal experience. I grew up without a dad. I resented both of my folks for that. As a result, I committed that I would be there for my two sons. I was there for just about every school function, and coached both of their sports teams. When I took a higher-paying job in 1997 that involved a longer commute, I figured it would still be worth it. I lasted 6 months when I realized that I was now missing their games and functions. I took a 25% pay cut, but was there for them during their early teen years - vitally important. I guess I did OK, since one is now an ATC Center controller, and the other flies for United Express.

Just saying that family influence cannot be discounted. I don't know if this is the real reason or not for Rod's departure. Until a BoD member chimes in here (doubtful), let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Pat (above) said it all very nicely.

[Hank]

C'mon, Carl!

I agree that "family issues" are important to all of us. But making children change schools is not a large family issue . . . From kindergarten through high school, I attended 8 schools in four states, none closer than 300 miles to the previous one. Most moves were during summer vacation, but I did move in the middle of the year twice. Three high schools, too; leaving after being on the Class A State Champion football team was not fun, especially when the next team went 0-5 and cancelled the rest of my senior season due to excessive injuries, but hey, it's only high school. Dad got a promotion; they offered to let me stay behind and finish, living with a classmate, but they're my family and I went with them. The senior year is not the right time to be parentless.

Now I'm off to read the gossip rag that Bill kindly left a link to.

As a new EAA member, I'm not up on all the behind-the-scenes politics; I joined mostly to give Young Eagles rides and interest the next generation of pilots. Tornado-and-Fun last year was good, but I didn't join until afterwards. Maybe some day I'll make it to Oshkosh . . .

As much as I hate office politics, to me this looks like office politics writ large.

[Flyfalcons]

Spending time with family was the excuse the ousted CEO at my previous company used when he was fired. It's industry speak for "I got canned and wish to make a graceful exit".

[Jimbabwe]

Oooh, I wrote that Pelton had fake B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering from Hamilton University and my post was DELETED! So much for an open forum. Well, read the article here: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

If Jack Pelton has fake degrees which he purports to be real, how can he be trusted and why should he be a part of the EAA?

[Hal Bryan]

Oooh, I wrote that Pelton had fake B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering from Hamilton University and my post was DELETED! So much for an open forum. Well, read the article here: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

If Jack Pelton has fake degrees which he purports to be real, how can he be trusted and why should he be a part of the EAA?

No, your post was deleted because you directly called him a liar. That's a personl attack, and everyone should know by now that they're not allowed here, period.

[Bill Berson]

Just to be extra-clear, Mac is not running EAA. Jack Pelton was elected recently as our new Chairman of the Board, and he has stepped in to act as an interim leader during this transition phase. Mac remains the VP of Publications, and is a member of our senior leadership team along with people like Chad, Sean Elliott, etc.
So the ex CEO of a Jet airplane company now runs EAA?
Not much has changed.
I know nothing about Jack and wish him well.
But can you imagine if Bill Lear had been appointed CEO of EAA in 1965?

Again, airplane manufacturers running EAA is a direct conflict of interest. EAA members need leaders that will fight against the agenda from jet manufacturers and airlines ( who mostly want us to stay out the way, especially ultralights).
But Jack is welcome to explain how he can advocate for ultralights and low cost home-builts (without $15,000 ADS-B, etc., etc....)

[Mayhemxpc]

There have been some comments about Sport Aviation as an indicator of broader changes in EAA. I felt I needed to chime in. Overall, I like the changes in Sport Aviation (overall). If that is an indicator of broader changes in EAA, then I guess I like that too. There seems to be something in each issue that appeals to me, often more than one thing, and often for more than one reason. Now the down side, which is an indicator of cautions we must keep in mind with change. For a long time now, there has been little difference between Flying and AOPA Pilot. Even the covers are the same and I often forget which one I am reading (and I am not THAT old...yet.) Some years ago, I found it difficult to justify keeping both subscriptions. Then Lane Wallace came in to Flying's staff and brought a breath of real touch the sky and look at the ground flying. I decided to renew. Then her style started conformed to the model of everything else in Flying -- and out of touch with the "weekend pilot." (Thankfully, she seems to have returned to her earlier passions since coming to SportAviation). Before I could drop my subscription, Martha Lunken came on board. I keep my subscription to Flying for her. (This is long but bear with me.) I always looked forward to reading Mac in Flying (but I flew a Baron, then) but I do not see how he fits in Sport Aviation. OK, now where I am going with this? Sport Aviation needs to appeal to the broad interests of General Aviation: real, grass roots pilots and aviation enthusiasts of all types, while guarding against becoming just another aviation advocacy group. It must keep a particular character, which may be different than the one it had 20 years ago, but one that stays consistent with that spirit. The Chapters will keep that going -- and there is nothing else like it (with respects to the CAF). But we need to keep the Chapters going. We also need to talk with each other. That is why Sport Aviation is important, it allows the experimenters, the warbirds, vintage flyers, and the rest to inform one another about the great community we are all part of and share ideas about our common passion. That is why EAA is important.

Rod Hightower left for whatever reason. I wish him well. Jack Pelton is taking us through transition and we need to work with him, however we can, in whatever capacity we have, to make that transition successful and keep EAA growing, changing, while remaining the same in its essential. It is about the people.

Sorry for being so long-winded.

[RV8505]

Oooh, I wrote that Pelton had fake B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering from Hamilton University and my post was DELETED! So much for an open forum. Well, read the article here: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

If Jack Pelton has fake degrees which he purports to be real, how can he be trusted and why should he be a part of the EAA?


Even if it isn't true, So What, An A&P certificate doesn't make you a great mechanic and a aerospace engineering degree doesn't make you an good Engineer. There is a lot of talent on the airfield at Oshkosh by those without degrees and certificates. Furthermore, If you were to search the Biographies of many prominent inventors and and notable engineers in aviation you would find they lack a formal education. All I can say is Jack was a member of EAA and Chapter #1 long before he ever joined Cessna and he is one of us. I havn't seen Jack's EAA number but I would bet it is a low number.




http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-80863924.html no real formal aeronautical education. Much like his mentor, John Northrop, he was a self-trained draftsman,
http://www.nationalaviation.org/northrop-john/
During his long career at Douglas, Heinemann designed more than 20 combat aircraft, primarily for the U.S. Navy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy), including many that became legends in aviation history. His designs included:


SBD Dauntless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_SBD_Dauntless) dive bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dive_bomber)
A-20 Havoc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-20_Havoc) light bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_bomber)/attack aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-attack_aircraft)
A-26 Invader (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-26_Invader) light bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_bomber)/attack aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-attack_aircraft)
A-1 Skyraider (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-1_Skyraider) attack aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-attack_aircraft)
A-3 Skywarrior (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-3_Skywarrior) bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomber)
A-4 Skyhawk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-4_Skyhawk) light bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_bomber)
F3D Skyknight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_F3D_Skyknight) night fighter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_fighter)
F4D Skyray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_F4D_Skyray) carrier-based (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-based_aircraft) fighter aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft)
Douglas Skystreak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Skystreak) and Douglas Skyrocket (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Skyrocket) research aircraft

[Jimbabwe]

RV8505, you are missing my point. I agree that certificates don't make the man or the woman. I agree that a lack of a formal education does not prevent one from being a great inventor, leader or engineer.

However, there are many fields and professions in which misrepresenting one's credentials are grounds for suspension from professional practice and sometimes even criminal prosecution. Unfortunately, management is not one of them.

[RV8505]

RV8505, you are missing my point. I agree that certificates don't make the man or the woman. I agree that a lack of a formal education does not prevent one from being a great inventor, leader or engineer.

However, there are many fields and professions in which misrepresenting one's credentials are grounds for suspension from professional practice and sometimes even criminal prosecution. Unfortunately, management is not one of them.

What is your point? Rod is gone, Our organization is in a state of chaos, I don't know if your intent is to push the EAA over the edge or you have a personal ax to grind with Jack as a possible former Cessna employee. Jack was appointed and it is what it is. Your remarks aren't really doing anything more than adding to the turmoil. That article came out in 2004 and whatever Jack supposedly did or didn't do, Cessna believed in him enough to keep him around 7 years. If you know anything about corporate America that is a long time.

[Kurt Flunkn]

So what?

I believe there is a huge difference between being talented / self-taught and claiming a questionable credential. What if an A&P / IA signed off *your* annual and turned out to be unlicensed? What if you applied for a job using real credentials and someone with higher degrees from a diploma mill got the job? Would you feel cheated?

Read these:
http://investor.textron.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=110047&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=477271&highlight=

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_J._Pelton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_University

After I read the above articles, I think Mr. Pelton should explain to the membership his degrees from Hamilton University and the circumstances under which these were awarded. There may be a very good explanation. Then again, maybe not.

[Kyle Boatright]

So what?

