Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes Plane & Pilot magazine

There's no doubt about it in my mind! I've expressed those same thoughts here before! I've been a continuous "card carrying" member of AOPA for nearly 20 years, and I've always felt like I didn't belong in their "elite" society. GOOD! I don't want to be like them!

I've actually been snobbed when AOPA came up in a conversation including a group of pilots who all (except for me) flew 6 and 7 figure aircraft. I found them standing near my not so shiny 150 discussing the merits of 150's and 152's:

"Yeah, I learned to fly in one of those decades before I bought the Baron!", said one.

I mentioned that magazines like AOPA Pilot rarely if ever mentioned their desirability.

"You're a member of AOPA????" was the astonishingly pointed question asked by one arrogant bigot before he realized his insult!

AOPA may still present a useful lobby to Congress on some aviation issues, but make no mistake about it: AOPA is a large money hungry corporation, as represented by the salaries enjoyed and the viewpoints dictated by any "member" with a monthly column in Pilot. They don't represent me, and they never have!

Keep plugging, Robbie! "That's funny. They're one of the magazines that hasn't responded to my inquiry about Clinton - I am trying to get an article and some slides I shot there published. AOPA didn't hesitate; they just said NO thank you..."

I once put together an essay on all the ways that pilot training has changed the way I drive. An inquiry to Plane & Pilot about it nearly a year ago was never answered.

Most special interest magazines at least get back to you. I've placed articles in Flying Models, Model Aviation, The Longbow, Speedskating Times, Math Horizons, and the Christian Science Monitor -- all civilized, two-way-communicating publications.

Jim:

Much of what you say about AOPA is true -- it has become a lobbying firm for the upper end of GA. Their magazine is following the same trend that Flying took back in the '50s. That is, the Pilot is more interested in turbo props and jets than in smaller airplanes that fly low and slow and in the advertising pages that the manufacturers of turbos and jets buy. The magazine needs advertising dollars from equipment manufactures too and people don't generally install high-dollar avionics in cubs, champs, & 150s.

Who else is there to represent us in Washington? EAA has a voice, but in my opinion, it is not as influencial or as sophisticated as AOPA. In many ways EAA and its members fit the non-aviation people's stereotype of pilots. That is pilots who fly small airplanes made out wood and using 2 cycle lawnmower engines for power. While we might identify more closely with EAA, my sense is that people don't take EAA as seriously as AOPA.

AOPA is, I believe, capable of some skillful lobbying. Lobbying and good lobbyists cost money and that is what is driving the membership campaigns and solicitation campaigns. As far as the airplane giveaway goes, EAA also gives one away. All organizations want more members and more money.

Bottom line, like 'em or not, if it were not for the AOPA, private aviation would be in the same boat as Great Britian and the European countries. I don't see anyone one or any organization currently on the scene that can do the work that AOPA is doing right now.

Don

Hmm, you know, I'm beginning to think we have it pretty good here in Canada. The focus of our own COPA organization sits squarely in what I'll call Personal Aviation. Not so much General Aviation - which can often mean twin-sized aircraft and bigger. COPA is much smaller and really only has three guys doing pretty much everything. However, they do have four full-time secretaries - and those girls do a lot of stuff!

Our monthly COPA newspaper always has a big section on ultra-lights and two-seater home-builts as over 30% of the readers are there.

The only reason I know any of this, is that I turned down a web design position with them last year. I got a ton of push-back from my wife when I said I was thinking about taking the COPA position up in Ottawa (2-hour drive from home).

Absolutely true! We may get pissed at the AOPA, but they have done a world of good for GA. And that's why I have been a member for more 40 years, but I don't have to like everything that they do.

Geo.

Amen to both sides of this coin.

AOPA has long lost sight of our world within GA.

AOPA is an absolute necessity to fight Washington.

Kind of like hiring a lawyer...he's money hungry and you don't have to like the guy, but when you need him, you need him.

...and the extras like insurance, and online tools are downright handy.

In an ironic twist, I know many in the field of Experimental aviation feel the same way about EAA. They have also "main streamed" much of their focus. Why would GA pilots be attracted to EAA? Well many reasons really, and they are all warranted, but not "experimental" IMHO. Why is EAA slogan on thier home page "The Leader in RECREATIONAL Aviation", rather than "Experimental" (in fact you won't find reference to experimental stuff on the web site. The answer is that they also wanted to appeal to a broad market...war birds, antiques, etc.. Heck even many of today's kit planes leave little to "experiment" with. Chapter meetings do not typically involve discussions about anything truly "new", though they are valuable groups to know.

EAA may very well serve as the meeting place for those alienated by AOPA, but I think the name EAA is probably a misnomer at this point.

The ideal orgainzation is one that has a LOT of dues-paying menbers that are quiet.

AARP.

They get the bucks and minimal infighting.

