bigbaggy

Gents,
I am amazed at how this has spun out of control. One thing to remember before everyone jumps ship the JPO has done a good job of keeping the Turbine Regs in the "Reasonable Man domain." Remember what is "not there" is as important as what "is there." Meaning there are plenty of regs that don't exist due to the JPO.
I think we all need to take a deep breath and for the sake of the community assess what we are trying to accomplish.

Paul Bageman
JPO Dist X

seanreit

My Feedback: (60)

Frosty, I think you should be applauded. I spent a lot of time wondering why you jumped back on the Tiano bandwagon on that old Fl. Jets thread, I guess your level of dealing with his crap is a bit higher than mine. And while I agree that JPO has accomplished a lot on behalf of jet pilots, I sincerely doubt any of that reflects on the current president of the JPO.

Kevin W made an interesting comment, "Go public when all private channels have not worked".

Interesting, when I did just that on another issue, and proved it over and over again, I was chastised.

Patrick Frost

My Feedback: (88)

Sean,

I can assure you that I didnt start this thread NOR was it my idea. It just so happened that the "Ghost" posted this the same day I resigned from JPO. I got a call this morning from a buddy in Ohio and told me to check out a thread that Ghost Rider posted and I just added to it for what it's worth.

I am tired of trying to "please" everybody and I am going to start enjoying my hobby again. Guess you could call me a "rebel" eh?

Boomerang1

Why does all this dirty laundry have to be on the forum? Go away & sort it out with the telephone or emails or the boxing ring if necessary. Keep the cursing, flaming, degrading, insulting & embarrassment elsewhere.

Release the hounds! (moderarors). - John.

zemkes_wolfpack

My Feedback: (5)

John,

I have been watching this thread all day to make sure that things do not get out-of-hand. As I stated on the thread I deleted last night, if the involved parties wanted to discuss this issue in a first-hand account then I would watch it to make sure that it did not get out-of-hand. I hate to see things like this happen to an organization that has been around as long as the JPO has and accomplished the things it has.

I have absolutely no first-hand knowledge of this issue so I am being completely un-biased in my moderating of this thread.

I am going to let this thread play-out.

Thank you for your understanding and as always if anyone wants to discuss this via PM or Email please do not hesitate to contact me.

Jim

AndyAndrews

The actions of one man or even a group of individuals shouldn't cause the JPO to be disbanded. Moreover, I don't think that a single JPO individual or group of individuals in the JPO should even publicly suggest it without conferring with the membership first. People have paid dues toward this organization (me being one) and I don't expect one or even a group of people to suggest that they would have the power to disband it without even a simple vote. If someone has created a situation that needs to be corrected, the membership in general should vote on it. Isn't there bylaws that deal with this situation? Why as some have said here should we, "toss the baby out with the bath water".

I think cooler heads need to prevail here.

Andy
JPO #2085
Waiver: FW14290

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Sometimes one or more of the parties involved prove to be so intractable that sorting something out by telephone or email will never happen, in which case why should people NOT get to know about both sides ? Should everyone be kept in the dark, with all threads that involve any kind of disagreement being heavily censored and banned ?

Are we such children that we can not be trusted to read the multiple sides of a story and make up our own minds ?

As for the boxing ring comment... I had kinda hoped that most of us here were at least semi-civilized people, rather than the kind of thugs who think violence is the solution to every disagreement. Maybe I'm deluding myself on that score though... after all, even though it's claimed that the pen is mightier than the sword - if the pen is banned by people always asking for speech to be censored, then maybe all we'll have left is the sword.

Gordon

u2fast

My Feedback: (37)

zemkes jim, why have you already decided to close a thread at the days end. it is a discussion of jet related issues. no flaming yet, that i have seen. has rcu policy changed on the closing of threads? barry

ddennison

My Feedback: (15)

Could someone perhaps point us to the facts or issues? I am LOST as to what this is all about and also on the fence about joining the JPO although I think the idea is still a good one if it can be fixed.

Thanks
Dave Dennison

kirkj

My Feedback: (61)

PLEASE LEAVE THIS THREAD OPEN.

it is an interesting exchange of views, and one i want to read ALL responses. it looks like a good, non-flaming exchange of actual events, calm down Jim.

eardoc

My Feedback: (1)

Dave:
It's about old guys who barely fly any more, but who think they control this hobby, being frustrated by models that vastly outperform the ones they used to fly.

They don't like it. They call it unsafe.

People on horses probably said the same about motor vehicles.