<snip>

After I read the above articles, I think Mr. Pelton should explain to the membership his degrees from Hamilton University and the circumstances under which these were awarded. There may be a very good explanation. Then again, maybe not.

I say let's give the guy a chance. He's had decades of experience in aviation and wasn't voted in as EAA Chairman of the Board or temporary CEO because of his degrees or lack thereof. He earned the position through a lengthy, successful career. I've never met him, but I have spoken to people who know him first hand and who believe he will be an excellent fit for EAA. I hope they are right.

[steveinindy]

I see this as a forced removal, by the ever deafing roar of the few who think EAA should be nothing other than ragwing, wood or metal framed homebuilts with engine horsepower ratings below that of a decent motorcycle.

Fixed it for you.


And if that's the case, I may elect to not renew my membership.

I am very afraid that this may very well be a move by that vocal minority of older members who are just trying to get the 'kids' off what they perceive to be their 'lawn'


I'm disappointed to see him go, it seems like he was doing a good job at increasing the income for the organization and putting it on a path to continued expansion in GA in general, rather than sitting in a niche corner that will continue to decline as the population gets older.

Exactly, but you forget the purpose of the EAA is not to advocate for aviation or even homebuilt aircraft but to keep folks fixated on certain parts of the hobby. Or at least that is what the attitude of that vocal group seems to be.


"Infirm of purpose!' to quote Shakespeare, if Hightower departed for the stated reasons. Its incredibly hard to believe that a successful businessman would undertake such a change as the move to Oshkosh, which is a delightful town, without the support of his family. If he did, then it calls his judgement and common sense into question.

Things change. I once gave up a position very important to me to return to my hometown because of family commitments (taking care of my dying grandfather).


I also have a hard time believing that the "roar of the few" stampeded the EAA board into booting him. We'll probably never know the real reason for his departure

All it takes is one rich or politically connected person roaring while wielding his wallet.


I've been very impressed by Pelton

What's so impressive about him? I've never met the guy and the only thing I know is that he used to be the CEO of Cessna.


It's about grassroots aviation. Recently, it's been less about grassroots aviation and more about elitist.

What exactly is this "grassroots aviation" I keep hearing about? Talk about a poorly defined term. Ask ten people and get ten different answers.


But its not, as it looks that everyone wants to chase the "elitists" out, not that I'm not sure who they are. I would say that by definition, anyone who flies is an elitist.

I would agree with both of those statements.


Are they going to chase themselves out? By your definition, "everyone" is a member of the "elitist" set. If they chase them out, the result is the null set.
The problem is that the true and dangerous elitists are the ones who think only their kind of airplanes are "real" and belong at Oshkosh. I may not have an interest in the grass field based high-wing ragwings nor have the desire to fly just for "the sake of flying", but they have their place just like the "point A to B" traveling aircraft that attract my interest. The issue is not what someone chooses to fly or where that places them in someone's artificial hierarchy but rather the fact that some of us have forgotten that we are all airplane geeks and part of a fraternity that should transcend stupid genitalia surrogate measuring contests.


Our founder did more to define our mission years ago when he said "We're not about airplanes, we're about people". Our chapter uses that as our motto just to remind us we're a social organization whose members share an interest in all things aviation.
Exactly. He also has said that there is room enough for anyone in the EAA.


EAA should never cater to factory new turboprops ( see recent $900,000 turboprop article, for example) or factory new airplanes of any kind. New airplanes don't need experimentation or restoration.
It is a conflict of interest for EAA to associate with commercial aircraft companies as other magazines do, and that is the problem.

I don't see it as a conflict of interest anymore than letting Van or the folks from Lancair speak at Oshkosh. They build good airplanes but are not much more than factory built aircraft with multiple final assembly plants.


Why is Mac " I only fly IFR" McClelland left to run EAA?

What's wrong with flying IFR?


I've often wondered were EAA was headed when Tom Poberezny was in charge.

Same here. The only reason his leadership wasn't more widely questioned is because of who his dad is. No one wants to dare sully the Poberezny name.


They could have at least tried a different excuse than "I need to spend more time with my family". That one's been a bit overplayed.

If I didn't need to work, I would tell my boss to shove it and never do anything but enjoy life and spend time with those I care about. And this is coming from someone who is more or less self-employed!

I am of the opinion- right or wrong- that most of the members of this forum are here simply to gripe and they wouldn't be happy or satisfied with the "direction" of EAA even if Paul tapped them to be the next leader.

[Unwiredone]

I say let's give the guy a chance. He's had decades of experience in aviation and wasn't voted in as EAA Chairman of the Board or temporary CEO because of his degrees or lack thereof. He earned the position through a lengthy, successful career. I've never met him, but I have spoken to people who know him first hand and who believe he will be an excellent fit for EAA. I hope they are right.

<Edited presidential comment>Was the same amount of scrutiny provided for Mr. Hightower's educational background? I don't personally see the point about Mr. Pelton's degree's now that the man is retired from Cessna. He did very well for his stakeholders before and this isn't to say he won't do it again for us members of the EAA.

[Unwiredone]

In all this mishmash of opinions, let's not forget the EAA employees, who have been battered by layoffs and now the uncertainty of the (perhaps) unanticipated transition to new leadership after only a couple of years to adjust to the just departed leadership. They have done a commendable job of keeping EAA going throughout all of this. I think we need to express our appreciation, as EAA members, for their perseverance through these hard times and the excellent job they have done in keeping EAA a responsive organization, open to all interested parties, during this time.

Thanks for all you have done.

Excellent Bill and I would certainly agree with your observations as a whole. I will share that Chad and Hal have been in the middle of the firestorm for a long time. These gentleman both need a huge pat on the back and a beer at the beer tent at AV 2013.

[Cherokeeflyer]

Everyone must have felt the changes at 'Ariventure' since the start of the Hightower era. It became more of an military airshow and a commercial event. Hightower even said he wanted to, turn Oshkosh into the worlds leading airshow. As a 'humble' GA pilot, I felt more and more marginalized. The EAA is an orginization of passionate pilots and chapters, building small aircraft in their workshops. We don't fly P51s, we don't buy jets. We fly what we build or single engine Cessna's and Pipers...let's get back to our roots, support the average GA pilot and forget making 'Airventure' a corporate / military airshow. There are plenty of those in the world. EAA is unique, with its membership of private pilots. Let's celebrate, respect and involve them more in the organization. We need a new president who understands its members.

[rwanttaja]

Spending time with family was the excuse the ousted CEO at my previous company used when he was fired. It's industry speak for "I got canned and wish to make a graceful exit".
Yep, that does make the red flags wave. However, Mac's article does put a bit of additional light on it. Apparently, one of the conditions of the Board of Directors offering Hightower the job was for him to move to Oshkosh. This apparently didn't happen. It may be that the board was unhappy with him for other reasons, and the failure to move was just a convenient justification that let both side save face (and EAA avoid a lawsuit).

I met Hightower a couple of times on visits to Oshkosh, including right after he got the job. While I agree with many of those who criticize the direction the organization went under his leadership, my conversations with him seemed to indicate that he was *not* ignoring the homebuilt side. He was very concerned about how the homebuilt accident rate was being perceived by the FAA, and what EAA could do to counter unnecessary FAA action.

Probably the biggest thing against him was the spelling of his last name: It's not spelled, "Poberezny." Fifty years of leadership by a family dynasty is hard to overcome. Paul and Tom grew with the organization, it is a very strong reflection of their personalities. The organization structure reflected what they felt were important. Plus, they themselves grew as the organization did, and had their opportunities to make mistakes while the operation was still small.

Like it or not, EAA is now a fairly large corporation. You *can't* just promote the president of EAA Chapter 9507 to the top job; you need someone with experience in managing a multi-million dollar concern. The qualification includes organizational and political skills. Rod Hightower was a good choice, from that point of view. But his vision for the corporation didn't match the way an increasingly large number of people wanted it to go. Hightower was a new broom, and those comfortable with the old regime found him a bit scratchy.

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

What's wrong with flying IFR?


.

Nothing wrong with IFR other than it is not sport flying.
But Steve, Mac brags that he ONLY flies IFR.
Hardly optimal that a sport aviation association of members has him writing and blogging ONLY about IFR.

No need to say more Steve, we have debated this enough.

[Ylinen]

I find it interesting that most here are ok with Pelton as interim CEO, but we're not happy with Hightower taking the organization towards more GA orientation. What are Pelton's experimental or home built background?

People complain about the changes being made to include more jet and rich aviation at EAA. Wasn't that Pelton's background at Cessna?

Hightower spent the first 6 months visiting the chapters and listening.

Given how the NTSB and FAA have their sights on A/B, the next CEO should have experience in government relations. EAA has one person in DC. It will take far more resources to repell the attack.

Good luck Pelton. Hope he communicates with the chapters quickly and keeps open communications. Especially two way.

