GA needs an advocate

Fearless Tower

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
16,473
Location
Norfolk, VA
Display Name

Display name:
Fearless Tower
But not like this one.

Anyone else see this?

AOPA Salaries....
Fuller (Craig): More than $815k
Myers: More than $800k
Moran: More than $462k
Roberts: More than $416k
Rudinger: More than 321k
Other Misc: Numerous $200 - 300k

http://aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&ID=568942B1-3B6B-4E35-9549-F23580A4E205

Pretty sickening. The problem is that GA needs an advocate now more than ever. But the advocate that AOPA used to be is gone. It has become a self-licking ice cream cone.

Want to know what Craig is up to while he scratches his head and wonders why membership is declining? Just plug in N4GA into Flight Aware.

Sadly, there are alot of hard working people at AOPA that don't even get a fraction of the salaries above. This is UNSAT - Craig needs to be shown the door.
 
Which precisely, is why I ended my membership 2 years ago. :no:
 
Out with the bum. I'll do the job for 750k. :goofy:
 
I wish those choosing not to renew would reconsider.

We are a teeny, tiny, minority, that most people view with ambivalence, irritation over noise, anger over pollution, or jealousy because we're all filthy rich.

We are ONE piece of legislation away from extinction. Slap a $100 per IFR segment fee on me and I'm done. Can't do what I do without IFR and I can't afford the fee. Outlaw/restrict 100LL same effect.

Further, aviation is one of the handful of industries where we are still on top. It is one of the few bases of manufacturing left. Someone should be letting law makers know this and push them to protect it and encourage it.

I'm happy to be a member and donate more for certain issues. I don't begrudge them their salaries as long as they get the job done.
 
I'm happy to be a member and donate more for certain issues. I don't begrudge them their salaries as long as they get the job done.

And there is the problem. The job isn't getting done.
 
I wish those choosing not to renew would reconsider.

We are a teeny, tiny, minority, that most people view with ambivalence, irritation over noise, anger over pollution, or jealousy because we're all filthy rich.

We are ONE piece of legislation away from extinction. Slap a $100 per IFR segment fee on me and I'm done. Can't do what I do without IFR and I can't afford the fee. Outlaw/restrict 100LL same effect.

Further, aviation is one of the handful of industries where we are still on top. It is one of the few bases of manufacturing left. Someone should be letting law makers know this and push them to protect it and encourage it.

I'm happy to be a member and donate more for certain issues. I don't begrudge them their salaries as long as they get the job done.

Hard cheese. No one should put up with BS because it is the 'only' way. Old school GA is already dead, and with the regulatory/sissy society Boomers built there is no saving it. Besides if everyone stays a member there is no reason for AOPA to change.
 
Bob and Greg-

So is the answer to destroy AOPA?

Do you think the Center for Environmental Health (California 100LL) members have quit contributing because they haven't prevailed... yet and their lawyers make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year?

Suggest an alternative and I'm all ears.
 
What sickens me is the justification common in corporate America these days and demonstrated by AOPA.....'we need to pay our executives huge salaries in order to secure and retain the right people'. And therein lies the problem. They get their chunk whether they are successful or not. People like Craig feel they are somehow owed the perks of a corporate jet for personal trips and limosines everywhere they go. Performance means absolutely nothing to people like that.
 
What sickens me is the justification common in corporate America these days and demonstrated by AOPA.....'we need to pay our executives huge salaries in order to secure and retain the right people'. And therein lies the problem. They get their chunk whether they are successful or not. People like Craig feel they are somehow owed the perks of a corporate jet for personal trips and limosines everywhere they go. Performance means absolutely nothing to people like that.
Do you think they could find someone to to it for cheaper? Would they be as effective? I don't know the answer to these questions. You are right. These are the same questions that are asked about corporate America and I don't have the answer to those questions either.
 
Bob and Greg-

So is the answer to destroy AOPA?

Do you think the Center for Environmental Health (California 100LL) members have quit contributing because they haven't prevailed... yet and their lawyers make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year?

Suggest an alternative and I'm all ears.

