gmcjetpilot said:
Don't bother if you are not an AOPA member. They hit you up for $40 or $60 for membership. I don't know but it seems AOPA spends most of theit time trying to get $dues$ and promoting themselves and Phil Boyer. G
Click to expand...

What.....your not an AOPA member? :eek:
 
gmcjetpilot said:
Don't bother if you are not an AOPA member. They hit you up for $40 or $60 for membership. I don't know but it seems AOPA spends most of theit time trying to get $dues$ and promoting themselves and Phil Boyer. G
Click to expand...

I seem to recall the AOPA doing a whole lot more, than what you've listed above.

L.Adamson
 
Really, what...

L.Adamson said:
I seem to recall the AOPA doing a whole lot more, than what you've listed above.

L.Adamson
Click to expand...
Please tell us. No seriously tell me, I would be glad to hear some real thing they did. I was a member for many years. I dropped them oh about 15 years ago. I heard a lot of talk from them. They will tell you they do a lot but what do they really do??????? The best thing I heard was a pilot who said he just got his medical back with the help of AOPA.

Aviation is highly regulated. The national security, commercial aviation, aerospace commerce and military will always prevail. The claim is AOPA protects our rights. I just see more restrictions and AOPA is ham tied, no fault of their own. Our rights to fly where granted well before AOPA where around, but AOPA often makes it sound like they invented flying.

Here is the latest Example:

Remember the Unmanned air vehicle (UAV) that crashed Tuesday monitoring the southern border. Well the FAA dropped the TFR on Wednesday for obvious reasons, it was not needed anymore. The TFR ran 300 NM from 14,000 ft to 16,000 ft. This is how the AOPA spins the story .......

"AOPA is pleased that the FAA has finally canceled the TFR, considering the fact that there are no operations being conducted in it at this time," said Andy Cebula, AOPA executive vice president of government affairs. "AOPA has been opposed to using flight restrictions to control UAV operations, and it's a shame that it took an accident to illustrate why TFRs are a bad idea."

(Huaa? I personally am for the border protection even if 300-nm stretch of airspace is cordoned off from 14,000 feet msl to 16,000 feet msl. AOPA takes credit because the UAV crashed and the FAA dropped the TFR?)

"In fact, this accident illustrates why UAV operations should not be conducted until these unmanned aircraft are certified to the same level of safety as manned aircraft. Just think that if a pilot had been flying legally under the TFR and the UAV hit the aircraft from behind and above ? the pilot would have had no chance to see and avoid the uncontrolled UAV."

(Again Huaaa? Again I want border security and planes with people flying them run into each other all the time, many times, year after year. They may make a point but it is so whinny I can't stand it. These are troubled times and I don't want any bad guys crawling across the borders with illegal immigrants who are just looking for work. Also there is no reason ATC can't monitor the UAV and alert the operator of other aircraft in the airspace, OR the UAV could have TCAS, Traffic Collision Alert System. They don't give out all the capabilities of a top secret weapon system. AOPA protecting us from UAV's, bravo! Go get'em Phil :rolleyes: AOPA says so many dumb things I wounder if anyone who is in AOPA's employ are pilots. It is that or they try to drum up causes to justify their existence.)


HERE IS ANOTHER ONE
The airspace over Washington, D.C., will be pretty much shut down to GA operations from 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. on Jan. 31, during President Bush's State of the Union address to Congress. AOPA says the restriction covers 3,000 square miles, and notes that airlines are not affected, and neither are cars and trucks, "which can get very close to the Capitol with much greater payload than a Cessna 172." AOPA is also not happy about a restricted area along 300 nm of the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona and New Mexico. The "temporary" restriction is in place now through Dec. 31.

I think in a time of war when most of washington DC is all in one place, outside extra precaustions need to be taken. Also even then they where whining about border protection. AOPA is most concerned about self preservation and expanding payroll. It's a business like any other. There are other organizations that support aviation that I belong to. EAA, ALPA and NAFI to name a few. You could start your own non-profit charter, RVPA, and become president. If it was me my starting salary would be $275,000/yr.

