Mon May 08, 2006 11:15 pm
Go for it Rob!!! I know of a well hidden bent wing bird just rotting away in a swamp. Also, how many guy's have already recovered stuff and are just waiting for the ok to bring it out of the shadows? Do you really think he could actually make the situation worse. He's done his homework and probably knows of some amazing stuff that if recovered would be fantastic contributions to the Warbird Community.
The more noise you make...
Mon May 08, 2006 11:35 pm
...the fewer can turn a deaf ear. Rob has his negatives, but on this forum, he's the only one vociferously trying to go after the USN's anti-ownership/imperious policies regarding warbirds.
Someone mentioned depending on EAA, WOA? Yeah, right. As for advocacy, they have backed away from more fights than they have taken up. Most of the warbird legislation/policy letter stuff that comes their way is analyzed in the context of their greater organizational goals, and not acted on. There is still no comprehensive policy on dealing with aging aircraft, still no comprehensive policy on letters of authorization for things like ride exemptions, and no "cry foul" for things like when Liberty Belle couldn't come to Philadelphia International Airport due to insurance issues. To depend on them for such an esoteric, isolated bit of policy which effects so few directly would be asking too much of Paul P. and his buddies.
If you think I'm wrong about the EAA, WOA about warbirds, then come see how effectively they have dealt with the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) here around Baltimore and Washington DC. You sure do get a nice magazine for that membership money but I'm not hanging the future of my L5, BT 13, or anything else I might acquire on the actions of the EAA.
I must qualify that by stating I am not a member of the EAA or WOA (you must be a member of EAA to join WOA). I used to be a member of EAA but felt my flying would benefit more from the extra 100LL I could purchase in lieu of a membership. I do encourage people to join the organizations as the benefits are good and the experimental nature of aviation is extremely educational to people learning to fly or play with airplanes.
Someone mentioned depending on EAA, WOA? Yeah, right. As for advocacy, they have backed away from more fights than they have taken up. Most of the warbird legislation/policy letter stuff that comes their way is analyzed in the context of their greater organizational goals, and not acted on. There is still no comprehensive policy on dealing with aging aircraft, still no comprehensive policy on letters of authorization for things like ride exemptions, and no "cry foul" for things like when Liberty Belle couldn't come to Philadelphia International Airport due to insurance issues. To depend on them for such an esoteric, isolated bit of policy which effects so few directly would be asking too much of Paul P. and his buddies.
If you think I'm wrong about the EAA, WOA about warbirds, then come see how effectively they have dealt with the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) here around Baltimore and Washington DC. You sure do get a nice magazine for that membership money but I'm not hanging the future of my L5, BT 13, or anything else I might acquire on the actions of the EAA.
I must qualify that by stating I am not a member of the EAA or WOA (you must be a member of EAA to join WOA). I used to be a member of EAA but felt my flying would benefit more from the extra 100LL I could purchase in lieu of a membership. I do encourage people to join the organizations as the benefits are good and the experimental nature of aviation is extremely educational to people learning to fly or play with airplanes.
Tue May 09, 2006 5:49 am
Everybody keep it civil, this thread is rapidly degenerating and if it gets any worse it will be gone.
My personal opinion is that Rob has two choices. Either join the EAA/WOA and work from within convincing members to put pressure on the NHC or form his own lobbying group and rally his supporters to the cause. Talk is fine but as the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words.
As for Rob's someone creative spelling, he's explained that he is dyslexic, an affliction I also deal with. He knows his spelling is attrocious and it is up to him to make efforts to improve it. Personally I think he should write stuff off line and spellcheck it before posting it, if only to present a better arguement. However, the nitpicking of his attempts at spelling and making fun of it are not appreciated and will be subject to arbitrary editing. I am working on integrating a spell checking feature into the forum.
We all have the same goal, preserving warbirds, and have different ways of going about it. If we all remain civil we can all share this space and express our views. We are a large and diverse community, lets try and remember that and respect each other.
My personal opinion is that Rob has two choices. Either join the EAA/WOA and work from within convincing members to put pressure on the NHC or form his own lobbying group and rally his supporters to the cause. Talk is fine but as the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words.
As for Rob's someone creative spelling, he's explained that he is dyslexic, an affliction I also deal with. He knows his spelling is attrocious and it is up to him to make efforts to improve it. Personally I think he should write stuff off line and spellcheck it before posting it, if only to present a better arguement. However, the nitpicking of his attempts at spelling and making fun of it are not appreciated and will be subject to arbitrary editing. I am working on integrating a spell checking feature into the forum.
We all have the same goal, preserving warbirds, and have different ways of going about it. If we all remain civil we can all share this space and express our views. We are a large and diverse community, lets try and remember that and respect each other.
Tue May 09, 2006 7:01 am
I really couldn't care less about Col. Rohr's dyslexia. Spelling is not really the point in this little "dust-up". I'm more inclined to believe the problem for many of us is the obvious inability to put two coherent sentences together.
If I'm going to have somebody "representing" my views on pretty much anything, I want that person to have outstanding communication skills.
Simple as that.
Obviously, everyone here is free to contact anybody they so desire and say anything that comes to mind. So...go to it!
"I may not agree with what you say, but will defend......"
Mudge the succinct
If I'm going to have somebody "representing" my views on pretty much anything, I want that person to have outstanding communication skills.
Simple as that.
Obviously, everyone here is free to contact anybody they so desire and say anything that comes to mind. So...go to it!
"I may not agree with what you say, but will defend......"
