Another AOPA failure, IMO

[rhkennerly]

"every time"?

I trust you are using hyperbole.

some. But I can cite a lot of examples of naivety in the contracting practice that tied DoD to "rent seekers" for decades. Especially in the earlier days of computers. Take the military health records system during the switch to electronic. The basic contract deal was "our data, your program." So after a few decades of dealing with an antiquated MuMPS mainframe with various WYSISYG laid over what was at heart a terminal system, DoD fired the contractor for not upgrading to a more modern SQL system after multiple requests.

On other day of the handover, the contractor showed up with two tractor trailer loaded with paper boxes, printouts of "your data." When they let the contract, nobody at DoD really understood computers; they certainly didn't understand relational databases and how they worked.

The contractor did, however. They couldn't give digital copies of the records without also giving access to their proprietary software. And they rolled their own proprietary programs (common back in the day).

I think that showdown was in early 2000's. That contractor contract is renewed (at a higher rate) every time, which includes the cost of an onsite expert at every MTF (military treatment facility) to keep that archaic system running. They're still at it.

"General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin considered much of the data and equipment on the LCS proprietary — a problem that the GAO has identifiedthroughout the military. As a result, only their employees were allowed to do certain repairs, former officers said. This sometimes meant that contractors would go overseas to help, adding millions in travel costs and often delaying missions. The Navy recently purchased some of the data. A Navy spokesperson would not disclose the price “due to proprietary reasons.”" https://www.propublica.org/article/...ampaign=majorinvestigations&utm_content=river

Regarding the LCS: "General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin considered much of the data and equipment on the LCS proprietary — a problem that the GAO has identified throughout the military. As a result, only their employees were allowed to do certain repairs, former officers said. This sometimes meant that contractors would go overseas to help, adding millions in travel costs and often delaying missions. The Navy recently purchased some of the data. A Navy spokesperson would not disclose the price “due to proprietary reasons.”"

That GAO report on "rent seeker" capture of DoD systems will make you want to kill yourself with a brick: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104752.pdf

 

[rhkennerly]

Post 34 already stole my thunder but I'll double down anyways:


I've buried friends before the age of 30 because of capitalization delays by rapacious defense contracts. I lost one marriage and a second one almost didn't happen, to congressional pork barreled basing decisions that support both rent-seeking contractors and the local economic districts they capture. The latter is done in order to spread the footprint wide enough to so that no single congress person can put an end to the cash-n-grab nonsense. All at zero primary consideration nor positive impact to combat readiness.

My current wife hates what I do precisely because my life is pawned at the feet of some pay-to-play contractor's whims to decide whether and at what pace to overhaul engines and hydraulic control servos that should have been at the National Mall's Air and Space Museum 40 years ago. And that behemoth that starts with a B and cannot stay off the media headlines for one second, is already 5 years late to delivering a basic trainer replacement the Koreans have been flying a better version of full up COTS for decades now. I'm not even going to debate the details of some of y'alls revisionist history about the Viper program, honestly this isn't the venue. I'll be sure and tell the widow of my former student that defense contractors say all is well in the home front with legacy fighter program procurement/sustainment. Doesn't escape me they didn't bring up Fat Amy instead. I swear, if I had a quarter for every time that business casual CorpO lanyard around neck cohort come to tell me what was good for me, I'd be independent-wealth retired by now.

yep. well said. I'm sorry about your friend.

 

[AV8R_87]

How can we encourage/stimulate/badger AOPA into doing things and accomplishing goals, instead of just spending $50M per year on entertainment?

Tell them why you're letting your membership lapse. If enough people do that because of a common reason, they'll listen.

 

[Doc Holliday]

How can we encourage/stimulate/badger AOPA into doing things and accomplishing goals, instead of just spending $50M per year on entertainment?

AOPA is a business. Their product is to sell the member that they advocate on their behalf. They also offer a cheesy glossy magazine that can be read in about 30 minutes.

As long as they are producing an income based upon their current activity, not much will change. Go ahead and write letters, they will answer you that yes, they are concerned and they will work on it. And they'll be sure to send you multiple subscription renewals as well.

 

[Half Fast]

The AOPA situation is not new. I have a copy of AOPA's book, Freedom to Fly, which is a picture-book history of the organization and its role in US aviation. All the way through, there is story after story of the AOPA engaging in some issue or tilting at some windmill and losing, time after time. There are a few wins, of course, but not many.

