Can we fix it

[RickH]

In a recent issue of Sport Pilot I read an article refering to RAA as being broken.

 

In a number of posts on this site I see references to rules being enforced which don't exist and it would appear that subsequent to the discovery of their non-existence rules are introduced to ensure that they do exist.

 

In A recent post with regard to engine off operations I have suggested that facilities be added to this site where rule changes be promulgated having provisions to allow members to vote on such changes in order to accept or reject same after having entered their member number (so there can be no double dipping so to speak).

 

I have also e-mailed the Ops team suggesting same.

 

I feel this simple measure would go a long way toward fixing our organisation and in the process make it truly democratic.

 

I am sure there are those who may ridicule this idea as being impracticle.

 

To those I say perhaps you would prefer to continue to whinge and do nothing.

 

However I would like to hear comments from people who prefer democracy.

 

Regards

 

RickH

 

 

[johnm]

I think consensus is how many active RAA members are there

 

.................. and how many of those use this site ?

 

 

[Admin]

I have tried many many times over the last 10 years that this site has been operating, to have a closer working relationship with RAAus however it has always been met with extreme barriers by the boards and general managers yet this site has done more for recreational aviation in Australia than anything else. It has saved lives, it has improved flying skills, it has helped so many maintain their aircraft to higher standards whilst at the same time bring the recreational aviation community closer together and be more informed.

 

When will the RAAus realise this?

 

There is scope for this site to be the social arm of RAAus, members here of which 85% are RAAus members, to organise and fix Natfly, organise training events, flyins, socialise RAAus news to everyone, promote and market the joys of recreational flying...we have the members to form committees here to get things done and get recreational aviation going again. All it would take would be for the board to open up communications with the site to start working together.

 

 

[turboplanner]

In a number of posts on this site I see references to rules being enforced which don't exist RickH

Let's see a few examples; it may be that you just haven't found them.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Hi Rick, I think online voting is the only way to go these days, many of us have forgotten what a stamp and a mailbox looks like.

 

From your comment in another thread, I don't think our organisation has ever been as democratic as asking the membership to vote on specific rule changes, in any case not sufficiently for the poll results to be the decider one way or the other.

 

Over the years, when important matters have been up for consideration it has been promulgated via the AUF/RAA magazine and members encouraged to speak with their area Rep regarding their views ion the matter and the Rep then takes that to the Board. If you want to change the entire system you need to request an agenda item for the AGM, for a change to the Constitution. You can't just suddenly expect the organisation's methodology to be changed on request, to include membership voting on every matter.

 

As far as voting on this forum site is concerned, that would be impractical as it is privately run and with no mandate to provide open access to all of the RAA members. And although it's often thought by forum members that this is a site mainly for RAA people, I understand it is for all recreational fliers whether they are skydivers, aerobatters, hangies, trikers whether in HGFA or RAA, SAAA and anyone else in GA who flies for recreation too.

 

More importantly we should consider the actual extent to which this site reaches the RAA membership. Our local flying club - Gold Coast - has upward of 100 members, most of whom have a plane and, although I don't know all the members by any means, I only know of a couple of others who frequent this site. Some may read in the background but don't post here. Most of our members are getting on a bit and don't hang around computers very much.

 

Also, it isn't overly difficult to be awarded a week or more of holiday from the site and if you happened to be banned when a vote was being conducted it wouldn't be a fair poll. And if it is anything like most other forums there might be people who are, or in the future may become, RAA members but who have been banned from here for life.

 

Even so, I quite agree that online voting should be introduced for the voting that we do have and there's no reason at all why it shouldn't be within the members portal on the RAA site, with the matter being promulgated and discussed here and in the Sport Pilot magazine.

 

Please name a specific rule that has changed recently ?Engine off operations have never changed it has always been in the book as best as we know!!!

I'm not sure how long you've been around AUF and RAA, Deborah, but you may be assured that it hasn't "always been in the book", any mention of it is a relatively recent thing. Interestingly, having seen your location, we used to have dead-stick landing competitions at Barry Coutts' strip at Koo Wee Rup, as well as at Pakenham, Berwick, Leongatha, Tooradin ...

 

 

[Admin]

Hitc...no one is permantly banned and is a misconception promulgated by comments such as yours. Yes, people have to obey the site rules and if they dont they get a holiday in the same way as a person who doesn't obey the rules of their flying privilidges. So a person who hasn't obeyed the rules of their flying privilidges would also be excluded from voting. I cant remember the last time a person was given a holiday from the site but if they broke the rules then, like their flying, they may think twice before breaking the rules again.

