On Feb 27, 3:50*pm, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:
"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote in messagenews:q4adnW7skPAdC1janZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@iwvis p.com...



I certainly agree that the EAA magazine doesn't even come close to Kitplanes
for content that I'm interested in but EAA does lobby Congress in my behalf,
so I'll keep my membership a little longer. *I just wish that EAA would
produce a magazine dedicated to Experimental Aviation.

* *Like it or not, the EAA magazine is aimed at EAA members in general, not
homebuilders in particular.


Judging by the amount of interest drawn by Cirrus, Piper, Cessna, and
the other production aircraft companies that show at Oshkosh, I would
have to agree.

* *I wonder what percentage of EAA members are actually homebuilders? *I will
bet that it is a great minority. *To be honest, I am a member that does not ever
see himself actually building an airplane. *In fact, the first several years
that I was a member, I was not even a pilot.


You are probably right as a total percentage of EAA Membership. The
EAA for some reason seems to draw a wide spectrum of pilots and as you
say, some non--pilots.

* * *I am a member of EAA for several good reasons, and I think it is a good
(not perfect) organization that is important to us small guys in aviation,
(homebuilder or not) particularly those of us who might fly Experimental ships.
I am also a member of AOPA, & the SSA. *I would rate the EAA magazine higher
than either of those other organizations's publications, though the AOPA rag
seems to have improved in recent years.

Vaughn

I have been a frequent reader of the AOPA magazine and the Sport
Aviation Subscriber. Of the two, the Sport Aviation seem to be much
more oriented to the individual recreational pilot. AOPA tends to
lean more to the commercial pilots at least from my perspective.