Relocating the office...where to?

[Oscar]

As I understand it there is no overarching RAAus strategy, so no IT strategy, and therefore the expected progress.....Until someone can clearly articulate what finished looks like, and all stakeholders sign up to that then setting sail on a transformational journey is going to cost heaps and deliver little

 

PM 101 basics

 

Andy

Well, if that is so, then I suggest that we are in deep cacky, head downwards. While I think we all accept that there was much wound-patching and staunching of blood required, I would have expected that by Natfly we'd be hearing the triage assessment at the very least, and preferably at least the broad principles for the development of an overarching strategy. If this idea of re-location is purely the brainchild of the GM, then I would certainly be wanting to know that more urgent matters had been addressed before any time or effort was being put in to what is at best an entirely secondary issue; if it has been prompted by Board concerns, then I think we'd all like to be re-assured that the Board has grasped the full range of issues facing the organisation.

 

We've seen a lot of discussion on this forum relating to things such as 'how democratic is the RAA?', 'how well are we conforming to the articles of incorporation?', 'who is the President this week?' etc. Perhaps this just reflects specific concerns that matter to members of this forum and not so much to general RAA membership. However, the RAA simply cannot prosper if it behaves like a balloon in a hurricane; it needs to have and pursue a clear direction towards efficiently delivering the core services that keep members safe and aircraft reliably (and legally) in the air. Band-aids on boils is going to be utterly useless if the patient is suffering septicemia.

 

 

[Keith Page]

RAAus. relocating:- This a Wonderful Idea.

 

There are some points we must use as guide lines:-

 

* We must have room for growth and expansion.

 

* We can develop into something which is greater and grander, something we can to aspire to. Have a vision and look outside the square and think where you would like to be

 

* Would be good to be located west of the Great Divide this will facilitate an ease for pilots to access. This location would be two fold head office and good location for fly ins. Away from the chances of poor flying weather. #The town must have RPTs or very easy to access #there is a thriving industry agriculture, small manufacturing # good town services motels and clubs #real estate and living not through the roof. #There are some tourist attractions #There are a great deal of outlying airfields and others in close proximity which can be used for training.

 

* I am not keen on Toowoomba and its immediate regions do not get me wrong it is a great location. The big but here is and just thinking ahead, what will happen if there are changed regulations regarding airspace. What needs to be considered Oakey army base changes its airspace and the new Wellcamp airport has some regulated airspace zones. Wellcamp is talking about bringing the big fellows along too, just to look after the fly in fly out brigade in the mining sector?

 

*One example to demonstrate my concerns, look at Moranbah (Qld) once we could land there, now we must get permission three days (if answered) before the event and permission is never granted this airport is only for RPTs, something needs to done with regarding this problem. This place is like getting into Fort Knox, I think Fort Knox would be easier.

 

*We must be ever vigilant and careful of people who have self interested hidden agendas who will be pushing for our new location/home. We want something which will grow RAAus for the next generation not someone’s ego.

 

* Now for the record I will suggest Kingaroy Qld good big airport with plenty of space, real estate not expensive, living not expensive the town has quite a few tourist things plus wineries, comfortable motels, industry. I must hasten to add there is no RPTS however the town is about 160ks from Toowoomba or Brisbane. A drive up the Brisbane Valley is worth doing for the spectators.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[kaz3g]

RAAus. relocating:- This a Wonderful Idea.* Now for the record I will suggest Kingaroy Qld good big airport with plenty of space, real estate not expensive, living not expensive the town has quite a few tourist things plus wineries, comfortable motels, industry. I must hasten to add there is no RPTS however the town is about 160ks from Toowoomba or Brisbane. A drive up the Brisbane Valley is worth doing for the spectators.

Keith Page.

Hi Keith

 

I agree with most of your post and I'm sure Kingaroy has many things going for it. But it fails rather badly as far as offering equity of accessibility to the majority of the membership. We don't all live in Queensland.

 

In fact, as best as I can see the population mean point is probably around the latitude of Sydney so somewhere suitable inland from there would seem to be fairest. So once again, I invite members to consider Griffith.

 

Kaz

 

 

[dazza 38]

The only way to make it fair is to build the HQ and airstrip smack bang on top of Ayres rock

 

 

[rankamateur]

We don't all live in Queensland.

But we could all do ourselves a favour and MOVE!

 

 

[JEM]

Greetings all

 

If we are thinking airports, what about Cootamundra. Great town with cheaper motels tan Temora and the XPT train station close to the airport if WX catches you out.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

With regard to priorities both in time and money we can afford to do both - that is, modernise the systems and set up RA-Aus somewhere that makes a lot more sense than Canberra. If we don't start doing a few things in parallel they will never get done. Why limit our ambitions when we have the cash reserves we have and there is a willing sub-committee prepared to roll up its sleeves and get things done. Admittedly, Committees have not been wonderfully successful in recent years (if ever) with one notable exception the fabulous team that puts on NATFLY each year. Previous Committees that have not got their job done is no reason to sit on our hands forever more.

 

The Committee that tackles the question of where best to permanently locate RA-Aus needs to be properly established with Project Sponsor, Project Manager and adequate resources in manpower and money i.e. a project schedule and project budget.

 

In the past it seems if you didn't want something to happen in RA-Aus you assigned the task to a Committee. That must change.

 

Keith Page, your optimism for future growth is admirable but I fear misplaced. There is some good evidence to show that membership numbers have plateaued or are possibly even in decline. There are some clear threats to future growth like aircraft owners sick of being stuffed around, like the RPL perhaps persuading GA pilots to stay GA rather than drop down to RA, like the less than stellar reputation of RA as an organisation to belong to and most importantly the like the aging demographics usually referred to as the greying of the baby-boomers.

 

The calls above for systems to smartened up is not just a nice-to-have but vital for RA-Aus survival - particularly if we have, as I suspect, a declining revenue stream. I doubt anyone would disagree with the notion that RA-Aus has managed its growth phase poorly. Growth has been accommodated by more office space, bigger filing cabinets and more staff. The office functioning look like something from the 1960s. RTing up and ask a question and somebody goes searching for a manilla folder.

 

Now, none of us are doing much other than decrying the current situation. The Board does not seem to be communicating even aspirations for the fixes we all see as vital. So, who's going to nominate for the Board and get these improvements on the Agenda?

 

 

[gandalph]

Gee Don, I don't know. Do you have anyone in mind?

[jetjr]

Kaz, ygth is a good idea but a few issues ive found as i frequent there for last few years and in fact work is based out of there

 

Accomodation is very expensive and regularly full

 

Rpt from there is VERY expensive with just one provider

 

Weather although ok, does get fog much of winter

 

Not much Raa activity or aircraft there I know of

 

Whole area highly sensitive to water politics and this will be difficult to confirm in the future

 

BUT

 

It is a very nice place to visit with tourisim and good food etc and busy, profitable town.

 

YNRM or YSDU are other options but myself im not sure RAA needs airfield etc to be effective

 

 

[dazza 38]

Brisbane is roughly half way between Melbourne and Cairns, CASA is in Brisbane. The majority if RAA members live in SE Qld or in NSW. It is a no brainer to relocate near Brisbane.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Griffith to:Adelaide. 376 NM

 

Melbourne. 216 NM

 

Sydney. 246 NM

 

Brisbane. 537 NM

 

http://www.griffith.nsw.gov.au/cp_themes/lifestyle/page.asp?p=DOC-MRV-43-27-08

 

I have no conflict of interest or particular interest in Griffith...I have been there just twice and flew both occasions...and was impressed. The airport is a few clicks out of town, so no noise issues. Council separated GA and RPT when I was there. The town is roughly the same size as Dubbo, clean and blessed with good infrastructure. House prices are reasonable, schools are good, and a good choice of accommodation.

 

I tried to book a motel or cabin in Temora a few days ago for the end of March AAAA flyin and nothing...only a few pub rooms upstairs no ensuite no thanks.