AOPA does a lot a whining and complaining but so what? When not whining, and their other breath, they tell you how groovy Phil is or hustle you for dues. Its the illusion of action? May be better than nothing but may be we need a better association.

GA was drastically affect after 9/11. At least the government is doing something. I don't think UAV's on the boarder takes my rights away or is unreasonably unsafe. Are there restrictions? Sure but for USA pilots we live in a Country that has aviation freedom without compare, second to none. We are pretty lucky.

If AOPA gets people's medicals back, than good for them. However claims of "AOPA doing a whole lot more", make me ask, I would love to see it. I think they are ineffectual and too self promoting for my taste.

There are other Aviation organizations to belong to. Surprisingly the US Federal and local state Government supports aviation very well and AOPA has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. It is mass federal funds that we enjoy so many airports with great facilities. We can complain about FAA or ATC but they are still the world leader. We have more in this country than anywhere and AOPA wants you to believe it would go away tomorrow without them.

I would like to hear about rule making that AOPA actually, really, truly changed, not something they just took credit for. If everyone canceled their AOPA membership nothing would change. With that said, I am glad all you AOPA members are keeping the sky free for the rest of us slackers. :rolleyes: I just think AOPA members should demand more from AOPA, get a new president more often than once in 25 years. Last AOPA is just plan ignorant about experimental aircraft. I don't want to be part of a group that ignores homebuilts so they don't anger Cessna and Piper. I could be wrong. But after 10 years that is what I saw and heard of late from the gent I mentioned who was selling homebuilts and was told by the AOPA adviser to PART IT OUT. That is idiotic hysteria based on NO legal precedence.

George
 
Last edited:
Aopa

gmcjetpilot said:
GA was drastically affect after 9/11. At least the government is doing something. I don't think UAV's on the boarder takes my rights away or is unreasonably unsafe. Are there restrictions? Sure but for USA pilots we live in a Country that has aviation freedom without compare, second to none. We are pretty lucky.
Click to expand...
If my comments start getting too political, I hope Doug deletes them. I'll try to restrain myself.

I'm not sure if you are kidding or not in your comment about the government doing something. I can't believe someone of your intelligence would believe that restricting GA aircraft is making anyone safer. Just "doing something" to be seen as taking some action, even if it is useless, does not earn kudos in my opinion. Perhaps to be seen as "doing something", the government should have banned the production, distribution, and sale of box cutters. That would have prevented any future attacks, right? Perhaps, since it seems like the aircraft used in the attacks were large airliners, the government should have banned all aircraft over 12,000 lbs from US airspace. Now THAT would have at least been logicial!

gmcjetpilot said:
I would like to hear about rule making that AOPA actually, really, truly changed, not something they just took credit for.
Click to expand...
I think you're not aware of how things work in Washington. My belief is that without the AOPA, our rights to fly our small aircraft would be severely restricted or eliminated altogether. You see, everything in DC is based on money or pressure. If you have lots of money, then the politicians either pass laws to help your business, give you taxpayer handouts, undercut your competitors, allow you to collude with your competitors, or at a minimum don't pass laws that hurt you. Without the AOPA in DC putting pressure on politicians, we would have lost more than we already have. No, we have not gained much, if at all, you are right. However, in today's environment of pay to play, not losing is winning for us.

I'm really not sure how the AOPA does as much as they do with the budget they have, and the relatively small number of constituents, but I commend them, and I'm happy to pay my dues.
 
gmcjetpilot said:
...[snip]...There are other organizations that support aviation that I belong to. EAA, ALPA and NAFI to name a few. You could start your own non-profit charter, RVPA, and become president. ...[snip]...
Click to expand...
Hey, guess who owns www.RVOPA.org? :) You never know what the future will bring, so I parked that one some time back.

I'm enjoying this good debate regarding the merits/accomplishments of various organizations. I often marvel and how much text some of you guys can generate. :) I appreciate everyone keeping it so civil also. Thanks again for that.