Mudge the succinct
Tue May 09, 2006 7:28 am
I see nothing wrong with this thread. Everything discussed in it was placed on the forum by Rob, including his problems, which seem to come up only when things don't go the way Rob see's the world around him.
Mr Patterson is correct in his statement. Rob you have no right to include the membership on this board as your support at meetings with the government. All of us who read this board know about Rob's views.
If you don't want it discussed don't place it on a public forum
As for the topic of this thread. I think meetings with the Navy are important. I also think people who are charged with the Warbird view of the situation are placed there due to the level of skill they bring to the table and the meetings need to progress.
The operaters and owners of these aircraft know what needs to happen and they are the ones who will put the cash on the table to get it done
Steve
Mr Patterson is correct in his statement. Rob you have no right to include the membership on this board as your support at meetings with the government. All of us who read this board know about Rob's views.
If you don't want it discussed don't place it on a public forum
As for the topic of this thread. I think meetings with the Navy are important. I also think people who are charged with the Warbird view of the situation are placed there due to the level of skill they bring to the table and the meetings need to progress.
The operaters and owners of these aircraft know what needs to happen and they are the ones who will put the cash on the table to get it done
Steve
Tue May 09, 2006 7:34 am
I am working on integrating a spell checking feature into the forum
Scott, you dont need to, the Google Toolbar (IE and Firefox versions) spellcheck just fine.
Tue May 09, 2006 3:43 pm
I agree with Mr Downing and Mr Patterson; if you want to represent your own and only your own interests and points of view then good luck and godspeed, but please don't attempt to lead people to believe that you speak for the vast majority. I am just a VERY little guy (3 a/c) and I have no quarrels with anyone here - Rob or otherwise - but please don't attempt or pretend to represent me or my interests.
Dan
Dan
Tue May 09, 2006 6:27 pm
Hey Rob,
I think what people are trying to say is that if you want to go for it, go for it! Just represent yourself and not the warbird community at large. I don't have a problem with your spelling. Some people have a problem with your temperament and "biting" posts sometimes. In writing at least , they come across as hotheaded or short fused.
You obviously have the interest , passion, and some financial resources. I believe what people are trying to say is that it will take a "rainmaker" . Someone with exceptional experience and "gravitas" in the political arena. And yes someone that would go behind the scenes and make things happen "invisibly."
Example; we have an attorney here in Nashville named James Neal. Remember the Exxon Valdez tanker spill in Alaska? Exxon was charged with multiple felonies totalling $800 million bucks in fines. He got the charges dropped to misdemeanors with Exxon volunteering to do about $15 million in cleanup efforts!! Back in the 1960's he got Jimmy Hoffa convicted and served time and was the only prosecutor to ever get Hoffa convicted. Did I mention F.Lee Bailey and him were drinking buddies in the Marines and at Harvard? THere are some people that have so much ability they can get whatever they want accomplished including the federal re-interpretation of case law. It justs costs money
I think what people are trying to say is that if you want to go for it, go for it! Just represent yourself and not the warbird community at large. I don't have a problem with your spelling. Some people have a problem with your temperament and "biting" posts sometimes. In writing at least , they come across as hotheaded or short fused.
You obviously have the interest , passion, and some financial resources. I believe what people are trying to say is that it will take a "rainmaker" . Someone with exceptional experience and "gravitas" in the political arena. And yes someone that would go behind the scenes and make things happen "invisibly."
Example; we have an attorney here in Nashville named James Neal. Remember the Exxon Valdez tanker spill in Alaska? Exxon was charged with multiple felonies totalling $800 million bucks in fines. He got the charges dropped to misdemeanors with Exxon volunteering to do about $15 million in cleanup efforts!! Back in the 1960's he got Jimmy Hoffa convicted and served time and was the only prosecutor to ever get Hoffa convicted. Did I mention F.Lee Bailey and him were drinking buddies in the Marines and at Harvard? THere are some people that have so much ability they can get whatever they want accomplished including the federal re-interpretation of case law. It justs costs money
Wed May 10, 2006 12:07 am
Hey Rob, See how far you can get for us 44%. If the others don't want to do anything about current Navy policy or at least in their name, so be it. Who else is actually trying to address this important issue? Feel free to contact me off board anytime. Best Regards, Rob
Wed May 10, 2006 11:32 pm
Col. Rohr wrote: Since I was the person who got the ball rolling in the first place.
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... =lake+mich
Rob,
In reading through all that nonsense, it sure looks to me like Owen Miller got the ball rolling on the original meeting. If you want to refresh your memory, it's right before you started making your list of demands about conditions of the meeting.
By the way, did you ever get the guy that runs the Army Aviation Museum and his board fired? I seem to recall your claim being that it would happen if it was the last thing you did!
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... highlight=
Thu May 11, 2006 12:28 am
Col. Rohr wrote:...Don't worry Steve and the rest of you I'm not going to say we need to have the meeting.
RER
Rob, I never said we didn't need to have a meeting. I just said we didn't need you.
Thu May 11, 2006 6:24 am
????
Last edited by Broken-Wrench on Thu May 11, 2006 6:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Thu May 11, 2006 6:26 am
That's just Great!! Airshow season is here and we are building grudges! Can't we all get along and put the smoking guns up!..... It's not worth it and Airshow season is here! Blue skys, Sun, and Get togethers!!!!! Let's save this argument for the winter when we have nothing to do and bored. 
It's just not worth it! 
It's just not worth it!
Thu May 11, 2006 1:13 pm
Okay, this conversation is at the bottom of the hill and so it's locked.