 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
 |
|
| Quote: |
2) You wrote: "OBAM means "owner *built* and *MAINTAINED*"
As you can see the term OBAM is a bit of a misnomer because, as described
above, any one can repair, work on, or maintain an amateur built
experimental aircraft. I think the acronym ABEA (Amateur Built
Experimental Aircraft) is both more inclusive and more accurate, but it
has not received wide spread use.
|
Bureaucratic nomenclature not withstanding, the idea behind
"OBAM" was to eliminate the terms "experimental" and "amateur"
while substituting equally accurate words for public consumption.
The average Joe on the street thinks getting into any little airplane
is foolhardy. Pasting an "experimental" label on the "amateur" built
machine only serves to elevate the listener/reader's level of
tension/apprehension.
Back when I gave depositions in accident investigations and
analysis we took pains to avoid words like "impact", "crash",
"shattered", etc in favor of equally accurate but less exciting words
like "contact", "event", "failed", etc. When attempting to
explain the finer details of an accident where 90% of the energy
is expended in the first few hundred milliseconds of an event,
it's challenging but useful to downplay the violence while
focusing on the science.
It's easier to keep the listener's attention to facts and
logic if you avoid the kind of words one hears in abundance
on the 6 o-clock news. It worked well in the courtroom and
many of our aviation-ignorant fellow citizens are considered
ideal jury material.
Further, in many venues the owner of a TC aircraft has accomplished
some pretty heavy maintenance and repairs albeit under the watchful
eye of a "certified" individual who ultimately accepts responsibility
for the work.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob McC
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 258
Location: Toronto, ON
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:31 pm Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
|
|
Just a point of interest and my 1/2 cent input. (way less than 2 cents).
This thread is the first time I've seen the acronym ABEA, but I have become
very familiar with OBAM over the past few years on this, and other,
Matronics lists. I think OBAM is a much better "sell" to the general public
than any mention of "experimental", "homebuilt", "homemade", or "amateur".
All of those words tend to instil negative connotations to anyone unfamiliar
with our hobby. To those directly involved the semantics are irrelevant, to
those "outsiders" the semantics could mean all the difference between
acceptance, understanding, appreciation, and rejection, mistrust or fear.
(just a thought to keep in the back of our minds when the need for
terminology comes up).
Bob McC
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Bob McC
Falco #908
(just starting) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dale Ensing
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 571
Location: Aero Plantation Weddington NC
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:30 am Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
|
|
The ABEA words can cause negative vibrations in various ways. Once had a
corporate VP question my management competence because I built and flew an
"experimental" airplane.
Dale Ensing
| Quote: | All of those words tend to instil negative connotations to anyone
unfamiliar
|
| Quote: | with our hobby. To those directly involved the semantics are irrelevant,
to
|
| Quote: | those "outsiders" the semantics could mean all the difference between
acceptance, understanding, appreciation, and rejection, mistrust or fear.
(just a thought to keep in the back of our minds when the need for
terminology comes up).
Bob McC
do not achieve
|
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Dale Ensing
RV-6A
Aero Plantation
Weddington NC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:37 pm Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
|
|
At 01:28 AM 8/16/2006 -0400, you wrote:
| Quote: |
<robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Just a point of interest and my 1/2 cent input. (way less than 2 cents).
This thread is the first time I've seen the acronym ABEA, but I have become
very familiar with OBAM over the past few years on this, and other,
Matronics lists. I think OBAM is a much better "sell" to the general public
than any mention of "experimental", "homebuilt", "homemade", or "amateur".
All of those words tend to instil negative connotations to anyone unfamiliar
with our hobby. To those directly involved the semantics are irrelevant, to
those "outsiders" the semantics could mean all the difference between
acceptance, understanding, appreciation, and rejection, mistrust or fear.
(just a thought to keep in the back of our minds when the need for
terminology comes up).
|
Exactly. Obviously, anyone may craft what ever descriptive
terms they wish to convey meaning to a listener/reader.
I crafted phrase "OBAM" several years ago because I didn't believe
that our craft was well presented to the public -OR- prospective
new builders with words like those you've cited above.
