oh, no! eaa membership expiring!

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

cjensen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
149
Location
Oshkosh, WI
Chad, is there any hard evidence on what aircraft is most frequently owned or being built by the current EAA membership? That is among the portion that actually own or are building an aircraft....
This is something that has never been developed, and I'm almost speechless as to they why the organization has never sought out this information. We are working on means to gather the info out there. The best I have to offer at this point, is the registrations at AirVenture. But even that is flawed because the data is somewhat skewed toward cross country airplanes and more local low and slows. The list is dominated by RV's, and I suspect that would be the answer even without hard evidence.

Recently, I submitted to the editor of Sport Aviation a cross country story that I had written. It's the story is about two homebuilt airplanes in formation flying from Kitty Hawk to Catalina Island. To me, such a story is interesting, inspirational, and educational. However, I was told that it was too long (by number of words). In fact, it was "twice as long as a typical article" and was never read at EAA or even suggested that it be shortened.

Combined with building, is this not the epitome of the the freedoms and gratifications of the homebuilt experience?

Perhaps if the trip were in a Baron it might be more suitable...;)
How long ago was this? Can you send it to me? cjensen@eaa.org

Well, to be blunt - not for me. If it's a story about flying qualities (roll rates, stall behavior, stick force gradients, etc), then I'm interested. I'm admitedly pretty hard core, but "adventure" stories are simply fluff pieces as far as I'm concerned. There are plenty of magazines for that stuff.
There are people that want this type of article, but I can tell you that it's very much a minority. BUT, that's not to say that it won't get published or the attention it deserves. It interests me a lot too...
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,074
Location
Rocky Mountains
If you have any complaint about the lack of technical or other articles to suit your fancy, write one (or make the suggestion and myself or someone else will)

I've actually been working, when time allows, on a home built aviation related article in an area where I think I have something to offer. Up until this thread popped up I hadn't even considered submitting it to the EAA for publication. They are that far off my radar when it comes to Experimental aircraft. At this point I'd liken such a submission to tossing stones into a flood swollen creek in the hopes of changing it course.
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Then where the heck were you planning on publishing the article?

They are that far off my radar when it comes to Experimental aircraft. At this point I'd liken such a submission to tossing stones into a flood swollen creek in the hopes of changing it course.
My opinion has always been that if one is not willing to work to fix something, then perhaps there is no reason for them to speak up.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,074
Location
Rocky Mountains
Then where the heck were you planning on publishing the article?

Tailored for Kitplanes. At least they still speak homebuilt.

My opinion has always been that if one is not willing to work to fix something, then perhaps there is no reason for them to speak up.

I am spending a fair amount of time trying to promote and enhance aviation, particularly safe and affordable aviation. I'd like the time and resources to do more.

When it comes to trying to get the EAA back to it's homebuilding roots - at some point you run the risk of doing a very good imitation of Don Quixote.
 

N111KX

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
24
Location
Atlanta, GA USA
Wow, so much negativity in a "recreational" forum. Your way or the highway, heh? You guys are great motivators for the newbies, I'll bet.

First off, the editor never read the article because he did not want to see it. It was never sent. So, who knows if there is a "compelling pitch" or not? He was not interested in a shortened version or he would have told me so. I just read somewhere something about "seeking content". Oh, well.

Are you joking when you use the word "mundane"? Has your aircraft stall behavior changed since the 5, 100, 1000 hour mark. That would make a riveting story. Is there no other room in a magazine to read about people that actually like to get out and see some sights and have a little adventure on the road? Turning the page is quite easy. I practice it often when I get to the stick force gradient articles.

And the "formation" part meant that there were two HOMEBUILTS flying together, not BARONS. I was not trying to be "special" but hey, my buddy was there in his HOMEBUILT and to not mention him after flying 4200 miles together would have been akward. I should have written "accompany", I guess.


I almost forgot this was the internet when I started typing today.

Chad, I appreciate your participation here.
 
Last edited:

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Tailored for Kitplanes. At least they still speak homebuilt.
I find them to be useful for maybe 2-10% of the articles they put out. The rest have nothing to do with anything of interest to me (builder stories, etc) or is the same repetitive ads and other filler over and over.

For example, take the March issue:
Special Report
Super Cub Kit Comparison

Super Cubs are beloved by many a backcountry adventurer, and several kits offer options to meet the demand of builders interested in these sturdy workhorses. By Dave Prizio.
Repetitive filler.


