EAA, whats the allure?

steingar said:
You'd have to look at what the US would be like without AOPAs advocacy efforts. My guess is it would look a lot more like Europe vis-a-vis aviation policy. And by the way, I get one letter a year, period. Never got any more than that.
Click to expand...

Because AOPA did great things 40 years ago does not mean they deserve my money today.

How the hell do you not get the PAC notices at least? I got at least 5-10 recruitment letters a month, and like 3 PAC requests monthly too. Sometimes the recruitment letters were more like 20+ a month.
 
SkyHog said:
Because AOPA did great things 40 years ago does not mean they deserve my money today.

How the hell do you not get the PAC notices at least? I got at least 5-10 recruitment letters a month, and like 3 PAC requests monthly too. Sometimes the recruitment letters were more like 20+ a month.
Click to expand...

I do get one letter a year from their PAC. It used to have nice little address labels. I miss those.

We have far more freedom to fly in America than anywhere else in the Industrialized world. Every President has proposed user fees for aviation since I learned to fly. I find it hard to believe that AOPA had nothing whatsoever to do with stemming that tide. I will happily give them my money.
 
steingar said:
I do get one letter a year from their PAC. It used to have nice little address labels. I miss those.

We have far more freedom to fly in America than anywhere else in the Industrialized world. Every President has proposed user fees for aviation since I learned to fly. I find it hard to believe that AOPA had nothing whatsoever to do with stemming that tide. I will happily give them my money.
Click to expand...

I guess there's something to be said for blind faith.

You trust that "They must be doing something," and I'll trust in the fact that AOPA will take credit for ANYTHING that any organization does, including itself, so if it were doing anything, we'd have heard about it through the magazine, the website, multiple mailings, and press releases.

"AOPA Successfully Fights off User Fees."
 
In your "often wrong but never in doubt" approach to this subject you have obviously chosen to turn a blind eye to all of the other OAPA initiatives, including saving airports, safety foundation, pilot education, legal services and others. Have a nice day.

SkyHog said:
I guess there's something to be said for blind faith.

You trust that "They must be doing something," and I'll trust in the fact that AOPA will take credit for ANYTHING that any organization does, including itself, so if it were doing anything, we'd have heard about it through the magazine, the website, multiple mailings, and press releases.

"AOPA Successfully Fights off User Fees."
Click to expand...
 
SkyHog said:
I'm an idiot because I recognize that AOPA did great things back in the day, but not lately.

You're a moron because you can't see that AOPA has become inefficient and useless. (And I might note, you resorted to name calling because you can't answer my question. Typical)

How's that feel Tim?
Click to expand...

See, I didn't say you WERE an idiot. I said I THINK you're an idiot (and only on the topic of AOPA). I really do think there's a difference, and one is a personal attack and the other isn't. But let me rephrase... I think you're IRRATIONAL on the topic of AOPA. Hope that feels better.

I chose not to answer your question because it would be pointless. Nothing I can say about the positive effect I've personally observed AOPA have with the Forces of Darkness on the SFRA, or the good work done by the Airport Support Network, the Air Safety Foundation, or any of the other things will make any difference. For as long as I've been in this community your antipathy for AOPA has been clear. And that's fine - it's your money, your choice. But it's strange the way you have to contradict anyone who says they have a different opinion.
 
wabower said:
In your "often wrong but never in doubt" approach to this subject you have obviously chosen to turn a blind eye to all of the other OAPA initiatives, including saving airports, safety foundation, pilot education, legal services and others. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

And again:

AOPA is an advocacy group first. The magazine, the legal services, the discounts here and there (that often wind up more expensive than without the discount) are not what the dues are intended to cover.

AOPA should fight for GA. Instead, AOPA lets things happen to GA, and then reports these issues as news, rather than trying to stop them.

For proof - look for any reaction to the MassPort crap a few years ago, look for any reaction to the TFR over the major cities whenever someone big comes to down, look at the reduction of size of the ADIZ. One day, you had Phil Boyer issue a statement that says "We have no reason to believe that the ADIZ will be changing to a circular, smaller shape, these are just rumors" and then the next, you have AOPA with a front page ad, taking credit for the fact that it changed, look at the change to international travel policies.

