If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a
hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. Jim -- "Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean wrote in message oups.com... http://www.john-ross.net/osh2.htm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
RST Engineering wrote:
Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. I've seen guys desperate for a date do some weird stuff, but this ranks right up there! Matt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
I sincerely hope this is a joke. At least part of it. I agree that theEAA
posture about the Young Eagles has been focussed on the quantity of people flown. I wonder if anyone has done a follow up to see just how effective that thing is in generating aviators. I mean would those aviators attributed to the Young Eagles program been aviators anyway? Did the Young Eagles program really change the direction of some individuals? I don't doubt that there were some examples of this but what kind of effectiveness is involved. What is the ratio of actual re-directed individuals to the total number flown. On the other issue raised by Mr.Ross, If EAA expands Oshkosh much more to non-aviation things, like jet powered trucks, Ford cars, Honda generators, John Deer Tractors and now Hooters and some kind of dating game business? I've already asked them to consider relinquishing the title Experimental Aviation Association as they need to rename it more appropriately. The focus of Oshkosh has been trending away from the experimental side of the EAA. Also the magazine has lost some meat even though it has gotten bigger. One year, I think it was 2005, the Oshkosh video sold by EAA did not even mention experimental aviation, with the exception of some Rutan space flight data. It did not mention the awards, it only had some Mooney and Piper aircraft at Oshkosh mentioned. Besides there are a bunch of experimental aviation nuts that would like to use that title. EAA and its title is a bit like the US and its constitution. We got it but it doesn't mean what it used to anymore. -- Stuart & Kathryn Fields, Publishers Experimental Helo magazine P. O. Box 1585 Inyokern, CA 93527 (760) 377-4478 ph (760) 408-9747 publication cell (760) 608-1299 technical cell www.experimentalhelo.com www.vkss.com "Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... RST Engineering wrote: Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. I've seen guys desperate for a date do some weird stuff, but this ranks right up there! Matt |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
On Jun 23, 1:52 pm, "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote:
I sincerely hope this is a joke. At least part of it. I agree that theEAA posture about the Young Eagles has been focussed on the quantity of people flown. I wonder if anyone has done a follow up to see just how effective that thing is in generating aviators. I mean would those aviators attributed to the Young Eagles program been aviators anyway? Did the Young Eagles program really change the direction of some individuals? I don't doubt that there were some examples of this but what kind of effectiveness is involved. What is the ratio of actual re-directed individuals to the total number flown. On the other issue raised by Mr.Ross, If EAA expands Oshkosh much more to non-aviation things, like jet powered trucks, Ford cars, Honda generators, John Deer Tractors and now Hooters and some kind of dating game business? I've already asked them to consider relinquishing the title Experimental Aviation Association as they need to rename it more appropriately. The focus of Oshkosh has been trending away from the experimental side of the EAA. Also the magazine has lost some meat even though it has gotten bigger. One year, I think it was 2005, the Oshkosh video sold by EAA did not even mention experimental aviation, with the exception of some Rutan space flight data. It did not mention the awards, it only had some Mooney and Piper aircraft at Oshkosh mentioned. Besides there are a bunch of experimental aviation nuts that would like to use that title. EAA and its title is a bit like the US and its constitution. We got it but it doesn't mean what it used to anymore. -- Stuart & Kathryn Fields, Publishers Experimental Helo magazine P. O. Box 1585 Inyokern, CA 93527 (760) 377-4478 ph (760) 408-9747 publication cell (760) 608-1299 technical cellwww.experimentalhelo.comwww.vkss.com "Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... RST Engineering wrote: Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. I've seen guys desperate for a date do some weird stuff, but this ranks right up there! Matt- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I am going with his ideas to a point. I agree the Experimental Aircraft Assoc was formed to perpetuate the concept of someone being able to create his or hers own plane. After attending Oshkosh last year the whole show looked more like the " certified" aircraft assoc. My plane has an alternative engine in it and the EAA treats us like second class citizens. That is exactly the reverse of what it was founded on. Now I am told this years young eagle flights are to be flown in certified planes only, no experimentals allowed. They have lost their direction for sure.... Of course this is just my opinion.. And I didn't even stay in a Holiday Inn express last night. G Ben www.haaspowerair.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
I believe Paul Poberezny did try to start a new organization that was
more true to the experimental aircraft purpose, the Sport Aviation Association. http://www.sportaviation.org It looks like it didn't succeed though. I'm not sure why. Maybe lack of publicity, maybe just no critical mass to get it off the ground. Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote: I've already asked them to consider relinquishing the title Experimental Aviation Association as they need to rename it more appropriately. The focus of Oshkosh has been trending away from the experimental side of the EAA. Also the magazine has lost some meat even though it has gotten bigger. One year, I think it was 2005, the Oshkosh video sold by EAA did not even mention experimental aviation, with the exception of some Rutan space flight data. It did not mention the awards, it only had some Mooney and Piper aircraft at Oshkosh mentioned. Besides there are a bunch of experimental aviation nuts that would like to use that title. EAA and its title is a bit like the US and its constitution. We got it but it doesn't mean what it used to anymore. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
"Paul Dow (Remove Caps in mail address)" wrote in
message ... I believe Paul Poberezny did try to start a new organization that was more true to the experimental aircraft purpose, the Sport Aviation Association. http://www.sportaviation.org It looks like it didn't succeed though. I'm not sure why. Maybe lack of publicity, maybe just no critical mass to get it off the ground. Very true, and I am amoung the many who intended to join; but never got around to it. Peter Part of the problem, for which I am sorry. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
"RST Engineering" wrote in message
... Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. I believe I have a tear in my eye. That is so . . so . . REAL! Rich S. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
"RST Engineering" wrote in message
... Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. Jim -- A grain???? He has hit the nail squarely and firmly on the head, and seated it securely with a single stroke! Peter (Actually the Tri-Motor is a bit over-the-top;but, what the heck...) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Tom Poberezny
RST Engineering wrote:
Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of truth in it. Jim John Ross has posted to RAH. He has many, many fans, including many people who follow this newsgroup. Google him to find out more. Try "John Ross" + "Timothy McVeigh" and see how many hits you get. -- John Kimmel I think it will be quiet around here now. So long. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Open letter to Sikorsky | Dave Jackson | Rotorcraft | 12 | April 4th 05 06:55 AM |
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots Open Letter To Media | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 3 | September 18th 04 10:42 AM |
Open Letter to John Kerry: | Vaughn | Military Aviation | 1 | February 22nd 04 04:47 PM |
An open letter to Illinois Attorney General, Lisa Madigan | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 0 | November 4th 03 10:22 PM |
OPEN LETTER TO JOURNALISTS | Dan Luke | Piloting | 7 | July 24th 03 03:28 PM |