Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

AOPA

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith601-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

yak52

Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Posts: 50

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:12 pm Post subject: AOPA

I just received the April issue of AOPA Pilot. This issue had letters from Sebastien Heintz and Jim Belcher pointing out the numerous errors in Bruce Landesberg's previous article on the 601XL. Rather than responding to those issues, Mr. Landesberg repeated, out of context and omitting qualifiers, statements from his previous article. It is apparent that there will be no favorable statement from AOPA no matter what Zenith Aircraft Company does, and it may be best to have no further reply to Mr. Landesberg as he has oviously not looked at any of the information made available to anyone who takes the time to find and read the materials. Perhaps the lack of advertising revenue from Zenith plays into the AOPA attitude. A look at the advertisers listed in the magazine shows numerous other LSA advertisers. Perhaps we should vote with our feet, as it were, by cancelling our memberships in AOPA and staying with EAA, where we at least get some semblance of a balanced reporting.  [quote][b]

jfowler120(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 1:42 pm Post subject: AOPA

Agree.  Will do so now.

  

 Karl

  



  From: roger lambert (n601ap(at)gmail.com) 

 Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:06 PM

 To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com (zenith601-list(at)matronics.com)  

 Subject: AOPA

 



I just received the April issue of AOPA Pilot. This issue had  letters from Sebastien Heintz and Jim Belcher pointing out the numerous errors  in Bruce Landesberg's previous article on the 601XL. Rather than responding to  those issues, Mr. Landesberg repeated, out of context and omitting qualifiers,  statements from his previous article. It is apparent that there will be no  favorable statement from AOPA no matter what Zenith Aircraft Company does, and  it may be best to have no further reply to Mr. Landesberg as he has oviously not  looked at any of the information made available to anyone who takes the time to  find and read the materials. Perhaps the lack of advertising revenue from Zenith  plays into the AOPA attitude. A look at the advertisers listed in the magazine  shows numerous other LSA advertisers. Perhaps we should vote with our feet, as  it were, by cancelling our memberships in AOPA and staying with EAA, where we at  least get some semblance of a balanced reporting. [quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c

[b]

LHusky

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Posts: 86
Location: Madras, Oregon

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:05 pm Post subject: AOPA

I have also done so.  

  

 Larry

  

  In a message dated 3/25/2010 2:42:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  jfowler120(at)verizon.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Agree.  Will do so now.

    

   Karl

      



      From: roger lambert (n601ap(at)gmail.com) 

   Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:06 PM

   To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com (zenith601-list(at)matronics.com)    

   Subject: AOPA

   



I just received the April issue of AOPA Pilot. This issue had    letters from Sebastien Heintz and Jim Belcher pointing out the numerous errors    in Bruce Landesberg's previous article on the 601XL. Rather than responding to    those issues, Mr. Landesberg repeated, out of context and omitting qualifiers,    statements from his previous article. It is apparent that there will be no    favorable statement from AOPA no matter what Zenith Aircraft Company does, and    it may be best to have no further reply to Mr. Landesberg as he has oviously    not looked at any of the information made available to anyone who takes the    time to find and read the materials. Perhaps the lack of advertising revenue    from Zenith plays into the AOPA attitude. A look at the advertisers listed in    the magazine shows numerous other LSA advertisers. Perhaps we should vote with    our feet, as it were, by cancelling our memberships in AOPA and staying with    EAA, where we at least get some semblance of a balanced reporting.  	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c





====================================

t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List

====================================

ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com

====================================

tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

====================================



	
	


  [quote][b]

Z601c(at)anemicaardvark.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:05 pm Post subject: AOPA

On Thursday 25 March 2010 12:06:26 you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I just received the April issue of AOPA Pilot. This issue had letters from

 Sebastien Heintz and Jim Belcher pointing out the numerous errors in Bruce

 Landesberg's previous article on the 601XL. Rather than responding to those

 issues, Mr. Landesberg repeated, out of context and omitting qualifiers,

 statements from his previous article. It is apparent that there will be no

 favorable statement from AOPA no matter what Zenith Aircraft Company does,

 and it may be best to have no further reply to Mr. Landesberg as he has

 oviously not looked at any of the information made available to anyone who

 takes the time to find and read the materials. Perhaps the lack of

 advertising revenue from Zenith plays into the AOPA attitude. A look at the

 advertisers listed in the magazine shows numerous other LSA advertisers.

 Perhaps we should vote with our feet, as it were, by cancelling our

 memberships in AOPA and staying with EAA, where we at least get some

 semblance of a balanced reporting.