The only influence people have with AOPA is not renewing, if they lose enough members they will have to change(or die.) AOPA doesn't do jack anyway. The 100LL situation is funny 100LL is indefensible in this day and age. No way that stuff should exist in a kinder, gentler, greener world. GA is dead, modern society has no tolerance for dirty dangerous stuff. Best thing for GA would be a campaign moving societies thought back to 'it's a free country' way of thinking. But that means unbanning jet skis, good luck. :mad2:
 
I wish those choosing not to renew would reconsider.

We are a teeny, tiny, minority, that most people view with ambivalence, irritation over noise, anger over pollution, or jealousy because we're all filthy rich.

We are ONE piece of legislation away from extinction. Slap a $100 per IFR segment fee on me and I'm done. Can't do what I do without IFR and I can't afford the fee. Outlaw/restrict 100LL same effect.

Further, aviation is one of the handful of industries where we are still on top. It is one of the few bases of manufacturing left. Someone should be letting law makers know this and push them to protect it and encourage it.

I'm happy to be a member and donate more for certain issues. I don't begrudge them their salaries as long as they get the job done.

But AOPA does not advocate my position, that is why I quit.
 
Do you think they could find someone to to it for cheaper? Would they be as effective? I don't know the answer to these questions. You are right. These are the same questions that are asked about corporate America and I don't have the answer to those questions either.
Yes, I think they could. Especially in aviation. I think there are a TON of aviation professionals who would gladly serve in that capacity for half of what the current execs make. And with a large enough pool of volunteers, you could easily find enough with the people skills to fill the seats at the table.

As far as effectiveness, that is an unknown, but considering that many of us don't think the current execs are very effective, I don't think we'd be any worse with new blood.
 
Yes, I think they could. Especially in aviation. I think there are a TON of aviation professionals who would gladly serve in that capacity for half of what the current execs make. And with a large enough pool of volunteers, you could easily find enough with the people skills to fill the seats at the table.

As far as effectiveness, that is an unknown, but considering that many of us don't think the current execs are very effective, I don't think we'd be any worse with new blood.
Maybe I'm a cynic but I'm not sure there is all that much altruism in aviation, especially when it comes down to business and money.
 
Maybe I'm a cynic but I'm not sure there is all that much altruism in aviation, especially when it comes down to business and money.

When has there ever been? Aviation has been steeped in court battle since near day one.
 
Bob and Greg-

So is the answer to destroy AOPA?

Do you think the Center for Environmental Health (California 100LL) members have quit contributing because they haven't prevailed... yet and their lawyers make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year?

Suggest an alternative and I'm all ears.

If AOPA ever becomes an effective advocate for GA again, then I'll consider rejoining.

My only method of voting wrt AOPA is with my dues.

My chosing not to be a member is not going to destroy AOPA. AOPA's inability to be effective is what will destroy it.
 
What sickens me is the justification common in corporate America these days and demonstrated by AOPA.....'we need to pay our executives huge salaries in order to secure and retain the right people'

That's true to a point. But comparing to other similar organizations, AOPA's executive compensation seems very high.
 
I didn't renew my AOPA membership either. Where can I sign up to be an advocate? I have some spare time now.
 
Yes, I think they could. Especially in aviation. I think there are a TON of aviation professionals who would gladly serve in that capacity for half of what the current execs make. And with a large enough pool of volunteers, you could easily find enough with the people skills to fill the seats at the table.

As far as effectiveness, that is an unknown, but considering that many of us don't think the current execs are very effective, I don't think we'd be any worse with new blood.

I don't think an aviation professional is what we need, but I agree they would be happy to do the job for less. Influencing federal government is a big money job best done by people well versed in that environment (who also just happen to be big money people or become so). Our society has made it that way (unfortunately).

I'm all for alternatives and constructive changes, but lacking those I would rather go down fighting vs. stop feeding our only dog in the fight.:dunno:
 
I didn't renew my AOPA membership either. Where can I sign up to be an advocate? I have some spare time now.

You just start working the politicians who control budget and policy for your sector interest. You post a goal and get as many registered voters to back that goal as well.
 
Funny, AOPA practicing ageism. They are dumb.
Safety Publications/Articles
JANUARY 2013 VOLUME 56 / NUMBER 1

Safety Pilot: Curb their enthusiasm
Judgment errors, youthful exuberance give GA a bad mark
Share on google_plusone Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
0

We’ve often spoken about sharing the joy of flight with nonpilots to introduce the wonders of general aviation. Many of us are enthusiastic—perhaps to the point of being evangelical—but there are times when enthusiasm must take a back seat to reality. It’s that judgment thing! Sadly, a few pilots don’t seem to quite grasp this and lives are lost, as in these cases.