 

The Auster flyin is at Luskintyre a month later and I have to negotiate that bloody Great Divide to get there just when Autumn fogs are at their best. I have to pay for accommodation in advance but there's a fair chance I won't be able to get there. It's a bit off-putting to plan a 12hour round trip without knowing you will be able to make it across that last barrier.

 

Kaz

Hello kaz3g

 

There are some distances one has to get their mind around and we must consider most of the Australian population is on the east coast

 

Griffith -to- Townsville 904NM.

 

You showed Brisbane as a point for Queensland there is a lot of Australia above Brisbane.

 

Just to demonstrate:- Brisbane - to - Cairns 759NM.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Brisbane is roughly half way between Melbourne and Cairns, CASA is in Brisbane. The majority if RAA members live in SE Qld or in NSW. It is a no brainer to relocate near Brisbane.

Hello dazza38

 

Why not take off over the hill away from air traffic tranquil quiet settings and some good wine.

 

Stop at Kingaroy. No constant fog there either.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Oscar]

With regard to priorities both in time and money we can afford to do both - that is, modernise the systems and set up RA-Aus somewhere that makes a lot more sense than Canberra.This is very probably entirely correct - HOWEVER, it is always wise to remember that just because one can do something, doesn't necessarily mean one should do something. There is a qualitative difference between simply having results of actions and achieving outcomes, and whatever RAA resources are spent on, the objective should always be the best outcome. Maintaining a useful cash reserve that generates ( a decent rate of!) interest may be a feature of the best selection of outcomes; without a clear forward strategy for the organisation, we are left with no metric for judging that.

 

The calls above for systems to smartened up is not just a nice-to-have but vital for RA-Aus survival - particularly if we have, as I suspect, a declining revenue stream. I doubt anyone would disagree with the notion that RA-Aus has managed its growth phase poorly. Growth has been accommodated by more office space, bigger filing cabinets and more staff. The office functioning look like something from the 1960s. RTing up and ask a question and somebody goes searching for a manilla folder.

We have had extremely tangible evidence of the fact that RAA's systems are inadequate, to the point of being close to hopeless, to meet the quality of service to members that is not just desirable but frankly critical as the regulatory requirements become ever-more complex. I doubt that needs any repetition of instances to reinforce the point.

 

For all of its life so far, the RAA has not had a 'home airfield' as such. Can anyone - and I am not trying to pick a fight here with those who feel that a place on which to plant the RAA flag is highly desirable - point to any tangible evidence that the lack of having a 'home airfield' has hampered the RAA development / operations? What would have been done better / more productively etc. had RAA HQ been located on a 'home airfield?' What could have been achieved that was hampered? Maybe, members could have had a mass fly-in and barricaded the Board etc. in with their aircraft and demanded better outcomes, resolution of issues, whatever - but realistically - would that have a) happened, and b) made any damn difference? If, for instance, the EGM of last year been held at an RAA HQ located at - let's say - Griffith, Mildura, Kingaroy, wherever - would there have been thousands of angry RAA members flying in and marching from the apron in serried ranks to confront the Board? It's a lovely image - but I contend that it would not, in fact, have happened.

 

Having a 'home airfield' is without doubt a grand symbolic image of strength, purpose etc. for the organisation. But - is it realistically going to make a vast difference to the way RAA will (or even should) progress? A difference that one can realistically point to and say: 'This is what will be achieved and that is why it is worth the investment'.

 

I'm open to persuasion, but to date I haven't seen any cogent argument put forward as to what real difference having a 'home airfield' could make. What the heck (not Heck!) is going to happen on that 'home airfield' that will advance the functioning of the organisation? What are these activities that will energise the development of a new, more vital etc. RAA? I ask this question sincerely, because the whole point of intelligent investment is to achieve a better outcome / outcomes as a result. I think it is of primary importance that RAA funds are not dissipated on providing a solution to a problem that does not, in fact, exist.

 

Is it possible that the whole idea of having a 'home airfield' has little more practical value than the symbolic one of being able to say: 'here we are and here we stand?' I'd love to see a vision of just how the RAA would develop if it does, indeed, have its own 'home airfield'. Seriously, folks, show me what we would get for our bucks. What is the potential ROI here?

 

In terms of the PR value of having RAA-level activity become more visible, regional fly-ins have, I suggest, way more impact on local communities than would be achieved by RAA having a 'home airfield'. Hell, even Natfly rarely gets a mention in the press unless there is an accident while events such as Summernats get significant (and usually grudgingly positive) press coverage.

 

So, to those who are excited about the possibility of RAA having a 'home airfield' - and being encouraged by the fact that it might just be possible within the sort of financial expenditure that might just be achievable with current RAA resources - please, lay out the vision for us all to consider. Surely, the 'why' for even having such a facility needs to be accepted before we go too far debating the 'where' - even if the 'how' appears attainable.

 

To me - and perhaps I am just insufficiently romantic by nature to grasp the importance of having a 'home airfield' - at the moment the debate over where that might be located is a wee bit suggestive of debating the size of a proposed inflatable dartboard...

 

 

[jetjr]

Tend to agree Oscar

 

Taking what youve said, then theres sensible options like:-

 

1. An head office setup where work is done - priorities are staff availability, support services IT/consultants etc, easy access, strong comms position (NBN etc) = captital city

 

2. Feel good emotional home, best to be tied to good weather and flight conditions all year, non CTA and never likely to be, good facilities and especially low cost (coz aint going to do much but cost money), central and linked to key events, other organisations = Central NSW

 

Hang on isnt this how SAAA is setup???

 

 

[Oscar]

IF RAA were to embark on expansion of its activities beyond the merely administrative plus Natfly, that would necessitate having an airfield-located presence, I suggest that a couple of areas worthy of consideration would be:

 

a) the provision of 'residential' training for L1 and L2 maintainers;

 

2) possibly (and here I suggest others with the requisite experience need to comment on whether this is at all practical or desirable), flight trainer courses / check flights. Such courses might include not just 'practical' air work but general training in the proper adherence to standards, SMS etc.

 

In regard to the first of these - a suitable facility with suitable personnel is obviously necessary. I'm going to go radical here, and suggest that (if we could leave turf wars aside), a shared arrangement with SAAA would seem eminently sensible: more consistent work for the 'trainer staff' spread over greater numbers of users plus more effective use of the physical facilities. Or, in crude terms - economies of scale by combining the client catchment size.

 

In regard to the second possibility - well, again economies of scale of shared use of facilities: classroom, training aids etc. perhaps between as many groups of recreational aviation bodies as can be mustered. Obviously, a site that has a high degree of decent flying weather would be essential; and shared use of the airfield for all of the different groups would be necessary. Ahem - Narromine has SAAA on hand, gliders operate from there, (the way to include the GFA in the shared use of resources) and I'm pretty sure that there'd be room for just about every other type of recreational aviation activity.

 

Heresy? Sell-out? - well, consider this: CASA lumps all of 'recreational aviation' into the one basket for most purposes, it's mainly the difference between aircraft types and operational characteristics that tends to separate these groups.

 

All of the above is highly theoretical and the very first consideration would be: 'should RAA be doing these things'? The next question, I think, is: 'if the answer to the first question is YES, then what is the most cost and outcome-effective way for RAA to be doing these things: directly as an HQ responsibility or indirectly through e.g. the use of existing facilities - such as well-equipped Clubs - with suitable support?' By way of example: the Darling Downs club has just about all the facilities needed including (some) on-site accommodation to run residential courses for the whole of SEQ at the very least - and it has, I believe, the highest numbers of members of any individual RAA club in Australia! Instructor work would need to be scheduled during the dry season, however - when it gets wet the airstrip becomes unserviceable for some days.