Consider even Basic Med, which the AOPA keeps touting as a big win. It really just corrects an AOPA loss from 1960. Prior to 1960, private pilots could be examined by their usual doctor, no AME required. When the FAA moved to require AMEs to do the exams, the AOPA opposed the move. And lost.

I'm afraid the organization has very little clout.

 

[Ed Haywood]

It all eyewash. nobody with a contract gives a **** about the troops.

Funny, just last week I ran into an old SF buddy who is now a Lockheed exec. He was the XO of Delta Force when they were going hard after ISIS, with teams showing up at night in terrorist safe houses all over Syria and killing everyone inside. He is now supporting the same guys. I suspect he gives a **** about them.

Curious, what did YOU do in the war?

 

[Half Fast]

Funny, just last week I ran into an old SF buddy who is now a Lockheed exec. He was the XO of Delta Force when they were going hard after ISIS, with teams showing up at night in terrorist safe houses all over Syria and killing everyone inside. He is now supporting the same guys. I suspect he gives a **** about them.

Curious, what did YOU do in the war?

BTW - for 36 years at Lockheed, I never saw anything even approaching indifference to warfighters. In fact, I fought and won a few battles with gov't procurement folks to get stuff out the door and into the hands of people who needed it.

On the walls throughout our Orlando facility, there are photographs and stories of employees' family members who are in the service, plus photos and stories of employees who previously served. It makes things pretty up close and personal, and when I was there we cared sincerely about the users of our products. Many of our execs, including our VP of engineering, had kids who were serving overseas. Think they cared about our products and customers? Hell yes.

When 9/11 took place, I was managing a program to develop a minefield detection system. Word came down from LM corporate to all us managers that if our customers asked for anything we were to just do it immediately and we would sort out the contractual stuff later.

 

[Piperonca]

BTW - for 36 years at Lockheed, I never saw anything even approaching indifference to warfighters. In fact, I fought and won a few battles with gov't procurement folks to get stuff out the door and into the hands of people who needed it.

On the walls throughout our Orlando facility, there are photographs and stories of employees' family members who are in the service, plus photos and stories of employees who previously served. It makes things pretty up close and personal, and when I was there we cared sincerely about the users of our products. Many of our execs, including our VP of engineering, had kids who were serving overseas. Think they cared about our products and customers? Hell yes.

When 9/11 took place, I was managing a program to develop a minefield detection system. Word came down from LM corporate to all us managers that if our customers asked for anything we were to just do it immediately and we would sort out the contractual stuff later.

Having served on both sides for 50+ years, I can tell you I saw much the same. Some contractor/OEM skulduggery or corruption maybe, but it was very much the exception. With so many prior service employees, or family members in the service, anybody that scorned the troops in my workplaces would be quickly strangled made to understand who the real customer was.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I admit I am biased. I co-own a govt contracting company. Our main customer is SOCOM, under which I served the majority of my career. Of our top 10 managers, 9 are veterans. Several are combat veterans with the kind of experience most people imagine only exists in movies. Delta Force, SEAL Team Six, Green Berets. My BD director is missing a finger from a mine explosion. His sons are both infantry platoon leaders. One of my PMs has spoken to me of shooting 4 armed men at point blank range in a small kitchen late one night on the Iraq-Syria border. He does not have PTSD. Another quit an obscenely lucrative position at SpaceX to support his old teammates in the SEAL teams.

I can't speak for other companies, but I know our values. If I didn't put the customer first, my own employees would hang me by my balls.

 

[hindsight2020]

Curious, what did YOU do in the war?

Careful with passive-aggressive "combat cred" litmus testing in order to chastise civilians, that's a slippery slope. You can still make your point about your company without insinuating there's lesser degree of legitimacy in non-combat Service. Logistics win wars anyways, not allusions of personal heroics to impress the grandkids and intimidate civilians. But I know you knew that already, if you rose in rank above the level of small team trigger puller.

Long winded way of saying: we're on the same team here, Vet.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Careful with passive-aggressive "combat cred" litmus testing in order to chastise civilians, that's a slippery slope. You can still make your point about your company without insinuating there's lesser degree of legitimacy in non-combat Service. Logistics win wars anyways, not allusions of personal heroics to impress the grandkids and intimidate civilians. But I know you knew that already, if you rose in rank above the level of small team trigger puller.

Long winded way of saying: we're on the same team here, Vet.

Not passive aggressive at all. Actively aggressive. There are degrees of legitimacy in service. Not all vets are equal.

 

[hindsight2020]

Not passive aggressive at all. Actively aggressive. There are degrees of legitimacy in service. Not all vets are equal.

