AOPA Elections
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AOPA Elections
OK, the AOPA elections arent for at least six months, so why this post now. Well I have been told that the old huff-and-puff days of the AOPA committee are not behind us.
A friend who attended an AOPA forum held in Adelaide has warned me that a couple of the 'old' characters are still there breathing their stale magic, upsetting members and attacking anyone who criticises their wisdom.
Seems we might even see another 'old' hand from WA throw his hat back into the ring. After the damage that person and his cohorts did a few years back that would be a disaster for GA.
So what you say, so I suggest you think carefully about who you will vote for, if not a member (or a resigned in disgust member, like many) rejoin and vote AGAINST any name you recognise from the bad old days.
I hear there are some good people there, but you won't hear much from them, they are drowned out by the monotonous mating call of the blind walrusses.
A friend who attended an AOPA forum held in Adelaide has warned me that a couple of the 'old' characters are still there breathing their stale magic, upsetting members and attacking anyone who criticises their wisdom.
Seems we might even see another 'old' hand from WA throw his hat back into the ring. After the damage that person and his cohorts did a few years back that would be a disaster for GA.
So what you say, so I suggest you think carefully about who you will vote for, if not a member (or a resigned in disgust member, like many) rejoin and vote AGAINST any name you recognise from the bad old days.
I hear there are some good people there, but you won't hear much from them, they are drowned out by the monotonous mating call of the blind walrusses.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing much has changed at AOPA for the past 25 years, same attitudes, same rhetoric,
only new names and faces.
Yes I was a member, I just didn’t renew, and that was in 1977, and I have met most of the Presidents along the way too.
Become a member again - No way.
only new names and faces.
Yes I was a member, I just didn’t renew, and that was in 1977, and I have met most of the Presidents along the way too.
Become a member again - No way.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bankstown Airport
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Thermal,
I'm with you!!!. Lets not do anything for our mates and sit back and whine and whinge about what could be, but will never happen because of the slackers that we are. Sh!T let's even borrow some money of our mates so that we can be even more comfortable, considering we are already weltching of them now for what their membership in AOPA does for your flying.
Dont get it yet? AOPA has done more this country's flying, (some bad, mostly good) than any organisation around. Why? because Joe down the road can commit his money to making a difference.
You dont wanna be a part of it. Don't! But you can't complain about the current state of affairs within GA either. (or better yet, you spend most of your weekends going through the mess that CASA try to put on us, then you go and argue that, and then you sit back whilst everyone has a go at you for doing it wrong. At no charge for your time!!)
Not much has changed in the last 25 years with AOPA... nope, but one hellovalot has changed within GA.
Btw- not caught up in this mobil thing are you....
AF
I'm with you!!!. Lets not do anything for our mates and sit back and whine and whinge about what could be, but will never happen because of the slackers that we are. Sh!T let's even borrow some money of our mates so that we can be even more comfortable, considering we are already weltching of them now for what their membership in AOPA does for your flying.
Dont get it yet? AOPA has done more this country's flying, (some bad, mostly good) than any organisation around. Why? because Joe down the road can commit his money to making a difference.
You dont wanna be a part of it. Don't! But you can't complain about the current state of affairs within GA either. (or better yet, you spend most of your weekends going through the mess that CASA try to put on us, then you go and argue that, and then you sit back whilst everyone has a go at you for doing it wrong. At no charge for your time!!)
Not much has changed in the last 25 years with AOPA... nope, but one hellovalot has changed within GA.
Btw- not caught up in this mobil thing are you....
AF
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm. I don't post here often, AOPA Board members tend to get shot at here!! 
Anyway Thermal, I agree with AF. A lot of stuff goes on 'behind the scenes' that you don't see.
Just look recently, Mobil - Chris McKeown. (and add that to the thousands of dollars worth of free legal advice he gives every week!!). And pretty soon you will see a real achievement, one that WILL help revitalise GA training. All Chris' work!!!
AUF, we all got stuck in to try and stop CASA over-regulation.
Russell Kelly. A free accountant, treasurer and magazine director. Without him no AOPA, without AOPA you guys would be neck deep in P@@!!!
Part 121B. Some here argue GA Chtr needs cleaning up. Over prescriptive regulation isn't the way!!!
Marjory Pagani, CASA are a lot less keen to stuff people around over net exams now!!!
