My chapter has some tunnel vision going on

[ironnerd]

Hey all.
I am building a single-east, wood-and-fabric plane. I joined the EAA in search of some support and expertise. Unfortunately, my chapter is pretty much a Van's Air Force Booster Club.

I have no dislike for a Van's. They are, by most measures, excellent aircraft. They are not, however the only plane. So far, in fact, I have worked on planes ranging from J-3 Cubs to 777-200's, and haven't met many planes I don't like. Although I have preferences for configuration and materials, I look at every plane as a pretty amazing creation. I would love to discuss Bearhawks, GlaStars, Murphy's, Rans, Zeniths, Kitfoxes, ELSA's, Part 103, etc... without always having to compare them to the RV series and defend them as a viable aircraft choice.

So, does anyone have any suggestions for guiding my chapter towards being more open and welcoming to those who chose the EAB path less taken?

Thanks.

[rwanttaja]

Hey all.
I am building a single-east, wood-and-fabric plane. I joined the EAA in search of some support and expertise. Unfortunately, my chapter is pretty much a Van's Air Force Booster Club.

I have no dislike for a Van's. They are, by most measures, excellent aircraft. They are not, however the only plane. So far, in fact, I have worked on planes ranging from J-3 Cubs to 777-200's, and haven't met many planes I don't like. Although I have preferences for configuration and materials, I look at every plane as a pretty amazing creation. I would love to discuss Bearhawks, GlaStars, Murphy's, Rans, Zeniths, Kitfoxes, ELSA's, Part 103, etc... without always having to compare them to the RV series and defend them as a viable aircraft choice.

So, does anyone have any suggestions for guiding my chapter towards being more open and welcoming to those who chose the EAB path less taken?
Volunteer for the Chapter Presidency the next time it comes open. Or, if someone other than the president arranges the topics for the chapter meetings (ooops, "Gatherings"), volunteer for that position and ensure some variety in the presentations.

Or volunteer for giving a presentation on your own airplane for an upcoming meeting.

I'm kind of outspoken, so members of my chapters don't forget I have a wood and fabric single-seat airplane. It probably doesn't help that I always refer to RVs as "Vancans", "Oregon Cherokees", or "JAFTHAs"*. It just ticks them off. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

* JAFTHA: Just Another ******* Tin Homebuilt Airplane

[ironnerd]

Good advice. I think if I volunteer, it will at least lead the current president to something of a "come to Jesus" moment. There are other people in the club who are looking at planes that are not a bucket of rivets held in place with bits of sheet metal. One new guy told me he was looking for a 4+ seater (his wife wants a Lance, so I suspect he'll be getting a Lance), and said that after talking to the Chapter president, he figured he would just build an RV-10. I asked him if he had heard of a Murphy Moose or Bearhawk 5. That's when the crickets joined the conversation.

So it seems as though a change in leadership of some kind may be in order.

"Oregon Cherokees"...
LMAO!

Thank-you, Sir!

[Airmutt]

Based on your locale, could we be in the same chapter?? PM me. Thanks

[DaleB]

"Ramp fleas" is another good one. Blast those pesky RV pilots... Oh, wait. That's right... I'm one of them. But I get to get looked down upon by both "real" RV pilots and "real" homebuilders; I fly an RV-12... and one built by someone else, no less. But hey!! All is not lost. I'm building a wooden airplane, too... Fisher Celebrity, from plans, none of this sissy kit stuff.

And yes, I'm the only one in my chapter building anything out of wood. Even the non-RV builds are mostly aluminum or fiberglass, save the lone Airdrome Nieuport finished not long ago. There just really aren't that many people building to begin with, and the majority of those who are, are building RVs for reasons discussed many times before. They're really well done kits,. with good support and a VERY active and supportive community of builders and owners.

They're not the end-all be-all for everyone, but given the tiny number of people building airplanes out of wood, or even tube and fabric, you can't be surprised or take it personally when you're the only one in a hundred mile radius or more doing what you're doing. Certainly get more active in your chapter if that's what you want to do, but don't feel like you have to proselytize. And look for other chapters in the surrounding areas... though there's a good chance they are full of RV guys, too.

[ironnerd]

I agree. Most kit-built planes are RV's. They are 1) darn nice, 2) have excellent kits, and 3) are very well developed aircraft. They do, however, take the some of the "E" out of the "EAA".