AOPA lost its focus. Until I hear the day that AOPA says something other than "User fees are bad," and instead says something like "The government has proposed the following law. We will not accept this" and they start to actually lobby on behalf of us, I will consider AOPA a lost organization.

But you can certainly enjoy your insurance discount and magazine in the mean time.
 
TMetzinger said:
See, I didn't say you WERE an idiot. I said I THINK you're an idiot (and only on the topic of AOPA). I really do think there's a difference, and one is a personal attack and the other isn't. But let me rephrase... I think you're IRRATIONAL on the topic of AOPA. Hope that feels better.

I chose not to answer your question because it would be pointless. Nothing I can say about the positive effect I've personally observed AOPA have with the Forces of Darkness on the SFRA, or the good work done by the Airport Support Network, the Air Safety Foundation, or any of the other things will make any difference. For as long as I've been in this community your antipathy for AOPA has been clear. And that's fine - it's your money, your choice. But it's strange the way you have to contradict anyone who says they have a different opinion.
Click to expand...

Well, at least get the facts straight - the changes to the SFRA were not AOPA's doing. They, of course, took credit for it, but they themselves, just the day before the changes happened, claimed the changes were rumors and that they did not believe that it was changing.

That leads me to believe that the changes were fueled by some other organization. Their PR department, as great as it is, successfully convinced you (and others) that they were responsible.

There are worse organizations to throw your money at. But, I want people to have a clear understanding: AOPA is not a GA advocate anymore. They are a magazine and outdated airport guide publisher, and that is it. USPA and EAA are advocacy groups.

If you want to spend money on advocacy, spend it on USPA or EAA.
If you want to get some neat swag from a group that is popular, spend it on AOPA.
 
The adversaries of GA are numerous and formidable. They include several agencies of the federal government, hordes of well-funded developers and politians, the trial lawyers and most homeowners who have purchased a house near an existing airport and then come to the conclusion that the airport decreases their property values even though there was no evidence to support that claim when they bought it.

The AOPA and all of the other forces we can muster aren't going to win all the battles, even if they had the funding to go head-to-head. Unfortunately, our small (and rapidly declining) minority can't (or won't) provide the funding to fight the battles, and even more sadly, we probably couldn't rally public support for our side of the argument if we could.

I categorically reject your assertion that the AOPA is ineffective in their representation of GA's political agenda, most of which is playing defense. Nobody who lobbies in DC thinks they're going to win them all, and in some cases a no-bill is the best result we can expect. Bashing them here seems to serve no constructive purpose other than a continued display of ignorance.

SkyHog said:
And again:

AOPA is an advocacy group first. The magazine, the legal services, the discounts here and there (that often wind up more expensive than without the discount) are not what the dues are intended to cover.

AOPA should fight for GA. Instead, AOPA lets things happen to GA, and then reports these issues as news, rather than trying to stop them.

For proof - look for any reaction to the MassPort crap a few years ago, look for any reaction to the TFR over the major cities whenever someone big comes to down, look at the reduction of size of the ADIZ. One day, you had Phil Boyer issue a statement that says "We have no reason to believe that the ADIZ will be changing to a circular, smaller shape, these are just rumors" and then the next, you have AOPA with a front page ad, taking credit for the fact that it changed, look at the change to international travel policies.

AOPA lost its focus. Until I hear the day that AOPA says something other than "User fees are bad," and instead says something like "The government has proposed the following law. We will not accept this" and they start to actually lobby on behalf of us, I will consider AOPA a lost organization.

But you can certainly enjoy your insurance discount and magazine in the mean time.
Click to expand...
 
SkyHog said:
Well, at least get the facts straight - the changes to the SFRA were not AOPA's doing. They, of course, took credit for it, but they themselves, just the day before the changes happened, claimed the changes were rumors and that they did not believe that it was changing.

That leads me to believe that the changes were fueled by some other organization. Their PR department, as great as it is, successfully convinced you (and others) that they were responsible.

There are worse organizations to throw your money at. But, I want people to have a clear understanding: AOPA is not a GA advocate anymore. They are a magazine and outdated airport guide publisher, and that is it. USPA and EAA are advocacy groups.