Even Bill Pike (and yes I know what you are gonna say), I figure he puts in AT LEAST 50 hours a week into AOPA business. negotiating with CASA, AsA and Government. Who is gonna do that if AOPA folds because you can't be bothered???
But anyway, all that and a magazine subscription don't seem to be worth $100 bucks a year or so. So what should we do to get you all to join???
I mean that, give me some suggestions!!!
I suppose if AOPA was a union we could have two sets of Regs, one for AOPA members, and whatever CASA want to throw at those that aren't.
Now there's a thought.
Anyway Thermal, I agree with AF. A lot of stuff goes on 'behind the scenes' that you don't see.
Just look recently, Mobil - Chris McKeown. (and add that to the thousands of dollars worth of free legal advice he gives every week!!). And pretty soon you will see a real achievement, one that WILL help revitalise GA training. All Chris' work!!!
AUF, we all got stuck in to try and stop CASA over-regulation.
Russell Kelly. A free accountant, treasurer and magazine director. Without him no AOPA, without AOPA you guys would be neck deep in P@@!!!
Part 121B. Some here argue GA Chtr needs cleaning up. Over prescriptive regulation isn't the way!!!
Marjory Pagani, CASA are a lot less keen to stuff people around over net exams now!!!
Even Bill Pike (and yes I know what you are gonna say), I figure he puts in AT LEAST 50 hours a week into AOPA business. negotiating with CASA, AsA and Government. Who is gonna do that if AOPA folds because you can't be bothered???
But anyway, all that and a magazine subscription don't seem to be worth $100 bucks a year or so. So what should we do to get you all to join???
I mean that, give me some suggestions!!!I suppose if AOPA was a union we could have two sets of Regs, one for AOPA members, and whatever CASA want to throw at those that aren't.
Now there's a thought.
Moderator
AOPA friend, it's funny, but the people who seem to compalin about the state of GA are often very vocal members of AOPA already. The rest of us, who have no wish to join this organisation, or who have already resigned in disgust, are too busy getting on with making a living in GA to get involved in that sort of nonsense.
snarek, saying people "can't be bothered" again shows a typical AOPA lack of understanding of the realities of this industry. No, we would not be in deep doo doo without AOPA, the professional GA organisations would be a lot better off without their unwanted interference in the past, and future intentions. And this is our livlihood, not a weekend hobby.
Sorry, but AOPA have done too much damage and made too big fools of themselves, a few reshuffles in the committee won't change that.
If I had a lazy $100 I'd give it to the RFDS
snarek, saying people "can't be bothered" again shows a typical AOPA lack of understanding of the realities of this industry. No, we would not be in deep doo doo without AOPA, the professional GA organisations would be a lot better off without their unwanted interference in the past, and future intentions. And this is our livlihood, not a weekend hobby.
Sorry, but AOPA have done too much damage and made too big fools of themselves, a few reshuffles in the committee won't change that.
If I had a lazy $100 I'd give it to the RFDS
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFI
And who are your customers???
If the 'weekend hobbyists' can't fly then who are you going to train??? Or are you another who feels a CPL is the minimum we all need to be allowed to fly. (And seeing the quality of some CPLs of late, that is positively scary!!!).
Anyway, since you and your organisation are obviously not members then you are about to miss out, big time
And if you come crying 'please let me in' perhaps we will think about it, perhaps not. (more likely not)
To those of you with a little more common sense, imagine where GA would be today if CASA had free reign??? Scary eh. For those GA'ers with AUF roots, together we can keep em at bay, apart we are all stuffed!!!
Oh and by the way, I remember, CFI was one of those who would use repressive regulation in the interests of his own profits against the AUF. In my view, blinkered, self interested 'I'll be right' Jackism.
Anyone care to give us a hint which organisation 'CFI' represents??
AK
And who are your customers???
If the 'weekend hobbyists' can't fly then who are you going to train??? Or are you another who feels a CPL is the minimum we all need to be allowed to fly. (And seeing the quality of some CPLs of late, that is positively scary!!!).
Anyway, since you and your organisation are obviously not members then you are about to miss out, big time
And if you come crying 'please let me in' perhaps we will think about it, perhaps not.
(more likely not)To those of you with a little more common sense, imagine where GA would be today if CASA had free reign??? Scary eh. For those GA'ers with AUF roots, together we can keep em at bay, apart we are all stuffed!!!
