(This was mostly written within days of Hightower’s
exit. I played around with it for a
while but now I just want it off my computer. In fact, I'm even tired of looking for all the typos. Feel free to email me if you find one, or twenty. If I have left out things you think should be
in here, things that grind your gears, or ways EAA has ticked you off, it doesn’t
mean I don’t agree. It also doesn’t mean
I do. All it really indicates is the
lack of hours in a day.)
EAA has a problem.
Their President is gone, the members and vendors are not happy, and the
majority of the remaining management lacks an understanding of what EAA
is. As bad as that may seem though,
these issues are not the problem; they are the symptoms of an often fatal
non-profit illness known as Acute Spinal Culturitis. Put simply, EAA has a culture problem.
Is there a cure for such an illness? Yes, there is. Unfortunately, the treatment has to be
perfect and it must be administered with precise timing. Mind you, entire nations have disappeared due
to such problems. So where do we start?
Figuring out what EAA is would be the logical first step.
What is EAA? It may
not be what you think. Although a large
percentage of members believe the organization is about homebuilding, if truth
be told much of what EAA is, or was, was an organization founded to promote
freedom; freedom to build your own plane and the freedom to fly it. Today’s board would do well to remember
that. There can be no more selling out
to anyone who wants to take that away; anyone.
Secure the freedom to do those two things, make them both easier, and
you will have secured a future for the organization.
“The Spirit of Aviation”, is what EAA has chosen for a tag
line (motto, whatever) and quite honestly, that is a great statement. The spirit of aviation is what EAA has been
in the past and what it needs to be again if it wants to survive. This also means that a percentage of the
membership needs to learn the same lesson.
It is time for homebuilders to stop perpetuating the notion
that EAA is and should only be about homebuilts. I have deep respect for those who build and
fly their own planes. Yet with that in
mind, I have to say it is time for them to stop acting as if their parents
sailed to America
on the Mayflower and because of that they should be given the city of New
York. This is
such a silly notion, that my reaction now is one of laughter.
Yes, homebuilding is the EAA mascot for a reason. I also understand that it doesn’t help when
you’re treated as a second hand member at your own event. But, it is time to quit flogging the horse.
The time has come instead to take stock of what we have and face reality.
Homebuilders represent what EAA was when it was founded and
they represent the same to this day.
They didn’t leave EAA, EAA left them.
But that does not mean that EAA should close down everything except the
Sport Air Workshops in order to express that they are sorry they moved away
from their founding ideals.
Were EAA to be what some homebuilders want, it would produce
a high budget publication for a readership of less than 5000 so that 100 of
them could read once a month what they could have found online in three minutes
and printed at their computers for less.
EAA is not and never was a technical manual on how to build a
plane. It was the Spirit of
Aviation. Obviously, everyone knows
there were always how to articles in Sport Aviation. But those articles applied and appealed to
other areas which were also building steam; vintage and warbirds were soon followed
by ultra-lights and more. Was EAA ever
an experimentals only group? Perhaps
there was a moment, similar to that cosmic fraction of time when time as we
know it began, but it is clear that EAA rapidly became much more than that to a
large cross section of aviation and that is what it has been ever since.
Ultimately, we are all in this together and it would be nice
for everyone, including homebuilders, to quit implying they are the most
important part of EAA. It would also be
nice if homebuilders weren’t continually insulted and pushed aside. The moment has come to figure out what has to
be done to save this ship and expect everyone to participate in the cure. It may not taste great going down but in the
end we’ll all be better off if we can act like big boys and girls and take our
medicine. A healthy EAA is the goal.
To begin with, an understanding is needed. EAA should state that it will be the world’s
premier organization for homebuilding and that the spirit of aviation which
makes it so will also be applied to all areas of aviation considered “the sport
of aviation”. Homebuilders need to
accept that the only way homebuilding stands a chance of survival is to have an
organization full of members who understand what it takes to keep aviation
alive and flying machines in the air. In
some form or fashion, anyone who flies or maintains a vintage aircraft,
warbird, ultra-light (that’s what I call them), racing plane, homebuilt, rotorcraft,
and even a Piper Cherokee in today’s world is trying to do the same thing; keep
the freedom of flight alive and the planes in the air. Every single one of us has something to learn
from the others and we are stronger together. Yet, before we move on, there’s
an additional point about our groups I would like to discuss. It is about remembering “who brung you to the
party”.
How many of you have heard the statement “EAA is so much
more than just homebuilding”? Heck, I
pretty much just said it myself. There
is a difference though in knowing it and hearing it spoken the way we’ve all
heard it. And, I really do not want to
hear it again from EAA. Yes, as I just
described, we get it, EAA comprises much more than homebuilding. But let’s remember the rule of foundations;
as long as you build a good one, the things built on top will stand.
