Roost Air Lounge => General Discussion => Topic started by: FB41 on September 11, 2006, 09:15:25 PM
Title: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: FB41 on September 11, 2006, 09:15:25 PM
Today being the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the WTC, when you go out and celebrate your skills today, let's all of us remember that people are much more sensitive about flying today, so be sure to be an ambassador for aviation, even more so than normal.
I had people today spouting knee-jerk nonsense about banning GA planed and other stupidity. A big sigh and a few calm words later, those folks saw the light.
Of course, the media isn't helping any...
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: switchtech on September 12, 2006, 02:28:53 AM
AOPA has a good web site for defending General Aviation (http://www.gaservingamerica.org/) primarily aimed at the United States. I used the information on their web site to do a presentation shortly after 9/11 for a college speech class (Spring of 2002). I helps to have that kind of information handy when confronted by general-aviation-phobes.
The media makes money selling controversy - playing fair with GA isn't part of their plan to pay the bills. That's why we need to spread the word (not that anyone sees it but I link to the GA Serving America site (and ChickenWingsComics..:) on my web page) and to be good ambassadors for aviation.
Go out and have fun, but be aware we're under a microscope and any misdeeds will be broadcast on the evening news.
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Mike on September 15, 2006, 10:04:43 PM
The media makes money selling controversy - playing fair with GA isn't part of their plan to pay the bills. That's why we need to spread the word (not that anyone sees it but I link to the GA Serving America site (and ChickenWingsComics..:) on my web page) and to be good ambassadors for aviation.
First Thanks for linking to us! |:)\
We also fight for preserving GA and have approached the AOPA numerous times about joining forces and working on a more humorous approach to raise awareness. They keep ignoring us, but we'll keep trying. Sometimes people just don't take you very seriously when you draw cartoons... :P
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 16, 2006, 02:08:45 AM
The media makes money selling controversy - playing fair with GA isn't part of their plan to pay the bills. That's why we need to spread the word (not that anyone sees it but I link to the GA Serving America site (and ChickenWingsComics..:) on my web page) and to be good ambassadors for aviation.
First Thanks for linking to us! |:)\
We also fight for preserving GA and have approached the AOPA numerous times about joining forces and working on a more humorous approach to raise awareness. They keep ignoring us, but we'll keep trying. Sometimes people just don't take you very seriously when you draw cartoons... :P
Or write fanfictions about em :P Thing is AOPA does there thing and that is that. I think EAA is FAR more effective then AOPA. Though I don't currently belong to either, my money would go to EAA first. 'Course I'm a dinosaur ;D
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 16, 2006, 03:08:12 AM
Or write fanfictions about em :P Thing is AOPA does there thing and that is that. I think EAA is FAR more effective then AOPA. Though I don't currently belong to either, my money would go to EAA first. 'Course I'm a dinosaur ;D
I'm curious what EAA does other than I'm aware of. Where I did my training in TN they did do Young Eagles as well as a fly in breakfast each month. I agree that it is effective and a good thing to do.
However, I don't know they qualify as "far more" effective than the political action AOPA does.
I believe they are both effective organizations. As discussed in another post, I'm hoping to get involved with the local EAA here this fall, but that doesn't mean I want to withdraw from AOPA membership.
-Ryan AOPA 04451841 :P
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: tundra_flier on September 16, 2006, 07:10:21 AM
I agree with Ryan on AOPA, I've heard almost nothing but good about them. I belong to EAA but not AOPA because I fee AOPA tends to emphasize the commercial end of aviation, while EAA's focus is more on the recreational side. However, there's some definite overlap.
Phil
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: FB41 on September 16, 2006, 12:11:43 PM
I agree with Ryan on AOPA, I've heard almost nothing but good about them. I belong to EAA but not AOPA because I fee AOPA tends to emphasize the commercial end of aviation, while EAA's focus is more on the recreational side. However, there's some definite overlap.
Phil
The one thing AOPA harps on is commercial aviation wanting to put us out of the skies. They are the NRA of aviation; the largest and most powerful aviation lobby. ATA and other commercial aviation organizations try to keep AOPA out of touch with government agencies because they don't feel they have their best interest at heart.
The truth is they support ALL aviation, but weigh heavily on the side of the little guys... US!
I am an EAA member and an AOPA member; both have their place.