Oh and by the way, I remember, CFI was one of those who would use repressive regulation in the interests of his own profits against the AUF. In my view, blinkered, self interested 'I'll be right' Jackism.
Anyone care to give us a hint which organisation 'CFI' represents??
AK
Moderator
I rest my case
A worry if AOPA have got a little surprise up their sleeve that will leave the flying schools "crying" (again) what is it this time? Why do AOPA people make these statements, which sounds like a thinly veiled threat to wreck our industry and livlihoods, and then expect our support?!!!!!
"Oh and by the way, I remember, CFI was one of those who would use repressive regulation in the interests of his own profits against the AUF. In my view, blinkered, self interested 'I'll be right' Jackism"
Well if running a good business, providing a safe, quality service , employment, and making a profit is a crime then tell that to ASIC and the government. Actually nearly all turnover goes back into the industry in the form of wages, maintenance, fuel, LSC etc. The meagre profits in this industry are hardly enough for anyone to accuse the schools of being greedy. This is not a charity, this is an industry which puts dosh into the economy and employs a lot of PROFESSIONAL people who have worked hard and made a lot of sacrifices to get where they are. IF AOPA sees that as blinkered, self interested "I'll be right Jackism" then I shudder to think what your little surprise is, if it has been conjured up by people who display their lack of understanding of this industry, human nature and business in general as clearly as your last post did.
BTW many on pprune (though obviously not yourself) know who I am, and that's fine; just be aware that "outing" people on Pprune is generally considered to be bad Pprunemanship. I know exactly who you are, your name is in my logbook, but that doesn't mean I would resort to "outing" you because I disagree with you!
Perhaps you will hear what you want to hear elsewhere.
"Oh and by the way, I remember, CFI was one of those who would use repressive regulation in the interests of his own profits against the AUF. In my view, blinkered, self interested 'I'll be right' Jackism"
Well if running a good business, providing a safe, quality service , employment, and making a profit is a crime then tell that to ASIC and the government. Actually nearly all turnover goes back into the industry in the form of wages, maintenance, fuel, LSC etc. The meagre profits in this industry are hardly enough for anyone to accuse the schools of being greedy. This is not a charity, this is an industry which puts dosh into the economy and employs a lot of PROFESSIONAL people who have worked hard and made a lot of sacrifices to get where they are. IF AOPA sees that as blinkered, self interested "I'll be right Jackism" then I shudder to think what your little surprise is, if it has been conjured up by people who display their lack of understanding of this industry, human nature and business in general as clearly as your last post did.
BTW many on pprune (though obviously not yourself) know who I am, and that's fine; just be aware that "outing" people on Pprune is generally considered to be bad Pprunemanship. I know exactly who you are, your name is in my logbook, but that doesn't mean I would resort to "outing" you because I disagree with you!
Perhaps you will hear what you want to hear elsewhere.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
snarek, I can see that your post was made in the heat of the moment, but let me see if I got this right....
You (reperesenting AOPA) appear to say that anyone who a) runs a legitimate aviation business in our free country and b) who exercises thair democratic right in this free country NOT to join an organisation deserves to have thier livlihood threatened by hitherto unknown "fait accompli" from that organisation unless they beg to join the organisation.
This is an Australian forum isn't it? Or are we living somewhere rather sinister?
Please explain!
You (reperesenting AOPA) appear to say that anyone who a) runs a legitimate aviation business in our free country and b) who exercises thair democratic right in this free country NOT to join an organisation deserves to have thier livlihood threatened by hitherto unknown "fait accompli" from that organisation unless they beg to join the organisation.
This is an Australian forum isn't it? Or are we living somewhere rather sinister?
Please explain!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IB.
I think he was just trying to say that Flying schools could miss out on some good opportunity if they continue to keep the attitude of "never join AOPA again".
Oh, and when you see a rather odd sentence followed by " ", common Ppruneknownledge means its a joke.....
REEEELLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAX!
I thought this forum was predominantly UK??
Dog
I think he was just trying to say that Flying schools could miss out on some good opportunity if they continue to keep the attitude of "never join AOPA again".
Oh, and when you see a rather odd sentence followed by "
", common Ppruneknownledge means its a joke.....REEEELLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAX!
