Author Topic: "9/11" anniversary  (Read 8643 times)

Offline tundra_flier

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • It's not an old plane, it's a classic!
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #15 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

Offline Baradium

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #16 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.
"Well I know what's right, I got just one life
In a world that keeps on pushin' me around
But I stand my ground, and I won't back down"
  -Johnny Cash "I won't back Down"

Offline tundra_flier

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • It's not an old plane, it's a classic!
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #17 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-)

Offline tundra_flier

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • It's not an old plane, it's a classic!
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #18 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

Offline Baradium

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #19 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).   
« Last Edit: September 20, 2006, 05:57:03 AM by Baradium »
"Well I know what's right, I got just one life
In a world that keeps on pushin' me around
But I stand my ground, and I won't back down"
  -Johnny Cash "I won't back Down"

Offline cj5_pilot

  • Rooster
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
  • "Fly Fast, Fly Low, Turn Left"
    • Alaskan Aviators
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #20 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
The average pilot, despite the sometimes swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring. These feelings just don't involve anyone else.

Offline tundra_flier

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • It's not an old plane, it's a classic!
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #21 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

fireflyr

  • Guest
Re: "9/11" anniversary
« Reply #22 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!!! |:)\