Part of the appeal of the Wood-n-fabric plane is that not a lot of other people are making them. Maybe not as rare as wood-n-fabric biplanes, but not at all ubiquitous either.

I don't want to be a rabble-rouser, or bring drama to the chapter, I just think some of the other members would like to talk about different planes without hearing about how they are lesser planes because they are not RV's. If they RV guys want to set up a Van's Air Force self-appreciation chapter I would be fine with that - I would even attend a few meetings and offer to smash a few rivets or run some wires. That just ain't what I think an EAA chapter should be.

[melann]

I do quite a lot of Experimental and Light-Sport aircraft certifications in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma area. I just went back over the last year's folders and found:

RV's = 30%, Cub replicas and Sonex =13% ea., Rans and Zenith = 7% ea., and the rest assorted kit and LSA manufacturers.

[rwanttaja]

I do quite a lot of Experimental and Light-Sport aircraft certifications in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma area. I just went back over the last year's folders and found:

RV's = 30%, Cub replicas and Sonex =13% ea., Rans and Zenith = 7% ea., and the rest assorted kit and LSA manufacturers.
Here's some work I did with the 2019 FAA Registry. The "New EAB" column lists the number of newly completed aircraft, the "Re-Registered EAB" is a list of previously-deregistered homebuilts that returned to the active list in 2019, and the final column is the total.

To no one's surprise, Vans aircraft had the most completions. What is surprising, though, is if you look at individual aircraft types, a tube-and-fabric type was tied for first....



Type

Model

New EAB

Re-Registered EAB

Total


Aircam

All EAB

11

2

13


CubCrafters

All EAB

62

1

63




Carbon Cub CCK-1865

10

1

11




Carbon Cub CCK-2000

51

0

51


Glastar

All EAB

20

4

24


Just

All EAB

18

1

19


Kitfox

All EAB

29

14

43


Lancair

All EAB

12

11

23




Lancair 4

6

4

10


Rans

All EAB

33

13

46




Rans S-5

1

1

2




Rans S-6

1

3

4




Rans S-7

6

4

10




Rans S-12

1

3

4




Rans S-14

0

2

2




Rans S-18

2

0

2




Rans S-19

7

0

7




Rans S-20

12

0

12




Rans S-21

3

0

3


Rotorway

All EAB

10

3

13


Sonex

All EAB

25

7

32




Onex

6

0

6




Sonex

10

6

16




Subsonex

2

0

2




Waiex

6

1

7




Xeno

1

0

1


Vans

All EAB

199

52

251




RV-3

1

3

4




RV-4

3

13

16




RV-6

18

21

39




RV-7

51

4

55




RV-8

44

5

49




RV-9

21

5

26




RV-10

27

1

28




RV-12

3

0

3




RV-14

31

0

31


Zenair

All EAB

60

7

67




CH-601

6

2

8




CH-650

6

0

6




CH-701

14

4

18




CH-750

31

0

31




CH-801

3

0

3



Note that this is *only* aircraft registered as Experimental Amateur-Built. Light Sport versions of these aircraft aren't included in the above list.

Ron Wanttaja

[ironnerd]

That is some really interesting information.

Yeah... Van's makes up a large portion of home-builts. Like I said, they are nice planes, but they are not the end-all and be-all of the EAB community.

Some of that has to do with Resale value. I know that a few people build RV's for themselves, but sell them shortly after completion. It would not shock me to learn that same applied to the Cubs and some of the others.

[Airmutt]

So where are you sourcing your wood? Aircraft Spruce, TEAM, local lumber yard. If local, would really like to know which one. Thanks. At this point in time I would really like to take over a project or find a rebuilder. Been hoping something nearby like a FlyBaby would show up but no joy there.

[ironnerd]

I took a shortcut and bought an incomplete kit. The previous builder did some darn nice work, but it sat for a while. It needs a few repairs, some sanding and re-varnishing, and new fabric.

[robert l]

So where are you sourcing your wood? Aircraft Spruce, TEAM, local lumber yard. If local, would really like to know which one. Thanks. At this point in time I would really like to take over a project or find a rebuilder. Been hoping something nearby like a FlyBaby would show up but no joy there.

Last time I checked there was a Fly Baby stored in a hanger at KCDN. I don't know anything at all about it though. I may go there tomorrow, I could ask.
Bob

[Airmutt]

Sure, that would be awesome!!