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: spacer on September 16, 2006, 01:15:16 PM
Ergh, if they're the NRA of aviation, they'll struggle a little, then accept defeat, forgetting all about the fight. I would hope they'd be more like the JPFO or GOA. Awright, I'm just nitpicking now, but I have to work on Saturday and had to vent. CHeers! |:)\
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 17, 2006, 04:17:14 AM
I agree with Ryan on AOPA, I've heard almost nothing but good about them. I belong to EAA but not AOPA because I fee AOPA tends to emphasize the commercial end of aviation, while EAA's focus is more on the recreational side. However, there's some definite overlap.
Phil
AOPA focusing on the "commercial" end of aviation?! That's a good one!
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. ;) They emphasize *General* aviation. Recreational flying is included in that, airlines aren't. :P
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 17, 2006, 04:18:36 AM
Psst, AOPA members, I went to the Members' section of the website and sent an e-mail to "Pilot" magazine asking about maybe getting a certain comic strip in it. If you'd like to see the same, e-mail too! ;)
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: switchtech on September 17, 2006, 04:50:04 AM
Psst, AOPA members, I went to the Members' section of the website and sent an e-mail to "Pilot" magazine asking about maybe getting a certain comic strip in it. If you'd like to see the same, e-mail too! ;)
We might be reaching the point this should be its own thread - but I just dropped AOPA an email suggesting a little humor would be a good thing - and suggested a likely source of said humor ;)
jbs
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 17, 2006, 05:09:05 AM
As long as it gets done, who cares what thread it's in. ;)
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Mike on September 17, 2006, 05:15:49 PM
Wow guys! That's really awesome! Thanks for doing that, I REALLY appreciate it (*insert blushing smiley, holding back a tear*) |:)\ |:)\
We'll see. Maybe if they hear it enough, they might welcome us with open arms next time....
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: fireflyr on September 17, 2006, 06:02:53 PM
I'll mention it next time I do lunch with Phil :-*---Seriously though, I dropped them a line too! |:)\
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: FB41 on September 18, 2006, 01:44:49 AM
As long as it gets done, who cares what thread it's in. ;)
Since I initiated the thread, I probably oughtta complain... but I won't. ;D
Like Baradium said, who cares what thread as long as it's done.
Besides, even though Chuck is a goon sometimes(?), he's a great aviation ambassador.
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: tundra_flier on September 19, 2006, 11:38:29 PM
Quote
AOPA focusing on the "commercial" end of aviation?! That's a good one!
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. They emphasize *General* aviation. Recreational flying is included in that, airlines aren't.
Well, in their magazines all the articles seem to be based around planes that I only see flying for hire. I suppose there are people that own Piper Malibues, twin turbo props and Cessna Citations purly for recreational use (hey honey, I'm going to take the Gulfstream and go for a $1,000 burger, wanna come?), but I'm betting it's a minority. They may not represent the major airliners, but I haven't seen them represent the opposite end either. Maybe I should have said "Business" instead of commercial.
After looking at Both EAA and AOPA I felt EAA was more closely aligned with my personal interests in aviation. Not knocking AOPA in any way, they're a top notch organization. And we've got a great local EAA chapter to boot. ;)
Phil
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 20, 2006, 01:46:57 AM
How many of the magazines do you read?
I don't recall many articles trying towards the gulfstream crowd.
I'd say the majority of the articles apply to flying in general and the rest can be read fairly openly. This month there is one on a guy who uses a turbo arrow to commute to various clients around texas. That still qualifies as GA (and that's the cover story btw). There is also an article on a crash of a king air on an instrument approach, but that applies to everyone. A mistake that can kill a two pilot crew can kill a single pilot crew even quicker. Especially when it involves CFIT.
Sure some articles are about some fancy toys that not everyone can afford, but they tend to be things that everyone is still interested in.
I don't recall an emphasis on turboprops at all for AOPA either btw. ;)
I'm not saying EAA wasn't a good choice, just make the choice of "not AOPA" for the right reasons.
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: tundra_flier on September 20, 2006, 05:24:16 AM
Sounds like I did. You just proved my point. Notice I differentiate between GA and Recreational. Here's some of the main articles in this months EAA newsletter:
EAA Airventure (ie Oshkosh) First time Builder Couple's Glastar success. Father & Son restore a Cessna 120 Better Pilot: Keys to a Successful Forced Landing
EAA and AOPA both work hard for GA, they just have slightly different emphaisis' I'll Probably never use a plane to commute for business (I've asked, too many liability concerns for the company), and I'll certainly never fly a King Air, and I don't even fly IFR approches currently. However, I'm slowly restoring my 150, one part at a time. And a forced landing is something that applies to all GA - though I'm sure the King Air has a few more options available than the c120 ;) And yeah, they both review fancy toys that I'll never use, and don't have much interest in.