 

If the RAAus would enter into discussions on how we can work together then all these concerns can be discussed...simple

 

 

[facthunter]

Simple for some. IT seems to be very territorial with the RAAus. Wasn't someone from the NT going to do it once Ian? Nev

 

 

[Admin]

Simple for some. IT seems to be very territorial with the RAAus. Wasn't someone from the NT going to do it once Ian? Nev

I think it is more than just IT Nev...i think it is "working together" that we need to work on

Yes, the NT rep a few years ago was working in the new website subcommittee, and who is back on the board now.

 

Personally i would like to see the board concentrate on the administration and get this site more involved in the addon elements for all the members

 

Afterall, this site has been going for 10 years and proven itself as a very valuable tool for the industry and it is not going away any time soon

 

 

[RickH]

Hey Turbo And Debra I think Admin and Head in the Clouds Have answered your questions. Obviously you two guys do not care to try to improve anything. That is your choice.

 

Thanks to Admin and Head in the clouds for your comments. I understand that the Board maybe reluctant to change afterall "can't have those ignorant plebs getting to have a say"

 

The board may be resistant to change but on the RAA site it is claimed that RAA has 10,000 members, they also state that RAA accounts for about half of the Aircraft operating in Australia. This makes a very powerful loby group if the members band together. I see no possible reason why my suggestion can not be implemented.

 

Admin Please correct me if I am wrong but I assume that you are the maintainer of this site or at least one of those folk.

 

I have studied IT myself at JCU in Cairns, Multimedia etc and tho I have been out of touch with the field for a few years now it is my understanding that adding facilities to the RAA site such as I have suggested is not a hugely difficult thing.

 

Might I suggest that if every member of RAA who visits this site were to e-mail RAA Admin demanding that my proposal be adopted, they would have no justification for not complying.

 

To the knockers such as, and dare I name them, Turbo. et. al.

 

I say that if you do not believe that my suggestion is the way to go then instead of knocking it , how about you come up with a proposal which will help to fix it and bear in mind that I'm not the one who said it was broken in the first place.

 

And just to let you know I was one of the guys who helped to get this sport off the ground in the very early days when Kites, Ultralights were supposed to be tethered. We were the guys who, broken bones and all, were prepared to tell DCA as it was in those days to go away and no we were not going to comply with their stupid rules, like tethering our aircraft.

 

We were the guys who helped to pioneer your sport. And then as now it was people like myself and my friends who came up with "constructive " ideas for the betterment of the sport.

 

If all you can do is knock it, or say it can' t be done then I would suggest you remain silent and allow those people who actually care to try to improve things to try.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Please name a specific rule that has changed recently ?Engine off operations have never changed it has always been in the book as best as we know!!!

They were once flying aircraft --- Now they are ground dwelling aircraft.

 

Maximum Take Off Weight ---- Up and Down.

 

Regards

 

KP.

 

 

[Peter008]

I understand your passion Rick however having been in positions on state committees in the past, it does not work as simplistic as that.

 

Our representives are elected to make decisions for us at a committee level with as much information as they can gather at their disposal. Technical, quantitive, legislative, whatever is required for the decision.

 

What you are suggesting would be akin to having a referendum for each decision that is made by government. Grand in theory but simply not workable.

 

 

[RickH]

I can appreciate your comment Peter and I do understand what you are saying, however consider this.

 

RAA Board members meet, minutes of those meetings are kept and those minutes are recorded on computers. No resaon why those minutes can't posted on line in the RAA members portal and perhaps niave on my part but I believe that members have a right to peruse same. If facilities were available to accept reject decissions, the committee members would have a lot less research to do to find out the consensus from the members.

 

I am also told that in places like Sweeden the general populace vote almost every week on proposals put forward by their government apparently their Pollies are truly public servants.

 

ps and there would be a lot less debate as to what is or is not in the interest of the members and after all is not "the interest of the members" the operative phrase

 

 

[greybeard]

There's some interesting concepts and ideas expressed here about how an organisation should operate. Can't help thinking that there's a bit of a gap between the utopian concept of governance by mob and reality.

 

Bottom line is, vote for who you want to represent you, keep your elected representative up to date with your ideas and concepts, stop the delusion about the importance of opinions expressed on an internet forum.

 

 

[AVOCET]

it's a good idea RickH , IT

 

probably would have a chance at being accepted if instead of having to vote , It could be used as a Suggestion Box instead , that way a consensus could be reached and then considered .

 

my 2 bob spent

 

mike

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Gents

 

The RAAus constitution can be found here https://www.raa.asn.au/about/constitution/ In the constitution is the information needed to understand how the constitution is changed.

 

Myself and a number of other vocal members on this website have previously set to have it changed and succeeded in doing so, so not all whingers here, of which I feel many would put me into that category, whinge with no view to actually changing anything......