Builder Spotlight

Understanding Experimental Light Sport Aircraft
Dave Martin explains the different designations of factory-built and Experimental Light Sport Aircraft and how they continue to evolve.
Filler.

All About Avionics

Stein Bruch explains how bringing smart phones and tablets, with a bevy of aviation apps, into the cockpit have helped him become a better—and safer—pilot.
Not useful.

Finding the Source

While on a routine technical counselor consultation, Paul Dye discovered hidden treasure: Richard VanGrunsven’s original RV-1. He details a bit about its history and preparations for its planned tour this summer.
Fluff.

Fabric, Demystified and Non-Toxic

Marc Cook takes part in a three-day, fabric-covering course offered by Stewart Systems, learns about the company’s water-based product line, and picks up a few pointers along the way.
Not useful to me, but it might be to others.

The Ultimate Upgrade

As Martha and Wendell Solesbee near completion on their Lancair Evo, they encounter the minor setbacks that make the “90% done, 90% to go” expression ring true. By Dave Prizio.
Fluff

Build It Better

Paul Dye discusses risk management, and how you can decrease the chances of having an aviation mishap.
Useful

Ask the DAR

Mel Asberry answers readers’ questions on one-off engineering data requirements, how to fill out an AC 20-27G form, and how to test-fly an aircraft in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Maybe useful.

Completions

Builders share their successes.
Filler.



Shop Talk

Aero’Lectrics

From outlet convertors to button switches and parts to make your own temperature sensor, Jim Weir gives an overview of his favorite electronics sources and what’s available to make the heart of your inner geek beat a little faster.
Potentially useful, assuming they actually talk about certified parts this time around....

Designer's Notebook

Wind Tunnel
Taking off in an aircraft would seem to be a fairly simple, straightforward maneuver. But in fact it’s complicated, and a combination of factors must be just right for it to work. By Barnaby Wainfan.
Probably useful....


Exploring

What’s New RV-12 building assistance is available on DVD from HomebuiltHELP; Plane-Power has introduced a new alternator for Continental 520 and 550 engines; WhirlWind announces a new composite, ground-adjustable propeller for the Rotax 912/914 engine.
Not interesting so far as I can tell.

Viewfinder

Editor at Large Marc Cook takes to the soapbox to expound on the ever-increasing fees imposed by the FAA.
If I wanted this, I'd spend time here or on EAA forums.

Alternative Energies

Rapid strides are being made in the development of ultralight electric motorgliders. Dean Sigler talks to a few of the manufacturers at the forefront of this field.
Filler.


Down to Earth

Amy Laboda updated the avionics package on her RV-10 with an NavWorx ADS600-B box, and its ADS-B function has opened a whole new window on the world.

Filler.

Maintenance Matters

Damage to aircraft aluminum can be handled in one of two ways: repair or replace. Steve Ells explains what to consider when making this decision and asks three well-known kit manufacturers what they would recommend.
Interesting.

Light Stuff


Not all airports welcome “out of the ordinary” aircraft such as gyros, ultralights or powered parachutes. If you’ve been shut out, here are some tips to get you back in. By Roy Beisswenger.

Filler.

Free Flight

Paul Dye visits the hallowed halls of flight and reflects on the bond that exists between aviators past and present.

Filler.
I would imagine that this is about the same breakdown that a lot of folks on the other side of the fence feel about Sport Aviation and I feel the same way about it too...but I'm willing to do something to at least try to change it.

I've yet to come across a non-technical publication (as in peer reviewed journal) where more than maybe 25% or so is actually interesting or potentially useful.

I am spending a fair amount of time trying to promote and enhance aviation, particularly safe and affordable aviation. I'd like the time and resources to do more.
Glad to hear it.

When it comes to trying to get the EAA back to it's homebuilding roots - at some point you run the risk of doing a very good imitation of Don Quixote.
I think the problem is that the minority of folks who are pissed off are simply not happy that their definition of "homebuilding" isn't what is popular. Not saying that this is the case with you, but it seems to be the same problem that one runs into with any diverse group: you get a lot of people who are tolerant and then you get a few who dig their heals in and can't see past their own wants and desires. For one, I'm with Paul on the stance that it's big enough for everyone and we are all stronger if we stand together than if we take this approach:
<br>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
4,774
Location
Mojave, Ca
Wow, so much negativity in a "recreational" forum. Your way or the highway, heh? You guys are great motivators for the newbies, I'll bet...
I'll speak only for myself when I say that I know what I want to see in an organization, and when that organization changes, then yes, I have a right to be unhappy. It's not fair to expect me to change my interests just to go with the flow, is it? I'm certainly not expecting anyone to change theirs. I'd LIKE my old EAA back, that's all. I have come to realize that is not going to happen, so I simply "turned the page" and dropped my membership. I'm simply offering the reasons why... If that comes off as "negative", that's certainly not the intent.

