My day flying with AOPA President Mark Baker !

MichiPilot said:
If you look at actual records rather than aopa stories you'll see the reality. AOPA in the past open fought user fees however you've seen aopa take a much different approach to the most recent user fee discussion -- you saw a 'we'll wait and see' as aopa's govt affairs VP horse traded a crappy 3rd class medical reform for lack of opposition to user fees. Watch this year...aopa again will try to say user fees arent bad. AOPA had nothing to do with the ADB-S rebate...faa saw the trend of no one equipping and offered the rebate.
Click to expand...
https://www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft-and-ownership/ads-b
The FAA couldn't possibly be that entrepreneurial.
 
dmspilot said:
You are not just a spammer but also a troll. Your modus operandi is to put forth an argument, link to or attach documents that you say prove your argument, but the documents never prove your arguments and are sometimes completely irrelevant. I don't understand how you haven't been banned.
Click to expand...
Being wrong is not against the ROC.
 
We have seen the banned hammer dropped a lot lately.
 
Everskyward said:
If you read the Rules of Conduct, you'll see that being wrong is not one of the items we give warnings for.
Click to expand...
I have read it and do my best to comply. It is hard sometimes, but in the end the rules are the rules.
Plus I don't think the statment was to do with him being wrong as much as Advertising and Trolling.
 
NOLA Pilot said:
I have read it and do my best to comply. It is hard sometimes, but in the end the rules are the rules.
Plus I don't think the statment was to do with him being wrong as much as Advertising and Trolling.
Click to expand...
You don't know what warnings he may or may not have gotten...

Except in the case of obvious spammers, almost everyone gets a number of strikes before they are temporarily banned, and even more strikes before they are permanently banned. These guidelines are outlined in the Rules of Conduct.
 
Everskyward said:
If you read the Rules of Conduct, you'll see that being wrong is not one of the items we give warnings for.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I am reading this wrong. If you are a light aircraft using terminal services and at some airports there is a $9.95 daily fee see page 4 of the PDF.

If I recall I was charged that when I flew to Vancouver. Regardless however. Canada is a user fee system.
 
Everskyward said:
You don't know what warnings he may or may not have gotten...

Except in the case of obvious spammers, almost everyone gets a number of strikes before they are temporarily banned, and even more strikes before they are permanently banned. These guidelines are outlined in the Rules of Conduct.
Click to expand...
You are right. I do not know what warnings he may have had and it is non of my business really. I worry about my conduct and my conduct only.
I was making a joke....
I guess it was in poor taste and apologize.
 
Maui Cirrus CFII said:
Perhaps I am reading this wrong. If you are a light aircraft using terminal services and at some airports there is a $9.95 daily fee see page 4 of the PDF.

If I recall I was charged that when I flew to Vancouver. Regardless however. Canada is a user fee system.
Click to expand...
Yes, they charge for landing at the large international airports, but if you flew into a US airport the size of Vancouver, or the airports listed, you would likely be charged much more than $9.95. You said you were charged a route fee, and for using FSS.

Applicable at Vancouver including the water aerodrome, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto (L.B. Pearson), Ottawa (Macdonald-Cartier), and Montréal (Trudeau) international airports.
Click to expand...
 
Maui Cirrus CFII said:
Perhaps I am reading this wrong. If you are a light aircraft using terminal services and at some airports there is a $9.95 daily fee see page 4 of the PDF.

If I recall I was charged that when I flew to Vancouver. Regardless however. Canada is a user fee system.
Click to expand...

squirming o_O
 
NOLA Pilot said:
I have read it and do my best to comply. It is hard sometimes, but in the end the rules are the rules.
Plus I don't think the statment was to do with him being wrong as much as Advertising and Trolling.
Click to expand...
Disagreeing with another poster is neither trolling nor advertising.
 
I never said he was a troll or advertising( no matter what I think). I was explaining what the post I was referring too was saying.

Is this thread advertising?
NTSB report on Sully's use of AoA
 
AOPA - no emotional attachment on my part; I did get a hat, they have some decent training resources, and they have the loudest voice for GA. Don't always line up with my interests, but close enough, and the membership price isn't exactly high. Not sure why the vitriol against the org is so strong; someone on POA said the salaries are too high, but they look in-line to me, for high level lobbying, and the DC metro area.
 
I also don't understand the animosity against AOPA. They advocate for GA and for the annual fee that's not much more than a magazine subscription, I'm happy to support the cause. We all know it's needed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
NOLA Pilot said:
I never said he was a troll or advertising( no matter what I think).
Click to expand...
I never said you did.

I was explaining what the post I was referring too was saying.
Click to expand...

I was disagreeing with the sentiments expressed in that post, not trying to parse who agreed with them and who didn't.

Is this thread advertising?
NTSB report on Sully's use of AoA
Click to expand...
Dunno, haven't read it.
 
Some of you guys are being complete d-bags. The guy posts a story about a local flight with an aviation group figurehead and it has to devolve into a ****ing contest over questions no one would have the balls to ask Baker in-person. Why not ask for more details about the flight and the conversation as opposed to assuming he's just flying around on the corporate dime to entertain a piece of tail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
iflyvfr said:
At the Indy fly-in he walked up to me and 2 friends and started talking airplanes with us for probably 5 or 10 minutes.
Click to expand...

I was there, too. Why didn't you stop by and say, "hello?"
 
I don't understand the tremendous animosity towards AOPA. Aviation regulation and legislation is highly political. Why would anyone think that it would run more smoothly than any other part of our government? Why do people assume that AOPA can snap their fingers and make things happen in our political environment? What do people realistically expect them to do that they are not?
 
Everskyward said:
Being wrong is not against the ROC.
Click to expand...