The freedom to build and fly is the foundation of EAA and
yet we must not forget that in recent years some folks in management actually
took the side of the FAA to make it harder to build and certify
experimentals. Oshkosh
employees even went so far as to criticize members for daring to challenge them
on it. EAA may get some members back on
board but this is something they will never forget. In fact, if it were up to me, my first act to
start EAA back on track would be to lop the proverbial heads off anyone who
played a part in this; janitors to board members. If EAA were a country, these people would be
hanged for treason and I hope the members make note some of these people are
still with EAA management. For those of
you in Oshkosh who participated in
this, let me suggest the next time you want to play “my little lobbyist”, make
sure you remember who is paying your way.
OK, now that we have discussed the major issues from both
sides, it’s time for the two groups to start finding solutions several
issues. Here is a suggestion for the
makeup of the board.
The current board of directors has to understand that they
will be answering to the members. To
insure this happens, an advisory board with veto power, elected through mail-in
ballots, should be created. These people
would serve as the conscience and soul of the group and would have the power to
vote up or down the primary board’s
choice for president, that person’s pay, when or if he or she gets any bonus,
and any major initiative. EAA has had no
accountability to its members for some time now and this would put an end to
it. Small and daily operational details
would be out of the bounds of this board.
If this were deemed completely unacceptable, then a second option would
be to have a third of the board elected by mail in ballots included in Sport
Aviation. All initiatives should then
require a ¾ or greater majority vote of the board for approval.
Next, the members need a reality check. EAA is an airshow and a magazine. Deny it all you want but that is the
truth. You as members are the soul. That said, for a soul to interact with the
world it has to have a body of sorts that allows it to be seen. Airventure is that body. Without it, you are nothing more than someone
who pays for an average magazine.
Airventure is yours and you should be proud of it. Although the management forgot this aspect of
Airventure, you have made your voices heard, I believe some people have listened,
and now it is time for you to show your cautious support.
A good way to start supporting “Oshkosh”
starts with learning the economics of such an event. I agree it is nice you flew your plane to Oshkosh
but please do not expect to get in free when you get there. If you believe you should be getting in free
of charge, then EAA, your accounting teacher, and your parents have at some
point done you a great disservice. These
events cost great amounts of money to operate and when you go you should be going
with the understanding that although your being there adds greatly to the
event, you presence also generates an expense which you are willing to
incur. How much you should pay to get in
can be left up for debate but you should expect to pay.
Perhaps the best way to describe my stance on attendance
is to liken it to showing up for a pitch in dinner. If you feel the event is worthy of your time,
then you bring something to the party that makes up for or covers your attendance. If you don’t feel it is worthy, you stay home
and work in the yard instead. And, if
you still need something to make it easier, just remember that the more members
who fly in, the more obvious it is that America is still the king of aviation
and that your group EAA, hosts the pinnacle of aviation events. Therefore, if you are attending this event
and you are not proud, management isn’t doing its job or you are being a
miserable grouch, or more likely both.
Let’s review:
EAA is about the freedom to build and fly, the board should
agree to answer to members, and members must understand Airventure cost a great
deal of money to operate. Now we need to
rebuild the organization. Where to
start?
Culture:
As I mentioned earlier, EAA has a culture problem. A museum that drains funds, a magazine that
is poorly executed, a convention that has lost its way, and management that
doesn’t listen are nothing more than symptoms of this all too common non-profit
disease. But how exactly does an
organization lose its culture?
Easily, one could argue this issue surrounds
Airventure. The show is after all what
EAA has become, that and a magazine.
Although the organization may have many tentacles, when members discuss
it they are almost always discussing one of two things, Airventure and the magazine
“Sport Aviation”. It is also safe to say
members have legitimate issues with both.
Through the years the culture of EAA moved from membership to attendance,
articles to readership, pilots to free rides, and souls to management. Everywhere you look within the organization,
the culture has shifted from people to numbers and yet I feel sure in stating
that I have never met an integer with a heartbeat.
As Airventure became the focus, Oshkosh
became the focus. Entrenchment relative to the caste system followed and soon
EAA was building monuments to itself.
Museums, lodges, and ineffective programs which fed off a growing figure
of free rides instead of pilots, drove a surge in EAA much like packaged
mortgages and derivatives drove the false real estate boom. Unfortunately, members fell for it and in so
doing so they share part of the blame.
So how does EAA get back on track? First EAA and the members need to revisit,
once again, what EAA was originally about and what it once accomplished.
