In My Humble Opinion =>

There seems to be too much excitement about the print vs:
internet question. In both instances, there is both useful
information and incorrect (sometimes dangerous) information
to be garnered by reading each of the sources. Each of us
must keep our "crap filters" in good order to sort the
useful information from the bad.

In line with journalistic tradition, I expect the printed
form to be well checked and verified before printing, wheras
I am not the least bit upset to see the free form immediacy
of the internet result in some questionable entries. I find
the paid-membership organization to be useful and the "Coupe
Capers" similarly useful at times - I wouldn't want them to
be eliminated - yet. What I would like to see from the club
(and "Capers") is:

++ More attention to the local and social scene. Region 7
has been allowed to fall apart with not a single mention
that I can recall in "Capers." With as many coupes in
California as the rest of the country put together, there
has been virtually no call for an active director and a
resumption of activities.

++ Better quality in "Capers." 
The March '99 issue is an example of the good - A list of
337's on file with the club...
With an example of the bad - Skip's own piece on hanging a
radio from the panel with no rear support and a poor
description of the electrical work required. In a certified
plane like the 'coupe, the described work is not in
accordance with AC43 and would render the plane unairworthy. 

This list, the web sites, and Capers all have value to me.
Self criticism is good and sniping just provides me with
excess mail to read. Lets talk about our Ercoupes, Forneys,
Alons, and Mooneys - how to keep them flying safely and
where to meet for the $100 burgers.

David
N6359V


Mi Vida Loca wrote:
> 
> If you belive Skip's article's, all info off the net is at best
questionable and at worse is incorrect as opposed to the extremely limited
but absolutely (correct?) info he puts out in Coupe Capers...

Jerry Eichenberger wrote:
> 
> I've ranted on about this at length in prior e-mails.  Many different
factors are at play, and I'll take a minute and re-cap my feelings.
> I don't feel that EOC is a first class owners' club.  But, I understand
the economics of running a club, and understand that the money isn't
there, under the present structure, to make it one.
> Maybe there just aren't enough Ercoupe owners to support a first class
club.
> Maybe the truth is, and no insult is intended to anyone, that Coupes
appeal to folks who don't want to spend more money on their planes, and
who don't want to pay higher dues to a better club. 

Bob Saville wrote:
> 
> I enjoy receiving my Coupe Capers
> every Month and reading the articles in it and seeing what's for sale
> etc. I also enjoy the internet for seeing what all the latest "gossip"
> is on coupes, peoples Q&A's, etc.  And let's face it Dave, isn't the
> internet (including the mailing list as well as all others) really just
> that, A lot of gossip?  I agree that the computer is a great source of
> information, but it all has to be screened by the user as to just how
> accurate any of it really is.  Just take any question that is asked on
> the mailing list and look at all the different answers that are given.
> Which is right and which could get you killed? Only the user can decide
> which is right for his particular case.  Unless I am certain about
> something that I see on the list I check with either my, or perhaps
> another, AP or IA for his input on the subject. There are a lot of
> inaccurate and improper bits of "advice" on there at any given time and
> any given subject...
>         I think there needs to be more than one source of information
out
> there... 

Tom Laird-McConnell wrote:
> 
> I (and
> I think Dave) never said and don't support the idea of getting rid of
the
> printed form of the Coupe Capers.  Obviously, not everyone is online...
> *EVERYONE* is a Pilot in Command.
> *EVERY* piece of information has to be weighed and evaluated as to
whether
> we believe it.  That goes without saying, but perhaps it needs to be
said...

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to