Two Governing Bodies

[winsor68]

LP/HP=AUF/GA

 

Really it is quite simple.

 

Really....

 

 

[flyerme]

what about ? if it can land on my strip it must be raa ,if runs into the trees at the end then its G. A (or me having a bad day with a tail wind) I do recall a jabi landing here 2 up!

 

 

[Guest nunans]

I recall a post some weeks ago which made a connection between the level of correspondence between the organisers and a member, to the level of dissatisfaction that member has with the organisation. (I think this applies widely and I can relate to this with my involvement in workplace relations in particular)

 

To that end I can see how Ian being the administrator of this site would end up baring the brunt of much "correspondence" from RAA and would be sick of it for sure as would I.

 

But speaking for a general member like myself who has not alot to do with the bosses of RAA I can say I am tremendously happy with the fact that currently, I can own, fly and maintain my own aircraft at a very low cost (and yes I do think the RAA fees are cheap even at twice the price).

 

It's my understanding that I may very well owe this freedom and privalage to the founders of the ulralight movement here in Australia who laid the path for the rest of us to fly down, more so than to the current administration of RAA.

 

However I haven't personally had any bad dealings with the modern RAA administration and over all I think they are doing a good job.

 

The less time you spend on the phone and internet talking about the woes of the RAA and the more time you spend enjoying the freedom the happier you will be. (this of course doesn't work if they won't let you renew your membership....)

 

 

[dazza 38]

what about ? if it can land on my strip it must be raa ,if runs into the trees at the end then its G. A (or me having a bad day with a tail wind) I do recall a jabi landing here 2 up!

That wont work Tim.A piper super cub will get in there no worries. :plane:Unless Piper super cubs are allowed to joint the RAA.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The less time you spend on the phone and internet talking about the woes of the RAA and the more time you spend enjoying the freedom the happier you will be. (this of course doesn't work if they won't let you renew your membership....)

The present level of recognition and freedoms and knowledge also owe a lot to some good hard working people along the way; John Brandon is one who comes to mind.

 

As far as your quote is concerned, that's hope, but the reality is better covered by this quote from the 18th Century: "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"

 

 

[facthunter]

We really are very fortunate to be able to do what we do. It wasn't always that way and it may perhaps NOT stay that way if some things change. It only takes a few Galah's to destroy out reputation and put our freedoms in jeopardy.

 

Some tend to take things for granted. I agree with Nunans and Turbo's posts above. We have to take more interest in what goes on and CONTRIBUTE in whatever way possible to good outcomes. VOTING is the least you should do. Voter apathy is something that bothers me with RAAus. Like the old song... "you don't know what you've got till it's gone".

 

How many people in countries in other parts of the world would just love to have the opportunity to VOTE people in to represent them..?. Nev

 

 

[winsor68]

I think the most frustrating part is that I can "vote" until the cows come home... "I" can't do anything to actually help in a positive way. I mean you have to take your hat off to people that do but personally I think they are probably wasting their time and opening themselves up to an awful lot of public scrutiny.

 

More glory to those that do throw their hat in the ring with actually making these things happen rather than just talk about it...

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

My personal opinion - ALL private and recreational planes & pilot quals should be removed from direct governance of CASA (let them look after the commercial & fare paying passenger sector). More than one Governing Body to administer the standardised delegated authority. Remove distinctions between categories of aircraft for registration - that will stop the nonsense of removing seats & equipment, pretending to fly with a teaspoon of fuel, and fudging stall speeds to fit a category. One licence (certificate) for all, endorsements to cover type, like gliders, and "extras" like higher levels of skill, PAX, cross country, controlled airspace, night etc. Maintenance based on engine type and usage eg if doing Controlled Airspace or NVFR it should be certified and LAME maintained; training or hire by L2; otherwise - your choice - as per manufacturer's specification - by LAME, L2, yourself. The RAA syllabus is getting more like the PPL but the licence/certificate is determined by the plane's rego - VH or 55 - despite being the same make & model. Even the medical is now similar. There's a lot of room for simplification, but we seem to be going down the path of more complication. It seems to be driven by fear that some inadequately trained, medically suspect pilot flying a poorly maintained contraption will take out a bus load of voters.

 

I am dreaming .... it is a complex issue. I didn't vote because I think it really needs a complete overhaul rather than more "categories" and "authorities".

 

Sue

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well you can help now by getting people in your area to submit proxies for the three current motions, which will clear the way for more paricipation to members to do the things you want to do FV.

