RAA Membership $$$$

[fly_tornado]

And re the other argument about pilots getting older, about the same number of pilots turn 40 or 50 every year, they don't just disappear in a puff of thunderdust when midnight strikes, one turns 50,and the one coming in turns 40., it's like a conveyor belt.

Doesn't work like that, the number of GA pilots are declining, the RAA is picking up a bunch of ex-GA pilots but that pool of pilots will eventually start to decline and the numbers greatly diminished.

 

I noticed the flying club @ Clifton is having making the numbers for the xmas dinner this year, I know I'm not going. Its worse than a family dinner where you are forced to talk to relatives you only see once or twice a year.

 

 

[pudestcon]

Membership alone will provide 30.8 hrs of Lazair flying time.

Illegal hours if you have not paid your membership!!

 

Pud

 

 

[dazza 38]

Is there anyway to find out as a percentage what the ages are? Example 20-30 years of age X percent, 30-40 years X percent etc etc ? To be quite honest, I will head down the RPL route when it is all sorted out.

 

I realy want a RV 8 or RV 7.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

The RAA would have that, judging by the people I meet I would say 80% of the RAA population would be 50+. Would you agree?

 

 

[youngster]

Flying is expensive. End of story. $185 for a magazine, insurance, and all the administration etc is not that bad in the scheme of things. As for the website, it is pretty ordinary, but it provides access to all the necessary stuff, so I don't think it's as big a deal some people make out.

 

It must be very difficult for RAA's leadership, when some people are wanting a return to the "good old days" so they can fly from their back paddock whenever they want, and some people want whiz-bang websites and streamlined interfaces and programmatic specificity and all that expensive professional stuff. You can't really have it both ways.

 

 

[Guernsey]

I very nearly didn't renew my RA membership this year for the same reason. I'm still undecided about next year. I fell into RA flying by accident, not by design.If it's going to survive, RA needs to change. I'm sorry, but something that could be viewed as exciting - racing around the sky in small, fast, fun, affordable aircraft - is currently looking as boring as taking the dog to the vet. The website is atrocious and the new one is still nowhere to be seen - if I'd seen the current website before starting RA flying, I would've run a mile. The magazine is a lot better after its revamp, but still leaves something to be desired in my opinion - it's 90% stories of 'we flew there' - which is great, it's an important part of the magic of flying, but it could be improved - have articles about how to plan your first interstate/overnight nav, how to decide what to take, preparation for what happens after an emergency landing, a 'young pilots' corner, the possibilities are endless - have articles about how to have/plan your own adventures, that's 100% more exciting that reading about other people's. Reading about others people's adventures is like looking at somebody else's holiday photos - generally most interesting for the person who went, not the people hearing about it. Or, make the magazine optional or online. I'd prefer to save my $120 yearly to spend on actual flying hours rather than the mag.

 

To be perfectly honest, if I was looking in from the outside at RA at the moment, my impression would be 'a bunch of old men who fly'. I'm not saying all RA members are old (or male) but it does seem that way. I think there should be more emphasis on the affordability, about the young flyers as well, get new younger pilots in. Show it's fun, affordable, show the possibilities it gives you and it's not a bunch of planes made out of old bedsheets. You can't just rely on flying schools to steer all their students into RA before GA (my experience), you need to try and grab people, not just hope they'll find you or trickle in from GA.

 

This organisation has so much potential but it doesn't appear to be even contemplating using it.

I agree with you as to the magazine content and the different subject articles you suggest, but who (not being sarcastic here) would you suggest writes these articles.

 

Alan.

 

 

[Tomo]

The way I look at it - it's the people that make RA-Aus, not the those at the wheel. Yes they need to hold things together in the way of licenses and rules etc etc... but if we want change, start with the members, not a dozen board members.

 

I didn't come across RAA by their website, it was through Ian's forum here that I did, and then the people - this in my view is a perfect example of the 'members' making the club.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Flying is expensive. End of story. $185 for a magazine, insurance, and all the administration etc is not that bad in the scheme of things. As for the website, it is pretty ordinary, but it provides access to all the necessary stuff, so I don't think it's as big a deal some people make out.

If the attitude that aviation is only for the rich pervades the community then the public owned airports are destined to go "user pays" and end up as housing. Aviation should be accessible to everyone.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Tomo, do you feel like you have a voice in the RAA?

 

 

[Bandit12]

My GA costs:

 

Level 2 medical - $135 (4 years)

 

CASA medical processing fee - $75 (4 years)

 

ASIC - $185 (2 years)

 

Aeroclub membership - $175 (yearly)

 

Average yearly cost - $320 without flying once. And I am sure to have forgotten something. If you take off the aeroclub fees, the aircraft hire rates are more expensive. I don't think that the RAA costs are unrealistically high, but it does sound like they could do it better for the money.

 

 

[XP503]

$185 is not that bad! And if you're turned off flying because of a website or lack thereof, or by thinking it's " a bunch of old men that fly planes made out of bedsheets" then maybe you're just not that "into" flying???? LOL quit complaining!

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Some obvious ways the RAA can reduce the cost of flying via the website.

 

• self administration of fees, believe it or not there is a huge cost in having someone answering the phone or processing paper forms. and an ongoing storage cost with all that paper
   
   
  
• e-learning. most of what the RAA manages is related to the rules and regulations of aviation
   
   
  
• e-learning. a standardised set of lessons and exams, practice exams, everything associated with learning to fly and gaining endorsements.
   
   
  
• attracting new members.
   
   
  
• flight planning, access to emaps.
   
   
  
• advertising social events
   
   
  

 

 

the list goes on an on...