Hoo boy. Thankfully for us lesser/non-legitimate vets, Congress and the Department of Defense disagrees.

With friends like these....

 

[Piperonca]

Hoo boy. Thankfully for us lesser/non-legitimate vets, Congress and the Department of Defense disagrees.

With friends like these....

Recall that old adage, “When you point a finger at someone else, four fingers are pointing back at you.”

 

[Piperonca]

In terms of thread drift, this one has achieved escape velocity.

 

[Clip4]

From what I read, there is a shortage of DPEs and their fees for PPL are $900-1500.
This is reason #47 why it's so hard to become a pilot, and another failure of AOPA, IMO. They spend $50M every year to tell us how they are "working on helping us". If they wanted to, they would have fixed this problem years ago.
I so wish there was an organization that actually works, not talks, to enable more people to become and remain pilots.

How can we encourage/stimulate/badger AOPA into doing things and accomplishing goals, instead of just spending $50M per year on entertainment?

Yes, some of the fees are $900-$1500. Some are $600-$900.

During the time to take the DPE training and recurrent training, you make zero. None of the expenses are reimbursed.

One days the ceilings/vis is marginal or there is much wind or turbulence, you make $0. On days a student has to cancel because of aircraft issues, you make $0. When a student schedules for a ride because he thinks he is close and isn’t, you make zero. When some idiot CFI fails to sign the proper endorsements or have the minimum qualifications in the logbook, you make zero. If a pilot discontinues a ride for any reason, you have to reschedule.

 

[Kritchlow]

Not passive aggressive at all. Actively aggressive. There are degrees of legitimacy in service. Not all vets are equal.

I never served, so this is not about me, but….

My dad (who passed 22 years ago), was in the Army Air Forces during WW2.
For whatever reason he was never sent to theater. He did everything the Army asked of him, and would certainly have gone into combat if that was his orders.
He received an honorable discharge.

Is he somehow less of a veteran??

 

[Doc Holliday]

Not passive aggressive at all. Actively aggressive. There are degrees of legitimacy in service. Not all vets are equal.

 

[dmspilot]

Yes, some of the fees are $900-$1500. Some are $600-$900.

During the time to take the DPE training and recurrent training, you make zero. None of the expenses are reimbursed.

One days the ceilings/vis is marginal or there is much wind or turbulence, you make $0. On days a student has to cancel because of aircraft issues, you make $0. When a student schedules for a ride because he thinks he is close and isn’t, you make zero. When some idiot CFI fails to sign the proper endorsements or have the minimum qualifications in the logbook, you make zero. If a pilot discontinues a ride for any reason, you have to reschedule.

Most of this is wrong.

 

[Country Flier]

I don’t disagree with both your frustration with AOPA and the price of DPE exams.

As an observation, the DPE price is set by supply and demand - capitalism. The “fix”, which I personally think would be reasonable, would be to limit the amount they could charge by regulation - something some may choose to label as “socialism”.

Yeah, another “fix” is to increase the supply of DPEs to the point where the demand decreases and so does the cost. That’s fine too - so long as we don’t dumb down the DPE pool too, too much. Then again, “price fixing” within the group would still be a possibility.

Strictly an observation.

As for AOPA, I’m letting my membership lapse.

Not exactly true...no one pays $10,000 for flight training, then says "$1000 is too much for a DPE, so I'm not taking the test." Your demand is fixed.

 

[Tools]

The core argument:

1. It’s SO HARD to become a DPE we don’t have our best candidates applying.
2. It’s SO HARD to keep, our best DPEs aren’t staying.
3. FAA is not certifying enough.
4. Part 141 workaround fails because it takes 4 YEARS and performance metrics made difficult to maintain.
5. This shortage makes testing much more difficult.
6. DPEs so micromanaged and failures rampant it creates undue stress. I’ve seen a 10-20 percent first attempt rate (including discontinuances), close to 50 percent failure rate. ALL very sketchy (but legal) failures. Fine, but exacerbates the cost and availability problems.
7. FAA actually tried to help by removing geo restrictions… it’s something I guess.

Is there ANY relief in sight? Don’t see it getting better on its own.

 

[OneCharlieTango]

From what I read, there is a shortage of DPEs and their fees for PPL are $900-1500.
This is reason #47 why it's so hard to become a pilot, and another failure of AOPA, IMO. They spend $50M every year to tell us how they are "working on helping us". If they wanted to, they would have fixed this problem years ago.
I so wish there was an organization that actually works, not talks, to enable more people to become and remain pilots.

