AOPA Flight Training Article - a shame!!

[shon7]

The latest issue of AOPA's Flight Training Magazine carries an article titled "Academy Awards." While people may agree or disagree with the overall article I was horrified to see the author commending GulfStream and similar academies as a fast-track to the airlines -- and one that would help an aviators career.

If AOPA starts publishing such stuff -- there's not much hope left for the aviation community!!

 

[SDCFI]

Who is the author? CFI, airline pilot, one of the mentioned academy grads? Remember AOPA is a general aviation org so they are not apt to know how some of these places negatively affect commercial aviation. Maybe if enough people sent them letters telling them about the negative impact of PFT on the industry they wouldn't include them in the articles.

 

[TRLpilot]

Also, keep in mind what you see on almost every page as you flip through the magazine - ad after ad after ad of the above mentioned "fastracks to the majors."

FYI - the article was written by an atp with a Boeing 737 type rating and is a designated pilot examiner in Colorado. I would guess an alumnus.

 

[NuGuy]

Hi Guys,

To preface this conversation, let me say that I really like the AOPA, have been a member for almost 15 years, and think the only reason we have the flying in the US that we do is due their efforts and a select few other groups (including the EAA). I would also like to say that most people on the AOPA forum are nice people with whom I wouldn't mind knowing in RL.

But, if you spend any time surfing around the AOPA forum, you will soon get to notice that it is populated mostly by politically conservative people who, for the most part, really dig flying.

This makes sense, since to rent or own a airplane these days for personal pleasure (IE not chasing a career), you do have to have a modicum of personal success, whether in the business world, or wherever. I'm not saying that you can't be a liberal and be successful, but for some reason having an airplane and being outspoken enough to post on a forum leads to a certain concentration of personality types.

In any event, IMHO, most of the people there are self-driven go-getters, have a disdain for unions AND probably think that once they've made their personal coin, that forking over 18k to "fly for a living" would be a perfect idea. While they publically lament the fact that CFIs make $12/hr (at the same time wondering where all the experienced instructors are), you don't see many clamoring to pay extra. Some of the CFI mentors that are there are of the professor-management stripe, who probably think that this is all just "economics". Heck, even that dude Chip Wright that writes for their magazine said that he doesn't consider his ACA job "work or a job" (April, 2004).

My point is that I think you would be wasting your time trying to convince anyone over there. They would all just scratch their head and wonder what all the fuss is about and make noise about choice of the individual and all that.

IMHO, by and large, the airline types, who might lend support to your viewpoint, steer clear of the forum other than to lurk and answer specific, technical questions.

Best,
Nu

 

[labbats]

I've sent AOPA a couple letters and e-mails on this exact topic. With no reply ever recieved, I gave up and now dissuade my students from reading their Training Magazine.

I'm sure they're well aware that half their ad dollars ride on the backs of the unfortunate aspiring pilots that fall for the lies of the ads within, solely because they trust the source of the magazine. It's avoidable, plain and simple, and while I appreciate what AOPA proper offers, their Training Magazine is a sham and noone there cares enough to do anything about it.

 

[NuGuy]

Hi Lab,

Kudos for fighting the fight. That's the amount of success any of us could hope for. We could, I suppose, make a stand on the regular AOPA forum, but I think that would quickly be squelched by the regulars there, same as the smacktards and flaimbaiters are here, which is probably how they would see us.

Their playground, their rules, I guess.

Best,
Nu

 

[shon7]

I'm writing to them as well. Lets see if I get a response.

Also Nuguy -- this might come across as an ignorant question given that I have been on this board for a while now but what does IMHO stand for?

 

[NuGuy]

IMHO - In my humble opinion.

 

[TWA Dude]

I agree that Flight Training should present more sides of the story and it's good that they're going to receive an earful about it. However I disagree with labbats who now doesn't want his students to read FT. Let 'em read it and you can then educate them. Good CFI's are extremely influencial with students so it's a great opportunity to let aspiring professional pilots know about the serious issues facing our industry. Keep in mind that every week some newbee comes online here and asks if those places are any good.

Dude

 

[Timebuilder]

I agree that Flight Training should present more sides of the story and it's good that they're going to receive an earful about it. However I disagree with labbats who now doesn't want his students to read FT. Let 'em read it and you can then educate them. Good CFI's are extremely influencial with students so it's a great opportunity to let aspiring professional pilots know about the serious issues facing our industry. Keep in mind that every week some newbee comes online here and asks if those places are any good.

Dude

I have to agree with TWA dude. It's perhaps the first time this has happened, but perhaps not. The ad dollars, and the support those ads give to the good work that AOPA does do "the rest of the time" might be compromised by speaking out against the ads in an article or op-ed piece. If it wasn't raining today down in Frederick, I might have asked Phil Boyer about this situation. With the rain, I'm staying home from the fly-in.

As for the conservative part of AOPA, I think this might kill that idea:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/04-2-121x.html

At least Daschle is against privatizing ATC.

 

[Frac Daddy]

As for the conservative part of AOPA, I think this might kill that idea:

Sorry, but one article by AOPA about a Democrat does not change the fact that there are more conservative aircraft owners than liberal ones. Of course, there are no numbers to prove this either way, but when I go to my local airport there are no tree huggers amongst the airport bums. I am sure this is true at most airports.

 

[350DRIVER]

They are not the organization that they once were. . . I dropped my membership and have no interest or desire in giving them a single dime again until they change things for the best interest of GA. I find it very comical that they send me mailings week after week after week to re-new, you think they would get the point by now...
I would love to see how much money they waste just in postage..!!


3 5 0

 

[NuGuy]

Hi Guys,


Yup, you would have a very hard time convincing anyone over on the AOPA forums that the pay for training deal is bad. 'Just economics' they would say. A lot of folks there are MD, lawyer or business owner types, and to them "flying for a living" is their fantasy, but I seriously doubt any one of them would put up with 1 iota of the BS the typical regional airline dishes out. All it would take for them to fold is being told what to do by a high-school educated crew scheduler with a snippy attitude.

Don't get me wrong, most of the guys over at the AOPA forum I would love to know in RL, and are probably all pretty cool people to hang with and chat about GA. OTOH, trying to talk about pleasure flying and work flying is like mixing oil and water.

Best,
Nu