[phavriluk]

I need a fact adjustment. I thought Mr. Pelton is the delegate from the board of directors nominated to replace and fill-in temporarily as Hightower's replacement until such time as a new permanent CEO of the organization is put into the chair? No? Thanks.

[RV8505]

I need a fact adjustment. I thought Mr. Pelton is the delegate from the board of directors nominated to replace and fill-in temporarily as Hightower's replacement until such time as a new permanent CEO of the organization is put into the chair? No? Thanks.

October 24, 2012 - The EAA board of directors created a new chairman of the board position and on Sunday elected Jack Pelton to fill that role. Jack is the first formally elected non-executive chairman in the history of EAA.

The chairman's term is three years with the board's option to reelect the person for a second three-year term. Six years is the maximum any one person can serve as chair.

Jack is also acting as president and CEO of EAA while a replacement for Rod Hightower is found. Hightower resigned that position on Monday.

Jack is the retired chairman, president, and CEO of Cessna Aircraft. He is a lifelong EAAer with extensive flying experience in all types of airplanes from experimentals to warbirds to business jets.

Jack grew up in an aviation family in Southern California. His father, who flew in the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War II, was active in EAA Chapter 1 at Flabob Airport in Riverside, California. Among the airplanes his family owned was a Cessna 140A, the final version of the popular taildragger that had the single strut and tapered wing. Jack's mother was also a certificated pilot.

Jack began his aviation career at Douglas Aircraft. At Cessna he quickly rose from the head of engineering to the top job.

Jack and his wife, Rose, live in Wichita, Kansas, and have their hangar at Stearman Field on the northeast side of town. In that hangar is a Ryan PT-22, the airplane Jack's dad learned to fly in. The Peltons also own and restored a Cessna 195 that once belonged to Duane Wallace, the nephew of Clyde Cessna, who built the company into the largest producer of general aviation airplanes in the world.

Jack also owns and flies a Stearman and has a turbo Cessna 206 for traveling. Rose is learning to fly in the couple's Cessna 162 Skycatcher LSA.

In his interim role as president and CEO of EAA, Jack will be spending time in Oshkosh ensuring a smooth transition to the new leadership. The EAA board of directors has set no timetable for hiring the new CEO.

"I have committed my time to help ensure a smooth and effective leadership transition, no matter how long it takes to find the right person," Jack said. "EAA is very important to me, and its success is vital to all of personal aviation. I am fortunate to have the time in retirement to help out and I am happy to do my part."

[Chad Jensen]

He also built a Fisher FP-101 as a youngster with his dad.:cool:

[steveinindy]

Nothing wrong with IFR other than it is not sport flying.
But Steve, Mac brags that he ONLY flies IFR.

Well hell, even if I'm out for fun I fly IFR (but then again my definition of "fun" is largely point A to point B rather than just boring holes in the sky). The challenges of IFR are the fun of flying for me so it is "sport flying" at least in my book. Then again, I also always fly dual pilot for several reasons.

The issue is that it doesn't meet your definition of sport aviation because you don't enjoy IFR flying and it rubs you the wrong way. I don't enjoy your kind of flying, you don't enjoy mine but surely there can be a mutual respect between fellow pilots. There's friendly rivalry between bomber and fighter jocks but they still have a respect for one another. That's what seems to be missing in the EAA more than anything else. Until that changes, we will simply be chasing ghosts or our own tails rather than working to support one another. We either learn to live together as brothers and sisters or we die together as the ship of fools sinks beneath us.


No need to say more Steve, we have debated this enough.

Then why do we have a new "The EAA sucks" or "Sport Aviation" or "Mac is an ***hole" thread every week? If folks are going to drag up the same old tired and often slanted views of things and claim to speak for the entire EAA membership, then I will continue to rebut it.

[Burtles]

This thread needs the injection of a few facts. First, the obvious - Hightower was fired. Second, those close to the situation know the reason was not the direction he was leading EAA. The reason is contained in Jack Pelton's original quote on the EAA website. When Jack used the phrase "treat our employees fairly" this was a deliberate and pointed choice of words.

[Mike Switzer]

This thread needs the injection of a few facts. First, the obvious - Hightower was fired. Second, those close to the situation know the reason was not the direction he was leading EAA. The reason is contained in Jack Pelton's original quote on the EAA website. When Jack used the phrase "treat our employees fairly" this was a deliberate and pointed choice of words.

That is sort of what I figured reading between the lines.

Would I be out of line nominating Charlie Becker for the job?

[steveinindy]

Would I be out of line nominating Charlie Becker for the job?

Not in the slightest. Charlie, Chad or Hal would all be great leaders. However, I like all three of them too much to ever subject them to the "friendly fire" attracting position at the EAA helm.

[Dave Stadt]

That is sort of what I figured reading between the lines.

Would I be out of line nominating Charlie Becker for the job?

Charlie now works for AOPA.

[bdk]

I don't have the answer to any of this, but I stopped getting Sport Aviation years ago. I also stopped going to Oshkosh years ago too, it isn't worth the trip. I've just lost interest in how large and impersonal the organization has become.


I don't want to read a magazine whose authors bloviate about their personal experiences and opinions each month. I want to see something informative and educational about aviation. As a budding aerospace engineer, that's what I used to get, the trials and tribulations of each builder or restorer that had their aircraft featured.


Oshkosh has gone from the worlds greatest aviation swap meet to manufacturers row. I had to walk that much farther from the campground, through all that stuff in either the rain or 98 squared (temp & humidity) to get to what I really wanted to see. All that stuff just got in the way, both literally and figuratively. It all became very impersonal.


So what about all the money? Does EAA really need to grow to include every single person on earth that can recognize an airplane? Is that the organization we want? I preferred when it was much less formal, before they had all the musical headliners and movie stars. It was about aviation, aviation people and innovation, not about being everything to everyone. It was about the little guys. People were approachable. You could chat with Steve Wittman or Tony LeVier while in line at the porta-john. They were just normal people. And there were some real characters too, not just the polished sales booth guys. "Airventure" is a carnival now. I haven't been for a while, but are the hot dogs up to $8 yet?

[jim_spee]

One way to resolve these contradictions is through structures similar to those already in place at EAA, but reinvigorated. I agree it is too much for Sport Aviation to serve the needs of every member. Experimenter magazine, now online only, is for the hard core builder. Vintage Airplane is for those who love flying history. Warbird and Sport Aerobatics serve those communities. Why not a niche publication for owners and builders of complex kits? Bring back Light Airplane for those who want to fly inexpensively. At the same time, recognize that different generations have different preferences for receiving and sharing information. Some like one on one, some like face to face meetings, others are ok with forums like this one. The common theme I am hearing from this discussion is the need to refine EAA's definition of member as somthing that goes beyond "subscriber" to something deeper and more meaningful. When I was in my 20's I wrote Paul a letter about the motorcycle that was my ride while I was working overseas away from aviation. He sent me a picture of him on his Harley. That attention to me as a member meant a lot and built my loyalty better than a publication alone ever could.

[Mike Switzer]

Charlie now works for AOPA.

I Know. :(

[steveinindy]

One way to resolve these contradictions is through structures similar to those already in place at EAA, but reinvigorated. I agree it is too much for Sport Aviation to serve the needs of every member. Experimenter magazine, now online only, is for the hard core builder. Vintage Airplane is for those who love flying history. Warbird and Sport Aerobatics serve those communities. Why not a niche publication for owners and builders of complex kits? Bring back Light Airplane for those who want to fly inexpensively. At the same time, recognize that different generations have different preferences for receiving and sharing information. Some like one on one, some like face to face meetings, others are ok with forums like this one. .

Welcome to the forum and thank you for bringing another balanced take on this.


The common theme I am hearing from this discussion is the need to refine EAA's definition of member as something that goes beyond "subscriber" to something deeper and more meaningful

The issue with that is if we want to return back to the good ol' days (and I only caught the tail end of those as one of the "hangar rat" kids at the local chapter) where it was about members helping members is that such actions require more input from the members than we currently see. That's the biggest difference I have seen in the twenty or so years I have been around the EAA: lots of people want things but fewer and fewer are willing to offer their skills and knowledge for whatever reason. Is there a leadership issue affecting this as well? Probably but I think there's a much bigger issue underlying it that we don't want to talk about because it's unpleasant and, therefore, much easier to assign blame entirely at the feet of Rod, Mac and anyone else that falls into the crosshairs of those with a bone to pick.

[Bob Collins]

I have a rule in aviation: No politics, No religion, no primer wars. Aviation is -- or was -- fun for me because it's the one avenue I can escape all the nonsense of talk radio, political ads, and general crap of what passes for public discourse today. AirVenture is always a requirement because for a week, I can immerse myself in people coming together under a common bond, putting aside the differences of day-to-day life and enjoying this fine obsession.

This has all been ruined for me by discussions just like this one, which aren't any different than the political discussions I've thought to escape.

I'm in the news business and for years I've had a saying: "You know what killed the news business? News people."