 

There you are: I've hung out some ideas as a devil's advocate for my own position. I'm offering, as it were, a possible 'half-way-house' argument for some sort of airfield presence - but I'd have to say, I believe that snuggling up to the SAAA would be by far the more cost-effective delivery option than simply going it alone. RAA would not have to actually go all the way and get into bed with them, but just perhaps a respectful and productive platonic relationship might be worth serious consideration IF indeed is is the case that RAA should engage directly in these activities.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I agree Oscar and Jetr, Narromine has a lot of positives going for it with the SAAA already there.

 

 

[farri]

How about a few suggestions? Any other considerations?Kaz

Not a good idea Kaz! ......Too many cooks spoil the dinner.

 

Frank.

 

 

[kaz3g]

I agree Oscar and Jetr, Narromine has a lot of positives going for it with the SAAA already there.

Narromine is an equitable distance to travel for the membership living along the northern and southern extremities of the east-coast, whether from Melbourne or Rocky.

 

According to the distribution map provided by Mark Clayton, however, it appears to be well north of the mean distribution point.

 

I have no problem about mixing it with gliders - I did a lot of flying in them - and I'm also an SAAA member. It's a great field, the Aeroclub is very friendly and it does have a little accommodation on field.

 

BUT, the summers get very hot and bumpy (great gliding), there is no RPT, the population is just 3,500 and facilities for families are very limited.

 

I tend to think Farri is spot on and I'm just giving myself undue grief!

 

Kaz

 

 

[dazza 38]

Narromine is an equitable distance to travel for the membership living along the northern and southern extremities of the east-coast, whether from Melbourne or Rocky.According to the distribution map provided by Mark Clayton, however, it appears to be well north of the mean distribution point.

 

I have no problem about mixing it with gliders - I did a lot of flying in them - and I'm also an SAAA member. It's a great field, the Aeroclub is very friendly and it does have a little accommodation on field.

 

BUT, the summers get very hot and bumpy (great gliding), there is no RPT, the population is just 3,500 and facilities for families are very limited.

 

I tend to think Farri is spot on and I'm just giving myself undue grief!

 

Kaz

It is pretty far from Cairns though

 

 

[coljones]

snip snip snipAccording to the distribution map provided by Mark Clayton, however, it appears to be well north of the mean distribution point.

 

snip snip snip

What is the distribution map of which you speak? Is it a linear weight distribution or a geometric weighting or unweighted?

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Oscar if you had been following my posts over the last few years you would read that this is what i have been on about.

 

 

[Oscar]

Oscar if you had been following my posts over the last few years you would read that this is what i have been on about.

Which bit, Oz? - the 'improve the systems and forget the airfield' bit, or the 'this is what RAA could do' bit? I do believe that there are arguments for each side, and what I'm trying to do here is tease out the pros and cons for each, so we can all sit back and cogitate. Just that exercise in itself may, indeed, help the Board to look at the whole strategic development scenario; maybe even provide a topic for a session at Natfly where people can take the arguments further with at least some backgrounding of the issues involved. Just having people jump up and say: "I vote for X path to be followed' without being able to enunciate at least some of the reasons and justification, isn't going to be as much worth as having a group start to lay out a realistic plan for heading in one (or even both) directions. Whichever path/s is/are followed, they both mean very considerable expenditure of RAA resources.

 

 

[jetjr]

BUT, the summers get very hot and bumpy (great gliding), there is no RPT, the population is just 3,500 and facilities for families are very limited.

Kaz

Rpt is just 30 km away with bus service, up to 8-10 flights to sydney per day, talk of Melb and maybe Brisbane in the future

 

Big planes working off the field, ASIC etcetc ....kind of what we dont want isnt it?

 

 

[dazza 38]

Fellas, I don't want to throw a spanner in the works but if you drove/fly from Melbourne to Cairns using the inland HWY/IFR-I follow road. Charleville is smack bang half way. So geographically speaking Charleville has to be considered .

 

 

[kaz3g]

What is the distribution map of which you speak? Is it a linear weight distribution or a geometric weighting or unweighted?

Nothing so fancy...just a graphical illustration of the way in which the membership is spread across Australia. It's in Mark Clayton's article in Sport Pilot.

 

Kaz