Shok

My Feedback: (28)

view 1 = "I went to a jet rally and I thought things they did were unsafe, plus I donated cash and was not recognized"

view 2 = "Things were handled just fine and maybe you saw things differently than the rest of us"

view 3 = "View 2 angered view 1 so view 3 will never be part of your event again and here is all the email exchanges please post them"


basically

jetflyr

Ronny said it better.
Greg

zemkes_wolfpack

My Feedback: (5)

Gentlemen,

I have amended my previous post. I will leave this thread open as long as it stays on this track.

Kirkj I am perfectly calm. As I stated last night, I am completely open to everyone expressing their points of view but I will not allow nor tolerate personal shots or second-hand accounts.

Barry No the rules for closing a thread have not changed.

I want to Thank everyone who has PM'd me with their point-of-view in regards to closing or leaving this thread open.

Jim

Shok

My Feedback: (28)

edit

AndyAndrews

Just because a person is young and has great skills as a pilot doesn't excuse that person from breaking well established safety rules (if this is what happened) I wasn't there so I can't say. But speaking in general terms your comments are way off base and fairly indicative of someone who is quite uniformed and bias.

Andy

seanreit

My Feedback: (60)

Greg, no disrespect to you. I read the bylaws a couple years ago, and refreshed my memory a few minutes ago. I am one, and I can't change who the president of JPO is. I know I did not vote for Tiano, and I don't remember getting the opportunity to vote.

The way I read them, the only thing I can do is not support the JPO, because whoever was involved in the decision for Frank to be President, were not in my opinion like minded to me and the guys I fly jets with.

If this is anything like a political process, I am entitled to my points of view, and free expression of those points of view. If others agree with me, as in the past and currently some do, they might drop out of the JPO membership too.

Eventually, if for some reason, membership levels drop off, maybe the JPO might consider appointing someone else.

My vote would be Keith, Patrick, You, One of the Ellzey's, Sam Snyder, or just about any other number of fantastically qualified people that are far more level headed than I am. I'd pick Tam before I'd pick Frank.

FWIW, and trust all is well,

Sean

eardoc

My Feedback: (1)

Andy
With all due respect, I am not uninformed - I was there - all weekend

And if what I saw with my own eyes (being so different from what we are accused of) makes me biased, then I guess I'm biased. I am just basing my opinion on what I saw.

Perhaps I apologize for the sarcasm. False accusations sort of make you feel that way.

pilott28

My Feedback: (27)

I don't post much here any more, but I'll chime in on this one.

While the term "disband" has been used in recent discussions amongst the JPO officers group, to Patrick's point, I think the proper term is probably "morph".

The truth is that the JPO has been losing members in recent years. While some of it relates to personal disputes, the more prevalent cause is that people don't understand what value we really add right now. We are most visible when there is a crisis like speed limiters or insurance surcharges, but in times of peace, people don't see our value. Even as JPO officers, we have had trouble coming to consensus as to who we are and what we contribute, so it is understandable that many of you feel this way.

Having said this, the officers of the JPO ARE trying to come together to see if there really is something of value we can contribute to the Jet Pilot community, and if so, morph the organization to get to it. If not, maybe the right answer is to "disband". We can't be a viable organization if we don't have a significant portion of the jet community behind us. We are all volunteers so the only real benefit we get is the satisfaction of doing something that you all feel is worthwhile, and most of you are voting with your money (or your posts) that we aren't right now. So we are losing officers.

The one thing all the officers agree to is that we are not an enforcement organization, and don't want to be. There were rumours abounding that we were spying on people and meeting in dark garages with AMA officials and other such nonsense. In point of fact, we read Tom's note and Patrick wrote a very complete letter to us explaining the circumstances and facts as he saw them and I think we ended up being pretty well informed. And decided there was nothing for the JPO to do but let the parties involved work things out, which they usually do.

I have not read Frank's post on the other site, but do support his right to have an opinion apart and separate from the collective view of the JPO officers and organization as a whole. I believe he has tried to stay very impartial in the communications between JPO officers, as his role in the organization would dictate.

Anyhow, I would welcome any (constructive) views on how the JPO might add value going forward, or how you feel we could turn around the loss in membership. You can PM me or contact me through the JPO site.

And now for my personal opinion: I think the jet community needs to back off and let Tom and Patrick and the SL/RC group work this out amongst themselves. This has to be really frustrating and painful for them as individuals... none of us would welcome this kind of scruitiny if it were us ... and I don't think our participation is helping anything.

pattratt

My Feedback: (1)

I too will be dropping my JPO membership but for a somewhat different reason although related to our current JPO president.

Unless it has been canceled, it is my understanding that Mr. Tiano will in October be putting on a Giant scale event including Jets far in excess of what the AMA currently allows as far as weight and power are concerned. This is not an AMA sanction event but as JPO President I feel it "Fly's in the Face" of everything JPO has done to promote Jet Turbine Safety and cooperation between JPO and the AMA. I believe under the direction of Stephen Elzey and other previous presidents the JPO became a creditable organization with the AMA. It is my belief that just the opposite is happening with Mr. Tiano at the "Helm!"

