Pleasance out at AOPA

from a long term members view, AOPA was bloated and catered to bigger $ than us piston drivers....it lost its core focus and morphed into a professional donation marketer with its CEO making close to $2m a year and didn't want to press FAA on issues...maybe a complete reset and new charter is due. ... problem is, no matter how good AOPAs next interation is, most members will be hard to get back and most GA pilots now are trading for a career and want nothing to do with GA let alone join and pay AOPA dues. Most of the young pilots I meet think GA is scam and feel cheated paying so much for old planes and check rides and can't wait to be done with it. thus, AOPAs failure will likely have amplified negative effect for years to come in GA for most of us.
 
QFT. Watch out tho, they like to shoot the messenger around here...
It sure feels bad charging three times what I paid when I was in training, but then the money isn't worth what it was, either, and the mechanic's bills are definitely not cheaper and old airplanes break more often...
 
I agree, but it might be worth reminding people that "Vintage" in EAA-speak means aircraft built in 1970 or earlier. Many of the planes we're flying fit that definition. The EAA already has a rather wide umbrella. It might be worth widening it a bit more.
Might want to add "Antique" to the list of options. Anything 25 years old or older, but not a Vintage aircraft.
 
For the sake of the flying purple spaghetti monster, NO! Seriously, I've been griping about the reduction in the quality and quantity of serious homebuilt content in EAA's magazine for 20 years. If it gets worse, I'll have to leave EAA and form a New EAA that has a focus on the experimental market, which (along with the turbine market) is the only growth in GA.
You get a US version of the Canadian owner maintenance on certified aircraft, and you might see growth in certified piston aircraft usage. Plus, MOSAIC might, just might, lead to some growth in certified aircraft sales.
 
Last edited:
RE: Your italicized statement... I don't see how reducing the experimental content by 75% reaffirms EAA's focus or effort in the experimental arena. It suggests that EAA is meandering away from its base, just like AOPA has.
Certainly not the amount of content, but not having it be separate. Have you expressed your desires to EAA?

As far as content and capable writers go, I think there is plenty of content and I think there are plenty of writers. I miss the hands-on content Tony Bingelis brought in a monthly column. His content wasn't about "luckily I have a 50K SF shop with a CNC mill, 200 ton hydroform press, show-quality paint booth, and an overhead crane". It was about building airplanes in his garage and driveway with ingenuity and tools everyman already has or can afford. I miss the CAFE foundation's reports where they did an in-depth performance review of one or two homebuilts a year. Those were incredible. I also miss the design and engineering articles which went into technical subjects at something beyond a middle school level. They actually taught things in the magazine.
I agree with you - And I think that there's a big opportunity for EAA here. There are plenty of us certified-aircraft folks in EAA already, and lots of momentum towards experimental, especially via kit-built stuff like RVs. If EAA would put some things in their magazine that would attract some of the AOPA refugees toward building their first experimental, they might get some real traction. And once you build one airplane, why not do another? There are some really cool experimentals out there.

Helping to make the process of building easier would be a great thing, too.

AOPA's biggest benefit has been their ability to take credit for things that benefit GA that were going to happen anyway or happened as a course of natural evolution in the industry.
They've definitely done lots of that over the years.

They failed the PBOR miserably until a senator was impacted and decided to introduce the bill - which AOPA then took credit for.
I think you might be misremembering this. PBOR wasn't a thing at all until said senator landed on closed runway after not checking NOTAMs and decided to legislate his way out of trouble. AOPA smartly jumped on his bandwagon there and suggested some extra stuff to be attached to the bill that benefits all of us.
 
Certainly not the amount of content, but not having it be separate. Have you expressed your desires to EAA?
Yep. Reached out directly to the guy who pledged in writing "We're putting 14 (?) pages of "Experimenter" content into Sport Aviation every month", as they shut down the Experimenter.

A potentially true statement if we count ad content. ;-)

Otherwise, well...
 