...Is there no other room in a magazine to read about people that actually like to get out and see some sights and have a little adventure on the road? Turning the page is quite easy. I practice it often when I get to the stick force gradient articles...
First off, I use my airplanes a lot, and I even flew the RV-8 from California to OSH (in formation) with another RV this past summer. Pretty boring stuff, actually. Hours on end of flying straight and level, paying too much for gas, and eating bad food. The only thing more boring would be reading about someone else doing it. Fortunately, I had an autopilot, so it freed up my mind to daydream about modifications to make the airplane faster. So even while actually living the "adventure", my brain is hard wired to "technical". As you say, it takes all types...

...And those "types" started the EAA.
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
First off, the editor never read the article because he did not want to see it. It was never sent.
OK. I don't recall you mentioning that it wasn't sent. You just said they rejected it because it was too long. When you say things like that, the freelance writer in me says "Oh, he must have submitted it and it was rejected.".

So, who knows if there is a "compelling pitch" or not?
So did you even contact them? If so, you made a pitch. Whether it was compelling or not is not possible for me to decide without reading your pitch. However, if you were told not to submit it, then chances are it was not a a compelling pitch.

He was not interested in a shortened version or he would have told me so.
Did you ask? I have a lot of friends who are editors and they seldom ever take that tack unless the person has something really spectacular.

And the "formation" part meant that there were two HOMEBUILTS flying together, not BARONS.
Yeah, I figured as much because most folks that engage in formation flying (outside of those actually trained to do so such as airshow and military pilots) tend to be homebuilt pilots. It's kind of an "occupational hazard" of sorts for our hobby. Not sure if why but most Baron pilots seem to have little desire to emulate Maverick and Iceman during their flying. Hell, I don't want to fly a Baron but if anyone gets close enough to be "in formation" with my aircraft, I'm taking their tail number down and making some phone calls when I land.

I was not trying to be "special" but hey, my buddy was there in his HOMEBUILT and to not mention him after flying 4200 miles together would have been akward.
You missed the point that a 4200 mile trip isn't any more interesting to the average reader whether you do it in a Sonex, an RV, a Baron, a Piaggio or a trike. It's just not a big deal anymore to most people. Personally, nothing puts me to sleep more quickly than some news story about how so and so did such and such and it's so exciting because they were flying. I've told Richard Branson to his face that I thought his balloon flights were technically interesting but the idea of some rich dude floating around was about as exciting as watching paint dry. Hearing about some homebuilder's vacation trip is no different than going to dinner at someone's house and being forced to listen to them as they go through their vacation slides.

Are you joking when you use the word "mundane"? Has your aircraft stall behavior changed since the 5, 100, 1000 hour mark. That would make a riveting story. Is there no other room in a magazine to read about people that actually like to get out and see some sights and have a little adventure on the road? Turning the page is quite easy. I practice it often when I get to the stick force gradient articles.
Yes, just as there is room for the articles about things that aren't Pietenpols and Sonexs. I'm not saying we should not have stories about what you can do with homebuilts but I was simply pointing out that either your series of flights was not nearly as exciting as you make it out to be or you at very least botched your pitching of the story. Nothing more or nothing less.

You want stories of grand and not-so-grand adventures. I want how to articles about all sorts of stuff that allows me to design and build the aircraft I want. Other folks want to reminisce about their youth by reading about the history of homebuilding and how to build aircraft that have been around since my great-grandmother was a young woman. We can all have that if we work together and stop grandstanding.

Just because your article didn't make it, it doesn't imply that any sort of conspiracy to quash such articles is taking place. I've got roughly a dozen articles to my credit on a variety of topics (including three currently in press or undergoing peer review) and I can assure you that I have had at least one rejection from every magazine that has published my work. I think two of those rejections involved instructions on how to improve my submission to get it published and those both came from an editor with whom I have had a long lasting friendship due to a shared professional background.
 