If you want to spend money on advocacy, spend it on USPA or EAA.
If you want to get some neat swag from a group that is popular, spend it on AOPA.
Click to expand...

Nick, I WAS THERE in the room when some of this played out. The AOPA reps did a great job of putting forth a persuasive case (and the FAA ATC folks did too). Of course the result from the FoD was not encouraging. But they did in the end make quite a few of the suggested changes.
 
beating-a-dead-horse.gif
 
I am - and will remain-- an AOPA member because I am an airplane pilot and owner. The organization represents my interests, promotes research and analysis, and provides reams of useful information online.

And I use the AOPA Flight Planner exclusively.

:yesnod:
 
Last edited:
The #1 reason to be a member of the EAA? It's required if you're going to be a member of the IAC - an organization that represents the most safety conscious and fun loving group of aviation enthusiasts in the world. This is an organization that does nothing less than unlock the true, unfettered freedom of flight and support it's safe and responsible application. I'd be shocked if there was a single aerobatic instructor, upset/recovery instructor, or spin doctor that wasn't a member of this fine organization - anywhere in the world. It might surprise you to learn that the IAC has over 4,000 members even though fewer than several hundred actually compete. The magazine alone is worth the $40 a year and as a member you automatically get their insurance coverage at any event.

I'm a lifetime member of the EAA and if there was a lifetime membership to the IAC, I'd have that as well. As for naming something that AOPA has done for you recently - it seems apparent that they had some effect on the user fees discussion.
 
The AOPA membership is very cheap. Why not pay them even if they help very little? They do try to help.
 
dmccormack said:
I am - and will remain-- an AOPA member because I am an airplane pilot and owner. The organization represents my interests, promotes research and analysis, and provides reams of useful information online.

And I use the AOPA Flight Planner exclusively.

:yesnod:
Click to expand...

Good grief Dan! I thought I would never see something from you that I could concur on.

It's scary, we may need to become friends.
 
dennyleeb said:
The AOPA membership is very cheap. Why not pay them even if they help very little? They do try to help.
Click to expand...


For the same reason I don't donate money to ALPA or ATA.

They don't represent me, or anyone I know (despite what they may think)
 
dennyleeb said:
The AOPA membership is very cheap. Why not pay them even if they help very little? They do try to help.
Click to expand...
Exactly. In politics, it's never everything or nothing.

Sure, AOPA does things I don't like, but overall they do more good than harm. It's not a difficult choice - pick the lesser evil.

-Felix
 
sba55 said:
Sure, AOPA does things I don't like, but overall they do more good than harm. It's not a difficult choice - pick the lesser evil.
Click to expand...

Do you not know that in the King's service, one must always choose the lesser of two weevils??!
 
SkyHog said:
EAA: Cares about General Aviation
AOPA: Cares about obtaining more members and political power.

EAA: Willing to fight for General Aviation
AOPA: Willing to fight against user fees, but nothing else.

EAA: Fun, local meetings, with a great group of enthused pilots
AOPA: Town hall meetings with some pompous "experienced" pilot, and a discussion afterward

EAA: Crappy magazine
AOPA: Crappy membership package period

EAA: Will let you borrow a trailer to take your home built to the airport
AOPA: Homebuilts are too dangerous to fly, according the government. At the moment, we're battling user fees, don't you understand??!?
Click to expand...

Bullshyte Nick and you know it.

Damn man....lately you seem to be becoming more and more bitter about things and I do not know why.
 
tdager said:
Bullshyte Nick and you know it.

Damn man....lately you seem to be becoming more and more bitter about things and I do not know why.
Click to expand...

Care to actually show where any of that is wrong, or will 'Bullshyte" without any explanation work?
 
If all the EAA ever did was throw the best aviation celebration in the world, every year in Oshkosh, that would be enough for me. I start dreaming about going to Oshkosh about March (might not make it this year after 28 years in a row). They also promote aviation in an affordable, grass roots way, especially through their Young Eagles program. They are an open door to anyone who loves aviation, even if you are not rich or well connected. That is how my husband and I got introduced to aviation and now would live and breathe it, when able.
 
