Is AOPA Forgetting about the little guy?

True, AOPA is working hard for us now, but if they keep sliding to the
professional crowd, then they may forsake us.

I didn't know you could op out of the magazine.


"Stu Gotts" wrote in message
...
I've often thought as you do and although I'm a member but have
elected to not receive their magazine for a few years now. What you
have to look at is how hard the current leadership of AOPA is working
for you now. As far as the giveaways go, don't worry you'll never win
one.


On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:47:13 GMT, "James Blakely"
wrote:

Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k
but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

In article
, "James
Blakely" wrote:

Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?

[snip]
It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

I don't AOPA is "starting" to ignore the spam-can, I don't think
they've ever really loved the "weekend" pilot or the sport flyer
(at least not since I joined in 1988).

--
Bob Noel

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?

I don't AOPA is "starting" to ignore the spam-can, I don't think
they've ever really loved the "weekend" pilot or the sport flyer
(at least not since I joined in 1988).

Ok. Then tell us how the AOPA can do a better job of pleasing you.

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:47:13 GMT, "James Blakely"
wrote:

Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

I think AOPA does an ok job of mixing GA interests, especially when
considering the varied base of their constituents (private,
commercial, ATP, light GA owners, heavy GA owners). I fly a Cherokee,
and certainly enjoy the articles on latest/greatest avionics and
planes. If you are looking for someting different - I find the
type-specific magazines (Cessna Pilots Association, Cherokee Pilots
Association, etc) to be good sources of spam-can info.

As far as the WACO give-away, I think it is great. What a cool plane!
If the pilot who wins doesn't like it, they can always trade/sell it
for something of equivalent value. As others have already pointed out
many pilots won't be able to afford the taxes on the plane, so they
will have to sell no matter what.

AOPA and flying have gone a bit overboard on the turbine operations
sections, but I think this is being driven by the surge in the light
jet industry, ie Eclipse, MustangJet, etc. It might be a fad,
particularly if the 6-seat jet market never materializes.

Regardless of what they put in their magazine, and what they give away
- I do think AOPA does a good job of fighting against TFRs and other
GA-oppressive legislation. They are our best hope against scandalous
news reporting, and overzealous Congressmen.

-Nathan

If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche. If they are going to do a different
plane every year what would you have them give away? They don't give away
airplanes to provide members with airplanes, they do it to provide a subject
for a series of articles. It would be tough to make ten articles from a
Cub.

They used to have two versions of Pillot, one of which was called Turbine
Pilot which had one or two additional articles. They decided it would be
easier to give everybody the same magazine, so now everybody gets what used
to be Turbine Pilot. The magazine has everything it always had but, in
addition, it has the one or two turbine focused articles, so you are
complaining about recieving MORE magazine for your money.

Personally, I would like to see more articles about long flying "adventures"
like flying around the world or through Alaska/Patagonia/Siberia or perhaps
to the tip of South America. I think that AOPAs main purpose is to provide
general aviation a voice in government and they do that fairly well.

Mike
MU-2



"James Blakely" wrote in
message ...
Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k
but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net...
If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche.

Before that if memory serves me right it was a 206, a (new) 172, a restored 172.

I suspect highly that the selection is driven a lot by what they can get donated.

Ron Natalie wrote:

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net...
If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche.

Before that if memory serves me right it was a 206, a (new) 172, a restored 172.

The "good as new 172", the "better than new 172", the new 172, the "flying SUV"
(206), the Tripacer (plus some cash to pay the tax bill), the Bonanza, and now
the WACO.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:
The "good as new 172", the "better than new 172", the new 172, the
"flying SUV"
(206), the Tripacer (plus some cash to pay the tax bill), the Bonanza,
and now
the WACO.

There was a Mooney in there, somewhere.

Dan Luke wrote:

There was a Mooney in there, somewhere.

I don't remember that one. Was there a 182 after the 172s?

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

Wasn't there an "Ultimate Arrow" somewhere in there as well?


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Ron Natalie wrote:

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
link.net...
If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed
by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche.

Before that if memory serves me right it was a 206, a (new) 172, a
restored 172.

The "good as new 172", the "better than new 172", the new 172, the "flying
SUV"
(206), the Tripacer (plus some cash to pay the tax bill), the Bonanza, and
now
the WACO.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually
said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."