Early on, EAA was not
purely about homebuilding but instead about owning and flying a plane you had
built; there is a difference. It was
about Freedom. It was an attempt to
bring like minded people together to revive the glory days of aviation lost
when the government first decided aircraft would have to be certified. Back then the aviation industry was
generating hundreds of new aircraft designs per year. A few decades later it was not. Standing up for people who wanted to build
and fly airplanes was the right thing to do at the right time. And soon thereafter, homebuilders were once
again cranking out hundreds of new aircraft designs per year. This success was proof that if you set people
free to build and fly, advancement follows.
It was so successful in fact, certified aviation was left to play catch
up and look to experimentals for ideas. Then,
as though it never happened, modern EAA stewardship threw it away. This must be fixed, and it must not ever be
allowed to happen again.
A Mission Statement:
EAA needs a new mission statement that reaffirms its
commitment to its members and the freedom of homebuilding and flight they once
enjoyed. There will be a vicious battle
waged over the wording of this throughout social media and local fly-ins but it
needs to be done. Ultimately, the
shorter it is the better. Something like
this would be great: EAA is the Spirit
of Aviation and therefore committed to its members and the freedom of
flight. Looking to our roots in
homebuilding, we will faithfully strive to reduce the burden of regulations on
the sport of aviation while promoting our passion to the masses. An improving force on society, aviation makes
the world a better place, offers education from science to common sense, and
connects us to each other. In our eyes
our members are equals and our mission is clear; To work for and defend those who build in
their garage, seek to rescue aviation history, and fight to preserve our place
in the sky, for when they are safe so is aviation.
In this mission statement resides all the points that are
critical to getting EAA back on track.
EAA IS COMMITTED TO ITS MEMBERS and the freedom to build and fly your
own airplane, EAA’s homebuilding heritage, putting the FAA on notice we will no
longer roll over to their scurrilous whims, promoting aviation, seeing aviation
as a betterment to society, as aviators we are one, and when you protect the
front lines of aviation, the grass roots level, aviation as a whole is
secured. This is what EAA was meant to
be and this is what it needs to be once again.
The Logo
In this time of cleansing, a new logo for the organization
would be appropriate. Whatever it is and
no matter who creates it, it must not look like a jet (whose idea was that?),
and it must convey flight. While we’re
at it, we also need to decide what to do with the name Airventure. Nobody uses it.
Yes, I know EAA was trying to solve some legal issues by
staking claim to an official name for the event but it just isn’t working. EAA should suck it up and go back to using Oshkosh
as the name of the event. On top of the
obvious things there would be another positive to getting rid of it. The move would lower the cost of everything
from printing to t-shirt embroidering.
Why? Everyone knows “Oshkosh”
and nobody knows “Airventure” and because of this EAA has to pay to put both
words on everything in order to insure people understand where it came
from. Furthermore, doing away with
Airventure would allow the local community to get back in the game of
merchandising. A half-way point solution
to this issue would be a name reversal.
Make it Oshkosh Airventure instead
of the Airventure Oshkosh it is now.
If you need a great example of how silly it was to rename Oshkosh
“Airventure”, all you need is to hear is one name, “STURGIS”. Who, in their right mind, would take
something so universally known as STURGIS, and rename it “CYCLEVENTURE”. I can hear it now, “Hey Bob do you want to
ride to Cycleventure with us”? Bob would
then say, “Cycleventure? Screw that, I’m
going to Sturgis”. The attempted
renaming of Oshkosh to “Airventure”
is clearly one of the most ridiculous things ever to come out of EAA management
and “OSHKOSH” has suffered because
of it. Because of that, from here on out
I will no longer refer to anything but Oshkosh. (Thanks to my brother for this perfectly relative,
simple, and striking example)
The Museum
The museum should be restructured. I understand wanting a monument to EAA but I
would prefer that monument be leadership in the arena of sport aviation rather
than a big facility that is a drain on resources. When you consider EAA is an organization
about flying, it seems rather strange it would take so many wonderful planes
and permanently ground them. This is at
odds with everything the group should be.
Therefore it is time to re-organize the museum.
EAA should start by restructuring its primary museum
facility to include only historical homebuilts and experimentals. This isn’t as narrowly focused as it
seems. The museum could include a
vintage aircraft with a clear pedigree in homebuilding. One such warbird example is the prototype
P-51. That machine is clearly an
experimental and its original construction was in many ways a group effort in
homebuilding.
A restructuring should also include a change to exhibits
that drive home the freedom homebuilding offers, the skill involved in building
these aircraft, and some of the great advancements in aviation that came from
homebuilders. As for all other aircraft,
they should be subject to one of two outcomes.