My own opinions? (Have I EVER been known to shut up?) FLYING caters only to the "Upper Crust", so to speak. Oh yeah, they might patronize us 150-152 drivers and the like, but they're focusing on the big bucks and iron. Can ya blame them?

Same thing with the AOPA - being focused on the bigger stuff. Look - banks are where the money is, so that's where ya go to rob! (So to speak.) Back in the 1960's and 1970's, there was an organiziation that was VERY vocal - bordering on militant. It was the NPA - National Pilots Association. They advertised in Plane and Pilot and Private Pilot. I'm sure others, but don't remember for sure. They were small and scrappy, but I don't think enough folks took them seriously. They were against EVERYTHING (so it seemed) the FAA did. (Not necessarily a bad thing to be - against government interference). Of course, Thomas Hobbs DID say "Life without government would be nasty, brutish, and short."

Anyway, my point is this - I'm not protecting the AOPA - they DO have their faults and shortcomings as does everybody and everything (me too... both of them! ). One of my faults is bitching about what AOPA doesn't do, and the other is not doing anything about it.

Yeah - one person isn't gonna make that big a difference, but have I communicated my displeasure to them? No. I did make a suggestion a few times about the Club and certain folks to them and never heard anything, but it's not gonna ruin my day. (Although it does go in the mental file cabinet.)

Politics is a nasty buisness - who gets what, when, and how - and the Ed addendum - what you do with it when ya get it. AOPA has been called the NRA of the air, and they they have a lot of expertise ond resources. If it wern't for them, I'll bet the entire user fee package and more would've slipped through with nary a wimper. So what to do? Get involved - raise hell... find out supported this crap and target 'em. AOPA did as good a job as they could. Total victory was unreasonable, and yeah, the foot is now in the door. It can be pushed out, but it's gonna be harder. Sadly, Jay Rockefeller and Trent Lott were insistant on user fees. I'm disappointed, Trent. User fees. I guess what we pay for fuel taxes dosen't count.

We're a small minority, us pilots. And the ones that have the six or seven figures to spend on the toys are the guys the manufacturers will target - not the guy who screams about a replacing a $500 45 year-old mag on his 45 year old airplane. You get the idea. We are under assault - fact. But then again, I'd feel a lot more secure having the 800-lb gorilla on my side rather than the weekend athlete with the bad knee in a knock-down fight.

What to do, what to do. Don't scatter our resources. Concentrate 'em. Much like a general going into battle. "Get there fustest with the mostest" - Nathan Beford Forrest. Let AOPA know what we want - and stay on 'em As much as I'd like to see more stuff targeted for guys like me, AOPA is really the only game in town. EAA is a good second - but still, not the AOPA. The Seaplane Pilots Association is small and scrappy - and has done a manificent job of maintaining access to the nation's waterways. It can be done, but it really rquires a lot more effort than what I think we are willing to or able to provide on our own. It's a matter of practicalities - no one's a bad person for not devoting more time and effort. We still have to make a living, pay the bills and so on.

Satisficing. That's what it's all about. It's a compromise - politics - our entire system is based on it.

Just as a test - I wonder if AOPA were to get a noticable and SUSTAINED, INSISTANT influx of input from us here - I bet they would respond - perhaps grudingly at first, but maybe over time.

Bottom line - FLYING sucks. EAA - good - very good, but not taken seriously enough. AOPA - for all its warts, it's really the only realistic avenue for us. Work with your strengths.


And, oh yeah!




MAKE IT GREAT!!! VOTE POOBS IN '08!!!

Speaking of life insurance and AOPA ... their policy has aviation exclusions. It's been a while since I found this out and cancelled my policy, and the only exclusion that I remember is the one that directly affected me ... they don't cover a pilot while flying an airplane during a hunting trip. I probably should have looked more closely to see if they meant shooting while flying, but it didn't matter to me, the very fact that they have a well concealed list of aviation exclusions at all pissed me off and caused me to cancel the policy.

BTW, I agree with Jim and most of the follow up comments questioning the AOPA motives and effectiveness … I am still a member but I really don’t know why I bother to renew each year.

Terry

Robbie, I think you and I need to ask these ladies and gentlemen if we may have permisson to quote them concerning their frustrations with AOPA in our respective articles.

They are very telling comments. They may well also shed light...nay, puts the finger on the pulse as to why Clinton is the success it is and why people love it so much. I am also thinking of Katie's post comparing Clinton to Oshkosh.

Clinton has obviously managed to retain and preserve something that aviation in America in general appears to have lost.

How do we make sure that bright, burning spirit always remains vibrant and never suffers the fate of being extinguished by its own success?

Jennifer in Norway

Jennifer in Norway

The AOPA and the EAA are pushing Sport Pilot- Sport planes to the yuppie crowd and don't want to tell them that there is another option. Marketing a new product to a new market and ignoring the little guy. We are not important enough for them. They would prefer we go away or buy a new whatever.