Best always,
Doug
 
AOPA is not as effective at having restrictions on GA removed and saving airports as I'd like them to be. My Citabria is based within the Washington D.C. ADIZ and someday my RV-7 will be, and the ADIZ nonsense has been going on for 2+ years now with no end in sight. That said, AOPA is up on capitol hill fighting for GA rights, and I suspect things would be worse for GA without them. They are a voice and a presence on the hill for GA. How effective they are is hard to say. It's incredibly difficult to get anything done in this era of big government. Of course, if you can rally millions of people, it appears you can get anything you want.

... Bill
 
Two words: User Fees.

Who else will stand up to the airlines and defend our right to participate in the system?

I fear (maybe incorrectly, maybe not, but who wants to find out the hard way?) that without some form of GA lobbying group, whether it be AOPA or something else, the ATC system will become akin to the mess they have in Canada, Australia, and Europe. Giving the airlines free rein over the ATC system will greviously harm GA, IMHO.
 
Aopa

I consider the $39 (?) I spend on my annual membership to AOPA one of the few real bargains in aviation.
I can tell you that AOPA is well known on Capitol Hill. An organization that can generate thousands of letters from members to Congress on short notice, gets noticed by politicians who are primarily interested in getting votes for the next election. AOPA is not up there with the NRA or AARP, but they are a well known and powerful voice for GA in Washington.
That, coupled with their flight planning software, weather, medical department, legal, etc. are the reasons I consider the price of membership a bargain.

David
 
AOPA is a fantastic organization that deserves all of our support.

Things they have lobbied against:

  • SoCal FSDO restricting experimental access to airports (contrary to many peoples' assertions that the AOPA does not like experimentals)
  • They opposed the closing of numerous airports throughout the country
  • They opposed the absolutely hypocritical nature of the DC ADIZ that restricts individuals but allows commercial airliners (responsible for 9/11) access to the same airspace.
  • They continuously oppose needless and costly ADs
  • They support alternatives to 100LL

George: The fact is that everytime the FAA rulemakers and/or Congress get together to pass new regulations, the airlines are there. The safety nazis are there. The EPA is there. The real estate developers are there. The terror fear-mongerers are there (oops..hope that wasn't political :eek:). If the AOPA isn't there representing general aviation, who will speak for us?
 
Last edited:
Back to the Original Question

Ask and ye shall receive. I sent an email to AOPA membership services asking the original question and had a response within 2 hours. Here is their response:

"Thanks for your email. AOPA publishes only security notams issued under regulations 91.141 and 99.7 on our web site. The notam text and graphics are published in the public access section of our site. No membership or login is required to access this information. For a complete list of all notams and TFRs, please access the links provided."

So there you go. I too think they should publish all notams as there is always that inkling of what might be missed and more is better than not enough. But then again, on the same page is a link to the FAA web site where all notams and TFR graphics are available. If we would like to see all TFRs on this page, then we should all send AOPA an email and I bet if there are enough requests AOPA will accommodate us.

My opinion of AOPA is the same as a few others. I think $39 a year is pretty cheap for lobbying services. Same for EAA dues. Heck the discounts to Sun-N-Fun and AirVenture more than make up the EAA dues. Right now the political aire regarding GA is not very favorable. So yes AOPA and EAA may not be able to effect a lot of improvements, but they are at least running interference and trying to keep things from getting worse.

I happen to like the AOPA magazine. Rod's column is usually pretty good and I really like reading the "Never Again" stories. There are usually several articles in each issue about GA. I think they do a pretty good job of trying to balance the articles.

I also like the AOPA web site. They have many good web based training courses and an excellent medical section as well. The flight planning tool is hands and fists better than the EAA planning tool. Their insurance and legal assistance plans aren't too bad either.

AOPA or EAA may not be everything we want, but magazines aside, if we can't get our dues worth of services out of these organizations then we aren't trying very hard - IMO.
 
another supporter

Count me in on the ranks of AOPA supporters. They provide us with a much needed voice on Capitol Hill in an era where the government is only too happy to regulate without input from its citizens.

I am guessing that the majority of us don't want user fees or more restrictive airspace, and these are two of the issues that are most important to AOPA. Without them we have no say (or very little), with them at least we have a voice.