N111KX

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
24
Location
Atlanta, GA USA
^^^Wow, just wow.^^^^

This is Iceman, Maverick, grand adventurer, butt-hurt because his story was quashed, not exciting, rejected, boring, full of fluff, exicted by Grandma's stories, without a pitch, signing off for the evening.

You all are killing me...:)
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
9,257
Location
CT, USA
One thing to consider about Kitplanes magazine: It's sold on the newsstand as well as by subscription. I don't know what the proportion is, but while I've never subscribed to it I leaf through it if I see on a newsstand, and if it looks interesting enough, I buy a copy. As such, the article selection is doubtless different, to attract a casual reader.

-Dana

One thing about liberty, lots of people do things I wouldn’t pay for, and more power to them. It’s when they want to do it with my money that I get concerned.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,244
Location
Port Townsend WA
why don't you write in to editorial with your thoughts, concerns, and questions.
I think I have beat this issue to death already, here and at the EAA forum.
Much has been learned about EAA from your recent comments, and thanks for that. The most telling key fact is that Paul Poberezny approves of the growth and transition to GA that we see.
I think Paul has total control, either directly or with the appointment of select leaders. It is not a democracy.
And my thoughts and opinions about the direction of EAA will probably be mostly ignored.

Thanks for your efforts, good luck.
Bill
 

Aircar

Banned
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
3,567
Location
Melbourne Australia
This discussion is more about the personal motivation to be in aviation and interested in particular design than whether the EAA has "lost it's way " --EAA is being judged against each or our personal criteria as much as whether it should change in it's own best interests (the old cartoon about what the "ideal" aircraft as seen by the stressing group (a few massive I beams bolted together) the undercarriage dept (a massive double bogey retractaing gear with vestigial wings and fuselage) the engine group (huge engines on a tiny wing ) etc etc comes to mind-- can't please everybody .

Personally I would be happy with a nice self launching sailplane but I realize that the market for such a thing is miniscule and -having decided that I do know how to make a fully viable type of vehicle that could ,if built, ease the burden and improve the quality of life for millions of people -AND create jobs for many now unemployed --and know what that means --I ask myself if I have the right to do nothing with it (and decades of fighting laws that stopped any chance to do it on ny own country but knowing that the US is the most feasible home for it --do I go to the Chinese knowing how much that could add to the present difficulties.

Focussing on frippery and the "silvertail " complex shown by the barons of Detroit turning up in executive jets to beg for public alms might show how out of touch some people have become.

My point was that I had gone WAAAYYY out of my way to track down those designers that seemed logically to have the most by a long margin to offer to the 'typical' person interested in aviation who might need to justify his buying or building an aircraft to the wife or bank manager on a better basis than just satisfying a boyhood desire to emulate a world war two Ace or to even a two place hot rod or something that might be of occasional highly constrained use but very high cost nonetheless.

President Paul made the occasional editorial plea for the better aircraft that would not just -in his words ,- be a 'hangar queen for 95% of the time' -- Dan Zuck ended his book with a description of a family holiday by air from the West to east coast of the US including visting the Carlsbad caverns and meteor crater in Arizona en route to the Capital and all the sorts of things that people do when on holiday by car but doing it without days spent on bland interstates -- and doing things that he thought would appeal to everyday people unable to do such things in the limited time available to working families-- and the owner could bring his flying car home to do maintenance on it rather than have to pay a high priced mechanic out at the airport (SUSV seems to see some virtue in being unable to take your flying machine off airport or to have a choice of maintenance shops by being able to ..) Robert Fulton demonstrated his 1940s level flying car be driving to Broadway shows and even took it to England on tour -- showing some practicality beyond the usual 'hangar queen' -- Molt Built the Aerocar before there was an experimental category free of certification and no established homebuilding movement so the barriers were much greater and it was the cost of certification demographics as much as anything that caused that generation of flying cars to be stillborn. ( The 1947 crash of the whole light aircraft industry followed by the switch to produce war planes for Korea, Convair (Convaircar) pulled out then -even Cessna was rationed )

There has not been any substantial effort put into this field since and this is surely an indictment of an organization seeking to expand small aircraft use -- what other type of aircraft could match the potential and what other type has had as little support from EAA? --warbirds,antiques,aerobatic etc all got wall to wall coverage.
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,390
Location
Fresno, California
First of all, I am a staunch supporter of both EAA and AOPA, though I associate myself more with EAA (at least the "old" EAA). I too would like to see the EAA return more to its roots. I do think that both organizations do good things for aviation.