Either they would be sold at auction to people who intend to put them
back into the air, or any non-experimental or non- prototype aircraft remaining
would be maintained in airworthy condition in order to offer flight experiences
to the public. The later would also
allow for small flight displays throughout the year at Pioneer
Airport.
The proceeds from the sale of the warbirds and surplus
antiques in EAA’s museum would go to a newly established fund that would be
used to maintain the museum and only the museum. As for warbird representation, EAA could fill
that need and increase museum traffic by displaying a rotation of different
warbirds. These aircraft, on loan from
members, would also serve to generate return attendance
by marketing the warbird of the month.
Now, what about Pioneer
Airport? Have you ever wondered whose it is and what
it is? Another long standing source of
head scratching is the way it is used; or isn’t. Often included in EAA materials as being part
of the museum complex, one has to wonder why they have such a hard time
effectively utilizing it. One thing is
for sure, on any given day, EAA has far more antiques than its resources can
handle and it is time for a complete review of donation acceptance
policies. Fortunately, a quick look at
the “donations” page of their website appears to imply they already realize
this. More on Pioneer in a minute.
The Airshow:
_______ (the name I said I would no longer use), or as
everyone on planet Earth calls it, “Oshkosh”,
needs help. This primary source of
revenue for EAA best exemplifies the cultural problems within the organization. Fortunately, the event has one thing going for it, the
people. As aviators and enthusiasts,
when we come together in Wisconsin,
we are one. We are equals. We all love the feeling aviation gives us and
we all come together to speak the language; a language EAA
often seems to have
forgotten.
Historically, every form of aviation enthusiast, from Hollywood
star to garage builder knew they could come to Oshkosh
and, despite their background, be treated and seen as nothing more than an
aviator. Yet somewhere through the
years, EAA mgt fell for the notion of turning the place into a Hollywood
side-show. It was also highly believed
great numbers of pilots and citizens were coming to Oshkosh
to see these “stars” and thus improving the night time attendance. I was told this by a high ranking executive
and in some ways he was right. EAA was
forever lacking anything that would keep people around after 5PM.
Oshkosh attendees
had been hungry for night time entertainment for ages, sometimes literally due
to a lack of open food vendors. Anything
after hours would have improved evening attendance. Unfortunately, the first time people stayed
around for a concert or comedy show, EAA decided it had found a new formula for
improving the event. In no time flat,
everything related to Oshkosh took
on a new slant; Come see George Lucas promote his movie; while you’re here take
a look at some planes. Each consecutive
year, more stars were headlined and enthusiasts were ruffled. When people started saying “I went to a
Foreigner concert and a fly-in broke out”, you knew it had gone too far. Through its actions, EAA was saying “We are
not all equal. These people are
important and you should come see them,” and members grew tired of it. Don’t get me wrong; non-aviation
entertainment isn’t bad. There’s a point
though where it has just gone too far.
Corporate sponsors.
Now there’s a subject that gets members going. This is another unfortunate subject. Both sides have screwed the pooch on this
one.
It seems you can’t talk to people at Oshkosh
these days without someone getting worked up over the corporate sponsors. Again, somehow EAA has taken a positive and
made it a negative. Sadly, I believe
this is largely due to the makeup of the board of directors. Corporate types rarely understand grass roots
types and there lies the root of so many problems.
Board members assume the average member understands the
great level of funding required to host Oshkosh (although they never tell the
members anything) and so they go guns blaring to promote every corporation
willing to send money EAA’s way. The
board sees it as basic bean counting and so they think it will earn them a pat
on the back. Then, believing they did a really
great job, they trumpet the names of any corporations footing part of the bill. Yet to members and volunteers, Oshkosh
is a way of life and the official message comes across as a sellout marinated
in rotten fish. A long time Oshkosh
attendee sees the girlfriend of a Ford executive driving a brand new car where
they as long time patrons are not allowed to walk and they want to track
someone down to spit in their face. Only
EAA could get hundreds of thousands of dollars to help keep an organization
alive and end up pissing the members off because of it. Geez, it isn’t that hard guys.
On the other hand, many members just don’t get it. Some of them feel as though they should be
showered in confetti upon their arrival, others think everything should be
free, and many get upset over restrictions that are clearly mandated by the
FAA. As members, even as an attendee,
you have a job. That job is to know what
it takes to put on such an event. If you
don’t, then you are clearly missing part of the magic. Yet, I must also again point out EAA has
never done anything to explain this to members.
Now that we’ve covered the increase in Hollywood
types and corporate sponsors, let’s discuss another group of people; small business
people. They too once came to Oshkosh
as one of us. They came to share their
vision of aviation and to market their products to people who spoke their
language. Unfortunately, with an abundance
of these vendors EAA was not happy with the bottom line. Directors, being people whose incomes were
determined by stock values instead of good business practices, pushed for
changes they could understand; do whatever it takes to get a small increase in
the bottom line.