	


I'm not too surprised. At best, I expected to be ignored, but at least the flag 

has been waved. I have no plans to respond, no matter what he said; it's 

obviously a waste of time. 



The editors of a magazine can pretty well tilt things in whatever direction 

they wish. In this case, facts appear to have little impact, nor does any 

attempt at discussion. 



I've been toying with canceling my membership for some time. AOPA hasn't 

really done a good job of representing the little guys in a number of years. 

They caved in on the closing of the flight service stations, and now, they are 

actually advocating the mandating of ADS-B, which is going to cost us through 

the nose, and give little in return.



The old AOPA leaders fought things like the TCAs and ARSAs fiercely. These guys 

just roll over and play dead. Maybe we need a new pilot's organization that 

actually represents the needs of the rank and file.



-- 

========================================

                                       Jim B. Belcher

                                       BS,MS Physics

                                            A&P/IA

                      General Radio Telephone Certificate

                               Instrument Rated Pilot

                     Retired Aerospace Technical Manager

                         Semi-proficient Househusband

========================================

jaybannist(at)cs.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:33 pm Post subject: AOPA

Roger, I agree !!

  

     

  

    

     In his response, Landisberg says: "....we need to move on beyond denial of the issue and attacking the credibility of numerous witnesses."  In the first place, just who is in denial?  Zenith has studied the issue and designed upgrades to address the issues. The upgrade kits have been issued and they go far beyond what the FAA requested.  Is that denial ?  In the letters Landisberg is responding to, I see no one "attacking numerous witnesses", none.  Landisberg goes on: "....verify it (the wing structure) is not subject to flutter."  He apparently has not heard of nor read the report from Germany that tested the unmodified wing and found no evidence that it is subject to flutter, except with really slack control cables. Irregardless, the upgrade includes aileron counterbalance, which may or may not even be necessary.

 

 It appears that Landisberg comes from the "don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up (and I am right)" school of journalism; and his mind is made up that Zenith is irresponsible, regardless of their response to an undeniable issue. Therefore, I agree that there is no sense in responding to Landisberg.  It would be like talking to a stump on fire.  However, I think that letting Craig Fuller know why he might be losing members could the more appropriate way to go. I have been an AOPA member since 1982 and I am certainly considering dropping out over this issue.

 

 Jay Bannister

  

     

  

    --

bill.pagan(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 3:52 pm Post subject: AOPA

I've been considering dropping from AOPA since November when I attended their AOPA Summit in Tampa.  I felt like I was treated as if I had the plague whenever the subject of experimental aircraft came up.  They've always come across to me as a "holier then thou" bunch.

 

Bill Pagan  13 year AOPA member

 



 

   From: roger lambert <n601ap(at)gmail.com>

To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Thu, March 25, 2010 1:06:26 PM

Subject: AOPA



I just received the April issue of AOPA Pilot. This issue had letters from Sebastien Heintz and Jim Belcher pointing out the numerous errors in Bruce Landesberg's previous article on the 601XL. Rather than responding to those issues, Mr. Landesberg repeated, out of context and omitting qualifiers, statements from his previous article. It is apparent that there will be no favorable statement from AOPA no matter what Zenith Aircraft Company does, and it may be best to have no further reply to Mr. Landesberg as he has oviously not looked at any of the information made available to anyone who takes the time to  find and read the materials. Perhaps the lack of advertising revenue from Zenith plays into the AOPA attitude. A look at the advertisers listed in the magazine shows numerous other LSA advertisers. Perhaps we should vote with our feet, as it were, by cancelling our memberships in AOPA and staying with EAA, where we at least get some semblance of a balanced reporting. [b]

fderfler(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:46 am Post subject: AOPA

I fully agree with Roger and Jim.  I find this publication's attitude very strange.  And let's note that it seems this is the attitude of the publication... there are other editors and publishers who look at these things before they go to print.  It doesn't seem that this is just some writer gone rogue.  I know that I wrote a strong, referenced, and reasoned note to the author and editor after the original article and received a bland reply. Each person is free to project motives onto these folks, but when I look at it I don't see any reason to continue to belong to AOPA.     -- Frank Derfler, 601XL N183AM, (now in Eastman)    [quote][b]

PatrickW

Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 380
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:11 pm Post subject: Re: AOPA

I just pitched my AOPA renewal notice in the trash.  



Been a member for a few years, but I get the impression that they're more of a "GA" outfit, and that us homebuilders are not even on their radar.



