AOPA et al

[Rate One Turn]

Howdy folks!

I lately keep getting flooded by requests from AOPA to become a member. Now, barring the possibility that they think I'm really cool I'm actually contemplating giving in, if not only for the free airport directory..

Any thoughts before I shell out $39.95?


-ROT

 

[Mogus]

I think it's worth it solely because of the archived Flight Training airticles. Plus you get a free, trendy cap with AOPA's logo printed obnoxiously large on the front!

 

[310]

Join!!! Good Magazine. Doing alot of good work to keep General Aviation going.

 

[darien]

Go for it I thought the same thing Now I'm glad I did
Positives magazine subscription and free internet site membership plus I have seen first hand their efforts to save GA airports ie Albert Whitted in St. Pete Fla. No doubt in my mind that their efforts helped save this a/p
The site has been the great benifit to me Great to get all weather at one site and file Now they have a free flight planner by jepp Very cool

 

[avbug]

Years of membership, and I never got the hat, the directory, etc. They always took my money, and always forgot.

Seems I forgot to renew one year, dang it.

 

[350DRIVER]

I let my membership expire and probably will not re-join anytime soon.. If only they spent the money on "general aviation" (where it should be going) that they waste week after week and sometimes more frequently with regards to sending me letter after letter and brochure after brochure then maybee some good would come about. I cannot see or even attempt to justify the actions upon their behalf when it seems like every other couple of days I get "another" notice saying my membership has just expired. After getting these for about 12 months I tried to call and advise them that my membership has "not just" expired it has been "long expired", I had no desire to re-join, etc, etc, but I guess they just didn't seem to get it since to this day I still get the mailings.. I would love to know just how much money they are spending with all these mailings, surely the money could be put to better use.

The magazine was pretty neat though with all those color pictures in it.

I think avbug discussed many good points with regards to this issue in previous aopa threads...

Do as you wish

3 5 0

 

[Tim47SIP]

AOPA is a great organization

I can't share 350's opinion of AOPA (or mentality for that regard ), but I can tell you that they do do great things. I have been a member sinse 84 and have used their medical and legal services a couple of times. They have been great. Don't forget that they provide free life insurance and every year that you maintain membership, your life insurance goes up. Mine is in the 20's and it comes with my membership! They do a lot of good for general aviation and even help some in commercial aviation. Sometimes they work hand in hand with ALPA on common issues like LAHSO. You also get an Airport/Aims directory each year (now a CD). They have an excellent informational data base and are tied into the FAA's data base. My brother who has owned 7 different aircraft over the last 15 years has used them for history and AD information. They have great flight planning software and a myriad of other services. Well worth the 35.00 or so a year. The only negative thing is that I never got the hat either Going to have to talk to them about that!

 

[Caveman]

I'm a member of AOPA and the NRA for the same reason. They both actively and vigorously lobby the goverment about issues that are very important to me.

I don't have the time nor the money to support these things effectively on my own, but collectively with other like minded souls we have the resources to establish watchdogs to protect our interests.

The $40 @ year I send to each of these organizations is money well spent in my mind. They both do a credible job of protecting and promoting their respective causes.

 

[Sphincter Boy]

Definatly woth the money. The magazine alone is worth the membership cost. I basically keep it because I have not forgotten where my flying roots came from.

 

[English]

If you don't want to be flooded with requests to join AOPA, then go to registry.faa.gov and opt to not have your address released. I think this is where they get your info, because after I opted out, I stopped getting solicitations.

 

[bobbysamd]

AOPA

Does that mean the AOPA strike is finally over????

I like that! I haven't seen any picket requests here for a couple of weeks now.

Very seriously, in my $0.02 opinion, AOPA membership is well worth the annual $40. For one thing, you can avail yourself of the confidential legal and medical counseling services. Thank G-d I never needed legal counseling. A couple of years ago, I wanted to have a medical after several years of not having it. I called an AOPA counselor and received answers for all my concerns (As it turned out, getting a medical these days is seemingly much easier than it was ten years ago.).

Another good thing about AOPA is the life insurance policy. It may not pay much and may be restrictive, but it is available.

Maybe most importantly, AOPA at least tries to stick up for aviation interests. But for AOPA, perhaps an aviation-ignorant Congress might have seen to it that airspace was shut down completely long after 911.

Finally, the magazine is high quality and generally well-written, but, sometimes, its authors miss the boat on things. About two years ago, the mag ran an article about an author who took a comp check (IPC) at CAA. This author holds an ATP but gushed about all the gee-whiz procedures and standardization at Comair. Anyone who ever learned how to fly and/or instructed at someplace like Comair will tell you that 141 schools are that way. Had the author been more knowledgable, he would have known that 141 schools are strict, rigid and dogmatic and that most 141 CFIs are that way because they were hired from within and know no other aviation except for what their academies taught them. The magazine frequently runs articles that touch on professional aviation and I find that kind of gush to be tedious.

One more thing. Your AOPA membership is tax-deductable if you itemize.

 

[flywithastick]

I believe those who fly GA owe it to the rest to join AOPA. They do a pretty good job, IMO, of helping the industry through lagislative advocacy (lobbying).

The hats, magazines, pins, etc. are not why I pay AOPA membership dues. I want Boyer and their lawyers out fighting the bureaucrats who see GA as an easy target for control and additional regulations.