As for Phil Boyer being president forever -- more power to him. It's a tough job, he seems to do it well; and if he wants to suffer the slings and arrows in order to head these important initiatives for the rest of us, then he has my support.

On the tangent of AOPA cost -- it has to be the best value in aviation. The web site alone is worth the fee. I grudgingly pay dues to other organizations that I feel don't give me a lot in return, but I feel that AOPA has served me well so far. Now if they ever came out against experimental aviation in any way, we would have a parting of the ways.

Enough rambling for me.

Antony
 
Well Good stuff

Jamie said:
AOPA is a fantastic organization that deserves all of our support.

Things they have lobbied against:

  • SoCal FSDO restricting experimental access to airports (contrary to many peoples' assertions that the AOPA does not like experimentals)
  • They opposed the closing of numerous airports throughout the country
  • They opposed the absolutely hypocritical nature of the DC ADIZ that restricts individuals but allows commercial airliners (responsible for 9/11) access to the same airspace.
  • They continuously oppose needless and costly ADs
  • They support alternatives to 100LL

George: The fact is that every time the FAA rulemakers and/or Congress get together to pass new regulations, the airlines are there. The safety nazis are there. The EPA is there. The real estate developers are there. The terror fear-mongerers are there (oops..hope that wasn't political :eek:). If the AOPA isn't there representing general aviation, who will speak for us?
Click to expand...

Well I see the words *lobby against* and *oppose* but how often are
they successful? What do the REALLY DO?

LET'S LOOK AT THE CLAIMS YOU MAKE, SHALL WE :D


* The experimental restriction in SoCal thing (VNY FSDO) is still
being worked. We (pilots) will prevail because it?s illegal and the
EAA is working it NOT the AOPA. A letter from the FAA will
come out soon (in the next week) thanks to EAA. EAA is the one
that is pushing this. HOWEVER they are being quiet as not to
jeopardize the result. AOPA has nothing to do with this.

On AOPA's web site I found one ref:
AOPA for experimental

Again all AOPA did was send a letter out to the Las Vegas FSDO and
than post it on their web site with a hardy patting themselves on the
back.

The EAA again is still working this LAS FSDO issue (not the AOPA) and
doing more than just a letter. Also to the EAA credit they are not
broadcasting there effort as to not jeopardize the results which is still
being worked.

THIS IS WHY AOPA Looses credibility with me. They spend more time
self promoting and making overstatements of their efforts. They want
you to believe they are doing something, but I think they are full of
hot air most of the time.

If you are a AOPA member I would write Phil Boyer and tell him you will
vote him out if they do not work more with the EAA and do less self
promotion, it is COUNTER productive to be in negotiations with the FAA
and make public statements. That is what the AOPA does. I don't know
how members vote but I take it you have to pay more to have voting
rights?


*Airports close and AOPA is impotent. Often its a state thing
like Meigs field in Chicago. AOPA did complain.
AOPA makes hay with Meigs

Although not successful they did not hesitate to pat themselves on
their back (A LOT). Even when they fail they say how great they are.
Really there was likely nothing they could do. Will it stop a Governor
from bulldozing an airport in the middle of the night? Who knows.
Heck,with eminent-domain the Gov. and big money developers can
take YOUR home to put up a shopping mall if they want, tomorrow.


*AD's, even if every pilot wrote in, if wings are falling off or
cranks failing then the AD will go through. (public safety)
T-34 wing

Again the T-34 association got the relief but the AOPA did
little. It did not stop them from getting their $0.02 in, to get some
credit for "assisting". I am sure they helped but who else is going to
bat for T-34's but T-34 owners.

AOPA makes people think more airports would close, restrictions on
airspace proliferate and AD's would be issued in mass without them,
but fact is they do very little most of the time and make more noise
than difference. Do they help but not as much as they want you to
think. Is it better than nothing? I guess, but AOPA needs a shake-up.

AOPA members should hold them accountable. Like the UAV hub-
hub, Tell them to cut the UAV crud out. I want secure borders. How
about they just get their facts straight on what selling a homebuilt
means.