Now, I think that the people who killed aviation are aviators.

When I read this continuing squabbling, all I can hear in my head is "terrain! terrain! terrain! Pull up."

Let's try to get together and work things out.

[Tommuller2000]

I don't hear any deafening roar! The commercialization of EAA over the last two years, from writers, however good, hired from other GA publications, to fewer video tips to aerospace booth space on the homebuilt flight line just moved us a little too far from our roots. EAA still needs a mix, and homebuilding is a significant part of it, but not all.

Rod Hightower showed the danger of trying to order volunteers, rather then lead willing volunteers. His actions were responsible for fewer volunteers at AirVenture 2012, when many voted with their feet. Jack Pelton comes from a similar corporate background where leaders make decisions and the rank and file must follow whether they like it or not. This is a critical difference with a volunteer organization and I hope Mr. Pelton gets it. I miss Tom Pobrezny; he gets it.

[Bill Berson]

This thread was started by an EAA staffer to discuss the matter of the EAA president leaving and EAA's future direction and provide insight to the EAA board, I hope. If you think this is nonsense and crap then don't read this thread.

Here is my message to the board:

I think the new president of EAA should be elected by vote of the members (abolish proxy) for a term of two years.
Further, I would like to see the president serve without compensation.
(don't laugh, we have a first class, nonprofit aviation museum here, run entirely by its "retired" founder and others without compensation. He volunteers 12 hours per day.)

[steveinindy]

I miss Tom Pobrezny; he gets it.

Eh...I don't think Tom was any better (or worse) than Rod. The only reason he is/was held in such high regard was because of the great man with which he shared half of his DNA.


Rod Hightower showed the danger of trying to order volunteers, rather then lead willing volunteers. His actions were responsible for fewer volunteers at AirVenture 2012, when many voted with their feet.

As a former volunteer fire officer, I hate this myth that volunteers are immune from having to follow orders or directions and can't be fired for failing to comply. Either they do what is necessary or they find their way out. Most people I know who "vote with their feet" tended to be the people who are their for entirely self-serving
reasons. We see this in the volunteer fire service all the time because of the guys who want to have the ego boost (such as it were) of being a firefighter without the sacrifice et cetera. These are the guys who show up only for the big fires and bad car crashes but "aren't available" for the medical calls and other less "glamorous" duties. Having grown up in a town that survives almost entirely on a festival (kind of like how Oshkosh relies so heavily on AirVenture but to an even great degree), I understand and have seen firsthand that the same thing happens with volunteers of other sorts as well.

Granted, the difference between a good leader and a great leader is often simply the ability to convince people that they want to do what you want them to do even if they originally had other plans in mind. Once you achieve this, a smart leader will give them the means to do it and then get out of their way.


I think the new president of EAA should be elected by vote of the members (abolish proxy) for a term of two years.

Exactly. That must happen if there is to be any semblance of credibility.

[RV8505]

I have a rule in aviation: No politics, No religion, no primer wars. Aviation is -- or was -- fun for me because it's the one avenue I can escape all the nonsense of talk radio, political ads, and general crap of what passes for public discourse today. AirVenture is always a requirement because for a week, I can immerse myself in people coming together under a common bond, putting aside the differences of day-to-day life and enjoying this fine obsession.

This has all been ruined for me by discussions just like this one, which aren't any different than the political discussions I've thought to escape.

I'm in the news business and for years I've had a saying: "You know what killed the news business? News people."

Now, I think that the people who killed aviation are aviators.

When I read this continuing squabbling, all I can hear in my head is "terrain! terrain! terrain! Pull up."

Let's try to get together and work things out.

Good post Bob.

[Bill Greenwood]

For Bob Collins:

If you find that an open and free discussion of EAA or other matters is so painful and/or threatening for you to read, there is a simple solution, just don't read it.
Find some forum where everyone already agrees with you, and never a discouraging word is heard.That might not be an organization, especially one as large as EAA. Rather it might be a cult.

I, for one, believe in the free exchange of ideas and I am not threatened by someone who might write or say something that I don't agree with.
Many of the rest of us don't want to live in your restricted world.

[Burtles]

Let's try to get together and work things out.

Bob I have been reading your blog and forum posts for years and am delighted to learn that you have finally come round to a positive way of thinking. Good on you my man.

[Bill Greenwood]

I don't know much about Rod Hightower, never really met him. I sat at the same table with him and Sean Elliot at an aviation meeting in Chino recently, but he seemed pretty wrapped up in themselves, and never said a word to me.
I note he does fly some real airplanes, so that's good.

I don't know anything about the new man, Jack Pelton but he seems to also be a real pilot. Maybe he will work out fine.

[RV8505]

I don't know much about Rod Hightower, never really met him. I sat at the same table with him and Sean Elliot at an aviation meeting in Chino recently, but he seemed pretty wrapped up in themselves, and never said a word to me.

.


Maybe you're a little more popular than you know!?

[steveinindy]

I don't want to read a magazine whose authors bloviate about their personal experiences and opinions each month.

So....you don't want to read anything but scientific journals? Even the old issues of Sport Aviation you find they are heavily, heavily biased towards personal anecdotal experience ("When I built my plane, I did....") or opinion. The one that jumps to mind is an old Tony Bingelis article about cockpit layout where he offered suggestions based on the need for "safety" but what he suggests runs counter to scientifically validated approaches since the 1950s. Tony was (is?) a damned bright guy but to act like the good ol' days of Sport Aviation weren't chock full of one-off stories and anecdotal advice is patently false.


You could chat with Steve Wittman or Tony LeVier while in line at the porta-john. They were just normal people.
I've had similar encounters every year. One year, when I was on crutches, I ended up being given a ride on a golf cart to find myself sitting behind Bob Hoover who was apparently the one to ask the driver to stop and give me a lift. Granted, it's anecdote but I've never felt that any of the "big names" was unapproachable. Rutan (both of them), Yeager, Bud Anderson, more of the Tuskegee Airmen than I can count, John Roncz and many others are folks I've had friendly casual conversations with over the years. Hell, the year after my cart ride with Bob Hoover he saw me walking and asked how my recovery had gone!


I don't know much about Rod Hightower, never really met him. I sat at the same table with him and Sean Elliot at an aviation meeting in Chino recently, but he seemed pretty wrapped up in themselves, and never said a word to me.
I note he does fly some real airplanes, so that's good.

Rod seems to be a nice guy, at least based on the few times I got to meet him. The longest interaction I had with him was a twenty minute conversation after I found myself on the north end of KOSH drooling over a beautiful Stearman. He struck me as being an oversized kid once you got him on the subject of planes. Management styles aside, I think that is an assessment that would fit most of us on here. If not, you're probably on the wrong forum. LOL

[Bob Collins]

Bob I have been reading your blog and forum posts for years and am delighted to learn that you have finally come round to a positive way of thinking. Good on you my man.

Whatever. Calling each other names and questioning people's character without giving them a chance to outline a vision isn't an effective way to move ahead on substantive issues, and moving ahead toward a tangible solution should be the goal at this point.

The message was I imparting isn't that everyone should stop talking, it's that we should put down the pitchforks and begin to constructively move the discussion forward.

Repeating old grievances and allegations over and over and over again isn't progress. Judging who's a REAL EAAer and who's a poser isn't going to get us anywhere.

Everybody got their wish and Hightower is gone. So let's move along and capitalize on the opportunity that is being presented to us now.

Maybe the solution is to start by considering what we agree on first about what EAA delivers to us and taking it from there.

So, what do we agree on?

[steveinindy]

So, what do we agree on?

1. Direct voting on representation (no more proxy votes)
2. Continued focus on assisting members
3. Inclusion rather than exclusion of folks interested in all of the aspects of homebuilding instead of focus on one or two aspects.


Any others?

[Jim Heffelfinger]

There have been many voices that EAA (Corp) is isolated from the members and chapters. It has lost touch with the original mission and that Rod was ‘too corporate’
During the last 2 years I have had the opportunity to speak personally with Rod; Once while he was on one of dozens of grass root tours. One of the complaints from an attendee was that National was out of touch – speaking to Rod on tour. I have never met Tom
Rod frequently flew one of his or one of the Corp planes to events, commonly with relevant staff. Did Tom personally fly much as CEO? I don’t know .
Rod’s family was highly invested in the Stearman restoration project. It was very clear from the beginning that Rod had family as a priority in his life. I never read about Tom working on plane projects as CEO.
Rod was brought in as a “corporate type’ to redirect and reorganize a large 58 year old organization that had not changed much in several decades. He and the board knew that without change the organization was not heading toward long term success. He did that by returning to the roots that EAA was founded on - but not the way they were done back then. He outlined his vision and apparently with board approval implemented it. I believe every one of his elements has been put into place in two years. (It was moving fast.) Most importantly bringing Homebuilding to the senior leadership team.
EAA had a feeling of a volunteer organization from my perspective – was that the way internally? If so, having redirects, solid objectives and tight time commitments placed on staff might have received a lot of push back. There was no doubt from my perspective that Tom and Rod were cut from different cloths.
Any organization, especially one with a dynasty, is really uncomfortable with change. Since the average age of 10 year and longer members is way north of 50 – change can be even more painful.
It’s not the same – it never will be – it’s a living organism - that redefines it’s self over time no matter what we do.
Perhaps Rod was brought in as a stirring stick – shake it up and move on. Only a few know the truth and they have confidentially.
For me – I liked the change – it was exciting and dynamic. It was moving – IMHO - for the most part positively.