Phil
P.S. - I was deliberatly exagerating earlier when I mentioned turbin twins. B-)
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: tundra_flier on September 20, 2006, 05:28:31 AM
Oh, and swing by my hangar some time, I'll be happy to show you the Challenger we're building, The Bearhawk Patrol I'm starting to build, and the C-150 I'm flying. We can have a beer at my picknic table while we swap stories and watch the Cubs coming and going on the grass strip.
Now THAT's recreational aviation! |:)\
Phil
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: Baradium on September 20, 2006, 05:54:12 AM
Sounds like I did. You just proved my point. Notice I differentiate between GA and Recreational. Here's some of the main articles in this months EAA newsletter:
EAA Airventure (ie Oshkosh) First time Builder Couple's Glastar success. Father & Son restore a Cessna 120 Better Pilot: Keys to a Successful Forced Landing
EAA and AOPA both work hard for GA, they just have slightly different emphaisis' I'll Probably never use a plane to commute for business (I've asked, too many liability concerns for the company), and I'll certainly never fly a King Air, and I don't even fly IFR approches currently. However, I'm slowly restoring my 150, one part at a time. And a forced landing is something that applies to all GA - though I'm sure the King Air has a few more options available than the c120 ;) And yeah, they both review fancy toys that I'll never use, and don't have much interest in.
Phil
P.S. - I was deliberatly exagerating earlier when I mentioned turbin twins. B-)
It was an emphasis on instrument conditions and maintaining safe flight. They do not do anything that emphasizes on charters and a guy who bought an arrow and figured out a way to use it for buisiness has more in common with you than you seem to be willing to admit. However, a program that they have that is very handy IMO is the legal services plan which pays for a lawyer if you mess up and get in trouble with the feds (say you misunderstand an ATC clearance and get a violation).
The point is that you said they only talked about planes flying for hire ;) They also aren't about twin turboprops or jets. It's all light pistons and mostly singles. The kingair crash is dealt with because it's a crash. Since you asked about IFR the kingair instance is something you may want to pay attention to.
AOPA's primary focus is light general aviation. They cover a broader range than EAA, true, but their focus is still on the small aircraft.
BTW, just because they did an article on a guy who uses his airplane in connection to work doesn't mean that's all they are about. It seems you're applying a higher standard to AOPA on what they should cover than you do for EAA. ;)
Too bad AOPA covers aircraft restorations, introducing people to aviation, and emergency procedures as well!
I'd say the biggest difference between the two is that AOPA has a larger focus on legal issues, such as new laws and airport closures than EAA does while EAA focuses more on Kit planes.
And it looks to me that EAA covers as much expensive stuff as AOPA, so applying a double standard isn't fair. ;)
I'd love to see the challenger and the Bearhawk Patrol... two aircraft at once though? That's gotta get confusing sometimes with the parts! I have a little time in a 150 (more in a 152), but the 150 was a newer one (slant tail and not a razorback)... but the two 150 flights I had were the first flights in small aircraft for me. I have probobly 150 or so hours in a 172 and might have 30 or 40 in 152s (we used the 152s for the fli ght team).
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 20, 2006, 07:44:08 PM
He also forgot to mention the ribs for the Jenny wing he's supposed to be building ;D
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: tundra_flier on September 20, 2006, 09:24:09 PM
Quote
He also forgot to mention the ribs for the Jenny wing he's supposed to be building
No I didn't forget. I got out of that project about the time they started debating weather to make replica wings, airworthy replicas or completely original replacements. Construction by committee, no thank you! ::)
Quote
AOPA covers aircraft restorations, introducing people to aviation, and emergency procedures as well!
Exactly the point I've been trying to make. EAA and AOPA overlap on MOST issues, in fact they partner on many legislative and airport access type issues. Like the new Sport plane/pilot rule. So I decied to only belong to one. Since Homebuilts ARE one of my main areas of interest, EAA was the logical choice for me. :)
Phil
Title: Re: "9/11" anniversary
Post by: fireflyr on September 22, 2006, 02:30:34 PM
OK men, I believe we AND you concur, they are both great organizations that promote aviation in general!!! |:)\