Also AOPA advisers are telling homebuilders? they will be sued
if they sell their plane. Ridiculous! There is NO legal precedence of
ANY homebuilder being sued. FACT. They are way out of line with
this hysterical incorrect advice.

We are amateur built planes and do not have to meet any standards.
There are many, many ways to limit your liability exposure, but if you
follow AOPA's advice they will tell you to PART OUT YOUR RV or
SCRAP IT! Dumb, stupid and wrong.

Here is another AOPA comment on homebuilts:
"Do the limits applied to an experimental airplane differ from those for
my Cessna 152?"

AOPA: "You bet they do! The experimental operating limitations, which
are issued with the experimental certificate, define such things as flight
test requirements, VFR limits, passenger limits, and maintenance
requirements. For instance, homebuilt airplanes generally are
restricted from flying over populated areas (except for takeoffs and
landings) or on congested airways."

Wrong wrong. What VFR limits? I guess IFR is not allowed?

Maintenance requirements? Yes there are little to none.

Restricted from flying over populated areas? Wrong, most homebuilts
have a operating limitations that allow flying over populated areas,
even if not taking off or landing. Since 1995 or '96 the technical
order 88 gives guidance that homebuilts be given the ability to fly
over congested areas as a standard Op Limit approval.

Look the AOPA should just stay out of experimental aircraft affairs.
The AOPA does on occasion work with EAA but many times AOPA has
their own agenda and it's not the EAA's.

AOPA has done good, but do we NEED them? I think you ALL made
good arguments that we do, but I don't think you demand enough
from AOPA. Every RV/AOPA member should write in and tell Phil to
put out TRUE info out about experimental's and get advise on
experimental aircraft from the EAA.

We could start a grass root lobby group right here on this web site
from this forum. Every time we see something the Government does
we don't like, we all write in. It does not cost us anything and may be
as effective. However be sure AOPA will take credit as "assisting"
the Vansairforce builders pilot group (or the name Doug said).

If the FAA put some severe restrictions on homebuilts, EAA and
homebuilders would rally and protest with or without AOPA. The
Manufactures assoc, Helicopter assoc and Business aviation assoc
will not care.

The AOPA does have full time lobbyist, where EAA can not by law
due to it's type of organization. However the EAA works with the
FAA and makes a difference. They just don't advertise and over blow
their work as AOPA does. AOPA writes a letter and to a FSDO and
you would think by their description they saved the world.

Thanks for the input it was very intelligent and thoughtful. I will look
into AOPA and see if they have changed in the last 10 years. The fact
is AOPA will do what they want if it behooves them. I think they should
not give out advice on experimental's and keep quite and do more
actual work. Issues like UAV's is really not an issue.

Bottom line AOPA does good but lets not over inflate their stature
or their affect on government. It is up to us as individuals to get
involved, not just pay dues to AOPA. Write your representatives.

G
 
Last edited:
More about AOPA


Rv8ch: the government should have banned all aircraft over 12,000
lbs from US airspace. Now THAT would have at least been
logical!

I understand where you are going, but I am talking about doing
something about ground boarder patrol with UAV?s. You have a
point, a 1,600 lb plane will not take down a skyscraper, but who is
to say what "they" will put in it. As far as weapons carried on
airlines by passengers, you are right, but that is the past.



RV8ch: I think you're not aware of how things work in
Washington. My belief is that without the AOPA, our rights to fly
our small aircraft would be severely restricted or eliminated
altogether. You see, everything in DC is based on money or
pressure??I'm really not sure how the AOPA does as much as
they do with the budget they have, and the relatively small number
of constituents, but I commend them, and I'm happy to pay my
dues.

The fact is flying is not a right it is a privilage.

I am not sure either and how you can measure AOPA?s
effectiveness. I just observe a lot of complaining and losses for the
AOPA. Also as I pointed out above they take credit for more than
they really do.

If we all join the AOPA would it make a bigger difference. I think it
would inflate AOPA's net worth. I suspect many AOPA members pay
dues and little else. However we all can write our Congressman and
Senator without AOPA?s help. I do write my representatives in
DC on occasion and get replies. You don't need to pay AOPA to be
heard in DC. I think there are enough experimental's flying that it's
about time AOPA take the experimental's out of the ugly step child
category.