I thought this forum was predominantly UK??
Dog
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Living next door to Alan
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the red corner......
CFI 1
snarek nil.
No wonder most aviators (for whatever reason) do not consider membership as beneficial.
Snarek, you just gave us another with that attitude
snarek nil.
No wonder most aviators (for whatever reason) do not consider membership as beneficial.
Snarek, you just gave us another with that attitude
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IB
Read what dogmimed said, he is right. I am not threatening anyone. But if AOPA come up with a package that will assist GA in finacial terms, give me a good reason why we should not favour members first. I can't think of one and would need a lot of convincing. We are here for members first, if GA benefit from what we do the so be it.
I don't think there is one true aviator who would knowingly shaft the AUF, I can only surmise anyone who wants to is only in it for the dough. But anyway, i won't be and particularly not on the behest of non-members. (I actually have never received such a request from an affiliated school or club, only the non-affiliates, funny AOPA never take that line eh???).
I actually don't care if organisations are members. We put a lot more work into affiliates than members (and rightly so). At the moment more affiliates would be more work, something we don't really need as voluteers (but would welcome genuine rejoiners).
But you can bet your last buck, I'll be doing what ever I can to make sure it is only members that get benefit from AOPA work wherever possible.
The choice is yours.
I don't need to be outed CFI, I am Andrew Kerans, AOPA Director, most people here know that. And yes CFI, I know who you are as well. But no need to be paranoid (not much anyway).
AK
Read what dogmimed said, he is right. I am not threatening anyone. But if AOPA come up with a package that will assist GA in finacial terms, give me a good reason why we should not favour members first. I can't think of one and would need a lot of convincing. We are here for members first, if GA benefit from what we do the so be it.
I don't think there is one true aviator who would knowingly shaft the AUF, I can only surmise anyone who wants to is only in it for the dough. But anyway, i won't be and particularly not on the behest of non-members. (I actually have never received such a request from an affiliated school or club, only the non-affiliates, funny AOPA never take that line eh???).
I actually don't care if organisations are members. We put a lot more work into affiliates than members (and rightly so). At the moment more affiliates would be more work, something we don't really need as voluteers (but would welcome genuine rejoiners).
But you can bet your last buck, I'll be doing what ever I can to make sure it is only members that get benefit from AOPA work wherever possible.
The choice is yours.
I don't need to be outed CFI, I am Andrew Kerans, AOPA Director, most people here know that. And yes CFI, I know who you are as well. But no need to be paranoid (not much anyway).
AK
Last edited by snarek; 1st Nov 2002 at 05:18.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heh heh heh
Typical, non-members getting p!ssed off at AOPA's direction.
It is an association boys, if you don't like it, join and put your 2c in. If you don't want to join, shaddup!!!
Simple really.
As for AOPA's news, I hope it is big, and I hope non-members miss out bigtime
Chuck.
Typical, non-members getting p!ssed off at AOPA's direction.
It is an association boys, if you don't like it, join and put your 2c in. If you don't want to join, shaddup!!!
Simple really.
As for AOPA's news, I hope it is big, and I hope non-members miss out bigtime
Chuck.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may have been just possible that you could have got my $100, just to suck it and see if things really have changed or are changing, but on the evidence here and elsewhere, now I'm not so sure.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woomera
It is more than $100 (sorry). But it is worth it.
Now I am unashamedly an advocate of the private pilot, always will be. But I have a deeprooted sense of fairness, and when I look at the way CASA shuts down the small operator without recourse to natural justice, well that p!sses me.
A lot of people here think AOPA should represent GA Chtr, Trg etc and not PPL freedoms. But they aren't members. An organisation represents its members, taking money from the PPL or AUF member and then using it soley to support (say) CHTR or RPT just isn't right.
It would be good to have new blood on the committee. It would be good to have new opinions.
But the meek ain't gonna inherit AOPA, so fighters are needed. The opinions some claim to have been around or 25 years are strong and forthright, to change them people will need to put up a bl@@dy good argument or vote them out. Those that don't like my line (ie pro AUF and PPL) should join and vote me out!!!
That said, I'd love to see your membership come through.
AK
It is more than $100 (sorry). But it is worth it.
Now I am unashamedly an advocate of the private pilot, always will be. But I have a deeprooted sense of fairness, and when I look at the way CASA shuts down the small operator without recourse to natural justice, well that p!sses me.