Whew-new_whew_logo_by_fixxed2009-d7c63nt.jpg
 
runner4065 said:
I also don't understand the animosity against AOPA. They advocate for GA and for the annual fee that's not much more than a magazine subscription, I'm happy to support the cause. We all know it's needed.
Click to expand...

I guess a lot of folks are jealous thinking the should be hired as an aviation advocate and get big buck$. I've only been flying 10 years, but can imagine how crappy GA would look without BOTH AOPA and EAA around. Many express little activity by AOPA ... exactly how are they different than the NRA? All of these alphabet organizations are in place as a deterrent against "Barney Fife" congressmen and senators. We pay taxes to fund nuclear weapons for a reason ... not to use them, but to have something in place if we NEED to use them. Without advocacy groups, GA here would look like Europe and none of you would be allowed to land at anything larger than a Class D or escape with less than $125 a flight user fees.

I guess everyone should stop donating to St Judes Childrens Hospital and Make A Wish foundation as there's only a remote chance your kid would need those services.:confused:
 
I don't have any particular issue with AOPA. I just don't like it when people make false statements to further their cause, such as the one about flying in Canada. In this case the statement came from the OP, not AOPA, AFAIK.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't have any particular issue with AOPA. I just don't like it when people make false statements to further their cause, such as the one about flying in Canada. In this case the statement came from the OP, not AOPA, AFAIK.
Click to expand...

It looks like the system changed a little. When I flew in Canada it was 2009. Still looking for my receipt. Looks like the new changes went into effect in 2016. So I apologize if I was off a little bit.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...ry/13/user-fees-far-from-successful-in-canada
 
Maui Cirrus CFII said:
It looks like the system changed a little. When I flew in Canada it was 2009. Still looking for my receipt. Looks like the new changes went into effect in 2016. So I apologize if I was off a little bit.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...ry/13/user-fees-far-from-successful-in-canada
Click to expand...
Note that the AOPA article says:

Nav Canada wants to start collecting new "daily charges" from aircraft weighing less than three metric tons (less than 6,614 pounds) using eight major Canadian airports. The charge would start at $5 a day and escalate to $10 a day by 2008.
Click to expand...
This is AOPA's opinion and NavCanada ultimately did not do that.
 
349,996 as I just renewed. Just as I am a life member of the NRA. I hate the system of having to pay lobbies to fly around and kiss a$$ but it's the system we have. Without these organizations our single voices would mean nothing. Just look at the strength of the AARP.
 
Razorxp said:
349,996 as I just renewed. Just as I am a life member of the NRA. I hate the system of having to pay lobbies to fly around and kiss a$$ but it's the system we have. Without these organizations our single voices would mean nothing. Just look at the strength of the AARP.
Click to expand...
Yep. If you're not in AOPA or EAA or your local airport pilot's association, etc. you're not helping. 349,997
 
I just sent my check....to EAA.

New avionics think garmin G5, medical reform, and part23 changes - EAA was the leader in each of these.

Aopa has lost touch, and as a result this former member too. Keep paying $200k+ salaries and pay for employee use of their planes, and the golden parachutes - I am done. Use guilt to get/keep members is total crap.
 
I'm an AOPA member and appreciate the resources and advocacy they do on behalf of GA. The membership fee is minimal enough... Not sure why some of you have such animosity toward them. But then again, I'm probably the only one here who hates the NRA with a passion... So to each his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
On this board, combining AOPA and Cirrus into a single thread is going to create a ****ing contest. People just can't help themselves. Why don't we add some discussion of CAP for good measure.
 
CrimsonFlyer said:
I'm an AOPA member and appreciate the resources and advocacy they do on behalf of GA. The membership fee is minimal enough... Not sure why some of you have such animosity toward them.
Click to expand...

+1 ... Purchased my plane using their services, my insurance is through them as well.

CrimsonFlyer said:
But then again, I'm probably the only one here who hates the NRA with a passion... So to each his own.
Click to expand...

What? Wow! I thought being CrimsonFlyer your real name was Bubba, you fly a ragged out TaylorCraft with a Chevy carb and Harley throttle cables using ATV off-road tires, with gorilla tape and flex seal over most of the flight control surfaces.;)

My wife used to be the ultimate anti-gun nut. My son couldn't even have a toy one when he was five. Fast forward 15 years and now there's a gun safe with enough in their to supply a small army. She's an excellent shot and is in a womans group that promotes gun safety, CHL, etc. At least in my hobby I don't make her wash the plane, "Honey, can you clean the guns I used while I start dinner?" ... no dear, I'd rather put my foot down and have you do it and starve in the process:eek::rolleyes:
 
iflyvfr said:
... But what the heck do you want him to do, put a new airplane in every member's hangar? ...
Click to expand...
Well the cash hoard would suffice to put fifteen or twenty new airplanes in members' hangars. Or maybe 70-100 good used ones. Or $200 in every member's pocket. Jes sayin'
 
danhagan said:
+1 ... Purchased my plane using their services, my insurance is through them as well.



What? Wow! I thought being CrimsonFlyer your real name was Bubba, you fly a ragged out TaylorCraft with a Chevy carb and Harley throttle cables using ATV off-road tires, with gorilla tape and flex seal over most of the flight control surfaces.;)

My wife used to be the ultimate anti-gun nut. My son couldn't even have a toy one when he was five. Fast forward 15 years and now there's a gun safe with enough in their to supply a small army. She's an excellent shot and is in a womans group that promotes gun safety, CHL, etc. At least in my hobby I don't make her wash the plane, "Honey, can you clean the guns I used while I start dinner?" ... no dear, I'd rather put my foot down and have you do it and starve in the process:eek::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Have you called a broker to get a competitive insurance quote? After you do this curious if you stay with your current aopa broker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top