I know Phil will take notice if he gets thousands of AOPA members
threatening to quit if experimental's are not represented more
accurately and supported more vigorously. This of course would ruffle
GAMA's feathers. Do you know how much Van's and other kit plane
companies cost Cessna and Piper. I would be happy if AOPA stopped
spreading faults hoods about the operating limitations and real liability
in selling a homebuilt plane.



Flybill7: AOPA is not as effective at having restrictions on GA
removed and saving airports as I'd like them to be. My Citabria is
based within the Washington D.C. ADIZ and someday my RV-7
will be, and the ADIZ nonsense has been going on for 2+ years now
with no end in sight.... Bill

Bill I feel for you. I read the procedures to get into and out of local
DC airports and its a nightmare, if you can at all.

Frankly I was planning a personal visit in a light plane and it scared
me off. I only live 5 hours drive time, so I drove. Even planning
VFR flight along the East Coast, say from the Carolina's to New
York is like a ski slalom course. I just said heck with it and went
out of my way, just off the Atlantic shore line. I understand AOPA
has improved or streamlined some of the DC airport procedures.
Good for them and us.

As many pilots as there are, there are more non-pilots and if a vote
where put to it, I suspect the vast majority would vote to maintain
the GA plane restrictions around DC. That is a Democracy.



Dgamble: Two words: User Fees.

Who else will stand up to the airlines and defend our right to
participate in the system?

I fear (maybe incorrectly, maybe not, but who wants to find out the
hard way?) that without some form of GA lobbying group, whether
it be AOPA or something else, the ATC system will become akin to
the mess they have in Canada, Australia, and Europe. Giving the
airlines free rein over the ATC system will grievously harm GA,
IMHO.

I don?t think the airline lobby is anti-GA, but you are right there is a
pecking order and airlines are ahead. They employ people and fly
the general public in mass. I fly for the Airlines and we don't use
little airports and we fly well above GA altitudes. However the Gov
is doing things with ATC that is making the airlines nervous.

You make a good point and agree we need something, and the
AOPA is it? It would be nice if they had FREE membership with
no magazine, no voting right, that had web site access and sent
news letter emails for letter campaigns. However AOPA is in the
business of making money to pay themselves.

I see EAA, as an alternative, and they do work with the FAA,
but can not lobby DC, due to their legal charter restrictions.

With gas prices going up, GA may be the under more attack. Even
though we can get +30 mpg, I herd a TV pundit make a smug self
righteous comment about SUV?s and personal planes.
That is spreading. If the Government does not get alternative fuels
and look into Exxon, $400 mil CEO retirement packages and Multi-
Billion quarterly profits, it will not matter, when we can?t get any
Avgas at all, at any price. Airport, airspace and AD restrictions will
be moot with no go juice.

I think EAA is doing more for us than you know, but they just are
not into self promotion as AOPA is. To be fair AOPA has lobbyist
on the hill, EAA does not and can not.



Dmaib: I can tell you that AOPA is well known on Capitol Hill. An
organization that can generate thousands of letters from members to
Congress on short notice, gets noticed by politicians who are
primarily interested in getting votes for the next election. AOPA is
not up there with the NRA or AARP, but they are a well known and
powerful voice for GA in Washington.

So how do we become as powerful as NRA and AARP? I guess it
should be pointed out guns are a constitutional right, every one
gets old, and flying is a privilege not a right. I guess it is votes,
there are just way more old people and gun toter's.


Again AOPA should have a low cost no magazine, no frills membership
that allows some access to the web site for information. I don?t need
AOPA to get a weather brief. I guess AOPA has a office buildings,
Phil's salary and a company plane to pay for. What does Phil Boyer
make a year?

All experimental members who are homebuilder or experimental
pilots should write AOPA and threaten to quit it they don't do more
for experimental's. As I pointed out there comments on
experimental's are often wrong or negative.



william weesner: and who cares. if their work helps me to continue
to fly im fine with that but i feel like a step child to aopa, red
headed none the less. come on george they got that cool flight
planner thingy and i get a snobby hat to wear to ball games all for
39.00

ha ha ha ha ha ha , that is too funny. You are right. I am sure the
flight planner thingy is cool and you make a good point; I am no a
red head, but sure you meant no offense to red heads. You get a
hat too!

