Sport Aviation March 2013 - Celerity 2011 Lindy winner fell through the cracks!

[Clarke Tate]

There was a nice article by Budd Davission on a Celerity built by Gary Rene of Minnesota.
This Celerity was a Lindy winner in 2011 and seems to be a natural subject
for a cover photo main article. There was no comment about this
aircraft on the cover, not to mention that this aircraft should have
been front and center in this or one of the many issues since Oshkosh
2011 when it won the Lindy.

This plans built aircraft project deserves the attention this article has given in a far too
understated manner. The patience exhibited in building a cowling over
the period of a year deserves at least a black and white photo of
some preliminary stage showing other members what building is all
about.

During the time this article was waiting to be written since Oshkosh 2011,
FIFI was on the cover twice and one time it was not even a primary subject aircraft of the issue.
How many aircraft like this Celerity have fallen through the cracks,
and are waiting to have a photo on the cover highlighting the
personal quest to build and fly. Put the aircraft front and center
and not trade publication type article highlights, like formation
lite, homebuilt safety report or women in aviation, as seemingly a primary focus cluttering the
cover. No mention of the gem of a Lindy winner buried in the back of
an issue, and one from 2011 at that, is unfortunate indeed!

The Sport Aviation issues published
since Oshkosh 2011 and the Celerity winning the Lindy:


August 2011-FIFI

September 2011- EAA Bleriot

October-2011 T-6

November 2011-Mac in a Helicopter

December 2011-RV-10

January 2012- Piper Cub

February 2012- Corsair

March 2012- Glasair quick build

April 2012- DC-7

May 2012- Kitfox Radial

June 2012- Richard VanGrunsven


July 2012- Pitts

August 2012- Onex

September 2012- FIFI (Not an article
about the aircraft on the cover)

October 2012- Oshkosh Controllers ( Not
an article on the aircraft shown on the cover)

November 2012- Reno P-51(Not an article
on the aircraft shown on the cover)

December 2012-Mitchell (Not an article
about the aircraft on the cover, despite a rather nice Lockheed
project inside)

January 2013- Stearman ( The aircraft
is the sweepstakes aircraft with article)

February 2013- Aircam (No article about
the aircraft on the cover)

March 2013- Speedmail (Nice aircraft
and an article in the magazine!)

April 2013- Oshkosh Volunteers

[Victor Bravo]

X2 on what Clarke Tate said ! (and long live the Chilton Monoplane!!)

There is, and must be, a balance between all the different facets of aviation highlighted in Sport Aviation. I understand and agree that EAA is trying to branch out and appeal to other segments of aviation. Bravo, good idea, go for it. But not at the expense of the core principles or core competencies of EAA. EAA was mostly built on homebuilt airplanes, and that should remain the central theme.

The central theme of Sport Aviation magazine was (and should still be) the art, science, lore, and importance of personal homebuilt aircraft. To overlook a Lindy winner, especially an aircraft like the Celerity that is rare, exotic, and yet very relevant to the needs and interests of the core demographic of EAA, is a catastrophic oversight even if it was an innocent error. But if it was done because someone figured that the other stuff deserved the magazine space more... it is unforgivable.

There have been rumors that some of the EAA leadership wants to put all the homebuilts and construction stuff into a little side magazine called Experimenter, to make more room for the $120K factory Light Sport stuff, the $750K Bonanzas, and the $3M TBM's in Sport Aviation so the advertisers are happy. I don't know about you, but that would disenfranchise the heck out of me. EAA has a duty to its membership first, and advertisers second.

Flying and Plane and Pilot magazines have become almost irrelevant to a larger and larger percentage of pilots. Having Sport Aviation creep in that direction is a disaster.

With all sincere respect to Mac McClellan, if they want to have him write articles about the TBM 700, or known icing in a King Air, THAT should be shuffled off into a separate little magazine called "Epaulets", or "Exclusive Aviation", with a cover price of $75.00 per issue, and put on the news stands next to the Robb Report.

Any attempt to marginalize the core beliefs and main demographic of EAA, by putting US into a little side magazine... will disenfranchise a lot of the people who built EAA.

[martymayes]

Perhaps the builder hasn't the time, incentive or interest to show his plane and tell his story? I wouldn't necessarily blame EAA without hearing the whole story.

[martymayes]

With all sincere respect to Mac McClellan, if they want to have him write articles about the TBM 700, or known icing in a King Air, THAT should be shuffled off into a separate little magazine called "Epaulets", or "Exclusive Aviation", with a cover price of $75.00 per issue, and put on the news stands next to the Robb Report.


lol, "Wannabe ATPs" or "GQ Aviation"

Wholeheartedly agree, however many want EAA to be everything to everyone.

[Victor Bravo]

EAA can indeed be everything to everyone in aviation, believe it or not. I support it entirely, BTW. But the history books are overflowing with extinct organizations or product lines or brand names that forgot who they were or whet their brand represented.