[steveinindy]

One of the complaints from an attendee was that National was out of touch – speaking to Rod on tour. I have never met Tom
Rod frequently flew one of his or one of the Corp planes to events, commonly with relevant staff. Did Tom personally fly much as CEO? I don’t know .

I often wondered the same thing. In all the time I've spent around EAA chapters, I can't ever recall hearing of Tom doing much with the chapters and even back during the 1990s the local chapters I dealt with all had a very "detached" feeling. I can only recall crossing paths with Tom once and that was at one of the first AirVentures I attended. It was very brief and he didn't seem terribly friendly towards any of the folks around him. The friend I had with me at the time made a comment about him being "socially awkward" and a "fish out of water" as we walked away.

By contrast, Paul is one of the most gregarious people I've ever met. One of the local chapter presidents years ago (before the prequels came out) compared Paul and Tom as being the "reverse Skywalkers" with the father being the virtuous and respectable one with the son being the one with unclear issues that could "lead to the dark side" (the chapter president's exact words in front of the chapter). I don't like to judge folks on a single meeting but I've heard the same sorts of things from a lot of folks over the years.


There was no doubt from my perspective that Tom and Rod were cut from different cloths.

Rod always reminded me more of Paul than Tom did. No disrespect to Tom intended but as far as personalities go that's my impression. However, one is not always like their father. In my case, my father and I are distinctly different (My dad is quieter and reserved until he gets to know people well and I am, obviously, not).



Since the average age of 10 year and longer members is way north of 50 – change can be even more painful.

That's putting it mildly. I once heard the joke be made at one of the annual dinners by Paul himself that the only organization with a higher average age for long-term members is the AARP. He said that one of his staff liked to tell that joke and he had "stolen it" as his own.


For me – I liked the change – it was exciting and dynamic. It was moving – IMHO - for the most part positively.

Same here. The EAA had become stagnant under Tom's leadership (which is not the same as him being to blame; correlation =/= causation) and it needed to be prodded to grow once more.

[Flyfalcons]

Why does it "need to grow"?

[steveinindy]

Why does it "need to grow"?

"Grow" was a poor choice of words perhaps but isn't growth a good thing? The other option is to wither on the vine as the first and second generations of members die off through simple and complex attrition. Are you familiar with the "Red Queen paradigm" in biology? Basically it that you have to run in place (from an evolutionary perspective) as fast as you can to stay where you are?

[Flyfalcons]

Attracting new members isn't a bad thing, as long as it isn't at the expense of the mission statement of the organization.

[Bill Berson]

In theory, the majority of SPORT AVIATION content should be home built or at least be sport aviation.
Call it the 50 percent rule if you want.

But now, with the return of digital EXPERIMENTER (thank you Rod)the matter has been confused somewhat.
The first two issues of EXPERIMENTER look good to me. One problem is that my favorite author and perhaps others are not really interested in writing for a digital.

The digital has some advantages, with direct links to additional photos, video etc. Probably most magazines will be digital soon.
Pelton sounded somewhat reassuring on the Aero-News interview. He said " we blew it" , referring to the $40,000 chalets.
Good to see that confirmed. But other than that, the plan to cater to more general aviation continues, I feel.

[Jim Heffelfinger]

A bit off topic about Rod and his departure but this quote and others of similar wording has been around a long time. I believe it.
“In this world you're either growing or you're dying so get in motion and grow.”
― Lou Holtz (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/85179.Lou_Holtz)
In my small chapter we have had 4 "Gone West" so far this year. We have gained 3 new members.

Mission? 'keep the doors open' is an underlying mission for any business and association. I believe Rod did have a published mission statement.

Chapters and members were complaining about out of touch - and then recoiled when they were reached out to. - Damn change.

[Jim Heffelfinger]

Digital is sadly the way it will continue - I like holding paper, having it on the table or in my brief bag - reminding me of dreams and desires - connections with things other than the daily routine . But it is so expensive and time consuming. There for a while most of SA was just print rehash of the articles off the home page. It was kind of a yawn.
I am not too interested in the Mac articles but understand that covering a bit of certified GA might get some cross-over membership - those having an interest in something different - a bit more 'hands on' than the other flying mags.
Moving E-AB out of the basements and isolated hangars is a good thing. You wouldn't believe how many people don't have an inkling about home built aircraft - even pretty world aware people. But then, I bet you do.

[steveinindy]

Chapters and members were complaining about out of touch - and then recoiled when they were reached out to. - Damn change.

The question I have about that is "What do the people who say that the headquarters is 'out of touch' with the chapters actually want from headquarters in terms of involvement?". It's one thing to say that they aren't doing what we want them to do but it's a far more practical one to actually say "You know, I would like to see X, Y and Z". Remember that when you gripe about that sort of thing, it's not directly accusing the CEO or others who get a lot of the blame of not doing but rather you're basically insulting Hal, Trevor and Chad who we all know bust their behinds. That's why I think a "Can we get you to do X and Y? Z sometimes would also be helpful" would be much better than just a general complaint of disenfranchisement. Complaining in a vague way may make us feel better but doing so with specific points is much more likely to garner benefit or other constructive input.

The issues with Sport Aviation, etc have been laid out repeatedly but I have yet to hear anyone spell out what exactly this disconnect between the folks in Oshkosh and the local chapters is exactly. This is a serious question as I have not seen much change since I first become involved to varying degrees with local chapters back in the 1980s and 1990s. If we can improve things to make it even better, I'm all for that so let's hear it.

[Jim Heffelfinger]

The question I have about that is "What do the people who say that the headquarters is 'out of touch' with the chapters actually want from headquarters in terms of involvement?". It's one thing to say that they aren't doing what we want them to do but it's a far more practical one to actually say "You know, I would like to see X, Y and Z". Remember that when you gripe about that sort of thing, it's not directly accusing the CEO or others who get a lot of the blame of not doing but rather you're basically insulting Hal, Trevor and Chad who we all know bust their behinds. That's why I think a "Can we get you to do X and Y? Z sometimes would also be helpful" would be much better than just a general complaint of disenfranchisement. Complaining in a vague way may make us feel better but doing so with specific points is much more likely to garner benefit or other constructive input.

The issues with Sport Aviation, etc have been laid out repeatedly but I have yet to hear anyone spell out what exactly this disconnect between the folks in Oshkosh and the local chapters is exactly. This is a serious question as I have not seen much change since I first become involved to varying degrees with local chapters back in the 1980s and 1990s. If we can improve things to make it even better, I'm all for that so let's hear it.

I whole heartily agree. I once worked for a guy that ALWAYS wanted 2-3 solutions - when you went in with a problem

But this is off topic again

[steveinindy]

I whole heartily agree. I once worked for a guy that ALWAYS wanted 2-3 solutions - when you went in with a problem

I used to do that to my EMTs, medics and firefighters. The working rule was that if you couldn't come up with a reasonable solution or two to a problem, you probably hadn't thought about it long or hard enough yet to come to the supervisor(s) for a ruling or permission to proceed.

[RV8505]

I used to do that to my EMTs, medics and firefighters. The working rule was that if you couldn't come up with a reasonable solution or two to a problem, you probably hadn't thought about it long or hard enough yet to come to the supervisor(s) for a ruling or permission to proceed.

Steve, Chill! Go outside and enjoy the day today! Unless, your sitting around the fire house at work. This stuff will make you sick 24 X 7 ! Enjoy the day!

[steveinindy]

Steve, Chill! Go outside and enjoy the day today! Unless, your sitting around the fire house at work. This stuff will make you sick 24 X 7 ! Enjoy the day!

LOL I'm working at home today and this is a nice relaxing break from engineering analysis for the design project. *twitch* LOL

[phavriluk]

Having no facts to support my comments, I think that a large portion of the members' pushback to EAA management was anger at disenfranchisement. Folks who identified themselves as the folks whose time and effort and participation built the organization went to the convention, for example, to find the event imitating a carnival, not a members' annual convention, and whose purpose was to attract as many bodies through the turnstiles as could be persuaded to enter. Experimental/sport aviation didn't matter to management as much as head count at the convention they renamed 'airventure'. That head count was a very large part of the definition of convention success. And the membership base was ignored (chalets, noise-and-thunder circus acts during the daily airshow) as much as possible to indulge the pursuit of head count and corporate bigwig elbow-rubbing. Or brown-nosing. Seems like the organization subverted its reason to exist by pandering to the carnival crowd and the corporate crowd while spending all year figuring out how to do that.