A lot of people here think AOPA should represent GA Chtr, Trg etc and not PPL freedoms. But they aren't members. An organisation represents its members, taking money from the PPL or AUF member and then using it soley to support (say) CHTR or RPT just isn't right.
It would be good to have new blood on the committee. It would be good to have new opinions.
But the meek ain't gonna inherit AOPA, so fighters are needed. The opinions some claim to have been around or 25 years are strong and forthright, to change them people will need to put up a bl@@dy good argument or vote them out. Those that don't like my line (ie pro AUF and PPL) should join and vote me out!!!
That said, I'd love to see your membership come through.
AK
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow I may be new to this pprune thing, but i'm learning fast.
If the attitude shown here by the director of AOPA is typical of thier kind, then I don't want to play in that sandpit, because those children seem rather nasty and spiteful and i don't like bullies.
snarek said "A lot of people here think AOPA should represent GA Chtr, Trg etc and not PPL freedoms. But they aren't members. " so what is he doing coming onto a forum for professional pilots and threateneing them and slagging them off??
sorry if i seem naive.
If the attitude shown here by the director of AOPA is typical of thier kind, then I don't want to play in that sandpit, because those children seem rather nasty and spiteful and i don't like bullies.
snarek said "A lot of people here think AOPA should represent GA Chtr, Trg etc and not PPL freedoms. But they aren't members. " so what is he doing coming onto a forum for professional pilots and threateneing them and slagging them off??
sorry if i seem naive.
Moderator
Hello again Andrew.
So, in your own words GA and charter aren't members. You represent the PPLs and AUF and that is admirable, but surely that doesn't put you in a position to judge what is "good" for the professional end of the industry, if you represent, your own words again "weekend hobbyists".
Not sure how many people here think AOPA should represent us. Perhaps we could have a poll. Personally, looking at some of the childish rhetoric from their supporters, they don't seem fit to seriously represent anyone. Perhaps if you and your friends are looking to drum up support you woud publish your proposals for changes to our industry instead of posting "nyah nyah" style comments.
We would all agree that it would be nice to reduce the cost of flying. But safety comes at a cost, and there is no such thing as cheap flying. Or cheap fuel, cheap insurance, cheap maintenance, cheap rent, etc etc. If anyone is under the impression that GA businesses are run by "fat cats" they are very, very misguided.
Does your deeprooted (sic) sense of fairness include allowing others to have different opinions than yours?
P. S. I am no fan of CASA. They have made the last few months of my life a paperwork nightmare.
The AUF leave me with a profound feeling of indifference.
And the problem isn't so much the people CASA do prosecute, but the people they should and don't.
So, in your own words GA and charter aren't members. You represent the PPLs and AUF and that is admirable, but surely that doesn't put you in a position to judge what is "good" for the professional end of the industry, if you represent, your own words again "weekend hobbyists".
Not sure how many people here think AOPA should represent us. Perhaps we could have a poll. Personally, looking at some of the childish rhetoric from their supporters, they don't seem fit to seriously represent anyone. Perhaps if you and your friends are looking to drum up support you woud publish your proposals for changes to our industry instead of posting "nyah nyah" style comments.
We would all agree that it would be nice to reduce the cost of flying. But safety comes at a cost, and there is no such thing as cheap flying. Or cheap fuel, cheap insurance, cheap maintenance, cheap rent, etc etc. If anyone is under the impression that GA businesses are run by "fat cats" they are very, very misguided.
Does your deeprooted (sic) sense of fairness include allowing others to have different opinions than yours?
P. S. I am no fan of CASA. They have made the last few months of my life a paperwork nightmare.
The AUF leave me with a profound feeling of indifference.
And the problem isn't so much the people CASA do prosecute, but the people they should and don't.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IB
This is the GA part of the forum. PPLs are GA as well. Do you expect them to pay (their AOPA dues) to protect non-members???
Do you expect them, once they have paid you for their PPL, to give in meekly when CASA, RAAF and RPT attempt to impose 'safety' restrictions on their operations without justification???
What would you have of the PPL and AOPA???
CFI
I didn't say AOPA was just there for the PPL. I was referring to me and me alone. Their are those on the Board, such as Chris McKeown, who spend hours every day fighting for the whole GA sector. He also gives fee legal advice (not just 'referrals .. real advice that you would normally pay thousands for) to all sectors of GA.