If high end turbine singles and Barons and King Airs were really still relevant to the average pilot, then you could make half a case for giving them center stage in Sport Aviation, at the guaranteed risk of offending the "core rank and file" of EAA. But they're not relevant to the majority. The RV-6 and the Avid and the Bearhawk and the CH-750 and the Cassutt are much more within reach and relevant to the needs of the majority. So they should be the core of Sport Aviation. The fact that this would NOT pi** off the core constituents of EAA should also be a major factor.

Now, I once heard Rod Hightower speaking, and he addressed the fact that EAA was trying to reach out to other segments of aviation that were not the Volksplane types. He was right. EAA should have something for everyone... even Thurston Howell in his TBM 700. I believe it is a shrewd move for EAA to appeal to Mr. Howell in his TBM, but Gilligan and the Skipper in their RV's are who built EAA and those are the hundred thousand people who show up at Oshkosh. More importantly, those are the people who show up and VOLUNTEER at Oshkosh, and who volunteer at the chapter level. THOSE people are the ones who have earned the position of primary audience for Sport Aviation.

EAA needs to remember that a very small percentage of the Turbine Aero Commander owners are the people who made the Young Eagles program happen. The big percentage of Young Eagle success was the little guy in his Champ, Avid, Vari-EZE, RV-6, and the HERO who went off and rented a 150 or 172 at his own expense.

So, after spouting off ad nauseam about the problem, I'm more or less obliged to present a possible solution: Focused magazines, all branded under the EAA banner, all profitable to EAA, all spreading the EAA name, but catering to the interests of a defined segment:

EAA Sport Aviation: 75% or more focused on homebuilt airplanes, building, skills, EAA chapters and the core demographic interests of EAA, 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment.

EAA General Aviation: 75% focused on factory built GA aircraft, IFR, business class aircraft, turbines, the latest $100K glass cockpit, WX radar, etc. 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment. J. Mac McClellan, Editor in Chief.

EAA Light Sport Aircraft: 75% focused on factory built LSA aircraft, the remainder on government advocacy relevant to LSA, safety, maintenance tips, etc. 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment.

EAA Ultralight Flying: 75% focused on ultralights, trikes, powered hang gliders, and issues/rules/safety relevant to ultralights. 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment.

EAA Warbirds: 75% focused on warbirds and warbird restorations. 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment.

EAA Antique Aircraft: 75% focused on antiques, restorations. 25% focused on government advocacy, medical, etc. as it relates to this segment.

EAA Aerobatics and Airshows: 100% focused on sport and competition aerobatics, aerobatic homebuilt and factory built aircraft, coverage of world airshows, jet demo teams.

It should not be mandatory for any one subscriber to get any other magazine. The ultralight guys may have no interest in homebuilts, or warbirds... but they will still be brought into the fold under the EAA umbrella, and still have a brand they can be loyal to. Sport Aviation willbe a little thinner of a magazine. But the cost to publish Sport Aviation will be less, because they don't need corporate types writing about jets. Mr. McClellan will still keep his job at EAA, but now he can appeal to the readers and advertisers who matter to him and vice versa.

Did I mention the huge increase in revenue for EAA? They would now have packaged, targeted readers to "sell" to advertisers. Places like Aircraft Spruce, who appeal to several of those different audiences, would be buying five or six ads instead of one or two. EAA could charge money for each of the magazines.

EAA could also combine some of the magazine staff and use economies of scale for printing contracts, graphic departments, etc.

[Clarke Tate]

Perhaps the builder hasn't the time, incentive or interest to show his plane and tell his story? I wouldn't necessarily blame EAA without hearing the whole story.

Fair enough comment Marty. What I do see though, in issues subsequent to the 2011 and 2012 Oshkosh events, is very little in the way of photos or general comment regarding aircraft like the Celerity in the article. I would like to think if this and other aircraft are at "The Event" for the organization there would be at least a few teaser photos of these aircraft and a comment along the lines of "We hope to have more about these/this aircraft in an issue in the near future". Maybe the obligatory photo over Lake Winnebago or anything providing tangible documentation of these aircraft.

If someone at EAA is reading these posts I make an offer to photograph, and attempt an article of, any aircraft that may have been overlooked over the last several years. Who am I to offer this? I was responsible for layout and creation of cover ideas and graphics creation for a cosmetics industry monthly trade publication/s for a fair number of years, including trapping and creation of films for printing and proofing. I have a decent Nikon digital camera and am a Commercial Pilot that flys on a nearly daily basis. Oh, and I have been involved with EAA since I was 7 when my father took me to my first convention at Rockford. The offer is there so send me a list of aircraft in the Northeastern USA for a potential article. There must be at least one!
You have my phone number and email on file.

[Clarke Tate]

I understand and agree that EAA is trying to branch out and appeal to other segments of aviation. Bravo, good idea, go for it. But not at the expense of the core principles or core competencies of EAA. EAA was mostly built on homebuilt airplanes, and that should remain the central theme.


Well said Victor Bravo. Your comment regarding homebuilt aircraft as a central theme is certaininly what was previosly the focus of EAA and certainly Sport Aviation. How many years was the cover an aircraft photo and the magazine name and nothing else. This is a club magazine not a trade publication with the table of contents emblazoned on the cover. We are all club members and we are here for one thing, airplanes!