[bdk]

So....you don't want to read anything but scientific journals? Even the old issues of Sport Aviation you find they are heavily, heavily biased towards personal anecdotal experience ("When I built my plane, I did....") or opinion. The one that jumps to mind is an old Tony Bingelis article about cockpit layout where he offered suggestions based on the need for "safety" but what he suggests runs counter to scientifically validated approaches since the 1950s. Tony was (is?) a damned bright guy but to act like the good ol' days of Sport Aviation weren't chock full of one-off stories and anecdotal advice is patently false.




I've had similar encounters every year. One year, when I was on crutches, I ended up being given a ride on a golf cart to find myself sitting behind Bob Hoover who was apparently the one to ask the driver to stop and give me a lift. Granted, it's anecdote but I've never felt that any of the "big names" was unapproachable. Rutan (both of them), Yeager, Bud Anderson, more of the Tuskegee Airmen than I can count, John Roncz and many others are folks I've had friendly casual conversations with over the years. Hell, the year after my cart ride with Bob Hoover he saw me walking and asked how my recovery had gone!
My point is that the magazine was tending towards stories about flying to some airport and discussing what the restaurant was like. I have no problem reading about stories of a design or building process. Of course it has been a few years since I have seen the magazine, but that is the primary reason I dropped my subscription. It wasn't doing for me what it once had and I didn't want to waste paper or the organization's (my) money.


i agree that many of the aviation luminaries are approachable. What I'm talking about is the fixation on movie stars and pop bands. Maybe the move to make the organization more mainstream, i.e. other than aviation, is what I think is not worthwhile. Next thing you know they'll be opening a Walmart on site during the convention...

[crusty old aviator]

It saddens me to read all the vitriole about Mr. Hightower. Has all the vitriole from the on-going Presidential campaigns poisoned us as a society, so this is how we respond when our personal visions of EAA aren't fulfilled with instant gratification? It is unfair and unproductive to compare Rod with Tom and Paul. Rod had his own way of doing things, just as Tom did when he took his dad's seat. Mr. Hightower followed the direction set forth for him by the Board of Directors and did that job very well. EAA's membership wasn't growing, so the Board tried to make EAA the aviation organization for all aviation people, in an attempt to bolster the membership. It alienated many specialists, those who thought EAA should remain what it was...well, when? That depends when you joined, doesn't it? Many groused back in the 70's that EAA was becoming too big and mourned for the Rockford days, maybe you're in that crowd. Many groused in the 90's about EAA relying too heavily on corporate partners at the annual convention, instead of keeping it entirely grassroots and relying on volunteers and member donations to keep things going, as EAA always had in the past. AirVenture was nick-named AirDisney by the less-is-more philosophers who questioned if bigger is better, or if bigger is just overwhelming and alienating? To the purists, I have to ask: is the zillionaire who truly enjoys flying in the back of his Gulfstream any less an EAA'er than the unemployed dreamer who scrounges and scrimps and builds his own airplane for $2000? They both love aviation with the same passion, shouldn't EAA cater to both?
Many have commented over the years about how aviation is like a religion. Let's not allow ourselves to degrade aviation as others have done with their religions (ie. the Sunnis and the Shiites in Islam, and the Catholics and the Protestants in Christianity). Our wings are a gift, as is our passion for aviation. How we pursue that passion is up to the individual and should be respected by all.
I applaud Mr. Hightower's decision to put his family ahead of his EAA career. How may times have we heard references to a problem teenager along the lines of: but he comes from such a good family...? Define good: A big income? A big house in a ritzy neighborhood? Membership in country clubs? Too many top executives ignore their kids in their pursuit of making more money, then wonder why their kids turned out so poorly. That won't happen to Mr. Hightower. His values are in the right place and they are the same values he ran EAA with. I wish him all the best in his life in St. Louis, and I hope we EAA'ers can help Mr. Pelton grow EAA with constructive advice instead of the selfish whining that has filled too many of the posts before this one.
Soft landings, Rod and Jack, let's go fly!

[Jim Heffelfinger]

well said.... and have 3 solutions to the problems we imagine ready

[Jethro]

I wish him all the best in his life in St. Louis,

I too wish him the best in St. Louis. I wish him the best anywhere but in Oshkosh.

Glad to see him gone.

His family now has him. Happily, we don't. A win, win situation in my book.

Now, how to get Mac to depart for anywhere.

[MEdwards]

It saddens me to read all the vitriole about Mr. Hightower. ...I hope we EAA'ers can help Mr. Pelton grow EAA with constructive advice instead of the selfish whining that has filled too many of the posts before this one.For a member of EAA to say that they hated the chalets and the corporate direction they seemed to represent is neither vitriol nor selfish whining. It is the honest opinion of many members of EAA. And, as members, we are entitled to have opinions about such things and to express them publicly.

By the way, I heard about third hand that Mr. Pelton and some other board members shared or at least respected that opinion, which sounds great to me, but I have no first hand knowledge of that fact.

[Bill Greenwood]

For "crusty old aviator", whoever you are hiding behind that alias:

No, as far as the EAA goes , I don't think a "zillionaire riding , (riding is not flying) in the back of a Gulfstream, which likely as not may not even be owned by such a rider, is not the same as someone who is in EAA for the fun of aviation, for the sport of aviation, thus our magazine is called "Sport Aviation".

Almost all of us have a great and lasting respect for Paul P and what he did to found the EAA. For a long time it really is or was his organization.

But, perhaps somewhere along the way, it also became something in which the members are a great part of and who should have a lot of consideration, too.
I don't know where the dividing line is, and I don't even know if the changes lately in EAA are what Paul and to some extent Tom want. Was it Paul's desire to hire Mac from another magazine? I have some doubts on that, but don't really know.

Having all the changes in EAA seeming to come from only the top down may be part of the problem, where the members don't nominate and certainly don't vote on the new president, and where they are just appointed by the board.
We don't even know what Rod's salary was, and if it really was the $640,000 that was rumored, then it seems about 2 or 3 times what I'd expect and may seem that same way to the average EAA member.

Another problem is that the EAA, if they even know or care, hasn't always made it clear what their focus is and what customer or member base they are focusing on.
I suggested on this forum and also in conversation with a person at the admin that they do a survey to find members preferences.
obviously EAA, or at least some of the admin don't really want to do this, as they came up with lot's of reasons not to.
They could easy put a mail back card in the magazines to do a brief survey, just like they have subscription cards or raffle cards.
Their excuse was the not everyone gets the mag so the survey would not be perfect. Therefore we avoid having a perfect survey by not having any survey at all.

Some members claim we are "getting away from our roots" by not having homebuilding rule all of EAA, and some resent any focus the is not the bottom end of the cost scale on flying.
It is my educated? ( 35 years as a gen av pilot and some as an exp, builder, owner, and pilot) that homebuilding is a part of EAA, but a minor part. I don't think the average person is going to build a plane. And while local chapters may be great for many, and very active in some places , again that is not the focus of most people. And if you cut out anything over $100k or $200K so that many people are not resentful of what they cannot afford; you cut out many of the great fun airplanes, the B-17s etc. If you had an auto musuem, would you like only Fords and Chevys because the average person could not afford a Ferarri or Rolls? Or an art museum with only works under $10,000?

I'd like a survey to see what members want, and what is least desired. Many have already said that the acro part of the airshow is overdone and repetitive.

I hope EAA can encompass most of what is aviation for the fun and sport of it, and it seems to have done that in the past pretty well.

[bdk]

Another problem is that the EAA, if they even know or care, hasn't always made it clear what their focus is and what customer or member base they are focusing on.

I hope EAA can encompass most of what is aviation for the fun and sport of it, and it seems to have done that in the past pretty well.
Good post Bill!

Does a corporate chalet really encourage grassroots aviation? I think the goal should be primarily to make aviation more affordable. The whole reason the expirimental amateur built category came about as I recall was due to the expense of new (and to a certain extent used) factory built aircraft and the limitied availability of certain aircraft types, combined with the do-it-yourself mentality that many of us have. And certainly the restoration of older aircraft requires a similar skillset and there are many do-it-yourself types there as well. I also think the kit market is thriving despite the economy, and that market has been another great source of new members.

[Kevin O'Halloran]

I was told the chalets netted over 100K in profit after all expenses---that pays for a lot of trams and services--keeps up the buildings where the forums are , etc.
Kevin

[Chad Jensen]

<snip>I suggested on this forum and also in conversation with a person at the admin that they do a survey to find members preferences.
obviously EAA, or at least some of the admin don't really want to do this, as they came up with lot's of reasons not to.
They could easy put a mail back card in the magazines to do a brief survey, just like they have subscription cards or raffle cards.
Their excuse was the not everyone gets the mag so the survey would not be perfect. Therefore we avoid having a perfect survey by not having any survey at all.