My first introduction to OBAM aviation was about 1967 when
one of the engineers at Cessna's single-engine facility
brought his VW powered Headwind out on a Saturday morning
when we were working overtime on some project. We all went
out to see the airplane and watched Dick fly it away. We had
a good laugh discussing the "toy" airplane and went back
inside to work on "real" airplanes. 20 years later at OSH,
I was amazed at the levels of both craftsmanship and
technology in the amateur-built aircraft community. That
was the year the 'Connection was conceived.
In years since, we're all aware of how far we've come
and many of us have a vision of how far we can still go,
given the right circumstances. Part of those circumstances
include an elevation of our craft from that of a "poor
street urchin" amongst those who make their living
at designing, building, selling, maintaining and
(ugh) regulating aviation. The future is also dependent
on public perceptions . . . for when it comes to
regulation, those who would broaden their professional
horizons will go to Congress for a charter claiming
that we are loose cannons building death traps from which
we and the public must be protected.
OC wrote in an earlier post:
B) People who see the term OBAM over and over begin to think that
it is indeed only the Owner or only the Builder who may Maintain
the aircraft. This is misleading and needs to be clarified every
once in a while, in fact just recently on this list.
I'll suggest that a fundamental attribution error
is at work here. OBAM is not exclusive. It simply
acknowledges the fact that the vast majority of
participants in the OBAM aviation community are
here because they CAN build and maintain their personal
aircraft with an investment of sweat-equity as
opposed hiring "certified" assistance. This is in
stark contrast to the certificated side of the house which
IS very exclusive were the majority of owners do
little maintenance and no building at all.
C) Use of the term OBAM causes people tend to think that every
aircraft in our community must have been Built by the current
Owner.
How so? FAE is in play here too. Owners can both "build"
and "maintain" for the vast majority of what needs to
be done on the airplane.
But ownership by individuals subsequent to the builder is very
common in our community. There are some significant issues involved
with subsequent ownership.
Absolutely . . . but the only exclusion is that subsequent
owners need to seek the occasional sprinkling of holy
water for things that they've done. This is a tiny fraction
of the total $time$ expended on aircraft maintenance or
modification and does not alter the basic premise for
which most folks choose to either build or acquire such
aircraft.
Confusing? Only for those who are mired in tradition
and homage to regulation. I have no arguments with those
who work in and embrace that world. I too work in that
world but choose not to embrace it. If there is to be any future
for small aircraft it's in the OBAM universe not the
ABEA universe . . . and I'm pleased to explain the
differences to anyone who is confused.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:06 am Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
|
|
We can quibble over the technical details of OBAM, but what Bob has
done is to apply a bit of marketing savvy to an otherwise technical endeavor.
OBAM is a marketing term. No marketing expert would EVER use the
terms "amateur" or "experimental" in a concept he was trying to sell
to the public as safe and reliable. Would you let your kid go for a
ride in some "amateur-built experimental" made by Larry, Moe and
Curly in their garage?
While I was building my "HOMEBUILT", I was reminded virtually every
day by my boss that I was doing something dangerous, and he would
provide me with a printed copy of every news story of somebody
crashing in an airplane.
In this day and age, perception is more valuable than reality. Just
look at the "V chip". There is no such thing. But in the minds of
millions of Americans, it exists, and the government created it to
help them. What a marketing coup!! Perfume is another great
example. How else could you sell a half ounce of water for over
$100? It's all in the marketing.
Changing the name of that dastardly, dangerous contraption from an
AMATEUR (unskilled) built EXPERIMENTAL (might not work) aircraft to
an "Owner Built and Maintained" is mainly for the consumption of the
PUBLIC, not the people who know that obviously the owner isn't going
to be doing ALL the work on it if he doesn't want to. We can call it
an "uncertified" if we want to. But don't let the public know.
Dave Morris
At 10:36 PM 8/16/2006, you wrote:
| Quote: |
<nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
At 01:28 AM 8/16/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
><robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
>
>Just a point of interest and my 1/2 cent input. (way less than 2 cents).