Soon, Fortune 500 companies with no connection to aviation
were buying the best spots on the grounds and rubbing elbows with management. With the extra money and the growing list of
high roller contacts EAA insiders began to collect, their desire for more
followed. And from there it wasn’t long
until legendary aviation designers, retailers, artists, and homebuilt start ups
began to disappear from the pavilions.
This was followed by their disappearance from the grounds
altogether. Like all other boom and
busts, this binge of corporate style management culminated with a
disaster. Going over the cliff, the
fatal blow was to Oshkosh culture;
the notion of two classes of aviation; those who can buy a better experience
and those who cannot. The Chalets; need
I say more?
Sure, it would be easy to put this all on Hightower’s
shoulders. But let’s face it, the board
did not say NO. Yes, I understand the
board’s job is not to run the organization, but it is there to steer it. That is why they are called the “Board of
DIRECTORS”. And deep down, we all know
they thought these were great ideas.
That is who they are. That is
where they come from. And, that is where
they took us. Therefore, the membership
should put them all on notice and realize Hightower’s departure will not
automatically fix all ills. Like a
microcosm of our country, they did what they wanted until you became just mad
enough to speak out, then they miraculously shape shifted just far enough in
your direction to get you to shut up.
Now let’s see if they were sincere.
As for the show itself, one debate that has been going on
behind closed doors at EAA for years is the amount of focus that should be
placed on the airshow segment of the event.
Some have wanted to do away with it all together while others wanted
more focus placed upon it. Myself, from
what I have learned about event history, I know that if you were to get rid of
it, the event would die. Similar to the
soundtrack of a movie, the airshow must be there for Oshkosh
to have any meaning. Yet, the more
emphasis you place upon the airshow the farther the event moves from being
about members and the closer it comes to being the typical walk-in public based
events so many of us have learned to avoid.
You also risk the show masking what would otherwise be an obvious lack
of activity.
With these things in mind, I believe the airshow already has
more than enough focus placed upon it.
Aviators don’t go to Oshkosh
to watch an airshow. Sure, every pilot
will at some point watch part of the show for whatever reason, but the far
greater percentage of true aviator attendees are doing something else when the
airshow is in progress. If management
doesn’t know this, they do not know their membership.
Do you remember when all kinds of proposed homebuilts were
sold as plans out of airplanes on the flight line? No?
Well, that is something else that went the way of the bottom line. In order to sell or offer anything other than
conversation at Oshkosh, you have
two choices; buy a pricey vendor plot, outside or in, or you can be a well
connected crony and do business how you please.
Some may try to argue this but for many years I have made a point to
photograph all the insiders who were allowed to “bend” the rules smaller fish
could not.
Ultimately though, the real point about vendors is the level
to which their Oshkosh attendance
fees have raised and the level to which the options for startup grass roots
designers and businesses people have sunk.
There’s a reason the homebuilt market is often referred to as “Van’s”
and a large part of that is due to the way the little guy has been removed from
Oshkosh. And yet amazingly, EAA/Oshkosh’s support of
homebuilts got so bad in recent years, Richard
VanGrunsven himself played a part in
the start up of a new organization intended to offer what EAA was not; support
for Kit Manufacturers.
And with all that said, there are so many things the average
EAA member still doesn’t know about Oshkosh. For example, the accounting for Oshkosh
never has been truly separated out from the rest of the organization. EAA says they can tell you how much Oshkosh
brings in, but in reality it’s difficult to know for sure. So many lines of the spreadsheet are blurred
by “what is EAA” and “what is Oshkosh”
that it might be a cause of serious concern were anyone to ever really know the
truth. Even worse, it could potentially
reveal vanishing funds, missed opportunities, and almost surely some
exaggerations that are relied upon to attract vendors. Will we ever know? Does the “board of the reborn” really care? We’ll know soon enough.
Even more perplexing is the use of Pioneer
Airport for helicopter rides and
parking blimps during Oshkosh. On site is one of the greatest venues in the US
for displaying vintage aircraft and for the entire week of Oshkosh
it is used only for helicopter rides and mooring blimps. This is incredibly short sighted and I’m sure
it is due to the desire to generate revenue with helicopter rides. Yet of all things, a helicopter does not need
an entire flying field from which to operate.
What gives? I asked around and
here is what I was told by several people.
“IMPOSSIBLE”. Not
only was I told it was impossible to hold anything at Pioneer during Oshkosh,
I was told that the FAA would absolutely not allow it due to conflicts with
other aviation patterns during the event.