- Pat

LHusky

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Posts: 86
Location: Madras, Oregon

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:12 pm Post subject: AOPA

I was contacted by the AOPA today due to a letter I sent them on this very  subject.  I told them that when I owned a Cessna, I seemed to get different  treatment when I called.  One of the first questions they asked was what  type of aircraft I had.  At the time, I told them a Cessna.  OK, all  good.  When I recently called to ask a few questions, I was again asked  what type of aircraft I had.  I told them an experimental.  I did not  even mention the words Zenith 601XL.  Instantly the mood changed.  I  felt like I had just walked into a school classroom NAKED!  So, I sent them  a letter telling them what my experience was and that I felt I did not need to  be a member of an organization that makes me feel like that.  Well,  yesterday, they called and I let them have it verbally;  I told them they  are going to see a drop in their membership due to people feeling like second  rate citizens because we own experimental aircraft.  I explained that I  wanted them to take my name off their list and do not contact me again, unless  they go to work for the EAA.  

  

 Vented!! 

  

 Larry Husky 

 Madras, Oregon

  

  In a message dated 3/26/2010 7:47:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  fderfler(at)gmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I fully agree with Roger and    Jim.  I find this publication's attitude very strange.  And let's    note that it seems this is the attitude of the publication... there are other    editors and publishers who look at these things before they go to print.     It doesn't seem that this is just some writer gone rogue.  I know    that I wrote a strong, referenced, and reasoned note to the author and editor    after the original article and received a bland reply. Each person is free to    project motives onto these folks, but when I look at it I don't see any reason    to continue to belong to AOPA.     -- Frank Derfler, 601XL N183AM,    (now in Eastman)    	  Quote: 	
		  



====================================

t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List

====================================

ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com

====================================

tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

====================================



	
	


  [quote][b]

vayuwings

Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 16
Location: arizona

Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 6:32 pm Post subject: Re: AOPA

I'd just like to suggest trying a cooling period for anyone considering canceling membership to AOPA. There's no doubt to anyone examining our situation with the XL that we may not get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth from other groups with vested interests beyond the homebuilt community and its lack of advertising dollars. 



When it comes to legal issues - and I used AOPA some years back with my color deficiency with flying and they came to bat for me not only with letters and phone calls, someone even visited the FSDO I was having a problem with and they flattened the resistance immediately - and other important advocacy as pilots we need them, just like we need EAA.

There are plenty of groups that have biases and bad members out there, I'm just saying considering the bigger picture maybe we can influence their viewpoint on homebuilts from our success and perseverance when we show them year after year how strong, safe and wonderful our XL-U aircraft are. 

I'm just saying...

vayuwings

Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 16
Location: arizona

Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 6:34 pm Post subject: Re: AOPA

Forgot my name-

Dave

601XL-U

chris Sinfield

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 270
Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 12:29 am Post subject: Re: AOPA

Ah David 

but when AOPA went in to bat for you, did you tell them you flew an Experimental plane???? 



If it was to fly a Cessna / Piper  / business jet  they will bend over backwards..

Chris

Z601c(at)anemicaardvark.c
Guest

Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:02 am Post subject: AOPA

The value of AOPA to each individual certainly needs to be weighed before 

taking action. Value of an organization is an individual thing; each of us 

needs to decide whether to retain membership or not, based on our individual 

experiences. 



To me, the current set of AOPA problems are the first in a long string, some of 

which include, not necessarily in any order:



1) The legal support plan, for which I paid an additional premium. When I 

needed it, it turned out to pay $200, which was enough to cover not that many 

hours of an attorney's time. There wasn't enough money here to actually do 

much of anything.



The plan I counted on to meet aviation legal needs was nearly worthless.



2) "Airports USA," which was a good benefit with membership. It went from being 

sent to each member, through a variety of lesser availabilities. I think the 

last I heard, you either had to download it and print it yourself, or carry a 

copy on a computer. That might meet someone's need, but certainly not mine.



3) I'm still waiting to see how the insurance turns out. I dropped off the plan 

when I sold my certificated aircraft to build a Zenith. Does this mean the 

multiplier will start all over again? In hindsight, I bet it does. I probably 

should never have dropped off, but it's likely one more significantly reduced 

benefit.



4) AOPA hires "presidents" and "vice-presidents" without ever polling the rank 

and file for their feelings on the subject. This isn't a democratic 

organization. No one ever asked if we thought the author of the offending 

article should be given a position (vice-president of something, I think) at 

AOPA, they just appointed him.



5) AOPA uses my membership, and yours, to claim the positions they take 

represent our feelings. They've never asked me what I think about anything. 