You get a US version of the Canadian owner maintenance on certified aircraft, and you might see growth in certified piston aircraft usage. Plus, MOSAIC might, just might, lead to some growth in certified aircraft sales.
And MOSAIC teaches us that is the one thing they'll never allow. Their responses to the NPRM line item comments wrt expansion of LSRM/LSRI inspection authority to EABs make this evidently clear. I saw the writing on that wall with the part 23 re-write in 2013-15, MOSAIC just re-validates what I already knew/observed 13 years ago.
I was asbolutely surprised they allowed that expansion to LSRI/LSRM in the mosaic nothingburger, I'll 100% admit that. I didn't think they had the sincerity to offer even that meager of regulatory relief that's not otherwise catered to geriatrics/boomer special interest (medical, by statistical volume).

Of course, the other problem is that the builder crowd isn't as friendly to "refugees" as they virtue-signal. Building is also not a volume-viable way of maintaining fleet support status quo going forward. Sure, there's already under-the-table relief for the 51% rule, it just needs to be made legal and see what the market can offer as a business case. If a market doesn't exist, then eff it, they can have their cuban taxi cab hobby until 121 manages to exert enough pressure to access-deny recreational piston out of the airspace people actually want to land under, especially when flight training goes MPL/sim ab initio in the next two decades and facbuilt gets fleet-support mothballed writ large.

I love flying, but at the end of the day I rather partake in something more democratizing with my time, than play some stupid ladder-pulling status symbol game of who can income-flex the longest to be the one to turn the light off behind them. You're working against a big blind spot when it comes to affordability in this hobby. And unpopular take, many of the ingroupers don't think there's a problem at all, as the hobby sheds membership. You can't blame the regulators for that.
 
Politicians are always friendly people. :)

actually, that's not true. I can't give examples without violating POA ROC, but I will emphatically say that there are politicians that just can't be considered friendly.
 
actually, that's not true. I can't give examples without violating POA ROC, but I will emphatically say that there are politicians that just can't be considered friendly.
Reminded me of this for some reason...

Warning: NSFW, language.
 
Most of the young pilots I meet think GA is scam and feel cheated paying so much for old planes and check rides and can't wait to be done with it.
And most of those would probably be happy for GA to go away rather than put in the effort to fix it…but not before they’ve benefited from it.

Or, maybe they should pony up and go to a flight school with newer airplanes. I hear there are Cirruses that are fairly new.
 
And most of those would probably be happy for GA to go away rather than put in the effort to fix it…but not before they’ve benefited from it.

Or, maybe they should pony up and go to a flight school with newer airplanes. I hear there are Cirruses that are fairly new.
The problem is that the cost per hour for the ****ty planes is so high, not that there are not more expensive and nicer options available

I know AOPA can't direct impact cost. But a little focus on things that could have impacted GA 10 years ago would have made a big difference.

1. Drivers License Medical
2. MoGaw without STC
3. Owner Maintained Aircraft
4. Liability reform

If the next president is not using those 4 points as his/her mantra, they're still not getting it.
 
The problem is that the cost per hour for the ****ty planes is so high,
At one flight school I’m aware of, the reason the airplanes were ****ty was the renters. They did paint and interior every 3 years, and within 6 months they were looking ratty.

There was a really nice Warrior in a nearby club that the students found, and within a year that airplane was trashed, too.

I know AOPA can't direct impact cost. But a little focus on things that could have impacted GA 10 years ago would have made a big difference.

1. Drivers License Medical
2. MoGaw without STC
3. Owner Maintained Aircraft
4. Liability reform

If the next president is not using those 4 points as his/her mantra, they're still not getting it.
And none of that would affect the career-bound pilot significantly.
 
And none of that would affect the career-bound pilot significantly.
maybe not, but it would allow more the opportunity, and much of the reasons for high cost were/are tolerated. A young lady trained trained and took her PPL ride in my experimental c172, total cost for PPL was less than $3500 with the DPE fee and 30 hrs dual....last month a friend got his CFI training and passed his ckekride on it for a fraction of traditional costs after he ran out of $$ waiting 2 months for a local DPE and the cancelled due to wx and another month wait .. it's not rocket science, there are practical means of lowering costs and modernization ....we have accepted what legacy industry has been feeding us and FAA has been enforcing.