<snip>

I'd like a survey to see what members want, and what is least desired. Many have already said that the acro part of the airshow is overdone and repetitive.
Hey Bill,

I'm kinda curious as to where that info on not doing survey's came from, but nonetheless, we run survey's frequently on the membership. From monthly survey's on Sport Aviation to what the members want to see at AirVenture to who our membership actually is. The results are slowly filtering in and we'll be able to provide what our findings are as soon as we know.

The magazine survey's have been going on for a long time, but the "who our membership is" survey's are relatively new. That's the stuff I'm really curious to see.

This is way off topic though...

[steveinindy]

I was told the chalets netted over 100K in profit after all expenses---that pays for a lot of trams and services--keeps up the buildings where the forums are , etc.
Kevin

Yeah but they cater to folks who aren't homebuilders and we're "excluded from them" (the "test chalet" the NBAA had a couple of years back and my experiences there with must have been a fluke ;) ). Let's not muddy the waters by looking at it as a practical means to fund things that help the "little guys". LOL

It would not surprise me at all if they brought a nice return on investment.

[steveinindy]

The whole reason the expirimental amateur built category came about as I recall was due to the expense of new (and to a certain extent used) factory built aircraft and the limitied availability of certain aircraft types, combined with the do-it-yourself mentality that many of us have.

Where the heck did you hear that? It's been around since long before that happened. The experimental moniker/category existed back into the 1920s-1930s when they actually had the "NX" tail numbers for them. The "amateur built" aspect was simply a way of dividing it out for statistical purposes and I've seen a reference to it as a statistical category in a CAA (the predecessor of the FAA) report from the early 1950s. Whether they were handing out airworthiness certificates with "E-AB" on them is kind of moot point much akin to the use of the term "Negro" vs "Black" vs "African-American" as a way of describing a group of people for statistical purposes.

[RV8505]

I don't know.

You highlighted several problems however as a EAA member I believe it is in our culture to solve our own problems. And we did! Regardless of reason Hightower is gone. Bill, You were at Oshkosh, I would think, If you had all of this to say, why didn't you take a break from the Warbird area and show up at the board meeting in the theatre in the woods and make your grievances known. Hightower was right there on the stage and you could have asked them anything you wanted! With all your questions we could have benefited or at least been amused.

[Bill Berson]

A membership poll won't get to the many core experimenter types that have already abandoned EAA.
The main problem has been that EAA had no dedicated homebuilder magazine. EAA has Sport Aerobatics, Warbirds and other specialist publications, for example, but never something simply called Homebuilding.

This seems odd because home building was the core.
About 10 years ago, the paper version of Experimenter was dedicated to homebuilding, but it was morphed into Sport Pilot and this then covered mostly $ 100,000 factory built planes from Europe. ( again, not homebuilding) So it was cancelled, leaving members with no home built magazine (paper magazine).

Tom Poberezny said Airventure is the template for Sport Aviation. So naturally, now anything goes into Sport Aviation magazine just as anything goes at Oshkosh.
It doesn't bother me that everything is at Oshkosh, and really, most members did not go to Oshkosh anyway.
But they want a publication for average people. Average people don't fly Barons anymore (or ever?).
And my last point- EAA is about aircraft, not how to fly. Lots of other magazines teach how to fly.

p.s. Experimenter is back in digital form. Looks good Chad.

[Chad Jensen]

p.s. Experimenter is back in digital form. Looks good Chad.
:thumbsup::cool:

[Bill Greenwood]

Chad, I have been an EAA member since 1982, probably longer than most on this forum, and I don't recall ever having seen any such survey. So when you say that you "run surveys frequently" , there must be some disconnect between Osh and my mailbox. EAA can sure find my mail box with the multiple requests to renew my membership when the current one still has months to go, but I don't believe that I have ever seen any type of general survey.
I know a specific mailing may be an expense, but it may be worth doing or even a return type card in the magazine.
And I have been to about 25 conventions and don't recall ever being given any sort of survey form when I register there. All this takes is the printed sheet that the member or even public could fill out and drop in a box, doesn't have to have any mailing cost.
But , of course one can point out that this would not reach people who are not at the convenion, therefore not a perfect survey so a good excuse not to do any survey.


At the very least, it could list our 4 or 5 divisions and ask the member to rank where he wants the most attention.
A longer survey is even better with more real choices.

So if EAA has done surveys, who and what was asked, how were the members contacted, and what were the results?
Having some contract opinion business tell you what members think, based on a small sample, is not really the same thing.

[RV8505]

Chad, I have been an EAA member since 1982, probably longer than most on this forum, and I don't recall ever having seen any such survey. So when you say that you "run surveys frequently" , there must be some disconnect between Osh and my mailbox. EAA can sure find my mail box with the multiple requests to renew my membership when the current one still has months to go, but I don't believe that I have ever seen any type of general survey.
I know a specific mailing may be an expense, but it may be worth doing or even a return type card in the magazine.
And I have been to about 25 conventions and don't recall ever being given any sort of survey form when I register there. All this takes is the printed sheet that the member or even public could fill out and drop in a box, doesn't have to have any mailing cost.
But , of course one can point out that this would not reach people who are not at the convenion, therefore not a perfect survey so a good excuse not to do any survey.


At the very least, it could list our 4 or 5 divisions and ask the member to rank where he wants the most attention.
A longer survey is even better with more real choices.

So if EAA has done surveys, who and what was asked, how were the members contacted, and what were the results?
Having some contract opinion business tell you what members think, based on a small sample, is not really the same thing.

They are electronic email surveys and I have had about 3 in my 25 plus years. However, I am a lifetime member but I 'm not sure that matters.

[Mike Switzer]

Having some contract opinion business tell you what members think, based on a small sample, is not really the same thing.

Well, a small sample is good enough for the weekly jobs report.... ;)

I haven't been a member all that long, but i don't recall ever seeing a survey either.

[MEdwards]

I was told the chalets netted over 100K in profit after all expenses---that pays for a lot of trams and services--keeps up the buildings where the forums are , etc.
It would not surprise me at all if they brought a nice return on investment.I'm sure ROI is the most important thing to a whole lot of people. It is not the most important thing to me in EAA as a membership organization.

[Bill Berson]

It should be possible to survey polls right here on the forum. Others forums similar to this have polls for members to vote and see results in real time.:thumbsup:
EAA never released any poll info in the past, as far as I know.
I answered an email poll once about my experience at Oshkosh after the show.
But never anything about Sport Aviation or EAA direction.

[martymayes]

I was told the chalets netted over 100K in profit after all expenses---that pays for a lot of trams and services--keeps up the buildings where the forums are , etc.
Kevin

On the other hand, if the average attendee spends $300 during the week for admission, camping, parking, etc, all it takes is ~330 folks to boycott airventure in protest of the chalets to negate that "profit."

[MEdwards]

It should be possible to survey polls right here on the forum. Others forums similar to this have polls for members to vote and see results in real time.A poll here would be interesting but would not be very scientific or reliable. The sample size is too small and too specialized. But it should be possible to have a reputable contractor conduct a poll of all or a large fraction of the membership regarding the future direction of EAA for much, much less than the search for a new CEO is probably going to cost us.

[Rick Rademacher]

I placed a very short poll on the www.cubs2oshkosh.com (http://www.cubs2oshkosh.com) site to collect interest in flying to AirVenture next year. It's easy to do.

[Kurt Flunkn]

CHALETS:

So far all of the posts I've seen on the subject of chalets were negative. However, I'm wondering how many people actually got to go in one. I did and it was fantastic and a godsend. There was a lunch buffet, coolers full of drinks, ice cream, AIR CONDITIONING, and shaded seats to watch the airshow.

How did I get in? A friendly EAA staffer noticed my mom's 1993 Oshkosh tee shirt and after a brief conversation offered us complimentary tickets. For the past 26 years, I've been attending Oshkosh with my mom and dad. They are in their 70's, have some health issues, and the high heat & walking wasn't agreeing with them. So, it was a godsend that the friendly EAA staffer comp'd us for one day. Otherwise we'd never have gotten in.

So while I understand the all the arguments against the chalets, my personal experience they were a tremendous help. 2012 will probably be the last year my folks are able to attend and a friendly EAA staffer did their part to make Oshkosh '12 a great experience.

[steveinindy]

So far all of the posts I've seen on the subject of chalets were negative. However, I'm wondering how many people actually got to go in one. I did and it was fantastic and a godsend. There was a lunch buffet, coolers full of drinks, ice cream, AIR CONDITIONING, and shaded seats to watch the airshow.

