Keith Page Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 Too lazy for that sort of waffle Keith. You'll have to spoon feed me if you really want a response. Don you were instrumental in writing it hence the short coming are quite vivid to you. KP 2
Keith Page Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 Specifics please, Keith. What do you specifically see as 'having come to fruition? You fly an aircraft under regulations (and at a cost) that required an organisation capable of providing a professional level of administration to its activities - that was the genesis of the AUF. CASA ( in its various previous incarnations) was NOT interested in 'recreational aviation'. Without the development of the RAA via the AUF, you would be restricted to a bloody plastic chair suspended on strings under a pair of cotton-clad wings with a Victa lawnmower engine spinning a pair of paddlepop sticks. Or you would be paying for a C150 at the minimum, LAME-maintained.. Had a look at the minimum cost of any new GA aircraft lately? RAA ran for WAY too long under the dictatorship of a disgruntled ex-CASA employee who espoused the ideals of a 'cricket-club' management style that happened to appeal. Instead of evolving to meet the requirements of the modern age, it stumbled along until the CASA audit exposed the manifold faults. PUT UP, Keith, the things to which you allude. Let's have it out in the open for all to discuss. Oscar you work it out I do not have time to write novels. KP
Geoff13 Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 Very interesting that a lot which was said in this thread has come to fruition so soon.Regards, KP Come on Keith there are 22 pages in this thread, as you seem to know what has been said and come to fruition, how about you quote a few of them for us. Just to save us all going through the 22 pages. Or was your post just a sh*t stir? 3 1
Oscar Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 Oscar you work it out I do not have time to write novels.KP Don't need a novel, Keith, just the facts.
Keith Page Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 Ah! .....T he old "I don't have to provide details, I just have to sling the mud" gambit. It works well for FT so why shouldn't it work for KP? I received some good lessons from F_T, he is a good teacher. KP
DonRamsay Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 When F_T does his stirring he is up front not vague waffling. 1 1
Oscar Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 I received some good lessons from F_T, he is a good teacher.KP And his readers know that his contributions are worth exactly what they paid for them. As - unless you provide better information - do yours appear, Keith. Surely, you can do better than the lowest common denominator? There are things that grow under rocks alongside sullage ponds with more reliability. 1
SDQDI Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 I received some good lessons from F_T, he is a good teacher.KP Keith it is bad enough preaching doom and gloom all the time but saying FT is a good teacher and that you have learnt off him in no way helps your credibility. Sometimes I think it would be nice to meet fellow forumites as the picture we get when just reading lines can be quite different to reality, but then other times I am happy to stay unenlightened. 1
turboplanner Posted July 26, 2016 Posted July 26, 2016 For those who are infirm or in need of a helping hand, go over to the "RAAus election process thread, to Ian's statements on Page 4. 1
facthunter Posted July 27, 2016 Posted July 27, 2016 Love = intrigue? or do some love intrigue? The more facts you have the better the result. Hardly needs to be said. It should be obvious. Nev
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now