Have they asked anyone else on the mailing list?



AOPA is supporting things like ADS-B, and the so-called "satellite radar," and 

claiming it's something GA pilots want. I don't doubt some of us want this, 

but not all of us do, and we've never been asked.



6) IMHO. the monthly magazine did a much better job of reporting little guy 

aviation than it now does. It's become a slick publication, largely reporting 

high end items. Not entirely, mind you, but primarily. Kitplanes and GA news 

are far more valuable to me.



I feel the organization has strayed wildly from its roots. I've been a member 

for a number of years. It appears to be a very different organization from the 

one I joined. 



At this point, the only thing AOPA is really doing for me is providing a place 

I can ask questions about flight rules and interpretations. That's useful, but 

I don't have questions that only they can answer all that often. I think the 

last time was about 3 years ago. 



Does AOPA ever have any value? Certainly. Is it of value to me? It doesn't 

appear to be at this point.



There are likely a lot of you that can add to the list of experiences and 

concerns. In my mind, it's doubtful AOPA will fix anything until someone moves 

their cheese. I think it's time to haul cheese.



My opinions, worth almost as much as what you paid for them. 



On Saturday 27 March 2010 21:32:31 you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 I'd just like to suggest trying a cooling period for anyone considering

  canceling membership to AOPA. There's no doubt to anyone examining our

  situation with the XL that we may not get the truth, the whole truth, and

  nothing but the truth from other groups with vested interests beyond the

  homebuilt community and its lack of advertising dollars.

 

 When it comes to legal issues - and I used AOPA some years back with my

  color deficiency with flying and they came to bat for me not only with

  letters and phone calls, someone even visited the FSDO I was having a

  problem with and they flattened the resistance immediately - and other

  important advocacy as pilots we need them, just like we need EAA. There

  are plenty of groups that have biases and bad members out there, I'm just

  saying considering the bigger picture maybe we can influence their

  viewpoint on homebuilts from our success and perseverance when we show

  them year after year how strong, safe and wonderful our XL-U aircraft are.

  I'm just saying...


	


-- 

========================================

                                       Jim B. Belcher

                                       BS,MS Physics

                                            A&P/IA

                      General Radio Telephone Certificate

                               Instrument Rated Pilot

                     Retired Aerospace Technical Manager

                         Semi-proficient Househusband

========================================

psm(at)att.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 9:24 am Post subject: AOPA

Hi Jim,



This sounds a lot like the NRA.  That is another organization that was nice

to join decades ago but has since migrated to another world.  I'm not

surprised AOPA has moved to high-end aviation.  That is the way the world

went in the 1980s when the greedy lawyers destroyed general aviation for

normal people through product liability suits.  Only those who could afford

biz-jets could get past the liability costs.



I agree with your choice of publications.  I would add Avweb - an online

newsletter that is published twice(?) a week and has all the same news as GA

News.  I would still keep GA news and Kitplanes.



I think it is unfair that the great powers keep changing the world without

asking me first . . . 



Paul

XL installing upgrade



====================================



Kitplanes and GA news are far more valuable to me.



I feel the organization has strayed wildly from its roots.

bryanmmartin

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1018

Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 9:57 am Post subject: AOPA

The AOPA has been fighting hard against user fees in the FAA budget process. I was contacted by the AOPA once for my opinion on the proposed user fees for FAA services. They also fight airport closings when a government body tries to renege on it's obligation to keep an airport open after receiving federal airport improvement funds. As far as ADS-B is concerned, I recall that some of the alternatives that were proposed by the FAA would have been much worse, sometimes the FAA seems to forget that the airlines aren't the only users of the airspace system.



I may not agree with everything the AOPA does but, they do enough good to keep my support.





-- 

Bryan Martin

N61BM, CH 601 XL,

RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.

do not archive.

_________________
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.

vayuwings

Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 16
Location: arizona

Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:40 am Post subject: Re: AOPA

Yes, they knew my aircraft was a homebuilt, but the problem was more medical/airport related with the light signal test and the stubbornness of the FAA, so maybe they overlooked the aircraft type. It was their legal and political arm in action, and it was swift and effective.



Each should react as they see fit, but a lack of personal fulfillment and disappointment to one's viewpoint of how AOPA should be run differently is like the baby going out with the bathwater, and I find that simply impatient and shortsighted, and I feel we should at least give the emotional reactions time to ebb, but I'm only speaking for myself. Fully respect whatever choice others need to make.   



Cheers

Dave

601XL-U

workin' on the upgrade

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith601-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum