Board report......

[Guest Maj Millard]

As promised prior to my election to the board, I intend to report on this forum as best I can from time to time. It will be very general in nature, and no names will be mentioned as I have signed a confidentially agreement to allow me access to all board info.

 

Communication is the key and I will be communicating with you as required, together with my usual postings on this forum. Jim Tatlock has and continues to do a good job here on the forum also.

 

What's happening..........well the new ops manual draft has gone to CASA, and copies of the draft have also been sent to board members. I don't profess to have read it all yet, but a reading of selected items indicates that it is generally in the same format as we are used to, and kept as simple as possible. The NW and HP, LP endos have disappeared , and there are new ops conditions relative to powered parachutes and the like. More on this when I get around to reading it all. Just a draft remember, and CASA could require modifications.

 

Do not think for one moment that your board is not working for you. There is a LOT of 'behind the scenes ' stuff continuously going on, and just the constant flow of Emails has keeps me very busy in this early stage, just to come up to speed !.......It is not 'secretive ' stuff , but more general work and decisions that the board is tasked with carrying out on your behalf.

 

Jim Tatlock by the way has been, and continues doing a great job in the office as excutive member, and go- between with the GMs team, and other board members.

 

Board number reduction......it is generally considered that a smaller board would Probabily work better than the current 13 member one has. The CR committee has been looking at this. I was in favour of retaining the 13 , but after some thought and talking with people such as Don Ramsey, David Issacs and others I have also decided that a reduction would give us a more productive board. Personally I feel 9 is the right number which would still give good regional representation + 1. Others I have spoken to only want 7, and see the seven as qualification based, which I don't necessarily agree with.

 

I feel as the organisation is membership-based, and for the membership, that the members would still be overall In favour of a regional-based board rep system, if it were put to the vote. Should a reduction be decided then how to eliminate some positions would need to be looked at also. Natural attrition ?...reduction in numbers as the elections become due etc... What's are your thoughts on this ?.....

 

And whilst I think of it, not really board related, but I just called Brian Bigg to congratulate him on the impressive job he and the staff have done on the Novembers magazine for us. I'm sure you will agree it is one of the best I have seen in a while.......big .thanks to Brian and his staff........till next report .......Maj........

 

 

[coljones]

Did they leave in the controlled airspace and controlled drome parts of the ops manual. While it was of no consequence to some people - for whatever reason - its presence in the manual was an ideal marker if CASA ever changed their minds. This is part of the reason that the draft should have been showcased to members BEFORE it became dr jure so that little niggles like this might have been spotted by the ultimate beneficiaries?victims of the changes.

 

Ross, Keep up the good work.

 

Col

 

 

[biggles]

Thanks for that report Ross . A lot of people there doing their best , under less than ideal circumstances , for us members .

 

Bob

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Did they leave in the controlled airspace and controlled drome parts of the ops manual. While it was of no consequence to some people - for whatever reason - its presence in the manual was an ideal marker if CASA ever changed their minds. This is part of the reason that the draft should have been showcased to members BEFORE it became dr jure so that little niggles like this might have been spotted by the ultimate beneficiaries?victims of the changes.Ross, Keep up the good work.

 

Col

Col, good talking with you the other day, I plan to do some more reading of the draft this weekend ( after flying !) so I will get back to you on that specific matter......had a shot at it this arvo, but the air-con was on and,......ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzz you know how it works.........Cheers Ross.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Thank you Maj and Jim Tatlock without you two we will not hear a thing. A BIG thank you.

 

With a 9 member board there will be more happening and easier to manage as there will be less people to enter into the talk fest at decision time, and voting will happening quicker.

 

The other view I was thinking of, those members who are intrested could form (some type of group in their zone/area/club) and this group could form ideas and then hand on to their board member, by having a process like this more interested people would be able to have more input and thoughts presented to the RAAus.

 

I am open for modification to this process as we must start to work in harmony all this character assination must stop imediately.

 

I can not understand all this rot and noise, e.g. Have a vote on a point and majority rules by having these non-board groups all those interested people can have a say, no interested person is left out. For those who whinge, voted down and are out side these guide lines, guess what you have not got leg to stand on.

 

We have to change the format of RAAus which is workable and guided by practical people who can think and have foresight..

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[facthunter]

Nine is OK. Seven would work as a minimum. I don't see how you can screen candidates for board membership but a comprehensive resume of qualifications would help voters decide. This could be ratified. This all assumes you have more candidates than positions. You have to counteract member apathy . Perhaps a discount for voting. WHATEVER IT TAKES...EXPERT advice( when needed and I mean expert) will be unlikely to be available from any board most of the time. and if it happens it will be a chance happening. You will have to out source the real stuff. Like LEGAL Design, etc.

 

I know what goes on, on boards and most members would not really know unless they have done this sort of thing.. They can be very frustrating negative vibe places , when they go off the rails. A big thanks to Jim and the others who have continued doing a fairly thankless task and to you too MAJ in anticipation.... Nev

 

 

[poteroo]

Did they leave in the controlled airspace and controlled drome parts of the ops manual. While it was of no consequence to some people - for whatever reason - its presence in the manual was an ideal marker if CASA ever changed their minds. This is part of the reason that the draft should have been showcased to members BEFORE it became dr jure so that little niggles like this might have been spotted by the ultimate beneficiaries?victims of the changes.Ross, Keep up the good work.

 

Col

Col, I have to disagree with you here. RAAus isn't likely to receive any CTA/CTZ, and extra MTOW approvals until we get our basics right. We only need what is approved and current in the Ops Manual - not a bunch of thought bubbles and wishlists. Frankly, based on the quality of the radio work that I hear around the SW of WA - many of our RAAus, and GA, pilots shouldn't be going anywhere with traffic levels greater than Forrest. Even then, they'd be a danger to the mustering aircraft out there. Letting them loose in CTA/CTZ would create chaos. happy days,

 

 

[frank marriott]

Poteroo

 

Unfortunately poor radio procedure is not restricted to your area. The worst offenders are the ones who have had certificates for quite a while.

 

Guidance is taken as an insult - so unless it is addressed in a BFR, I don't see an improvement in the near future.

 

 

[coljones]

Col, I have to disagree with you here. RAAus isn't likely to receive any CTA/CTZ, and extra MTOW approvals until we get our basics right. We only need what is approved and current in the Ops Manual - not a bunch of thought bubbles and wishlists. Frankly, based on the quality of the radio work that I hear around the SW of WA - many of our RAAus, and GA, pilots shouldn't be going anywhere with traffic levels greater than Forrest. Even then, they'd be a danger to the mustering aircraft out there. Letting them loose in CTA/CTZ would create chaos. happy days,

The thought bubbles are already there in the manual. CASA has chosen to not allow us to use them. My concern was that if they were removed they are very hard to put back.

The issue is not the we can or can't issue endos but it is the quality of the training and testing for the award of the endos.

 

Bad radio work is not the fault of the manual but rather poor behaviors going un-rewarded.

 

If you feel that we can't be trusted to follow the rules then the answer is not to minimise the rules but to give some instructors a kick up the bum. Bad training and slack examinations produce bad outcomes so if we can concentrate on better training and more consistent testing we can move towards better outcomes.

 

Col