 

Once that's done, then you can get into groups etc and come up with these ideas and more readily get them up at meetings for discussions - the Constitution amendments are the starting point, and they are going to need a lot of votes.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I always thought it was just RAANZ that looked after "microlights" as they are all called in NZ. I was one of the founding members of what was originally called the "Microlight Association of NZ" back in 1982. I can't seem to find the other body & it's not mentioned on this thread. Could someone enlighten me please?

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Well you can help now by getting people in your area to submit proxies for the three current motions, which will clear the way for more paricipation to members to do the things you want to do FV.Once that's done, then you can get into groups etc and come up with these ideas and more readily get them up at meetings for discussions - the Constitution amendments are the starting point, and they are going to need a lot of votes.

Have already done my proxy, got another and spoken to the only other RAA member I know here. The flying club I belong to - rarely get to meetings - but 8 of them are on this forum and I have urged the club to get involved. They are revisiting their own constitution, so I got a bit more of a response from there. But on the whole, about half are willing to leave it to "someone else" to sort it out. They will only get involved when something they don't like hits them fair in the face - grounds them or fines them. By then it is nearly too late.

 

I wish more would get in the driver's seat rather than sitting up the back of the bus.

 

Sue

 

 

[turboplanner]

At least Proxys don't have travel costs, so it's really a matter of people just taking the time to sit down and do it, all round Australia

 

 

[frank marriott]

Sue,

 

...CTA should be Lame maintained?????????????? On what is this based????? Accidents or incidents????????

 

Certainly no agreement for this suggestion from me.

 

FrankM

 

 

[ave8rr]

I always thought it was just RAANZ that looked after "microlights" as they are all called in NZ. I was one of the founding members of what was originally called the "Microlight Association of NZ" back in 1982. I can't seem to find the other body & it's not mentioned on this thread. Could someone enlighten me please?

http://www.sportflying.co.nz/

Cheers

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Sue,...CTA should be Lame maintained?????????????? On what is this based????? Accidents or incidents????????

Certainly no agreement for this suggestion from me.

 

FrankM

The comment wasn't meant to be part of a manifesto. It is a CASA thing, and most likely one of the compromises that would have to be made. It would be nice to transit Controlled airspace any time in anything, but the political reality is that there will be too much angst from the Big Boys about anything less than certified and instrumented, LAME maintained, aircraft sharing "their" airspace, or flying over intensely populated areas. I can't base that on accident statistics - I strongly suspect the incidents, accidents and fatalities by GA (certified LAME maintained) proportionally outnumber non GA in controlled airspace. You could argue that we are safer, but then it would be argued that's because the unsafe planes have been kept out. There's a permit system now that will allow aircraft not fully compliant to access CTA - for example the disabled trike pilot who few unassisted from England to Australia was escorted so that he could complete the re-constructed historic route. But Joe Average wouldn't be allowed to fly his trike into Sydney. I was last into controlled airspace in 1995 - Archerfield, but can't go there now - although the C152 is NVRF and nearly IFR, I only have Mode A and therefore my altitude can't be read by other aircraft. None of our other aircraft would be allowed. CTA is a low priority for me, but it might be essential to others nearer regional centres.

 

My suggestion is to look at simplification before starting on more categories. It is a pipe dream. In reality there will be compromises (as above) and cut off points eg No.seats or kgs as I don't think they would allow private jets to be maintained by L2s or owners. But now we have a growing number of categories - 10, 19, 24, 25, 28, 32, 55, LSAs, experimental, GA, 450kg, 600kg, 5,700kg, RPL, PPL RAA. Too confusing. Politically we will be up against airlines & commercial users (who pay for ATC enroute services), Safety lobby groups, bureaucrats who fear loss of control, LAMEs (loss of business), Airport owners (loss of revenue - RAA doesn't give out addresses for sending bills) and the NIMBY people protesting at possible increases in noisy polluting dangerous flying lawn mowers.

 

What I was dreaming about - All non commercial planes licensed, registered and flown under one simplified delegated system. I really don't want to argue about the finer points.

 

Sue

 

 

 

[Methusala]

I am a GFPT trained private pilot but have done the most flying by far as RA A. I think that one of the answers to controlled airspace incursion is to tailor the airspace to that which is needed. I have flown into Sydney many times on RPT's and don't think that Victor 1 needs to be so restrictive. I am not an expert but have also flown around Albury from Holbrook on towards Mt Beauty. The terrible terrain that is flown at low altitude in order to avoid airspace - well I don't think that they need all that space to approach in a sophisticated aircraft. I realise that many will disagree but this is my belief. Don

 

 

[turboplanner]

Don there's another very timely post floating around, maybe a day or two old, where someone says he has been flying in as a passengers on RPT's, and some pilots are following the rules while others are hopeless and just head into the circuit from anywhere.

 

So if the areas were reduced you might get a cowboy in the face.