 

However all that said that is about the constitution that governs our incorporated association where things like engine off operations will never be mentioned....rather they (generalisation rather than this specific example) are in the tech and ops manual which are here https://www.raa.asn.au/safety/technical-manual/ and here https://www.raa.asn.au/safety/operations-manual/

 

Tech and Ops manual changes are not something we as an organisation do solely ourselves, rather they have to be submitted and accepted by CASA, so just sounding good to a bunch of members will not get it across the line on its own (but may well start the journey). Also the sad reality is that changes to these manuals seem to take longer to come to fruition than the historic lifespan of a tech or ops manager, and based on past board announcements it seems that changes relatively fast (as compared to say the "pitch drop experiment"....google is your friend) get to 80% but that last 20% seems to require skills, perseverance and a need to push through barriers far in excess of anything we seem to have available to us now. (and yes that is all tongue in cheek......sort of.....)

 

Andy

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Is that the one on the Koo Wee road ? They were there today no comment on what went on they.

You have a rather nasty habit of making insinuations and casting aspersions without backing them up. If you want to accuse someone of something at least have the guts to come out with the details, otherwise you'd be better off saying nothing. As has recently be demonstrated in Court, you can be sued for defamation, libel or slander just as readily if you post unsupported accusations on a forum or social media site, as if you write it in hard-copy or say it in public.

 

Me husband and I did training some fifteen years ago and we both were advised that motor off operations can be done with the cheif instructor

Then you are relatively new to RAA which explains why you are incorrect in thinking the rules under discussion were "always there". However the advice you were given would have been correct, motor off operations can be done with the Chief Instructor - but what they failed to mention is that there is nothing stopping you doing them without the Chief Instructor too, except in the circuit perhaps ...

 

RAA pilots have ALL of the same rules as GA but with exemptions. Just coz it's not in the RAA rule book doesn't mean it is not a rule

The rule book? I imagine you are referring to the Operations Manual and the Technical Manual?

 

No, RAA doesn't work quite like that at all. If you read the Order which provides the exemptions for the operation of the kind of aircraft that RAA certificated pilots fly - CAO95.55 Paragraph 6 General Conditions, Sub-paragraph 6.1, Part (d) states - "subject to the other conditions set out in this Order, the aeroplane must be operated in accordance with the requirements of the RAA Operations Manual;" Part (e) states "the aeroplane must be maintained in accordance with the maintenance standards set out in the RAA Technical Manual;"

 

So the 95.55 exemption is extensive enough to mean that we don't actually operate within ALL of the GA regulations at all, we operate primarily in accordance with our Association's own Manuals, then within the further limitations specified in the 2011 Instrument of CAO95.55 and then, only if answers are not found within those documents, would we refer to the CARs. Otherwise we would all have to study the full CARs and CAOs as part of our training, as GA pilots are required to do.

 

 

[RickH]

How about quit the bickering. And come on guys, why not try something completely different and E-mail the RAA Ops people and at least try. Or would that be a terrible idea because if it were to suceed Gee we might have one less thing to whinge about. If you guys directed this much energy to helping to fix the Organisation it could happen. As long as you do nothing and use the excuse that it can not work then it never will. If you all get behind it it can be done.

 

E-mail them its no harder than bitching and arguing on this site and it just might work.

 

I Have already E-Mailed them so come on guys you do your bit.

 

 

[greybeard]

The RAA board provides direction to the Ops People, not the other way round. If you want change, it must come from the members to the board and them directing the Ops People. ( Regardless of what anyone thinks of the previous and/or current situation )

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Rick, what exactly would you have people say in these emails?

 

I think it's already been pointed out that the RAAus Constitution determines the structure of the governing body and the method used for transfer of information within the organisation.

 

The organisation has a regular staff, an Executive board and an Board of Reps elected by the members.

 

Once you've elected your area Rep he takes your views to the Board meetings, they're discussed there and voted on and actions taken accordingly.

 

If you want to change the structure you need to change the constitution and to do that you need to have an agenda item approved for discussion and a vote at the AGM.

 

That's it, there's nothing to email the "Ops people" about.

 

I agree that online voting, as an additional option, would be a good thing and could easily enough be introduced into the RAAus members portal, that's the only thing I can think of that's worth bringing up with RAAus and the way to do that is to speak to your area Rep as above. Your Area Rep is Ross Millard (Maj Millard on this site) and his contact details are listed here.

 

The real issue is that members need to get used to speaking with their Rep regularly, and the Reps aren't going to be chasing you, if you have something to say you need to be chasing them.