SkyHog said:
Care to actually show where any of that is wrong, or will 'Bullshyte" without any explanation work?
Click to expand...

I dunno, those are some pretty serious claims. I should think the onus would be on the person making the claims to substantiate them.
 
SkyHog said:
Care to actually show where any of that is wrong, or will 'Bullshyte" without any explanation work?
Click to expand...

Nick..what can I show you?

The reduction of the DC SFRA? The backpedaling on user fees by the government? The reworking of LASP? Some apparent lessoning of the TTF stance of the FAA? Input into the rework of some of the Part 61 rules?

ALL directly affected by the AOPA.

Of course you will say "no they were not" but that is your opinion....and I would say it is wrong.

I will not even add the Air Safety Foundation, pilot education and training, and the "face" that the AOPA can be in serious crisis such as the Corey Lidel crash.
 
tdager said:
Nick..what can I show you?

The reduction of the DC SFRA? The backpedaling on user fees by the government? The reworking of LASP? Some apparent lessoning of the TTF stance of the FAA? Input into the rework of some of the Part 61 rules?

ALL directly affected by the AOPA.

Of course you will say "no they were not" but that is your opinion....and I would say it is wrong.

I will not even add the Air Safety Foundation, pilot education and training, and the "face" that the AOPA can be in serious crisis such as the Corey Lidel crash.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to repeat myself hundreds of times, so this is the last time I'm going to say this:

The DC SFRA had nothing to do with AOPA, as evidenced by them claiming it was just a rumor and "not likely to be true" the day before it took affect.

The backpedaling on User Fees is a huge accomplishment for AOPA, but it better be, since that is the only thing they have really taken on in the last few years.

If you want to see real affect by an organization, look at the Advisory Circular that was published by the EAA and the FAA together on how to design a test flight procedure for a newly certified aircraft.
 
TMetzinger said:
Whew! Glad to see that eyewitness accounts do nothing to sway your mindset.
Click to expand...

How do you explain AOPA denying it as a "rumor" and then taking credit the next day, if you don't see the eyewitness account?

I thought you were done with this. I understand the feverish defense of a corrupt organization if you're associated with them. Otherwise, step back and look at where the money goes....they're inefficient, and wasting donated money. That is inexcusable.
 
SkyHog said:
I thought you were done with this. I understand the feverish defense of a corrupt organization if you're associated with them. Otherwise, step back and look at where the money goes....they're inefficient, and wasting donated money. That is inexcusable.
Click to expand...

Oh come on... :rolleyes:
 
Politics Nick, politics man. Sometimes things happen in ways that take even the people "in the know" by surprise.
 
Where is the "ignore thread" button when you really need it?
 
SkyHog said:
How do you explain AOPA denying it as a "rumor" and then taking credit the next day, if you don't see the eyewitness account?
Click to expand...

Given the reaction (essentially negative) by the FoD reps in the meeting, AOPA rightly chose not to give the rumor credence. Apparently wiser heads in the FoD decided they could live with it.

Now, if the FoD folks in the room had said "Yeah, sounds great! Let's do that!" you'd likely have seen something different from AOPA.

Perhaps there were other meetings. The two meetings on SFRA issues that I attended had representation from the FoD (NCRCC), ATC (Potomac Tracon), FAA (FSDO and HQ), AOPA, EAA, Leesburg airport commission, USCG and USCS. And in those meetings AOPA suggested a lot of the initial changes to the SFRA (make it round, base it on a navaid), ATC came up with the whole "transponder observed" thing instead of a "clearance", and so on.

So, your claim that AOPA had nothing to do with the improvements to the SFRA is wrong. A whole bunch of folks worked together on this, and AOPA was one of them.

Your experience with AOPA is your experience. Don't try to define the organization for everyone else by your experience.
 
Nick- remember this:
SkyHog said:
Yep. And the Google Maps API is freaking sick. Would be cool if we could actually host it directly here on PoA instead of using a 3rd party site.

I will volunteer to do it if Jesse/Jason don't want to. I have a lot of experience with the Google Maps API.
Click to expand...

You may as well do it instead of wasting your time trying to convince people that AOPA is good for nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top