I can?t get into AOPA?s head or culture but I see them fighting
about a lousy TFR over the boarder and saying stupid hysterical
things about UAV?s running into planes, and I think Capital Hill
will just ignore them with that kind of bull. To use your analogy
they are the ugly step child with red hair on the Hill. The impact
of the TFR is small.

I still get the feeling AOPA is more aligned with:
-General Aviation Manufacturers Association
-Helicopter Association International
-National Business Aviation Association

They probably get way more money from GAMA and NBAA then
they do individual pilot owners. However it would be nice if the
"AOPA Advisers" stop making faults and unsupportable claims
that selling a homebuilt carries a high liability risk. From all legal
precedence it is pretty low risk, since it has not happened. If you
quote John Denver, you will be wrong. If you point out Van's
Aircraft and the factory RV-8 wing failure vs. Van's employee and
passenger, Van prevailed. Besides that was not against a builder,
it was against Van's wing design. It was determined that the plane
was just past or at Acro gross and was overloaded. LET THAT BE
A CAUTION, especially RV-4's and RV-8's. The controls are very
light with a backseater. Also before you give the controls to a
passenger to do ACRO make sure you know and trust them. You
can pull the wings off pulling the wing removal stick too hard.


LIABILITY
We should start another thread on how to reduce your liability,
but I suggest you get a good aviation attorney who knows about
product liability and knows experimental to council you prior and
during a sale of your plane. Records, placards, hold harmless
waivers and independent inspections will go a long, long way to
protect you if you need to defend yourself.

AOPA's advises that you WILL be sued if you sell your plane is
just silly and based on no legal facts. Yes you have liability, but
there is no product protection to a buyer of an amateur built plane.
You are more likely to get sued for your dog, kid or driving your
car.

G
 
Last edited:
My amazement at the verbosity of some of the posts on this forum has been stretched to a new level.......

Sam Buchanan
 
Thanks

Sam Buchanan said:
My amazement at the verbosity of some of the posts on this forum has been stretched to a new level.......

Sam Buchanan
Click to expand...
Thanks I think so to.
emoticon-claphands.gif


Do you have anything intelligent to add?

AOPA takes credit where credit is NOT due. :(

Have a nice day, G :p
 
Just for the record....I'm am both an AOPA and EAA member. I believe my money was well spent with both organizations. While I don't agree with everything they do, the overall impression is a net positive (for me).

Regards,
Doug
 
AOPA is worth 39 bucks a year

I find that AOPA's Air Safety Foundation safety seminars are well worth the price of dues alone. I even donate a little extra money to ASF.

If they also help to save airports to land my RV on (even if the attempt to do so is under the guise of saving the airport for business jets) then it is money well spent. As a matter of fact, AOPA just let me know that my local city government is eyeballing my airport's property again. They just see tax revenues from putting new homes on it.

AOPA must really get their money from the magazines advertisers because I know I sure get more out of them than they get out of me.
 
Last edited:
Aopa

>>RV8ch: I think you're not aware of how things work in
Washington. My belief is that without the AOPA, our rights to fly
our small aircraft would be severely restricted or eliminated
altogether.....

G>The fact is flying is not a right it is a privilege.

Question:
Is flying a privilege or a right for the airlines ?

A right for either entity? Maybe, maybe not. What it is about is equal "rights".

Currently the airlines are blaming their recurring financial difficulties on high passenger facility charges, "un-balanced" taxes, etc. AOPA is the prime defender of GA right now, and without some organization, GA would certainly be squashed under the lobbying weight of the airlines. I'm sure they are not perfect but what group is? I'm not going to wait around for someone better to come along while the airlines line up their whiney, what-pension, federally subsidized, lobbying efforts.

AARP was mentioned. AARP lines its own pockets from their own medicare part D plan (thats the new part where other people pay to chemically enable some weezers heart failure through horizontal refreshment and statins); car insurance plan, financial plan, etc.