I welcome other opinions. I will listen to them, but that doesn't guaratee they will become mine. If you and Barbie feel AOPA should be supporting another particular sector more strongly, then join and voice that opinion. Please don't expect us to change AOPA towards the perspective of non-members. That is niave.
There are many members, but not many active ones. Any person with a perspective and perseverance can change things, so why not give it a go???
AK
This is the GA part of the forum. PPLs are GA as well. Do you expect them to pay (their AOPA dues) to protect non-members???
Do you expect them, once they have paid you for their PPL, to give in meekly when CASA, RAAF and RPT attempt to impose 'safety' restrictions on their operations without justification???
What would you have of the PPL and AOPA???
CFI
I didn't say AOPA was just there for the PPL. I was referring to me and me alone. Their are those on the Board, such as Chris McKeown, who spend hours every day fighting for the whole GA sector. He also gives fee legal advice (not just 'referrals .. real advice that you would normally pay thousands for) to all sectors of GA.
I welcome other opinions. I will listen to them, but that doesn't guaratee they will become mine. If you and Barbie feel AOPA should be supporting another particular sector more strongly, then join and voice that opinion. Please don't expect us to change AOPA towards the perspective of non-members. That is niave.
There are many members, but not many active ones. Any person with a perspective and perseverance can change things, so why not give it a go???
AK
Last edited by snarek; 1st Nov 2002 at 19:33.
Moderator
Andrew mate,
Please try to understand. GA and CHTR Non members aren't necessarily wanting or expecting AOPA to represent them. They are mostly people capable of running their businesses without "help" from an organisation that has alienated many of them.
Some people may be non-members because they can't be bothered, others just don't want to be involved in your organisation AT ALL, for all sorts of reasons, nor do they want AOPA to be involved in theirs.
It's quite simple really.
Please try to understand. GA and CHTR Non members aren't necessarily wanting or expecting AOPA to represent them. They are mostly people capable of running their businesses without "help" from an organisation that has alienated many of them.
Some people may be non-members because they can't be bothered, others just don't want to be involved in your organisation AT ALL, for all sorts of reasons, nor do they want AOPA to be involved in theirs.
It's quite simple really.
Snarek,
No one is denying that GA accross the board needs a strong lobby group to represent it. But don't you just sit back and wonder sometimes why so many in GA have either left or refuse to join AOPA? When you come to grips with and be seen to address some of those causal factors perhaps then you can embark on a successful recruiting campaign.
No one is denying that GA accross the board needs a strong lobby group to represent it. But don't you just sit back and wonder sometimes why so many in GA have either left or refuse to join AOPA? When you come to grips with and be seen to address some of those causal factors perhaps then you can embark on a successful recruiting campaign.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,111
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
2 Posts
It is sad that we see such bickering as above and one has to wonder why. Of course everyone has their own preferences and agenda’s in life, but on issues such as this we really must stand back and look at the big picture, or outside the box if you like.
AOPA has been about for over 50 years which I suggest is longer than most contributors to this forum. It obviously has a role to play in representing “aircraft owners & pilots” but just were you draw the line is today sometimes hard to say.
A few years back we had (amongst others) the General Aviation Association (GAA) which represented charter companies etc and the Royal Federation of Aero Clubs (RFACA) which still exists but only a shadow of its former self, representing the aero club movement. The GAA failed because nobody would look outside their own backyard and support such a representative body. The commercial flying schools and charter organizations are now paying the price. The RFACA has changed because of the role of aero clubs over the past decade has changed. Even the Regional Airline Association has changed its name of late to represent a wider base of the commercial side of the industry.
Up until the mid 90’s AOPA I believe was there for the greater good and was managed well, if tho’ at times on the conservative side, nevertheless the Association did what most members expected. They just did not dance on the table every time they had a win, and they had many.
The revolution which occurred around 95 with the change of management and two high profile Presidents which followed changed the way the association was viewed by both members and non members alike. Many members did not agree with the new style and voted with their feet at renewal time and we saw the membership drop from over 10k in 94 to less that half that in 2000. Likewise the funds of around $700k have fallen to such a low level that is presently making the very existence of the association hard work for those that have the management responsibility.