 

Might be in the Roma Airport thread

 

 

[frank marriott]

Something that has been gained in the last few years e.g. CTA, above 5000 ft should not be thrown away just because someone does not take advantage of the privilege

 

For example I have a certified aircraft and engine, CIR, CPL and RAD 47 on instruments just not maintained by a LAME. Every 100 hrs inspected by a LAME but not signed out by him as this would involve his company and the relevant higher cost.

 

I thought a push from the RAA community was for a CTA endorsement for certified aircraft without having to a PPL.

 

To suggest these other restrictions I see a a backward step. I am happy with my 400 hr RAA licence and enjoy the freedoms but to suggest I need a LAME (and the company overheads) to enter CTA about 10 times a year I am sorry but I am on a different planet.

 

Sue I read your post with interest up to that point but you lost me there I'm afraid.

 

FrankM

 

 

[Admin]

The results of this Poll are very interesting because to me, I see it it as a "health" measure of our industry.

 

It seems:

 

Overall 2/3rds prefer a single body compared to 1/3 for 2 bodies

 

3 Axis only, the split is 2 to 1...this means that 2 out of every 3 people prefer to have one body yet 1 out of every 3 people prefer to have 2 bodies

 

My interpretation of this is more people are upset with RAAus then other components of the recreational aviation industry and with it being at 2 to 1, it is at a very dangerous satisfaction level of RAAus. To me it seems the RAAus MUST fix the current issues that are currently effecting them, including a complete restructure, management style and outlook or else the door will be widely open for another competing 3 Axis body to "come out"...it could be an existing body like HGFA or SAAA, or perhaps a whole new start up governing body venture bringing a fresh new outlook of recreational flying for the members and the industry.

 

The next 12 months is certainly going to be an interesting time and I can't help but wonder why, how and who has caused this situation that has, in my opinion, evolved over the last 2 years.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Another way to look at this is that 0.15% of the members voted in favour of a second body, and only 0.8% of the members were even interested enough to vote.

 

The average Company would kill for a dissatisfaction ratio of less than 1%

 

Promoting splinter groups is not productive because the failure rate is nearly 100%.

 

In my opinion, Recreational Aviation Australia is about 85% OK.

 

The other 15% in my opinion again mostly consists of allowing rules, procedures, auditing and training to get behind the very rapid change from fencehoppers to cruising aircraft.

 

If those issues were addressed in the short to medium term, I'd suggest there would be very little dissatisfaction.

 

The key to that is electing the right people to represent you and manage the Association.

 

 

[Admin]

Tubz, the figure you quoted of 0.15% is not on the whole membership as to get that figure you have not extrapolated the percentage figure of a "sample" up to the "total". Again the 0.8% has not been achieved by extrapolating both sides of the figure (both the denominator and the numerator) up to obtain a figure...so sorry Tubz, but I have to completely disagree with you on your figures

 

 

[Admin]

That will always be the problem with such a small sample number. It is also one of the things that I dislike about polls on here, with so many registered users logging in each day, and only registered users can vote in a poll, that so little do bother to vote...it is simply a click of a button, there is nothing strenuous about it yet it makes for some great topics of conversation and the intent was for some great indicators...I have had to do a lot in the behind the scenes aspects of the site and its code to allow for polls so perhaps it may be better to make the site cleaner in its default code and remove the polls feature, if the interest isn't going to be there...besides I rattle my brain every Monday morning trying to come up with some kind of an interesting poll each week whilst I could be doing other things...so, perhaps we have a poll asking if polls are worth it and if we don't get at least 350 votes (5% of registered users) for either choice then we remove them, and save the effort as nothing can be gained from them..

 

 

[turboplanner]

The polls are fine, and you don't need one a week.

 

This one was a bit of a loaded question that's all

 

 

[Bandit12]

It is exceedingly difficult to survey people well. If people who were more likely to support a new movement also happened to be the people who were more likely to join forums, and then your sample really includes mostly people more interested in change....and that is without even considering whether the people likely to vote are also more likely to support one or another. Biased samples cause many a researcher to throw up their hands in dismay, just because the results are so hard to generalise without criticism.

 

 

[Yenn]

From the amount of noise denigrating RAAus on this forum, I am surprised that the vote for another body is so low. CASA is charged with keeping flying safe and they are not going to let anyone else make up the rules for them. We are stuck with a body which has to deal with CASA and cannot make up its own rules. It is possible to fly in controlled airspace with a non LAME maintained aircraft. The knocking of RAAus makes me wonder wether or not I maght be better off going back to GA flying, especially as the medicals should be a bit easier to get and cheaper. I wouldn't have to pay membership or annual registration fees. I wonder how many others are thinking along similar lines.