AOPA had decadres of opportunities to get FAA to help with solutions, yet did nothing meaningful in the certified sector. while EXP continued to grow.


you are correct in that most career students will find ways to pay, but GA needs pilots and aircraft owners that fly for the fun and convenience of it, or rent a 172 to fly to lunch with friends and do some touch and goes.....the smaller we get, the less influence we have, and with AOPA weaker it will get worst.
 
from a long term members view, AOPA was bloated and catered to bigger $ than us piston drivers....it lost its core focus and morphed into a professional donation marketer with its CEO making close to $2m a year and didn't want to press FAA on issues...maybe a complete reset and new charter is due. ... problem is, no matter how good AOPAs next interation is, most members will be hard to get back and most GA pilots now are trading for a career and want nothing to do with GA let alone join and pay AOPA dues. Most of the young pilots I meet think GA is scam and feel cheated paying so much for old planes and check rides and can't wait to be done with it. thus, AOPAs failure will likely have amplified negative effect for years to come in GA for most of us.
I don’t think AOPA cares about jet-a burners ether, and most who are do not look to AOPA for guidance

As far as many of the young crowd, they don’t like aviation, many getting into it so so because they think they’ll be working 5 days a month of half a mil a year the second they “make it” to 121, most do them ideally would just sit indoors their houses for their whole life.

The younger people I have trained who enjoy GA also enjoy getting their hands dirty and working on their own planes, most of these guys don’t dream of a cirrus or new 182, they enjoy the older stuff, STOL planes, go fast aerobatic experimentals and the like


And MOSAIC teaches us that is the one thing they'll never allow. Their responses to the NPRM line item comments wrt expansion of LSRM/LSRI inspection authority to EABs make this evidently clear. I saw the writing on that wall with the part 23 re-write in 2013-15, MOSAIC just re-validates what I already knew/observed 13 years ago.
I was asbolutely surprised they allowed that expansion to LSRI/LSRM in the mosaic nothingburger, I'll 100% admit that. I didn't think they had the sincerity to offer even that meager of regulatory relief that's not otherwise catered to geriatrics/boomer special interest (medical, by statistical volume).

Of course, the other problem is that the builder crowd isn't as friendly to "refugees" as they virtue-signal. Building is also not a volume-viable way of maintaining fleet support status quo going forward. Sure, there's already under-the-table relief for the 51% rule, it just needs to be made legal and see what the market can offer as a business case. If a market doesn't exist, then eff it, they can have their cuban taxi cab hobby until 121 manages to exert enough pressure to access-deny recreational piston out of the airspace people actually want to land under, especially when flight training goes MPL/sim ab initio in the next two decades and facbuilt gets fleet-support mothballed writ large.

I love flying, but at the end of the day I rather partake in something more democratizing with my time, than play some stupid ladder-pulling status symbol game of who can income-flex the longest to be the one to turn the light off behind them. You're working against a big blind spot when it comes to affordability in this hobby. And unpopular take, many of the ingroupers don't think there's a problem at all, as the hobby sheds membership. You can't blame the regulators for that.

I wish the idea that older pilots are the ones the new sport and basic are for would die already.


If anything, it’s far more critical for younger pilots who’ve been conditioned to run to a doctor or shrink for every little thing, breakup? Here’s pills, kid


Older generations just embraced the suck, went out and found the next love of their life/month


Meanwhile, DUIs are handed out like candy now. Feeling too impaired to drive? Sleeping it off in your parked car makes sense and is responsible, minus you an easier target for police quotas than actually driving.


There are far more trivial traps today that can kill a young airman’s medical than in past generations.

I tell my students to only the medical you currently need, and only after a mock medical. For many that’s BasicMed or Sport Pilot.


People with minor FAA “conditions” can still train and build hours under Sport Pilot while the clock ticks and they quietly get their medical packet ducks in a row.
 
Back
Top