Should the JPO Board of Directors decide to rectify this situation[I personally feel they should] then I will again support the organization with my check book.

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

Hi Dave and Keith:

IMO, this thread is a magnificent display of exhorbitant self-righteousness. Why else would anyone post their intentions to resign in protest on RCU for all the world to see, even Boomerang 1, half way round the world. Does anyone really give a freek? It's not like I check the JPO roster while having my first glass of wine before dinner. I wish they would give us all a break and resign in silence, rather than expect incoming SCUDD, whatever the hell that is. I think they are expecting some sort of congratulatory wishes.....How about this- Don't let the door bang you on the ***** on your way out.

Why let all the hard work of prior JPO principals like Vern Montgomery, Steve Ellzey, Keith Sievers, and others just fade away, all the while enjoying all the benefits the JPO has brought us since I first got into jets in the late 90's. Attempting to destroy the JPO, thus losing our SIG status on the AMA Executive Committee, especially now, with a jet friendly AMA President for the first time in a generation, is about as well thought out as Tom Cook's original email, the response of the SLRC board and FT's comments. There still is much work to be done regarding multi-engine turbine rules, experimental weight limits, as well as specially sanctioned high speed, high weight limits events in the U.S. just to name a few.

Only question now is:

Will there be more resignations than SPAM emails my wife received last weekend. She offered to teach any respondent how to NOT include the original with her email addy in the reply. Tom Cook unfortunately tagged her email in his address book rather than mine, when I sent him a note a while back on her laptop. Very unhappy lady. No more CC cookies if it ever happens again....[:@]

tp777fo

My Feedback: (28)

OK boys, let's back off and take a deep breath. I think we had all better think about all the rules and regs being force fed to us before we formed the JPO. Over the last few years we had a real gentleman as the president, a guy who did a tremendous amount or work for all of us. Just look at were we are now. No speed limiters, no written tests, easier waiver process, bigger motors .....etc, etc. None of this would have happened without a SIG or the JPO as we know it. If our leadership isn't up to the job due to personalities, integrity or whatever else then we as a group need to demand a recall vote and get rid of the person/s in question. Let the membership speak. Don't disband an otherwise good organization because the politics are out of control. There is safety in numbers and we all need each other to continue flying our jets!

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Presumably to stir up debate, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

In his rather eloquent post, Keith indicates that the JPO has been losing membership and officers. Surely it is a good thing for there to be a public and open debate about any factors / issues which are leading people away from the organization that is supposed to be representative of US Jet Pilots ?

How better can anyone who genuinely wants to 'morph' the JPO into a more representative organization find out what is really behind declining membership than by not only hearing the reasons for people leaving, but also seeing in a public discussion whether there is a groundswell of support for anyone's allegations or whether this is just one twisted individual's distorted point of view that everyone else shoots down in flames ? You've gotta know what is really wrong before you fix it.

If Ben's post has done nothing more than elicit Keith's post asking what the JPO needs to do to gain / regain the trust and participation of the membership in the org., then I think that in itself is a wonderful thing.

YMMV, which is fine.

Gordon

DavidR

My Feedback: (1)

Wow I can't believe what I am reading here. Having been involved with JPO since the turbines actually started coming on to the scene and having seen and been involved with the efforts of people like Tom Dodgen, Vernon Montgomery, and Steven Ellzey I know what these guys and others went through to get us the livable turbine regulations that we have today. To "disband" or even drop your JPO membership and public denounce the actions of JPO just because a current president or JPO Rep leave a bad taste in your mouth. Sorry Ghost and a few other I am surprised to see some of my friends acting this way. If the current president is acting outside of the interests of JPO and the membership remove him. Simple as that! But to turn your back on the orginization because of that indivual(s) actions does not make any sense.

I was not at St. Louis so I can't comment from first had experience, but I do know that the two individuals that were accused of flying "recklessly" by Tom Cook are both good, and safe pilots. I wonder if Mr. Cook who I might add I have not seen fly more than half a dozen times at events in the last 10 years, was really judging impartially how they were flying or if he was just PO'd from his name not being announced over the intercom as a sponsor. Thus ripping on the St. Louis club and CD as well.

DR

Flyjets

My Feedback: (51)

Guy's

While I have had no dealing with JPO Jet Pilots do need a unified voice.

What ever happens just remember we are losing Turbine friendly fields and our ability to Hosts events.

Gentleman thanks for being very civil.

Ian