[Kyle Boatright]

So where are you sourcing your wood? Aircraft Spruce, TEAM, local lumber yard. If local, would really like to know which one. Thanks. At this point in time I would really like to take over a project or find a rebuilder. Been hoping something nearby like a FlyBaby would show up but no joy there.

What happened to the FB's you had?

[Airmutt]

When we started building our place up in Wisconsin I let them go and bailed out of Calhoun. Not too mention the pressures of trying to finish the RERP program meant no time off. Then went to a couple of programs that took me offsite several weeks at a time. Just couldn’t justify them and a hangar at the time. Retirement solved most of those issues.

[cub builder]

That is some really interesting information.

Yeah... Van's makes up a large portion of home-builts. Like I said, they are nice planes, but they are not the end-all and be-all of the EAB community.

Some of that has to do with Resale value. I know that a few people build RV's for themselves, but sell them shortly after completion. It would not shock me to learn that same applied to the Cubs and some of the others.


You need to adjust your attitude about what you are hearing just a bit. The reason these folks all talk about RVs is that their only point of reference is the RV line, i.e., they don't know any better. To be perfectly honest, their building experience is somewhat limited in that they have worked from some excellent plans with little left to create for themselves. I often times find when talking to RV builders, many have very limited knowledge about aircraft construction and systems. Instead, they quote what was on the Van's plans and can't conceive of any other way to accomplish the task. That's not to say all RV builders are ignorant, but it is to say many have a very limited and myopic view of Amateur Built Aircraft in that they don't understand other types of construction. By taking a role in expanding discussions or programming in your chapter, you can help educate these folks and enrich their knowledge base. After all, they don't know what they don't know and won't discuss other types of construction until they know enough to relate to it.

I currently own a RV that I bought wrecked, then rebuilt for myself. There is no denying it is a fine aircraft. But I have also built a wood and composite aircraft, and two tube, wood and fabric aircraft, all of which had sketchy plans that left a great deal to the imagination. I found that I got a lot more satisfaction from designing and creating for myself than I ever did by inserting tab A into slot B and pounding a specified rivet in to a pre-drilled hole.

[ironnerd]

You need to adjust your attitude about what you are hearing just a bit. The reason these folks all talk about RVs is that their only point of reference is the RV line, i.e., they don't know any better. To be perfectly honest, their building experience is somewhat limited in that they have worked from some excellent plans with little left to create for themselves. I often times find when talking to RV builders, many have very limited knowledge about aircraft construction and systems. Instead, they quote what was on the Van's plans and can't conceive of any other way to accomplish the task. That's not to say all RV builders are ignorant, but it is to say many have a very limited and myopic view of Amateur Built Aircraft in that they don't understand other types of construction. By taking a role in expanding discussions or programming in your chapter, you can help educate these folks and enrich their knowledge base. After all, they don't know what they don't know and won't discuss other types of construction until they know enough to relate to it.

I currently own a RV that I bought wrecked, then rebuilt for myself. There is no denying it is a fine aircraft. But I have also built a wood and composite aircraft, and two tube, wood and fabric aircraft, all of which had sketchy plans that left a great deal to the imagination. I found that I got a lot more satisfaction from designing and creating for myself than I ever did by inserting tab A into slot B and pounding a specified rivet in to a pre-drilled hole.

You make a good point. What I am hoping to do is open the minds of the RV drivers a bit to other planes. Right now the Pres is assisting with a Sling build - apparently the entire plane is wrong and the plans are inadequate. I had to chuckle at that. The Hi-Max I am building is basically blueprints and a page of "Assemble the Empennage", and I like it that way. While a MAX builder actually starts by building the fuselage and wing rib assembly jigs, the RV's come pre-cut, pre-drilled, and pre-formed with build manuals that resemble Ikea products. I also have to design an engine mount for a Hirth, since the plans only have drawings for Rotax (which is fair, I suppose).

The problem is that inferring that a particular plane is not the best invites righteous furry from its supporters, so I must treat carefully.

