What is the L.A.A. becoming

[Dave Hall]

I joined before I had even started my flying training, just because I had been going to the local Strut in Bristol, they were welcoming and the Rally was much cheaper to members - a trick no doubt copied from the EAA.

I don't think there's a local AOPA branch, and I've learned so much from others in the Strut who fly purely for the fun of it, and shared the flying with some of them. That's a big difference between LAA and AOPA.

I have to agree about the website. We don't self-promote very well - damn it, we're British, not Americans! It may not be as 'arty' as it was, but it can now be updated in house, and has a lot of information, which is important. As the first point of contact with the LAA for some people, we should pay more attention to its appearance though - it's our shop-window, after all. I think I heard that they are going to make past magazines available on the website - a searchable resource like that would be tremendous.

[Brian Hope]

Work is in hand to improve the website.
Comparisons with EAA are natural but unrealistic. they have over 200,000 members and a tremendous back up of full time staff looking after every aspect of their operation. We have 8000 members and our marketing budget is a few thousand quid and what a handful of volunteers can manage. There are plenty of things we could do better, and hopefully in time we will see improvements.
Whatever your gripe Ron, fact is you have never written to me with any ideas of what you would like to see tha Association doing or where you think it is falling short. How the hell do you expect it to change if you can't even be bothered to make suggestions or, god forbid, roll up your sleeves and muck in to help.
Have to say as well that being critical of people (like me) who choose to support the LAA on this forum is somewhat unfair. All you ever seem to do is complain about the Association, is it unreasonable that I offer an alternative view? It is unfortunate that you seem to see that as animosity but your own remarks slagging off all and sundry as perfectly reasonable.

[steveneale]

How many "new" members who fly 'Spam Cans' & pay their LAA membership fees have been offered a snippet of anything to do with their type of flying, and is this the way to try to keep them. ?

Ron, all the airspace work John Brady does is for all of us not just permit aircraft as is the lobbying Roger is doing for NPPL in France. I think LAA HAS changed to work for all types of light GA aircraft though I agree engineering offers you little re reductions in cost. That's why member and member+ was set up to at least reduce membership fees a bit for you guys in times of increasing costs for everyone. The Mag often carries stuff about spotting corrosion and other generic engineering stuff and that relates as much to CofA types. There are lots of other magazines that write about CofA stuff but the fact is permit is often where the interesting aircraft sit. Flyer is flight testing a RV8 this month and Brian has a Harmon Rocket to scare us all.

With regard to this particular self inflicted wound I can only say that the idea that 4 seaters would be excluded was not discussed at EC or NC. It demonstrated little understanding of LAA activities but a barrage of emails from struts that know you guys are our bedrock for YA soon sorted that out.

All I can ask is that you accept that real LAA grass roots were horrified that this was even considered. I'm sure Roger will 'have a word' as a result. In Bristol wing anyway there is no CofA or permit, just our aircraft. I fly as pax in a Wing members 182 a fair bit and it's so capable. It's the aircraft I would choose if I HAD to get somewhere irrespective of weather not our RV.

So from my perspective there is not them and us any more and IMHO on the lobbying side LAA works for all GA nowadays.

Hope that helps a bit.

[Dave Hall]

I hope you're the only member not happy to see your 60p spent on giving some 800 youngsters a memorable flight, not to mention the publicity value when they tell their neighbours, friends and relatives all about it. Some of the kids flown are recovering from cancer, or look after others in their family with long-term health problems.

It may be we can cover that amount in future through donations, grant-aid or company sponsorship, so you can get a mug of tea at your airfield instead.

[John Brady]

Dear Welshman,

I suspect you are overstating the issue when you say that "you are considering finishing with the LAA and joining AOPA as many other disillusioned spam canners are". Easy to make this kind of vague statement about others to sex up your own position but perhaps you could quantify "many". Would that be 2 or 20 or 200? Just give us the specific number please.

Meanwhile here is a link to the AOPA membership form in case you need it. Shall I tell Martin you are coming?

John

[Dave Hall]

Around 500 Young Aviators flown on Young Aviators Days, and another 250 - 300 on scout aviation camps. We're hoping to reach 300 this year.

I guess it may be a case that if you're not involved with something, it's hard to see the value. I can assure you flying youngsters, or in my case helping with the organising as I've not got the required PIC hours yet, is very rewarding. In fact helping others generally is very rewarding.