In January 2010, a 23-year-old pilot with just more than 300 hours total flight time, a commercial certificate, and instrument rating rented a Cessna 172 for the day to give rides to friends in Michigan. According to the NTSB report, “Starting at 6 p.m., the night prior, the pilot received or made calls or sent text messages, every hour, through midnight, until 3:12 a.m. on the day of the accident. In his communications, the pilot told the passenger about some friends that were going out that evening. The passenger responded back, expressing concern that the pilot be in good flying shape for the next day.”

At the time of departure, around 9:45 a.m., the ASOS reported 200 overcast and half mile visibility with freezing fog. The pilot told the lineman that, if necessary, he would file an IFR flight plan when airborne and return to the airport. Witnesses saw the airplane disappear into the overcast and shortly thereafter, the Cessna was heard to make four passes over the airport. The sound became louder but the airplane remained in the clouds. On the fifth pass, the Cessna was seen approximately 50 feet above the ground and barely missed some trees.

According to the NTSB report, “The pilot contacted Muskegon Approach Control at 10:22 a.m. and told the controller that he was ‘caught in some fog’ and wanted ‘vectors to Runway 8 for Tulip City.’ When the controller asked the pilot if he was IFR, the pilot replied that he wanted to ‘file a quick IFR into Tulip City.’” Believing the pilot was on the ground, there followed a discussion on what frequencies to contact FSS. At 10:03 a.m., when the controller asked the pilot if he wanted to file a flight plan, the pilot replied, “Caught in some heavy fog and would just like vectors to Tulip City Airport.” Asked if he was VFR, the pilot replied that he “was VFR, and now have to go in for an emergency.”

The passenger’s father is suing the FAA for negligence because the controller provided “incorrect” frequencies. I don’t see the FAA’s culpability. The FAA determined that the pilot had not been IFR current for two years and he failed to communicate clearly that he had an emergency and needed vectors. Even with ATC guidance a successful completion was doubtful—the Cessna was not GPS-equipped but the pilot had a chart open on his lap and the weather was well below approach minimums. Probable cause: Spatial disorientation and possible fatigue.

In July 2011, a brand-new 18-year-old CFI with about 400 hours total time and roughly 20 hours dual took a new student up on an instructional first flight. He had less than four hours in type. The aircraft, an American Aviation AA–1A—also known as a Yankee, is a snappy little airplane that is known for somewhat aggressive stall tendencies and is not approved for spins.

According to the NTSB report, “Radar data revealed that the introductory instructional flight departed and proceeded toward mountainous terrain adjacent to the intended destination. As the airplane approached the foothills, it entered a series of turns. A witness, located in her residence near the accident site, observed the airplane flying unusually low along the ridgeline. The airplane then made an abrupt, swooping, and descending turn. As it began to roll out of the turn, the wings started to rock from side to side, and the airplane then immediately descended nose down into the ground.”

Radar data indicated that the airplane’s groundspeed was about 96 knots, reducing to 77 knots during the turn, with a radius of about 400 feet. The FAA concluded that the angle of bank would have been between 50 and 60 degrees. The Yankee’s stall speed at 60 degrees of bank was estimated at 79 knots.

These are two different types of judgment miscues: The first involves much more premeditation and a string of errors. The second is an impulsive act, based on a lack of total time and model experience. Different in detail, but the root cause is the same—the desire to impress.

Adult supervision, especially where young pilots are involved, is sometimes needed to curb the natural enthusiasm and occasional youthful lack of judgment. I’ve been there myself and benefited from appropriate guidance. Consider a respectful and well-chosen word when you see something that looks like it might end badly. The two pilots’ passengers paid the ultimate price for innocent trust them and the GA community winds up with an undeserved stain. Collectively, we can do better.

Bruce Landsberg is president of the AOPA Foundation.
 
Why is it that someone is always trying to take anything I enjoy away from me?

Guns, big gas guzzling trucks, delicious unhealthy food, violent video games, now airplanes.