How can we encourage/stimulate/badger AOPA into doing things and accomplishing goals, instead of just spending $50M per year on entertainment?

“Dear Mr Baker —
I’ve been an AOPA member since xxxx, seeing such benefits as BasicMed and our continued ability to fly without user fees. I’ve been proud to be an AOPA member.

Recently, however, I fear there’s been a shift in priorities, with less attention to beginners and pilots on a reasonable budget. For instance, there appears to be a critical shortage of DPEs, which allows them to charge fees that are nothing short of strongarming. Obviously, this presents yet another impediment to those who would become pilots. If AOPA is doing anything to address this, please let us know that it’s a priority. If not, why not?

Thanks for your ongoing work on our behalf, and congratulations on your upcoming retirement.

Sincerely,
MountainDude
AOPA #xxxxxxxxx”

This is how grownups communicate. Twenty people writing something like this would do more good than 1000 whining, anonymous internet posts.

 

[KE5BM]

AOPA did a remarkable job of keeping my local field open in the face of a bunch of rich folks that don't like airplane noise. However, once it was done the field and we pilots are left holding the bag. Everytime an Osprey nest gets removed for safety, it's front page news. Right now, the Airport Commission is wanting to trim/remove some trees on the approach ends because they're encroaching on the glide slope. This has turned into an opportunity for the critics to use property rights and "conservation" as weapons. Additionally, there is fear that a very prominent local hotel ($1000 a night) might try adding charter flights into town as part of their package. So, the non-pilot know-it-alls want the airport to alter the 3000' strip to have displaced thresholds. In their view, displaced thresholds are the answer to their prayers. AOPA has been silent on the matter so far.

I forget how much I paid my DPE last year. It was a lot, but I seem to remember it was less than $1000. However, he was 1 of only 3 in the geographical area. Seems odd given our proximity to Boston. Took a few weeks for him to get around to me and a fellow student he examined on the same day. Based on the airplane he flew into town, I'd say it's a pretty good gig.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I never served, so this is not about me, but….

My dad (who passed 22 years ago), was in the Army Air Forces during WW2.
For whatever reason he was never sent to theater. He did everything the Army asked of him, and would certainly have gone into combat if that was his orders.
He received an honorable discharge.

Is he somehow less of a veteran??

No disrespect to your father intended. Military flying ANYWHERE was dangerous back then.

But I suspect your father would not have talked smack to a bunch of 8th AF vets about "not giving a **** about the troops."

 

[Llewtrah381]

Your demand is fixed.

It may be, but apparently at a high level. We’ve been talking here about the price for the exam but I’m also hearing (locally and on chats like this) that wait times can be exceptionally long. High demand drives both high cost and high wait times.

A good friend is a DPE for gyros (one of the most reputable in the country) and is looking to add FW. He’s still building the needed time for that after several years. It does sound like a not-so-easy task, which is actually good for aviation, I suppose.

 

[MountainDude]

“Dear Mr Baker —
I’ve been an AOPA member since xxxx, seeing such benefits as BasicMed and our continued ability to fly without user fees. I’ve been proud to be an AOPA member.

Recently, however, I fear there’s been a shift in priorities, with less attention to beginners and pilots on a reasonable budget. For instance, there appears to be a critical shortage of DPEs, which allows them to charge fees that are nothing short of strongarming. Obviously, this presents yet another impediment to those who would become pilots. If AOPA is doing anything to address this, please let us know that it’s a priority. If not, why not?

Thanks for your ongoing work on our behalf, and congratulations on your upcoming retirement.

Sincerely,
MountainDude
AOPA #xxxxxxxxx”

This is how grownups communicate. Twenty people writing something like this would do more good than 1000 whining, anonymous internet posts.

Thank you. I wrote them that email when I discontinued my membership. They did not reply. The purpose of this thread is to see how we can hold AOPA accountable.

 

[Steamflyer]

Ten years ago I took my most recent check ride. Cost was $450 or $500. Using the observation that seems to be more-or-less true, that all in aviation expect fuel has doubled in the last ten years, then $900-1000 seems about right. Does not address the availability issue or whether rides are easier or harder than in the past. (By the walk to school uphill both ways analogy, they had to be harder in the past.)

 

[OneCharlieTango]

Thank you. I wrote them that email when I discontinued my membership. They did not reply. The purpose of this thread is to see how we can hold AOPA accountable.