[Airmutt]

I’m a big advocate of the chapter program. Unfortunately not all chapters are created equal. I think a lot of chapters go thru phases over time. Some chapter issues are driven by the presence of one or more strong personalities. As a former chapter president I’ve heard others complain about their chapter only wanting to only fly Young Eagles or only do fly outs while others got left behind or just a bunch of grumpy old men reminiscing the good ole days. It’s easy to forget that your chapter may consist of the veteran pilot/builder to someone just getting interested in aviation. Chapter activities should have enough variation to keep folks coming back.

[cub builder]

.... As a former chapter president I’ve heard others complain about their chapter only wanting to only fly Young Eagles or only do fly outs while others got left behind or just a bunch of grumpy old men reminiscing the good ole days. It’s easy to forget that your chapter may consist of the veteran pilot/builder to someone just getting interested in aviation. Chapter activities should have enough variation to keep folks coming back.

When I was a chapter president, I was criticized for having too much technical and builder content in our meetings and not enough to satisfy members there aren't interested in building. :eek: You can't make everyone happy.

[ironnerd]

When I was a chapter president, I was criticized for having too much technical and builder content in our meetings and not enough to satisfy members there aren't interested in building. :eek: You can't make everyone happy.


True. And that's kind of what brought me to begin this thread. Too much of any one topic is too much for any organization. All Van's, all the time is closing in on too much. I mean... the Rotorway was not as good as a Vans... apples <> oranges

He just needs to open his horizons a little. We'll move him that way over time.

[Ron Blum]

I think that this topic is true with all Chapters. We now have 3 EAA chapters in the Wichita, KS area. One is focused on flying ... with Young Eagles as a second. Another is focused on Young Eagles ... with some technical. And the third, which just went through some major problems at the Board level, is going to go toward technical and projects ... unless the remaining members convince me otherwise. We are the only Chapter in the area that owns our own building. We also have an RV group in the area that started 2+ decades ago ... which hurt the Chapter.

So my question then becomes, with only 9 monthly meetings a year (the others are: 2 for fly-outs and 1 Christmas Party), how do you cover all the bases? I'm going to suggest that other members run other events ... like visiting projects, seeing aviation businesses in town, visiting local MakerSpaces (we have a $2M+ one called "Go Create" on the campus of Wichita State University) on non-regularly scheduled meeting days.

The main thing I think that we are missing is participation! I personally think our dues are too high at $36/year. My suggestion (in January ... when I become president again) is going to be to give members a $3 credit for each month that they volunteer during for next year's membership dues. Thoughts?

[Kyle Boatright]

The main thing I think that we are missing is participation! I personally think our dues are too high at $36/year. My suggestion (in January ... when I become president again) is going to be to give members a $3 credit for each month that they volunteer during for next year's membership dues. Thoughts?

I never worried about dues. $36 is pennies for the airplane crowd.

My reality (and why I haven't been to an EAA meeting in a decade) is that I sit in meetings all day long. I don't want to go to meetings on my free time. I want to participate in activities, demonstrations, fly-outs, etc., and my chapter (I was president for a while and am culpable) tended to have relatively boring meetings where we talked about the bank balance, scared up the volunteers for the next burger flip, etc. We didn't "airplane" enough. Sure, there was a guest speaker pretty often, but that wasn't enough to overcome the monotony of living through the same administrative meeting again and again...

[robert l]

Sure, that would be awesome!!

I checked on the Fly Baby today, it's not for sale. The guy that built it is going to replace or rebuild the engine after he finishes his current project.
Bob

[Airmutt]

Got it. Thanks for checking.

[ironnerd]

Yargh!
Two more members just purchased RV-14 kits. One sold his Sling (granted, he had some good reasons to do so).

I can't fault them much, Van's makes a good kit for a very good plane. I'm still more of a Bearhawk or Buttercup/Tailwind guy. I kinda associate bucking rivets with getting paid, so I feel like I'm getting [forked] if a day of riveting does not result in a check.

[ironnerd]

I went to a meeting of the "Georgia Sport Fliers" this weekend. They are a bunch of UL and LSA pilots in Cartersville, GA (KVPC). What a world of difference!
One of the first things they asked was if I had hangar space, and they were sure to tell me that my plane is small enough that I can share a hangar with another member. They offered me the use of their trailer to move the project to the airport.

I told them what I was building and they were all interested. At least one other member had a similar plane (Mini-max). When I mentioned I was going to paint it with latex, one dude smiled and nodded. "That stuff works great," he said. "I've flown quite a few latex planes."

Isn't this what the EAA is supposed to be about?