 

I don't think you'll ever convince anyone that the members should vote on every decision that's made, otherwise there'd be no need of a Board of Reps but we'd need an office staff of hundreds. I can't imagine any organisation like that, well it wouldn't be an "organisation" would it?

 

 

[RickH]

When I E-mailed Ops at RAA I refered to the report in Sport Pilot Magazine where The Ops manager or perhaps the Tech Manager( tried to find the copy of the mag so I could confirm which one.Its missing in action)

 

The Report stated that the organisation is broken and went on to point out why.

 

I also refered to the chatter on this site re RAA being a debarcle, The thread Eng Off Opps, and also Other articles on this site and in Sport Pilot mag some relating Maintenance Authorisatioon issues.

 

I suggested that a step toward fixing the Organisation would be to Allow the members to decide on all of the issues or at least those pertaining to Ops by doing as I suggested above and adding something to the Members Portal on the RAA site Where proposals are promulgated and Facilities where by members can accept/reject a proposal after having entered their member number as validation of their right to vote.

 

maybe this is utopian but it is worth a try.

 

The first step in getting things to happen is to start

 

 

[RickH]

HITC got your point. Okay so I picked the wrong people to E-mail. So Isay cool lets just Email the bloody lot and perhaps then everyone will get the message and something may happen.

 

Iwill definitely take your advise and make sure I forward a coppy of my email to as manyboard members and Reps as I can find and I guess A visti to the RAA site should get me their contact details

 

 

[AVOCET]

I

 

When I E-mailed Ops at RAA I refered to the report in Sport Pilot Magazine where The Ops manager or perhaps the Tech Manager( tried to find the copy of the mag so I could confirm which one.Its missing in action)The Report stated that the organisation is broken and went on to point out why.

I also refered to the chatter on this site re RAA being a debarcle, The thread Eng Off Opps, and also Other articles on this site and in Sport Pilot mag some relating Maintenance Authorisatioon issues.

 

I suggested that a step toward fixing the Organisation would be to Allow the members to decide on all of the issues or at least those pertaining to Ops by doing as I suggested above and adding something to the Members Portal on the RAA site Where proposals are promulgated and Facilities where by members can accept/reject a proposal after having entered their member number as validation of their right to vote.

 

maybe this is utopian but it is worth a try.

 

The first step in getting things to happen is to start

I think any idea to get more of the membership involved is good and worthy of a well inflated tyre on the wheelbarrow , keep up the good work.

Mike

 

 

[RickH]

So has any one else sent e-mails to RAA or is that to much like trying to help.

 

 

[Peter008]

Rick - again, I can see the passion that you have for the organisation but I am yet to believe that it is broken enough for us to be concerned. From all reports within there has been some concerns about the association direction in the past but the reports also state that things are showing improvement.

 

Reports on this forum of registrations being late and people not getting a full 12 months are discerning but I would believe easily resolved with an email or phone call to the head office.

 

I would believe that as an organisation, the dealings with government would be reactive rather than proactive, as each new issue comes to light.

 

Agree also that we as members, need to let our elected people know our beliefs in relation to any issues; I would think we probably only have a portion of the facts to arrive at our own beliefs, whereas the board would have more advice at hand.

 

All in all, I am putting my trust in the board but more particularly, in the paid administrators that work in the office on a daily basis. Our future is in their hands and I will trust them to guide us forward in the ever changing enviornment that we operate in.

 

One other comment is that as we age, I believe that we become more hesitant with change and often a lack of undertanding of the change, and the reason why the change is occuring, makes us angry that it is occuring.

 

That's life I guess!!

 

 

[Powerin]

I would be against this or any other privately run website being used for RAAus business. To do so would mean giving one operator a commercial advantage over others by handing them web traffic (traffic is money, even if you don't advertise). Any private website owner and administrator has complete control of their own website. They are able to see all the traffic and information on their website and who it comes from. You would have to trust any private operator not to disclose or manipulate confidential RAAus information that came through their website, especially voting information.

 

I am not casting any aspersions on this or any other website in any way, but I would prefer RAAus business to stay in-house or be subject to a commercial arrangement with strict non disclosure agreements in place.

 

On line voting is a great idea, but I believe there is still a significant proportion of members who are not computer savvy. How would you judge if a vote is accepted or rejected on line? By a simple majority? What if only 100 members voted on a particular proposal, would that count as law for all 10,000 of us? I'm all for letting people who bother to vote, or bother to turn up to a meeting, have a big say in the direction of any organisation. However, we really only have one universal way of communicating with the great majority of members that doesn't require any special equipment such as a computer...unfortunately that is snail mail.

 

By the way, all minutes from Board or Member meetings are available on the RAAus website member portal. There will always be a lag because minutes need to be accepted as correct at the following meeting before they are made public.