The whole country is turning beige.
 
Why is it that someone is always trying to take anything I enjoy away from me?

Guns, big gas guzzling trucks, delicious unhealthy food, violent video games, now airplanes.

The whole country is turning beige.

I could give you a big electric truck to put your gas guzzling one to shame.
 
So what is the alternative? NO advocacy?

Create an alternative to AOPA. Make the reason for the alternative group's need explicitly clear. Work out its objectives, bylaws, funding sources, what its objectives aren't (probably just as important as what its objectives are) and such things in an Internet public forum.

The PoA member count shows 10,010 entries as of today. Among those thousands should be enough people to form a viable core for such an alternative. One or more of those who quit AOPA should take the initiative and start a thread on starting such an alternative advocacy group. Be prepared for some long hard and expensive work. If spending a few tens of dollars a year is too much of a pain, you may as well forget the whole thing.
 
Create an alternative to AOPA. Make the reason for the alternative group's need explicitly clear. Work out its objectives, bylaws, funding sources, what its objectives aren't (probably just as important as what its objectives are) and such things in an Internet public forum.

The PoA member count shows 10,010 entries as of today. Among those thousands should be enough people to form a viable core for such an alternative. One or more of those who quit AOPA should take the initiative and start a thread on starting such an alternative advocacy group. Be prepared for some long hard and expensive work. If spending a few tens of dollars a year is too much of a pain, you may as well forget the whole thing.

Apply the 10% rule to internet participation and you're left with ~1000. Now see how many of those will do anything at all, even without spending a dime.

I've liked the Recreational Aviation Foundation's undeniable effectiveness for many years:

http://theraf.org/ because even though it's more specialized in focus than the broad scope of PoA pilots would prefer, it gets things DONE that benefit ALL GA pilots.

I will remain a member to just about every GA aviation alphabet group that there is including AOPA however, the more I hear and see written about high salaries and low performance, the more I listen to people that advocate witholding a substantial fraction of their dues with a statement in writing on their renewal form as to why.

It's their way of saying, "We want to stay with you AOPA but, tighten up your (our) ship or next time it will be nothing!" It looks more effective to do that than for members to just disappear.
 
Last edited:
I've liked the Recreational Aviation Foundation's undeniable effectiveness for many years:

http://theraf.org/ because even though it's more specialized in focus than the broad scope of PoA pilots would prefer, it gets things DONE that benefit ALL GA pilots.

Wasn't aware of this group - thanks for the heads-up.
 
I don't really care how much they make as long as the advocate hard...but they don't.

When the PBOR was in play their weak support was appalling and their tepid support to the barely improved D/L medical is worse. They are strong believers in "working within the system" and are quite fearful of ruffling the bureaucrats feathers.

They barely advocate for pilots. They "go along and get along"

I suppose they're better than nothing, but they could be so much more. And we need more.
 
And assume the other 98% of voters will be at least as interested in your legislative agenda as they are in obtaining pilot credentials.

You just start working the politicians who control budget and policy for your sector interest. You post a goal and get as many registered voters to back that goal as well.
 
And assume the other 98% of voters will be at least as interested in your legislative agenda as they are in obtaining pilot credentials.

Oh yeah, there is also providing the requisite freebies. Best to become tax deductible as well.
 
But not like this one.

Anyone else see this?

AOPA Salaries....
Fuller (Craig): More than $815k
Myers: More than $800k
Moran: More than $462k
Roberts: More than $416k
Rudinger: More than 321k
Other Misc: Numerous $200 - 300k

http://aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&ID=568942B1-3B6B-4E35-9549-F23580A4E205

Pretty sickening. The problem is that GA needs an advocate now more than ever. But the advocate that AOPA used to be is gone. It has become a self-licking ice cream cone.

Want to know what Craig is up to while he scratches his head and wonders why membership is declining? Just plug in N4GA into Flight Aware.

Sadly, there are alot of hard working people at AOPA that don't even get a fraction of the salaries above. This is UNSAT - Craig needs to be shown the door.

Seriously obscene. :yes:
 
ok hand it over

Army has em, I forget who they were working with. Freightliner (Mercedes) makes a fuel cell truck as well. If you've never driven electric, it's impressive 'instant on' power.
 
Back
Top