Having said that, I think they do have a good magazine (not that flight training rag - useless, IMO) and the second hat I got from them was pretty nice. Well made, fit good, looks good. The first one might fit my 6 yr old, but not my big, well evolved head. Those who want one, I got my second one (the good one) at Sun n Fun. Just axed, explained how the first one didn't fit, showed my card and the nice lady gave it to me.

Seriously - it's a good organization. Much better than EAA at advocacy and lobbying. Unless you're just dead broke, you need to set aside $39/yr and join to help protect GA if you're a young cfi, weekend warrior or big time airline pilot who flies your own equipment in your free time. AOPA is the best and most effective group working to keep GA flying rights intact.

 

[vclean]

In many regards, AOPA is a good organization for GA. However, sometimes GA and airline legislative goals are not in line with one another. The current Senate FAA Reauthorization Bill has many provisions AOPA sought, and therefore supports its' passage. The same bill also contains cabotage language that opens the door to outsourcing pilot jobs in an already difficult job market.

 

[flywithastick]

In many regards, AOPA is a good organization for GA. However, sometimes GA and airline legislative goals are not in line with one another.

You're right on this one. groups like the ATA (Airline Transport Assn), military, secret svc and even FAA would, in many cases, like to shut GA down 100%. None of these groups get any benefit from GA's existence.

But let's not hijack the topic away from the good things AOPA does.

 

[Timebuilder]

Just ask yourself: without AOPA, where would general aviation be right now?

I think there would be far fewer airports, and less access to the remaining airports. Your typical piston single could be banned from many places. Costs of training couild go even higher than they are as regulatory measures increase, making it more difficult to run a school. It only takes a little imagination to conceive of an aviation world without AOPA.

Join.

 

[rettofly]

Just ask yourself: without AOPA, where would general aviation be right now?

I think there would be far fewer airports, and less access to the remaining airports. Your typical piston single could be banned from many places. Costs of training couild go even higher than they are as regulatory measures increase, making it more difficult to run a school. It only takes a little imagination to conceive of an aviation world without AOPA.

Join.

Right on, TB. Ive been an AOPA member since 1968 (low six digit membership number) and haven't regretted a dime of dues or donations.

 

[NuGuy]

Hi all,

Someone was mentioning the editorial quality of AOPA Pilot, and I would have to agree.

I vastly prefer AOPA Pilot to FLYING. I don't own a turbine aircraft, nor do I ever plan to, so that eliminates about %85 of the articles in Flying from my interest. And since Bax and Len Morgan stopped contributing, it's just not the same. Plus in today's internet age, the Aviation News is ancient once it gets to the news stand.

I like AOPA Pilot because it has great production values (great layout, photos, quality), but still centers around what is interesting to the piston community.

Now I haven't read Plane & Pilot or Private Pilot in years...anyone got any opinion on those?

Best,
Nu

P.S. I'm going to win that WACO dammit!

 

[bobbysamd]

AOPA Pilot v. Pain and Pilot (intentional) v. Flying

I vastly prefer AOPA Pilot to FLYING. I don't own a turbine aircraft, nor do I ever plan to, so that eliminates about %85 of the articles in Flying from my interest. And since Bax and Len Morgan stopped contributing, it's just not the same.

But Peter Garrison and Melmoth (II) are still around.

I just renewed my sub to Flying. For $13/year on special, I could not refuse. But the mag has turned into a shill for many of its advertisers, e.g. its article on TAB Express. Sorry, that offends my sense of journalism. (Comments, Timebuilder?)

Now I haven't read Plane & Pilot or ...anyone got any opinion on those?

I haven't seen it in years, either, but I hear that it swallowed the Peter Buffington book whole. I find that to be less than impressive.

 

[NuGuy]

Hiya Bobby,

>>But the mag has turned into a shill for many of its advertisers, e.g. its article on TAB Express. Sorry, that offends my sense of journalism. (Comments, Timebulder?)<<

Too true.

Another mag I am happy to do without is Aviation Week. In my opinion, it's worthless for any sort of airline information that doesn't reek of management propaganda...they don't even pretend to go middle of the road (not a big deal to me, its who they play to...management types).

I like the stuff on space and defense, but not at $400 a year, or whatever it was.

What finally got my goat was the seemingly rabid anti-labor stance of their editorials. When I let my subscription run out, their subscription dept would bug me incessantly about re-upping. When I said no, even after the offer of "deals", they would ask why. I would say that my company followed the advice of their editorial staff and outsourced my job, and now I couldn't afford their magazine.

That always seemed to end the call really quick...they haven't called back in months.

Best,
Nu

 

[Timebuilder]

Sorry, that offends my sense of journalism. (Comments, Timebulder?)

If we proceed from the supposition that Flying and other pilot mags come under the term "journalism", then yes, I agree. I'm not sure when magazines decided to sell their article content so brazenly to their advertisers, but it certainly has happened. I get Flying as a perk of my NAFI membership, and it isn't totally without merit. I had a nice conversation with the publisher about five years ago, hoping to take Mac out to lunch. The logistics weren't possible at the time. Maybe I'll try again.

Maybe it is just a trend of commercial publishing that sees us finding this kind of relationship, or maybe it is because aviation mags consitute such a small "niche" in publishing. It would be a good ethical step for the articles to make clear the nature of the relationship between the magazine and the advertiser, as in the case of Tab Express. It would be even better if the article at least alluded to the controversial nature of programs such as Tab's among the pilot population as a whole, and could further give the Tab representative a chance to answer typical criticisms of said programs.

To do so might add some of the credibility that Flying had back when I read it as a ten year old. Maybe too much has changed for that to happen.