That being said, a number of people here have indicated that the EAA is beginning to look more and more like AOPA when it caters more to the higher dollar kits and production aircraft. Is it possible that, at the same time, AOPA may be looking more like EAA?

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2012/120216sd-house-passes-homebuilder-tax-relief.html


Bruce :ermm:
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,961
Location
US
From the bigger perspective, none of us should care at all if EAA puts on glitzy airshows, coddles the warbird set, snuggles up to producers of $100K airplane kits, etc. So what? All of that is fine if they enhance their value to homebuilders (e.g. technical references, classes, a re-invigorated Experimenter magazine with reporting/articles on subjects of real use to homebuilders, etc). It's entirely unrealistic to believe that if they rid Airventure of the heavy iron that all the acreage would be filled with tents and workshops. If EAA can make money running a brothel, a racetrack, or any other thing I wouldn't care if they did it, as long as the businesses were run competently and the proceeds were put to use to help homebuilders.

Just as there's nothing wrong with a college having a great football team if it serves to enhance other sports programs and academics at the school. But if the priorities get reversed, as they seem to have become at EAA, and the profitmaking is coming at the expense of the prime mission rather than in service to it, then there's cause for concern. Airventure gets bigger, but Experimenter magazine and it's great content gets sidelined.
 

delta

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
2,167
Location
Brookside Utah
I enjoyed the latest issue. When Paul chimes in I feel there's a master at the helm and the world is right whether it's that way or not...

Rick
 

millerdvr

Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
29
Location
Missoula, MT
Thought I would throw my $.02 worth in here.

I grew up reading my fathers Sport Aviation magazines and in fact I was the first to get my hands on them when they arrived, I knew precisely the day they would show up and looked forward to thumbing through the pages. Those days the E in EAA was what it was all about.

The magazine that shows up in my mailbox these days gets a casual flip through, then tossed on top of the pile with the rest of the junk mail. I don't want to nor do I care to read about aircraft that are rolled out of a factory. I don't want to read about the same "glass panel" stuffed into every conceivable aircraft, I get it already. I don't want to read about what a rudder does, I want to read about someone who labored in his basement to build that rudder for his "experimental" project he has been laboring away on for years. I don't want to read about a Cirrus sr-20 colliding with a piper pa-25, what does this have to do with Experimental aviation?
I am also tired of seeing the same cookie cutter "kit" planes, how about a bit of plansbuilt thrown in there, maybe that will spark a bit more interest in the scratch built market and keep some of the suppliers of plans/kits from closing their doors?

Lets not lose sight of what we are all involved with. The EAA is still called the "EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION", not the "general aviation with a bit of emphasis on the little guy who cannot afford six figures on an aircraft so he is forced to build one association"

Chris Ingram
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Lets not lose sight of what we are all involved with. The EAA is still called the "EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION", not the "general aviation with a bit of emphasis on the little guy who cannot afford six figures on an aircraft so he is forced to build one association"
The problem is that most of us don't do anything approaching "experimentation". Building a plane from a kit or a set of plans is about as much "experimentation" as changing the carburetor on your car makes you an Indy car pit crew member.

I am also tired of seeing the same cookie cutter "kit" planes, how about a bit of plansbuilt thrown in there, maybe that will spark a bit more interest in the scratch built market and keep some of the suppliers of plans/kits from closing their doors?
To me there is no difference between a plans built and a kit built in terms of creativity, "cookie cutter"-esqueness, or experimental nature.

The magazine that shows up in my mailbox these days gets a casual flip through, then tossed on top of the pile with the rest of the junk mail. I don't want to nor do I care to read about aircraft that are rolled out of a factory. I don't want to read about the same "glass panel" stuffed into every conceivable aircraft, I get it already. I don't want to read about what a rudder does, I want to read about someone who labored in his basement to build that rudder for his "experimental" project he has been laboring away on for years. I don't want to read about a Cirrus sr-20 colliding with a piper pa-25, what does this have to do with Experimental aviation?
Can I ask those of you who are fed up with the magazine to send me your copies? I'm happy to distribute them to schools and Boy Scout troops who might be excited by the current status quo of aviation and become more involved. This goes for Sport Aviation, Kitplanes, AOPA Pilot, Flying, etc. If you have back issues of aviation magazines and are looking to get rid of it, PM me and I am willing to get it to some kids who could well be the future of our hobby.
 
Top