How did I get in? A friendly EAA staffer noticed my mom's 1993 Oshkosh tee shirt and after a brief conversation offered us complimentary tickets. For the past 26 years, I've been attending Oshkosh with my mom and dad. They are in their 70's, have some health issues, and the high heat & walking wasn't agreeing with them. So, it was a godsend that the friendly EAA staffer comp'd us for one day. Otherwise we'd never have gotten in.

So while I understand the all the arguments against the chalets, my personal experience they were a tremendous help.

That was similar to my experience with the NBAA's "chalet" a couple of years back. They were polite, helpful, receptive and friendly. Not at all the rude, crass, self-righteous elitist pricks that a lot of folks on here want to paint the chalet occupants as being.

I just find there's something very odd about persons who spend $50,000-100,000+ to build and maintain airplanes but complains
about "rich folks and their fancy toys". It's just peculiar and reinforces an artificial chasm between two groups of pilots. I've yet to meet in the nearly 25 years I have hung around airports a non-airline pilot who isn't eager to show off their bird (the airline guys are too but are hindered in the name of the illusion of "security").

What's funny is that a lot of the rich passengers of corporate jets have been quite excited to show off their toys as well. One of my experiences was when a Gulfstream V landed at the airport I lived next to. Having never seen one up close, I decided to go take a look. The main passenger was Brett Michaels (from the 1980s band Poison and a damned nice guy too!) and I was talking to the pilot who was being crappy with me and Brett overheard. Next thing I know, the pilot is told to "Show the kid (mind you, I was 25 at the time!) the airplane and be nice about it or you'll be walking back to California".

This whole "them versus us" thing is just something I'll never understand because it doesn't fit with any experience I have had outside of a few of the homebuilders of racing aircraft who were really snobby about their planes. I've had far more "I'm better than you" encounters with "fellow" homebuilders than anyone else. Hell, I've found that a lot of the "corporate" aircraft manufacturers that come to Oshkosh are nicer than the staff of the kit manufacturers even though it's glaringly obvious that I'll likely never be able to afford a Piaggio Avanti, King Air or 787.

[BBARTONB]

Bill;I've been a member since 86,and I havn't received any "surveys"eather.Oh well.

[Mayhemxpc]

"Average people don't fly Barons anymore (or ever?)."

Average people don't fly. PERIOD

I used to fly a Baron. I traded it in for an O-2A. (Hard to say which I spend/spent more money on to maintain.) The O-2, or any warbird for that matter, is not average. It is, however, true EAA, just as much as Vintage or Aerobatics.

What is "average" anyway? One of the things I love about EAA and especially the Fly-In/AirVenture is the VARIETY.

[Joe LaMantia]

Steve,
I have had similar experiences over the past 20 years, it's something that makes the aviation community great! This thread shows us that EAA is a very American institution, lots of diverse comments and opinions, I even agree with some of them. We're now up to 14 pages an counting if HQ decides to create a survey they can glean a lot of good issues out of this thread.

Joe
:cool:

[steveinindy]

This thread shows us that EAA is a very American institution, lots of diverse comments and opinions, I even agree with some of them. We're now up to 14 pages an counting if HQ decides to create a survey they can glean a lot of good issues out of this thread.

Joe
:cool:

I agree. Despite my disagreeing with a lot of the "issues" mentioned, it is food for thought when it comes to do a membership wide survey which is exactly what needs to be done if a survey is to be done at all.


I have had similar experiences over the past 20 years, it's something that makes the aviation community great!

Hell, I joke there are only three phases of flight I like: takeoff, landing and hangar flying! Cruise flight is boring and what keeps me in the hobby (besides travel) is the people involved in aviation that I meet while not in the air.

[Bill Berson]

Kurt, the chalets probably would be welcome if open to all members. It would be a good gesture if the corporations paid for it for the members to use for free.
The heat is a big issue for me, as well.(in my decision to attend). I suggested that ice water should be available around the compound. Either self-serve and free, or near free.

[steveinindy]

Kurt, the chalets probably would be welcome if open to all members. It would be a good gesture if the corporations paid for it for the members to use for free.
The heat is a big issue for me, as well.(in my decision to attend). I suggested that ice water should be available around the compound. Either self-serve and free, or near free.

I've joked that the quickest way to be the EAA's favorite corporate sponsor would be to put in a few of those "misting tents" throughout the grounds.

[Flyfalcons]

CHALETS:

So far all of the posts I've seen on the subject of chalets were negative. However, I'm wondering how many people actually got to go in one. I did and it was fantastic and a godsend. There was a lunch buffet, coolers full of drinks, ice cream, AIR CONDITIONING, and shaded seats to watch the airshow.

How did I get in? A friendly EAA staffer noticed my mom's 1993 Oshkosh tee shirt and after a brief conversation offered us complimentary tickets. For the past 26 years, I've been attending Oshkosh with my mom and dad. They are in their 70's, have some health issues, and the high heat & walking wasn't agreeing with them. So, it was a godsend that the friendly EAA staffer comp'd us for one day. Otherwise we'd never have gotten in.

So while I understand the all the arguments against the chalets, my personal experience they were a tremendous help. 2012 will probably be the last year my folks are able to attend and a friendly EAA staffer did their part to make Oshkosh '12 a great experience.

That's cool and I'm glad the EAA is willing to give every visitor to Oshkosh a free ticket to the chalets.

[RV8505]

I've joked that the quickest way to be the EAA's favorite corporate sponsor would be to put in a few of those "misting tents" throughout the grounds.

You would think they would be appreciative but they probably wouldn't. More than likely you would get some backlash from some Jabroni about corporations taking over.

[steveinindy]

You would think they would be appreciative but they probably wouldn't. More than likely you would get some backlash from some Jabroni about corporations taking over.

Probably.

[kscessnadriver]

So, I guess the question becomes, are you willing to give a little to corporations so that the organization receives sizable contributions to the bottom line, or kick that type of thing out and not have the money to keep EAA alive?

[Flyfalcons]

The EAA has been alive for some time now, but the quest for more money invariably leads to the disenfranchisement of the membership.

[RV8505]

So, I guess the question becomes, are you willing to give a little to corporations so that the organization receives sizable contributions to the bottom line, or kick that type of thing out and not have the money to keep EAA alive?

My point is we need everybody! I liken our organization to a chair we all sit on. If you remove any leg it will fall. Just think about it ! We have gone to far a a organization to revert to a EAA Rockford event. It just isn't going to happen. What we need to do is find a balance.

[steveinindy]

The EAA has been alive for some time now, but the quest for more money invariably leads to the disenfranchisement of the membership.

I think if you were to go digging through the records that there's been corporate sponsors since at least the time they moved the offices out of Paul's residence. However, I do agree that the quest solely for funding usually ends up ticking people off. That doesn't seem to be the case here or as lawyers like to say "assumes facts not in evidence".

[Flyfalcons]

Perhaps, but the assumption that the EAA needs more and more corporate sponsorship just to survive is indicative of very serious problems.

[steveinindy]

Perhaps, but the assumption that the EAA needs more and more corporate sponsorship just to survive is indicative of very serious problems.

Well, if you want to grow/expand programs that do further the EAA's mission (like Young Eagles and the very important political advocacy they do for us, etc), the choice is hiking membership dues or going towards commercial sponsorship which I don't see as having changed the EAA that much. Either way, the same folks are going to gripe and they are going to gripe loudly.

[Kyle Boatright]

Well, if you want to grow/expand programs that do further the EAA's mission (like Young Eagles and the very important political advocacy they do for us, etc), the choice is hiking membership dues or going towards commercial sponsorship which I don't see as having changed the EAA that much. Either way, the same folks are going to gripe and they are going to gripe loudly.

Young eagles? Other than insurance (which is a secondary policy AFTER the pilot's own policy), what real expenses does the YE program incur? A template of a form on the website? Someone at HQ to tally the forms once they are mailed in? It can't be much... The members who give YE rides are the ones footing the real bill...

[prasmussen]

Notthat we necessarily need to use the affairs of business as a modelbut I know of several companies that have been severely challenged asthey transitioned from the vision of the founder to that of thesecond generation. I think the folks who are trying to guide the EAAdeserve some credit for listening as we evolve through that stage.And we need to know that these forums are where we exchange ideas butalso where the leadership can sample the attitudes and reactions ofmembers.


Iwould suggest maybe that there should less black and white and morerespectful acceptance of the wonderful range of our goals foraviation and the EAA. I can't quit because I don't particularly likethe fact that our dues support a segment of aviation in which I can'tparticipate. I need to stick around and make my opinion heard. Isthere another choice?


“Wemust all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

[WeaverJ3Cub]

Not that we necessarily need to use the affairs of business as a model but I know of several companies that have been severely challenged asthey transitioned from the vision of the founder to that of thesecond generation. I think the folks who are trying to guide the EAA deserve some credit for listening as we evolve through that stage.And we need to know that these forums are where we exchange ideas butalso where the leadership can sample the attitudes and reactions ofmembers.

Exactly! Apple is a great current example.