1) Email campaign. Like I said, 20 letters outweighs 1000 internet posts.
2) Run for AOPA Board of Directors. If you don't like the sausage, get involved in making it.

 

[MountainDude]

Ten years ago I took my most recent check ride. Cost was $450 or $500. Using the observation that seems to be more-or-less true, that all in aviation expect fuel has doubled in the last ten years, then $900-1000 seems about right. Does not address the availability issue or whether rides are easier or harder than in the past. (By the walk to school uphill both ways analogy, they had to be harder in the past.)

Thank you. The fact that everything has doubled in aviation is a huge problem. The fact that exams have tripled ($1500) in some areas is an additional problem.

 

[MountainDude]

1) Email campaign. Like I said, 20 letters outweighs 1000 internet posts.
2) Run for AOPA Board of Directors. If you don't like the sausage, get involved in making it.

Good suggestions. I cannot do (2), since I am already making a much more important sausage. I will consider an approach to (1).
Thank you

 

[OkieAviator]

… what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.

 

[Lindberg]

The real problem is FAA funding and allocation of funds. DPE's, like all other designees require oversight. When the powers that be limit the hiring and retention of FAA personnel, then the job of oversight is constrained.

Not everyone who applies for a DPE position is qualified. The FAA made a severe mistake in allowing any A&P who can pass a multiple choice written exam to become IA, which flooded the market and opened the door to some of these IA's to start selling signatures, which is now reflected in a large part of the GA fleet being in decrepit condition. Open up the DPE ranks the same way, and you will see guys willing to issue certificates for a couple of hundred bucks and a twenty minute "check ride".

In reality, the FAA DPE system is one of the best when compared against other countries aviation authorities. Flooding the system with anyone who wants to do the task will not improve it and only open it up for abuse.

This right here. DPEs have a ton of oversight. If you want more DPEs you need more FAA inspectors. Do you want more FAA inspectors?

And if you artificially limit what DPEs can charge, you'll just wind up with fewer of them.

 

[MountainDude]

This right here. DPEs have a ton of oversight. If you want more DPEs you need more FAA inspectors. Do you want more FAA inspectors?

And if you artificially limit what DPEs can charge, you'll just wind up with fewer of them.

Thank you for the info. Again, wanna-be pilots don't know anything about this; they are just faced with increasing costs of training every year. It should be AOPA's job to identify the root causes of increased costs of aviation and work on fixing them. Instead, they test fly all kinds of cool planes and make videos of it.

 

[Palmpilot]

Are there elections for AOPA leadership positions?

 

[Lindberg]

Thank you for the info. Again, wanna-be pilots don't know anything about this; they are just faced with increasing costs of training every year. It should be AOPA's job to identify the root causes of increased costs of aviation and work on fixing them. Instead, they test fly all kinds of cool planes and make videos of it.

Are you an AOPA member? Did you tell them what you think they should be doing?

 

[Doc Holliday]

It should be AOPA's job to identify the root causes of increased costs of aviation and work on fixing them.

Really?

 

[rhkennerly]

… what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.

Another late night with a bottle?

 

[rhkennerly]

In terms of thread drift, this one has achieved escape velocity.

Not only that, but the software has stopped threading properly. Leads to some bizarre discussions after about 75 messages.

 

[bradg33]

To me, what's lost in this conversation is the enormous responsibility that DPEs are given when they are designated. DPEs, in many instances, are the final "check" before a pilot is allowed to carry passengers (at all or for money), fly in the clouds alone, etc. Let's not pretend like that's nothing. While I agree that the bureaucracy surrounding DPE appoints is BS, I believe it should be very hard to become a DPE and that it should in fact be very easy to lose it. That doesn't mean the FAA should just generally refuse to designate more (which seems to be the MO of many FSDOs), but it should be a very onerous process that weeds out those who aren't suitable. I don't want the guy who is signing-off new IFR pilots who are flying around in the clouds with me to be someone who just decided one day that being a DPE might be fun and since the process is easy, might as well try it out. I do think it's particularly obscene that most FSDOs won't do any checkrides at all in-house anymore, but that's a different issue.

As to pricing, sure, cheap checkrides would be great. But as a professional who bills by the hour, I don't think $1k for what is usually at least half a day of the DPEs time is unreasonable (though that doesn't mean I want to pay that much...).

 

[robin ardoin]

… what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.

?????

 

[MountainDude]

Really?

Curious what you think they should be doing with the $50M annual budget that pilots paid to "protect their rights"?