Hightower Resigns as EAA President/CEO

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Switzer

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.

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Stadt

Charlie now works for AOPA.

---

I Know. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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. .

---

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

Quote:

---

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.

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.

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.

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.)

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

Good post Bob.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Collins

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

.

---

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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!

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burtles

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?

Quote:

---

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?

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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).

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Why does it "need to grow"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flyfalcons

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?

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

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.

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
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.

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveinindy

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveinindy

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RV8505

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveinindy

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...

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!

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crusty old aviator

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crusty old aviator

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.