I have been a member of AOPA since I started flying over 30 years ago and support what it is all about. I have continued to do this even when employed in the airline industry and even when I did not support the direction of the day.
It’s all very well to say it does not affect me, but I can assure you it does. The existence of a viable General Aviation industry is vital to all other segments of the industry. This includes the ultralites, gliders and the recreational pilot, as well as the schools and charter companies and airlines.
The GA industry at the moment is the worst it has been for longer than many can remember (and still going down hill), the average standard of pilot training is poor, many commercial pilots trained today would not have passed a PPL test 15 or so years ago. Pilots are now letting their licence lapse, not because of the traditional reason – cost, but now because many see it as been over regulated and just too hard to understand. Now who’s fault is that? And what could have been done about it? And what difference might there have been if there was strong representation over the past decade?
If you don’t believe there is a role for AOPA and other similar industry representative organizations then perhaps you don’t understand how it all works. There always has been and always will be strength in numbers, which is why we have unions etc. The operator or individual that does his own thing is unlikely to achieve the same as a group of like people with the same aims.
Yes, Ulm is right, there is now a chance to examine the board of AOPA and as a member vote to do something about it. But you can only do that as a paid up members. It is no use bleating about the association from the outside, you must be a member to bring about change. The Board must be those which show they support the big picture and the greater good and not for their own agenda and/or ego, sadly not the present state of affairs.
If you are in the industry, especially GA you have a responsibility to support whatever organizations provide representation and you can only do that as a member. The industry needs AOPA because you just watch what might happen if it did not exist.
AOPA has been about for over 50 years which I suggest is longer than most contributors to this forum. It obviously has a role to play in representing “aircraft owners & pilots” but just were you draw the line is today sometimes hard to say.
A few years back we had (amongst others) the General Aviation Association (GAA) which represented charter companies etc and the Royal Federation of Aero Clubs (RFACA) which still exists but only a shadow of its former self, representing the aero club movement. The GAA failed because nobody would look outside their own backyard and support such a representative body. The commercial flying schools and charter organizations are now paying the price. The RFACA has changed because of the role of aero clubs over the past decade has changed. Even the Regional Airline Association has changed its name of late to represent a wider base of the commercial side of the industry.
Up until the mid 90’s AOPA I believe was there for the greater good and was managed well, if tho’ at times on the conservative side, nevertheless the Association did what most members expected. They just did not dance on the table every time they had a win, and they had many.
The revolution which occurred around 95 with the change of management and two high profile Presidents which followed changed the way the association was viewed by both members and non members alike. Many members did not agree with the new style and voted with their feet at renewal time and we saw the membership drop from over 10k in 94 to less that half that in 2000. Likewise the funds of around $700k have fallen to such a low level that is presently making the very existence of the association hard work for those that have the management responsibility.
I have been a member of AOPA since I started flying over 30 years ago and support what it is all about. I have continued to do this even when employed in the airline industry and even when I did not support the direction of the day.
It’s all very well to say it does not affect me, but I can assure you it does. The existence of a viable General Aviation industry is vital to all other segments of the industry. This includes the ultralites, gliders and the recreational pilot, as well as the schools and charter companies and airlines.
The GA industry at the moment is the worst it has been for longer than many can remember (and still going down hill), the average standard of pilot training is poor, many commercial pilots trained today would not have passed a PPL test 15 or so years ago. Pilots are now letting their licence lapse, not because of the traditional reason – cost, but now because many see it as been over regulated and just too hard to understand. Now who’s fault is that? And what could have been done about it? And what difference might there have been if there was strong representation over the past decade?
If you don’t believe there is a role for AOPA and other similar industry representative organizations then perhaps you don’t understand how it all works. There always has been and always will be strength in numbers, which is why we have unions etc. The operator or individual that does his own thing is unlikely to achieve the same as a group of like people with the same aims.
Yes, Ulm is right, there is now a chance to examine the board of AOPA and as a member vote to do something about it. But you can only do that as a paid up members. It is no use bleating about the association from the outside, you must be a member to bring about change. The Board must be those which show they support the big picture and the greater good and not for their own agenda and/or ego, sadly not the present state of affairs.
If you are in the industry, especially GA you have a responsibility to support whatever organizations provide representation and you can only do that as a member. The industry needs AOPA because you just watch what might happen if it did not exist.