There were also several people who expressed doubt over the ability of
pilots to operate in and out of Pioneer safely.
Ultimately, it seemed such a forgone conclusion it almost surely is an
opportunity missed. Here’s my solution.
On one night of Oshkosh,
when the field closes to inbound traffic, how about we create a half-hour
window of airspace that is only open to antiques? Then, instead of having the vintage dinner
over at the shelter building far away from everything, let’s hold it at
Pioneer. Pilots interested in flying to
Pioneer can drop their name in a hat, and then 25 of them, with no duplicates
of type/model allowed, will be pulled out.
Additionally, the folks at Vintage could give five other slots to planes
they believe to be of great significance historically. So, when the field closes, just before
sunset, 30 vintage aircraft would lift off from Oshkosh
and reposition to Pioneer.
What a great thing this would be. Non-pilot attendees would get a chance to see
vintage planes operating from a “vintage field”; more people would be drawn to
the museum complex side of things, and the vintage group could have their
dinner among a truly vintage setting (all pilots and enthusiasts welcome). I can find no reason what so ever why this would
not work and no reason anyone wouldn’t want it to. Ultimately though, one thing is for sure,
Pioneer is greatly under-utilized and this would be a way to give it some much
needed marketing. The next evening,
after the primary field closes, another small window would be left open for the
vintage planes to return to the spots they had left vacant. While they were gone, their spots would have
been marked by signs in the ground that read “Come see this plane in its
environment, Pioneer Airport”.
Before moving on from the subject of Oshkosh,
I feel it is critical to discuss one other aspect of the show that most do not
realize. Oshkosh
is largely, by the textbook definition, unorganized. It is also one of the best examples of what
can be accomplished when you leave folks to do their jobs and don’t
micro-manage. Of course it also is a
great example of what happens when management decides they know better. What am I talking about?
Well, forever and a day Oshkosh
has been run by volunteers. And by run,
I mean RUN by volunteers. Each area or aspect of the show has its own
team of volunteers who work and have worked that area for ages. Each area also has its proverbial team
leader(s) that stands in for the group during planning sessions and
meetings. Yet, planning is a little
stiff of a term. Each area works to
perfect and improve its operation, and or services, and then they all get
together to sort out any technicalities that may have arisen due to their
ongoing efforts. In the way of an
ecosystem, depending on demand, weather, the economy, and so much more, one
area may bloom one year and die back in the next. And like an ecosystem, it all works great
until you screw with it. That’s what
happened under the last administration.
Management thought it knew better and a significant amount of issues
which previously had not existed came to be.
Government, so to speak, got involved.
Keep that in mind the next time you decide to complain about a
volunteer.
Finally, early on I mentioned how I believe when you attend Oshkosh,
you are coming to contribute to the event more than you are coming to see
it. Yet, I also fully understand that
for this mentality to persist, the management of Oshkosh
has to host the event with this in mind.
In recent years though, Oshkosh
became more about filling the coffers of the organization and took on the feel
of “you should want to come support us”.
I sincerely hope the leaders of the organization can figure out a way to
understand this; they must become part of the community instead of expecting the
community to come to it.
Magazine
Sport Aviation is largely accepted as the face of EAA. Unfortunately the publication no longer
represents the organization. When was
the last time EAA ran a multi-page article on someone who scraped together a
homebuilt for under $5000? Are these
planes not pretty enough? Could it be
due to the fact there are no electronics in these machines that would allow
full page coincidental advertisements to be sold? Who knows?
What I do know though is that there are quite a few machines out there
that have actually been bought or put together for $5000 and many more of them
for under $10,000.
Without articles on the easiest (least expensive) entry
points to aviation, and a growing list of advertisements and articles unrelated
to that core, many opportunities to support the foundation of the organization
are being missed. Sport Aviation must
return to its roots and begin once again to cover the spirit of aviation, not
just Oshkosh. EAA spends entirely too much time and money
on the publication to allow it to be nothing more than a high dollar wish
book. Instead, it should instead be a
possibilities book. Young adults must be
able to look at Sport Aviation, and think, “I could swing that”.
Another area in which the publication could begin to rebuild
the culture of Sport Aviation would be to use it to explain and re-affirm the
partnerships that exist with organizations such as Vintage and Warbirds. Few people know that these groups lie outside
the realm of EAA but instead work as partners from an agreement signed back in
1989. This relationship could be explained
and then developed.
All parties involved would start by agreeing to support the
spirit of aviation even if it is outside their groups. Their marketing efforts would likewise be
coordinated to promote the idea of the spirit of aviation. Furthermore, since each area needs to be
strong, each group would agree to the principle of one for all and all for
one. Therefore, when one group has an
issue, it’s everybody’s issue. As a way
to display support for this coalition, a one or two page synopsis of the latest
Vintage, Warbirds, and Experimenter (from online) magazines would be included in
Sport Aviation along with any issues their groups are facing. We’re in this together; let’s act like it.
