The Aerodrome Forum - View Single Post

4 December 2003, 09:12 AM

Hello Folks,
Like many of you, I am also a former Aerodrome weekend employee / volunteer and airshow pilot.
I knew Cole & Rita very well, and beyond the airshows, I flew my Cub year round (literally spring, summer, winter and fall)
giving countless rides to Aerodrome employees and associates as well as complete strangers. And in my opinion,
the biggest thing missing at the Aerodrome is exactly that......people tinkering with and flying their aircraft during the
weekdays and in the off-season in order to build a genuine foundation of interest in antique aviation.

I wholeheartedly agree that Aerodrome is at risk and fully support any efforts to reorganize / restructure
the organization. In fact, I consider myself one of the first to leave the Aerodrome (in protest or disgust)
because of all the nonsense going on......way back in 1996! A year after I left, there was a 'forced' departure
of a key person, followed a year later by another key departure, and so on. The situation today started
longer ago than some people might realize.

Remember the infamous 'sugar' incident? This incident occurred near the end of a long season during which there were
very strong leadership challenges between certain individuals. It involved tampering with aerodrome aircraft, ultimately
resulting in an airshow being cancelled minutes before showtime, and the whole incident was surrounded by the engine
quitting on the Nieuport 11 during a show, resulting in a forced landing in the trees. I always thought tampering with aircraft
was a serious federal crime, and although tampering was clearly evident, the FBI and state police investigations lead to no
conclusion (that I was ever aware of) and the whole incident was hush-hushed and slowly vanished away. And once again,
consider the one person who was at the epicenter of the 'sugar' incident controversy.

Now to my main points....in reading through the forum, I see alot of nostaglia, good memories and emotions. What
I don't see are facts or strong, incriminating evidence of wrong-doing. Without facts, there is no case. I certainly
hope that the key people driving this challenge are intentionally withholding some serious allegations that they
can not make public at this time. It's good to rally and rile the troops, but there needs to be a battle
or war to fight to take advantage of the enthusiasm and momentum.

I'm also a little confused as to what the strategy of this challenge to aerodrome really is.....what is the goal
of this effort? Is it to make enough noise and hope that the board members decide to step-down? I doubt
that will happen. Is it to drive a state investigation in hopes of criminally indicting people or forcing organizational
or bylaw changes? It needs to be clearly defined.

Any organization or company is rife with personal politics. That's human nature, and to some degree, it does
provide a level of checks and balances. However, bad decisions are not illegal. Bad judgement is not illegal.
Being stupid is not illegal. Immorality is not illegal. Just because we don't like what's going on at the aerodrome, or
it isn't like it used to be, that doesn't mean it's illegal or necessarily mean that it's wrong either. The whole stolen cub
situation, that was a private matter not involving the aerodrome. Yes, the aerodrome board went on to show very poor
judgement (repeatedly), but that's not illegal.

My overriding concern is that if this effort fades out, or if the state decides to not get involved, or if a state investigation
only turns up minor infractions, it will only serve to validate the current board members, who will then come out of this
stronger than ever and we will have lost the aerodrome as we knew it (if we already haven't). So there needs to be some
teeth to this challenge, and I haven't seen any yet. Can anyone tell me, are there any teeth to this?

Thanks.

P.S. Andrew - can you comment about reported 2nd stolen or mis-directed clipped-wing Cub incident, this time apparently
involving the aerodrome? While I've heard about the incident and even a grand jury investigation, I don't know much about
it and it seems like everything else, the incident has once again faded from the radar screen (which might imply that the case
was dismissed, I don't know).

4 December 2003, 09:12 AM	#102 (permalink)
N2911C Guest Posts: n/a	Hello Folks, Like many of you, I am also a former Aerodrome weekend employee / volunteer and airshow pilot. I knew Cole & Rita very well, and beyond the airshows, I flew my Cub year round (literally spring, summer, winter and fall) giving countless rides to Aerodrome employees and associates as well as complete strangers. And in my opinion, the biggest thing missing at the Aerodrome is exactly that......people tinkering with and flying their aircraft during the weekdays and in the off-season in order to build a genuine foundation of interest in antique aviation. I wholeheartedly agree that Aerodrome is at risk and fully support any efforts to reorganize / restructure the organization. In fact, I consider myself one of the first to leave the Aerodrome (in protest or disgust) because of all the nonsense going on......way back in 1996! A year after I left, there was a 'forced' departure of a key person, followed a year later by another key departure, and so on. The situation today started longer ago than some people might realize. Remember the infamous 'sugar' incident? This incident occurred near the end of a long season during which there were very strong leadership challenges between certain individuals. It involved tampering with aerodrome aircraft, ultimately resulting in an airshow being cancelled minutes before showtime, and the whole incident was surrounded by the engine quitting on the Nieuport 11 during a show, resulting in a forced landing in the trees. I always thought tampering with aircraft was a serious federal crime, and although tampering was clearly evident, the FBI and state police investigations lead to no conclusion (that I was ever aware of) and the whole incident was hush-hushed and slowly vanished away. And once again, consider the one person who was at the epicenter of the 'sugar' incident controversy. Now to my main points....in reading through the forum, I see alot of nostaglia, good memories and emotions. What I don't see are facts or strong, incriminating evidence of wrong-doing. Without facts, there is no case. I certainly hope that the key people driving this challenge are intentionally withholding some serious allegations that they can not make public at this time. It's good to rally and rile the troops, but there needs to be a battle or war to fight to take advantage of the enthusiasm and momentum. I'm also a little confused as to what the strategy of this challenge to aerodrome really is.....what is the goal of this effort? Is it to make enough noise and hope that the board members decide to step-down? I doubt that will happen. Is it to drive a state investigation in hopes of criminally indicting people or forcing organizational or bylaw changes? It needs to be clearly defined. Any organization or company is rife with personal politics. That's human nature, and to some degree, it does provide a level of checks and balances. However, bad decisions are not illegal. Bad judgement is not illegal. Being stupid is not illegal. Immorality is not illegal. Just because we don't like what's going on at the aerodrome, or it isn't like it used to be, that doesn't mean it's illegal or necessarily mean that it's wrong either. The whole stolen cub situation, that was a private matter not involving the aerodrome. Yes, the aerodrome board went on to show very poor judgement (repeatedly), but that's not illegal. My overriding concern is that if this effort fades out, or if the state decides to not get involved, or if a state investigation only turns up minor infractions, it will only serve to validate the current board members, who will then come out of this stronger than ever and we will have lost the aerodrome as we knew it (if we already haven't). So there needs to be some teeth to this challenge, and I haven't seen any yet. Can anyone tell me, are there any teeth to this? Thanks. P.S. Andrew - can you comment about reported 2nd stolen or mis-directed clipped-wing Cub incident, this time apparently involving the aerodrome? While I've heard about the incident and even a grand jury investigation, I don't know much about it and it seems like everything else, the incident has once again faded from the radar screen (which might imply that the case was dismissed, I don't know).