I'm sorry that you and some others begrudge 60p or so for this worthwhile activity.

Don't get me started on politics and politicians!

[Nigel Ramsay]

Just as an aside and considering the worries and woes (insurance) of putting on these charity and fun events with children, I wonder if everyone involved needs to be vetted in the same way as teachers, child carers and anyone else dealing with vulnerable persons.

Ron, I think that IS alluded to in the article....... it can only lead to a lack of willingness to provide these incredibly useful PR exercises to say nothing of the genuine pleasure of flying some of these kids, especially the terminally ill, who are just so OPTIMISTIC.

I hade the pleasure of flying several seriously ill children at a Starlight Foundation event at Popham a few years ago. When I got home to my 3 kids squabbling over minor matters, I really ripped into them!

[Bob F]

John,

Reference your "quantify" above, I am one of those members Welshman mentions. I am a "spamcanner" although I don't see why a simple comment on the BB requires proof be forthcoming. I feel that Ron is making a valid point about the PFA becoming the LAA and promising to encompass all LA. We all appreciate the work done behind the scenes with CAA, EASA, NATS etc. but there is no way that the promise of taking on board all LA has been followed through. Our magazine is beautifully produced, but have a look at this issue, how much is in it for a spamcanner to get his teeth into? (This may well be because the spamcanners amongst us are not providing any worthy copy for Brian.) I do get the impression that we are just "subs fodder".

Before I get lambasted for daring to criticise let me say that I have always admired & been interested in homebuilding, kit & experimental types, although I knew it would not be for me, so much so I have been a member of the EAA for several years as well being in the PFA before the name change. That said I can enjoy the PFA banter about kits, advice, spares etc., but what of others who joined on a different expectation?

I also think Ron is right about the way the BB has nosedived.

Bob F

[Rod1]

I too think the LAA has continued to represent the same group, as did the PFA. I have to say this is a good thing and long may it continue as we need a strong home built governing body and watering it down so we were a minority would have been a big problem.

I also think Ron is right about the BB.

Rod1

[Brian Hope]

The magazine content issue is a complex one. As an Association our core business is Permit to Fly aeroplanes, and most members that talk to me about the magazine prefere it over the newstand mages because it contains air tests and build articles about PtF aeroplanes. That said, a great deal of the technical material transfers to CoS types. Take Francis' excellent articles on aluminium, and his latest on wood. the Safety Spot items too are as likely to occur on a CoA as on a Permit aircraft. Travelogs are not aircraft type specific, nor is coaching material or John Brady'd updates on regulatory matters.
Bob F is correct that I do get virtually no CoA aircraft specific material, so come on guys, get writing.
I believe LAA is opening out more, simply by working to dispel the image that all LAA aircraft are old fashioned and slow and take years to build, awakens interest from a wider audience. Not that I have any problem with old and slow, but the average pilot today seems to want fast and sexy.
I'm always open to suggestions for what members want to see in the mag, but simply saying it doesn't contain what you want doesn't really help me to improve things.

[Norfolkjohn]

I’ve done my best to bite my lip up until now but the above post from Rod1 has finally touched one nerve too many. I part own and fly a 4 seat C of A aircraft and joined the LAA just over a year ago. I joined because I felt I had a moral duty to be a member of one of the GA representative bodies and AOPA simply do not represent the sort of flying I am interested in. Until recently I’ve been quite happy with being a member of the LAA and I certainly appreciate the work done on major consultations and the continued existence of the NPPL. However reading this thread and the debacle over insurance for 4 seat aircraft at LAA events (many of which are likely to be C of A machines) I am left with a distinct feeling that all I am really doing by continuing to be a member is to subsidise the homebuilders who seem to regard C of A aircraft owners with a fair degree of contempt.

Please understand I have nothing what so ever against homebuilders / operators of permit aircraft. I don’t expect any special favours for those of us in the C of A world but I object to an attitude that we should be treated as second class citizens because we are stupid enough not to want to build our own aircraft !

My subs are due at the end of the month and although my head says I should renew my membership my heart is saying that the money would be better spent on an hour and a bit’s worth of 100LL for my stupidly expensive to own and operate piece of American mass produced aeronautical junk – which I just happen to love flying !