I think AOPA represents their members much better than AARP; AARP just has more members.
 
Right or privilege

WildBill said:
Question:
Is flying a privilege or a right for the airlines ?

A right for either entity? Maybe, maybe not. What it is about is equal "rights".
Click to expand...
I was hoping to ignore George's troll on this question, but now that you've egged me on...

In these days of perpetual war on everything, the only rights we have are those that we are willing to defend. Companies learned this quite some time ago, which is why they invest so much time, energy, and money paying elected officials, one way or another, to do their bidding. Our rights are not under attack from none other than our own elected officials, and their corporate masters. Having a group like AOPA defending our interests is one of the ways we have to fight for our right to fly.
 
Strength in Numbers

It's often true that organizations such as the AOPA and yes, even the EAA, spend too much time patting themselves on the back, but that seems to go with the territory. I don't judge them on that fact alone, or self-promoting statements about the great things Phil or Tom have done for us. Have you listened to any politicians lately?

I have lived and flown in other countries, where GA is so restricted you sometimes wonder why you even bother, and I am convinced that without the AOPA we would be facing the same situation in this country.

Apart from all of the hyperbole on what they may or may not accomplish, the numbers speak for themselves. With about 450,000 members, it makes our trusted public servants in DC sit up and take notice, at least more notice than they would otherwise give GA. For the same cost as about 10 gallons of gas, your membership dues are well worth it. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't want to contribute is if they are harboring some sort of pathological hatred of the AOPA, in which case, maybe a few hundred dollars for a shrink would be a better investment.

There is strength in numbers. If you enjoy the privileges of being a GA pilot and you don't support an organization such as the AOPA, you are not only getting a free ride, you may be inadvertently contributing to the demise of GA in this country as we now know it IMHO.
 
We want You!

I guess the answer is every pilot should belong to AOPA. I don't want to be ANTI-AOPA, I am not. I would just like a better AOPA.

What I am ANTI about is the way GA gets treated. I think AOPA is a fine organization, but I also do think (right / wrong) they don't really represent experimental's. That's all.

Also the beauty of our democracy is any individual can access the "Gov" with out an intermediary (state and Fed). You can get info on what the Gov is planning, i.e., (NPRM), Notice of Proposed Rule Making and write our representatives. Even if the T-34 guys get picked on, we all write in. The scratch your back, my back theory. I don't think my $39 is going to make a differnce at AOPA, but I am strongly considering rejoining AOPA to see what's going on and get the groovy Flt planner. :rolleyes: I agree, power in numbers.

At least AOPA can say they represent xx,xxx number of constituents. However I cringe at some of their "causes" and feel they are tied to special interest, such as the General Aviation Manufactures Assoc. (could be wrong). I suppose what is good for (GAMA) is good for us? I just would like to see them stop with issues like the "UAV" deal and go after flight restrictions to experimental's in California and Nevada and support EAA. If all you AOPA Guy's and Gal's write Phil B., I think it would make a differnce in how AOPA treats our sub-group of GA. Instead of going lone eagle, we all join AOPA (and EAA), making them change for the better. I don't think there is much we can do about TFR's?

Here is how to read NPRM (attempted humor alert, please don't read following with out your funny hat on.)

Subject: FAA NPRM
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING (NPRM)
Part 0, Section 000 (a) 1(c)
Section I - No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction or
suggestion or supervision of a pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or
make, or make attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all, in
whole or in part of the herein mentioned Aviation Regulations, except as
authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed by, or inspected by,
the Administrator.

Section II - If a pilot, or group of associate pilots becomes aware of, or
realizes, or detects, or discovers, or finds that he or she, or they, are or
have been beginning to understand the Aviation Regulations, they must
immediately, within three (3) days notify, in writing, the Administrator.

Section III - Upon receipt of the above-mentioned notice of impending
comprehension, the Administrator shall immediately rewrite the Aviation
Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension
hazards.

Section IV - The Administrator may, at his or her discretion, require the
offending pilot or pilots to attend remedial instruction in Aviation Regulations
until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding
anything.

George :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.