 

 

[dazza 38]

The RAA would have that, judging by the people I meet I would say 80% of the RAA population would be 50+. Would you agree?

I would agree with that FT.I also see Turbo's point of view as well with younger people replacing old people.I joined the AUF in 1987 late or Jan 1988.I was 17 years old at the time.I remember at the start alot of 20 to 50 years old types. Those guys are still here or retiring or have retired.Alot have retired that I knew as a young fella. We still have alot of young guys coming through but Im not sure if there is enough to replace the older guys who have hung up there head sets.

I myself left the AUF/RAA to do a bit of GA flying, not alot about 60 hours in GA.The GA stuff stopped in around 1998.I had a break from 2000 to 2008 where I didnt fly anything as well.What got me back into it, was there was alot more types- example Tecnams, where back in 2000, they would have been to heavy under the rules of that time.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

$185 is not that bad! And if you're turned off flying because of a website or lack thereof, or by thinking it's " a bunch of old men that fly planes made out of bedsheets" then maybe you're just not that "into" flying???? LOL quit complaining!

David, casual users generally subsidise the heavier users in any sport. There is a value proposition with every activity and the less you fly the higher the cost, the poorer the value.

 

 

[octave]

My first involvement in ultralight flying was 1988 - 1990, from memory it cost me about $40 a year for membership of the AUF. This allowed me to fly to 500 feet, no magazine no 3rd party insurance and there were many fatalities. I ceased flying in 1990 and quite by accident resumed in 2007, $160, 5000 feet, a basic magazine, wider choice of aircraft and now some 3rd party insurance, 10 000 feet. It is just my personal opinion but $185 seems like a reasonable deal to me, I pay RA Aus about $5 per hour per year.

 

I wonder what the members who say this is excessive think would be a fair price and how the membership cost of RA Aus compares to other similar organisations e.g. gliding or motor sports?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Octave, did you pay fees between 1990 and 2007?

 

 

[octave]

FT no I didn't pay fees between 1990 and 2007 I wasn't flying

 

 

[dazza 38]

I also love rag and tube as well.I see ozzie's point of view as well.He has been at it at the very start of the UL movement.All that has happened to him, is the fees keep going up.And he hasnt done anything different for the past 2o plus years.Just wants to fly his aeroplane off and around private property.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

You can fly PPGs without an RAA licence?

 

FT no I didn't pay fees between 1990 and 2007 I wasn't flying

You considered yourself a pilot all that time though? And the AUF/RAA advocated on your behalf.

 

If the RAA had a cheaper membership option it could have kept you involved you might have been back flying a bit sooner instead of loosing you.

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

I agree with you as to the magazine content and the different subject articles you suggest, but who (not being sarcastic here) would you suggest writes these articles.

Ask the members, send out an email. Ask people here. If you don't ask, you won't get. Ask FIs to write an article occasionally. Ask some of these people who do the trips to write an article on how they went about planning, or about something they wished they'd known before they left and how they'd deal with it now. Ask Tomo or Cam or one of the many others for a youth perspective.

 

$185 is not that bad! And if you're turned off flying because of a website or lack thereof, or by thinking it's " a bunch of old men that fly planes made out of bedsheets" then maybe you're just not that "into" flying???? LOL quit complaining!

I'm not turning off by the website or the perception, if I was I wouldn't have bothered to get my PPL and now be working on my rotary PPL. I am very "into" flying. The only reason I considered not renewing my RA membership was because I'm flying GA in preference to RA, so am not using it much. If RA was my only source of flying, I'd renew it without a second thought.

 

However, I am also seeing practicalities. A person's initial perception of an organisation like RAA can come from something as simple as the website or their perception of the members. It's an obvious fact. To neglect things like that can suggest a neglect of other areas as well. It doesn't cost much to have a professional looking website where it's easy to find information about the organisation. People have to be idiots if they think something like the website doesn't affect people's opinions of things in this day & age.

 

Flying is expensive. The least RAA can do is appear professional to people who are about to spend ridiculous amounts of money both to them and to flying schools.

 

I'm not complaining, I'm just stating an opinion. Next RAA will be telling us all how member numbers are dropping.

 

Also, as a serious request to RA-Aus. Why not have two membership options like many clubs have - "Flying member" and "Flying member + monthly magazine". That way, people can choose whether they want the magazine delivered or not and choose which membership cost suits them. Members like Carl may well be more likely to stay if they could choose a cheaper membership option without the magazine.

 

 

[octave]

You considered yourself a pilot all that time though? And the AUF/RAA advocated on your behalf.If the RAA had a cheaper membership option it could have kept you involved you might have been back flying a bit sooner instead of loosing you

um no I didn't consider myself a pilot, when I quit in 1990 it was with the intention of quitting for good, in fact I even threw away my log book. I recommenced flying in 2007 after someone bought me a TIF and I became hooked.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I could never throw my logbook away. flying has given me some awesome experiences, log book is the only written record I have.

 

 

[octave]

I could never throw my logbook away. flying has given me some awesome experiences, log book is the only written record I have.

Oh I quite agree, I didn't intentionally throw it away, I just could not find it, probably lost in a house move, luckily RA Aus had a copy of my logbook up until the time I attained my cert so I only lost about 10 hours

 

 

[turboplanner]

Doesn't work like that, the number of GA pilots are declining, the RAA is picking up a bunch of ex-GA pilots but that pool of pilots will eventually start to decline and the numbers greatly diminished.I noticed the flying club @ Clifton is having making the numbers for the xmas dinner this year, I know I'm not going. Its worse than a family dinner where you are forced to talk to relatives you only see once or twice a year.

So you wipe off people like Tomo? They don't exist?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

how many Tomos are there? He is doing GA now, so not really an RAA member