EAA President:
Step one: Get
rid of the notion of a corporate president.
EAA has no need for a “corporate president”. Although the board of directors may disagree
with me on the subject, I am 100% sure about this. What EAA needs as a president is a person who
is first and foremost, passionate about aviation. If they are this plus intelligent, have the
ability to walk and talk aviation, and meet the next bullet points, they are
qualified.
- Have been successful at running a business of less than 25
employees
- Has organized large successful events
- Has the demonstrable
ability to find and surround themselves with
the brightest minds, not ass-kissers, available.
- Owns and has owned for at least the last three years a
plane of 180HP or less.
- Has flown at least 30 hours in that plane each year for the
last three years.
- Works on his or her own plane whenever possible.
- If they can be taken to a restaurant where a server is paid
to “accidentally” spill water on them and they sincerely laugh it off
- If they
are a genuinely nice person and people at their old job would miss them.
- Thinks big and brave
Find a person like this and EAA will thrive.
Step two:
Take as much time as possible to find this person. You only have one shot at this.
Step three:
Develop and publish, in all EAA publications, a criteria set
which would allow members to judge the success of the next president. Essentially, define what will be considered
successful. Then, if you want to take it
step further, let members vote up or down, line by line, on these items and
even ask for their input. Can you
imagine members being allowed to determine how the President is judged? It would certainly offer many more
opportunities to discover what members want.
Move back to being the lobby for our rights as originally
envisioned under the amateur built aircraft rules. Do not accept the notion of our sport being
dumped into categories which require us to conform to commercially built
aircraft standards and practices. We seem to be approaching a day when we will
have to submit our ideas, 337’s, and plans for certification and accept
issuances of denial for projects that haven't been tested to commercial
standards. This path is unacceptable. It
is time to put the FAA back into a position of advisor, rather than commander,
and to do that we must have at the top, not politicians, but backbones of steel. We must be strong.
A great way to develop this strength would be to build a
coalition of organizations facing many of the same issues as aviation. Boating, automotive, motorcycle, 2nd
Amendment, and even lawn care groups all know the same issues we face. They, like us, are continually attacked from
all angles by bureaucrats who wish to do to them what they wish to do to us;
put us out of business. Working together
we would have more power and more resources with which to fight back.
EAA must also get its head screwed on straight when it comes
to safety. Safety does not equal zero
risk and risk does not equate to a lack of safety.
337’s
The time has come for everyone to realize, accept, and embrace
the cheapest avenue into aviation is used airplanes. Why our aviation groups continue to ignore
this perplexes me but I have a few ideas.
There’s the fact advertising revenues don’t exist for old
airplanes. And of course, there is the
undeniable truth that our aviation leaders have fallen for the notion newer
planes are safer. Another possibility is
they so badly want a savior, in their eagerness to identify and report on its
arrival, they are missing the idea it may have already arrived as abundant
and cheap used aircraft. Whatever the
case, if we are going to connect new aviators with cheap airplanes, we must deal
with the 337 mess.
There’s no doubt in my mind the FAA has an undeclared
initiative to ground older airplanes through the use of red tape. Their reasons for this though are conceived
in ignorance and therefore unacceptable.
If our aviation community was forced to pick one thing it could do to
give aviation a boost, anyone who chose anything but fixing the 337 mess could
be guaranteed a mindless boob. There is
no shortage of inexpensive airplanes; there is a lack of avenues to easily
repair and retrofit them with newer and better equipment. Get this mess straightened out and you would
immediately give a shot to the bottom line of component manufacturers,
mechanics, engine shops, flight schools, and everything else associated with
operating classic aircraft. There is no
reason for having to beg the FAA for 337’s and a fix is needed.
Note: Part 23 Certification rewrites will never accomplish
for aviation what a 337 fix would do.
Safety (Italics indicate something written in the
language of government):
One of the first and most difficult jobs of EAA’s new
President should be to set the record straight with both the FAA and the
aviation community. In a moment of
clarity with an eye toward reality, the new president should state that EAA
will no long participate in the folly of striving for unobtainable increases in
safety. The notion any appreciable
increase in the safety of aviation can be obtained without unreasonable expense
or the removal of that which gives aviation its soul is ludicrous under current
FAA methods. Therefore, under new leadership, EAA should
state it will continue to support
existing and accepted safe practices, and nothing more, unless a demonstrable
and quantifiable 15% or greater improvement in the level of safety can be show
be shown to exist, with an expense of one percent or less, of the value of any
airplane in which it would be deployed, and in which it would not remove the
pilot from the controls or restrict his/her freedom of flight. At the time such an improvement exists, EAA
will fully support it only as a voluntary option. Until that point, all FAA proposed safety
goals or programs will be viewed as nothing more than political photo ops, thus
triggering full EAA opposition. The
participants of aviation, both personal and business, have suffered far too
long from the uncertainty and threat of pipe dreams and the time has come to
accept reality. Aviation is safe.