I noticed you mentioned possibly assisting EAA with your expertise in another thread. Did you ever hear anything?
I made a similar offer yesterday but on refelection I wonder if it would merely be wasted effort. When a writer like Mr. Davisson has his article on an interesting aircraft project buried in the back I can only wonder why!

[Bob Collins]

I enjoyed the article on the Celerity. I enjoyed Lane Wallace's article on Oshkosh controllers. I enjoyed the article on the P-51. I thought the Buffalo DC-3 was pretty cool etc. etc. etc.

When I go to the airport, I don't just watch experimentals land. I watch them all.

The EAA has been a great help to me in homebuilding. When I asked for help, it gave me help. When I need to take a workshop on various components of building my RV-7A, they provided a workshop on various components of building an Rv-7A. When I wanted to learn how to change the brake pads a few weeks ago, the Homebuilders Videos provided a video that showed me how.

I know some people think EAA is gravitating toward people who are well-off, as if they are somehow different from the rest of us. I'm pretty sure Gary Rene is a dentist in Edina, perhaps the wealthiest community in all of Minnesota, and --as such -- has the means (presumably) to do the things I could never do in homebuilding. I delivered newspapers to pay for my project.

Does this make him less of a grassroots aviator than me? Absolutely not. We are all different even within the narrow categories that people try to put us withing the aviation community.

I'm not sure what more I'm supposed to expect from the organization. It's doing fine by me.

I respect, obviously, opinions to the contrary.

[Hal Bryan]

If someone at EAA is reading these posts I make an offer to photograph, and attempt an article of, any aircraft that may have been overlooked over the last several years.

I read every post on these forums, as do many others on staff. If you have an article you'd like to pitch - great! Send it to:

editorial@eaa.org

[Frank Giger]

Bob, to be fair the gripes aren't so much about class envy as they are about commonality.

Put me in the pilot's lounge with the gazillionaire that has a restored WWII bird and we'll quickly find build (I actually think restoring would be harder than building from scratch) stories to swap out, even though I'm building a little tube-and-gusset plane that costs less than my pickup truck. Yes, he'll insert the words "my team" in there, but these folks are involved.

The guy that writes a check for a G5 or even a new C172? Not so much when it falls within the EAA bailiwick. Hell, I have gotten crazy "why would you ever fly that?" looks when talking about the Champ from those types.

I don't mind the "big tent" mentality, since we're all pilots and as such are part of a small community to begin with. That doesn't mean we should alienate the core definitions and membership of the organization.

[Aaron Novak]

Frank,
What you have hit upon is what an old family friend of ours told me a couple years ago. Basicly there are 2 types of people interested in aviation, Airplane People (AP's) and People That Fly Airplanes (PFA's). AP's tend to be the Antique, Homebuilt, and Warbird Guys, PFA's tend to be the C172, Bonanza and other generic aluminum aircraft pilots. AP's tend to stick with the lifestyle ( its not a hobby to them ) throughout their lives, PFA's tend to come and go as if it were any other hobby like boating, motorcycles, stamp collecting etc. In years of poor economy, the AP's will still be there, however the PFA's tend to grow with disposable income. PFA's can become AP's, but rarely is the opposite true.

[Victor Bravo]

I noticed you mentioned possibly assisting EAA with your expertise in another thread. Did you ever hear anything?

I made a similar offer yesterday but on refelection I wonder if it would merely be wasted effort.



I have made a couple of offers of assistance to EAA over the years on various things.

In 1992, I owned a very rare oddball antique airplane from England called an Auster. I happened to have a great adventure over two weeks ferrying it back to Los Angeles from Tucson, with mechanical failures, strange flying qualities, becoming stranded, and finally fighting my way home against intense heat and winds. Forgive my ego, but I wrote a very entertaining, humorous, and emotional two-part feature story essay about that trip. I submitted the article to Sport Aviation, and I would have bet my life they would have wanted it for a feature story. The Edwards AFB EAA chapter published it in their newsletter, and I was honored to have Air Force test pilots complimenting me about the story, and roaring with laughter and amazement as they read it. One of the test pilots said it was the best weird airplane ferry story he had ever read. I never heard back from Sport Aviation.

I offered some harsh, but accurate and appropriate criticism in a detailed feedback letter, after being a new product vendor at Oshkosh in 2010 and 2011. As part of that feedback, I recall I offered to work with them, or provide suggestions on how to resolve the shortcomings that I pointed out. Other than "thank you for your feedback", they did not take me up on that offer.

Along with (and submitted through) my chapter president, I offered some very good suggestions on how to improve the publicity and presence of the B-17 tour stop here in the LA area. (The B-17 had become "old news" here, because our media coverage game is very very different here in crazy old "Hollywood" than anywhere else... and the PR person they sent here to LA on another EAA related event was just completely out of her depth.) Our offer to help guide EAA on how to maximize the success and coverage of the event was not acted upon. In so many words, "we know what we're doing, thanks... we'll call you if we're interested".

So yes, as much as I don't want it to be that way, in all honesty there is a fair chance that any "outside" offers to assist EAA with suggestions or expertise, or help with fixing problems, or improve some EAA process or program, might fall on deaf ears.