>This thread is the first time I've seen the acronym ABEA, but I have become
>very familiar with OBAM over the past few years on this, and other,
>Matronics lists. I think OBAM is a much better "sell" to the general public
>than any mention of "experimental", "homebuilt", "homemade", or "amateur".
>All of those words tend to instil negative connotations to anyone unfamiliar
>with our hobby. To those directly involved the semantics are irrelevant, to
>those "outsiders" the semantics could mean all the difference between
>acceptance, understanding, appreciation, and rejection, mistrust or fear.
>(just a thought to keep in the back of our minds when the need for
>terminology comes up).
Exactly. Obviously, anyone may craft what ever descriptive
terms they wish to convey meaning to a listener/reader.
I crafted phrase "OBAM" several years ago because I didn't believe
that our craft was well presented to the public -OR- prospective
new builders with words like those you've cited above.
My first introduction to OBAM aviation was about 1967 when
one of the engineers at Cessna's single-engine facility
brought his VW powered Headwind out on a Saturday morning
when we were working overtime on some project. We all went
out to see the airplane and watched Dick fly it away. We had
a good laugh discussing the "toy" airplane and went back
inside to work on "real" airplanes. 20 years later at OSH,
I was amazed at the levels of both craftsmanship and
technology in the amateur-built aircraft community. That
was the year the 'Connection was conceived.
In years since, we're all aware of how far we've come
and many of us have a vision of how far we can still go,
given the right circumstances. Part of those circumstances
include an elevation of our craft from that of a "poor
street urchin" amongst those who make their living
at designing, building, selling, maintaining and
(ugh) regulating aviation. The future is also dependent
on public perceptions . . . for when it comes to
regulation, those who would broaden their professional
horizons will go to Congress for a charter claiming
that we are loose cannons building death traps from which
we and the public must be protected.
OC wrote in an earlier post:
B) People who see the term OBAM over and over begin to think that
it is indeed only the Owner or only the Builder who may Maintain
the aircraft. This is misleading and needs to be clarified every
once in a while, in fact just recently on this list.
I'll suggest that a fundamental attribution error
is at work here. OBAM is not exclusive. It simply
acknowledges the fact that the vast majority of
participants in the OBAM aviation community are
here because they CAN build and maintain their personal
aircraft with an investment of sweat-equity as
opposed hiring "certified" assistance. This is in
stark contrast to the certificated side of the house which
IS very exclusive were the majority of owners do
little maintenance and no building at all.
C) Use of the term OBAM causes people tend to think that every
aircraft in our community must have been Built by the current
Owner.
How so? FAE is in play here too. Owners can both "build"
and "maintain" for the vast majority of what needs to
be done on the airplane.
But ownership by individuals subsequent to the builder is very
common in our community. There are some significant issues involved
with subsequent ownership.
Absolutely . . . but the only exclusion is that subsequent
owners need to seek the occasional sprinkling of holy
water for things that they've done. This is a tiny fraction
of the total $time$ expended on aircraft maintenance or
modification and does not alter the basic premise for
which most folks choose to either build or acquire such
aircraft.
Confusing? Only for those who are mired in tradition
and homage to regulation. I have no arguments with those
who work in and embrace that world. I too work in that
world but choose not to embrace it. If there is to be any future
for small aircraft it's in the OBAM universe not the
ABEA universe . . . and I'm pleased to explain the
differences to anyone who is confused.
Bob . . .
|
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brian
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 7:35 pm Post subject: OBAM vs. ABEA |
|
|
On Aug 16, 2006, at 8:36 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
| Quote: | I'll suggest that a fundamental attribution error
is at work here. OBAM is not exclusive. It simply
acknowledges the fact that the vast majority of
participants in the OBAM aviation community are
here because they CAN build and maintain their personal
aircraft with an investment of sweat-equity as
opposed hiring "certified" assistance. This is in
stark contrast to the certificated side of the house which
IS very exclusive were the majority of owners do
little maintenance and no building at all.
|
If one wishes to draw a parallel, consider the production and racing
automotive communities. The new and innovative stuff comes from the
racing community. That then trickles down into the production
community. The unfortunate problem we face is that the FAA acts as a
serious impediment to the flow of new ideas from the experimental to
the production communities.
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