But wait, what’s so great about safety anyway? While aviation wrings its collective hands
over the lack of young entrants to the sport, kids everywhere are taking up
sports like those seen in the X-games; games that routinely leave people wounded
and maimed. People fill stadiums to
watch the professionals in these sports risk their lives. Why do you think the Red Bull Races were such
a success? How many people do you think
wet their pants with excitement when the pilot landed safely back at the airport? None; that’s how many. Yet how many people thrilled at the planes as
they raced through the pylons and cheated death?
Now, I’m not saying I want people dying in airplanes. What I am saying though is this; there are no vibrant
and free pursuits without occasional death and injury. That may completely shock your senses but
take a minute, think it through, and let’s place it at its most basic
level. If 1,000,000 people are actively
flying, there are going to be more deaths and injuries than if only 200,000
people are. A more active sport is,
quite simply, going to produce more broken bones. Less broken bones, the FAA’s stated primary
goal, is therefore a sure sign of an inactive or dying sport. Ultimately, if you want aviation is to grow
and thrive, safety cannot be your number one focus. Or, in the words of the FAA, Safety Kills
(aviation).
Marketing
Let’s face it, the marketing for aviation sucks. It is horrible. NO, it’s worse than horrible; it’s
ghastly. The leaders of our sport have
taken one of the most exciting things on the planet and convinced people it
sucks so badly nobody wants to do it anymore.
I’ve already mentioned the BS of safety, but what about all the doom and
gloom, avgas this, shrinking population that, and all the woe is me garbage? Spend some damn money and hire real
advertising and marketing professionals.
If nothing else, somebody grab the damn phone and call up Red Bull,
anyone involved with The Running of the Bulls, and even a freaking truck stop
with a mechanical bull. I don’t care,
just quit doing everything in your power to make this incredible sport seem
bland and outdated. Oh man, this makes
my blood boil.
If I could have every
penny spent on Young Eagles, that lodge thing at Oshkosh, and some of the other
silly feel good programs, I could pay some decent marketing and advertising
professionals to develop, produce, and run an advertising campaign that would
have people lining up for lessons. But
no, our leaders keep trying the same things in hopes they’ll eventually work. Or maybe they just want to hire their
friends?
If you want kids in aviation, place ads in social media
outlets that imply girls think pilots are “hot” and that boys will fall in love
with any girl self-confident enough to fly a plane. Kids also covet freedom so give it to them
with aviation. I can see a kid sitting
by the window looking out at a plane as it flies by. The headline would say “You may be grounded,
but not for long”. To grab the middle
age groups, show them how aviation will make them young again by setting them
free. And as for the seniors, appeal to
the importance of passing on knowledge by taking their grandkids for a
flight. “Be a kid again; fill a young person’s
mind with your soul”. Of course, these
are the most basic of advertisement spots.
Today, there are so many options.
The ideas are endless. They just
aren’t anywhere near aviation.
For all potential pilots as a group, we need to appeal to the things that make
aviation great; what it is about flight that stirs the soul and that which
makes it symbolic of the America
we all miss and love. If you want a
perfect example, look to the Dodge Super Bowl commercial “And God Made
a Farmer”. The commercial is a fantastic
example of what aviation needs; an appeal to the soul. But, don’t feel bad, even Dodge and their
agency got things wrong. Fortunately, someone
wrote a very concise “how to do it right” patch for such a campaign. Were aviation to follow the steps in this link, it would be off to a great start.
Put bluntly, we need to be doing everything in our power to
mold EAA into, and market it as, A KICK ASS, LEAN, MEAN, CUTTING EDGE,
FULL FRONTAL, AVIATION ORGASM. Anything less
and it continues to die.
For your consideration:
Please note there are so many facets to EAA that it
would be impossible to cover everything of concern. Additionally, each facet of EAA has its own
list of things that need to be addressed.
Therefore, I know some of you may read this piece and grumble that I left
something out. And you’re right, I have
left out many things in hopes of getting this small enough for people to read
and use it as a jumping off point for conversation and thought. I certainly have not covered everything and I
clearly do not have all the answers. But, I have tried to offer something. Feel free to agree or disagree.
