coljones

Can you put the end to end track up so us mere mortals can study it as we plan a plunder on CAGIT. Best wishes with the folding stuff, you have a nice little strip down there in Albany.

You could do an "Advanced Pilot Award". The pilot skill set is advanced. There are no additional privileges gained except the accolades of your instructors, fellow pilots and friends and the discipline and training of undertaking the award may well be very valuable. I have a feeling that the skill set is closer to or better than that required for a PPL. ADVANCED PILOT AWARD ENDORSEMENT (APA) 8. As this Endorsement does not allow the holder any operational privileges no further detail is provided here. However, the requirements for the endorsement are shown in Section 2.07, paragraph 13. ADVANCED PILOT AWARD ENDORSEMENT (APA) 13. An applicant for the issue of an Advanced Pilot Award must: (a) have reached the competency standards required under Unit 1.07 of the RA-Aus Syllabus of Flight Training; and (b) be recommended by an RA-Aus Examiner to undergo the flight test for issue of the endorsement; and © pass a flight test conducted by a Pilot Examiner or a CFI.

Camden has similar issues to YSBK except the hours of of tower operation (Class D) are 8am to 6pm. Daves has a quality cup of tea bag and instant coffee and the landing charges are most acceptable (about $5) Somersby -YSMB - about 30 mins north of Hornsby and near the expressway might also be an option but you will have to navigate the lane of entry with some low flying < 2000' and pass close to a major bankstown reporting point at Prospect Resevoir (PSP). The Sydney/Newcastle VTC and the Sydney Basin will give you a good heads-up See http://ontrack.casa.gov.au/index and have a play

try here http://sdr.casa.gov.au/sdronline/REPORTS/REPORTVIEWER.ASPX?TRANCD=RPTVWR or here http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90818 I suspect that these are all GA planes as there are no Rotax, modified VW, Subaru engines mentioned in the quick flip through I did OR there is massive underreporting in the RAA fleet.

And???

Don, we really do need you back on The Board.

Labour is a resource just like money. Staff are employed to satisfy outcomes in Ops, in Tech, in membership, in ASIC, in General Admin, in the Board Support, in Relationships Management, in Member Services and other areas. It is not just staff costs it is where the costs (including staff costs) are expended in each area. The CASA fiasco was not really about CASA demanding more but CASA demanding that we do the job we were supposed to be doing in the first place. RAA didn't insist on quality staff to do a quality job on quality systems. This failure has meant that it is going to cost us much more than it should have. But things are changing. If past boards and CEOs had had their eyes on the ball and had established systems rather than surpluses and ever growing reserves then RAA may have dodged the bullets It is pleasing to note that the board is put up $300,00 from reserves (previously so tightly guarded) to establish management systems. This should, hopefully, bring light to dark corners, improve the way RAA does business, establish protocols, reduce the revolving door in senior and other staff and reduce the cost of expensive consultants whenever there is a hiccup. Keep well.

Not at all Captain. My point is the board should ask for a fee increase by cogent arguments rather than hacking a member benefit. The board hasn't explained where the expenditure hole is and sought to rectify it, by mitigating the cost or by increasing the hypothecated component of the fee, or some other fee if it is a rego issue or an FTF issue. We do have reserves which can be used to even out cyclical cashflows, if required. To continue to demand continual supluses, year on year, without reserve targets and policies is clearly ridiculous but until recently that was the only game the board would play in fiscal responsibility. I have consistently said I don't have a problem with a well documented argument for a fee increase and will willingly pay up on that. You, I am sure, would understand that the shareholders would, and do, get very agitated, if companies reduce the dividends and benefits, without good reason, without growing shareholder wealth. There needs to be more hypothecation of the RAA fees and their allocation to cost centres so that the board and members can see where the organisation is headed and where the holes are and who is paying for what. Fx. Rather than allowing the confiscation of the kids' pocket money society generally demands that the old man give up booze and betting (and beating the wife). A much better way to balance the family budget. Are you happy about the fee increase? Keep well

And I said back then "The cost of the magazine is a smoke screen. Unless the cost benefits in other areas of RAA are rapidly established, and dealt with our financial deja vu will keep on repeating itself. If you can the magazine then I want my $60 back!!!"

Thanks Andy for your candid input to the debate. The issue was the lack of proper disclosure of a fee hike ($50). The announcement was bordering on obfuscation as it talked about saving money on the mag' rather than jacking up the underlying non-magazine related fee. I have never been afraid of a fee hike, if required and explained, and taking into account sensible policies on reserves and asset retention (some governments want to flog assets and to outsource) which we are yet to see. Was there a resolution or just a decision taken on this? I do prefer paper. A lot of people are handling technology well but a lot of the small things are becoming lost because it is becoming complicated to find them because the search terms are complex. Search for "broke" when the article in question said "financially embarrassed" rather than "bankrupt" fx You can fold a mag up into your pocket and read it outside without sunglare on the screen and batteries don't go flat. Despite anything else I am dubious about the imminent arrival of the paperless toilet. Cheers

Another resolution (or is it just a decision). RAA has decided to reduce the value to me of my membership by withdrawing my magazine from midyear without a rebate. If the board was being honest it would have formulated and talked about a strategic plan and if more income was required it would have asked for an increase in the fee but offer a rebate to members who decide not the get a paid magazine delivered. RAA is an effective monopoly. In the exercise of that monopoly power it should be more communicative, more consultative and have some commitment to the membership.

It is good to consider ways to reduce the inefficiencies but only if it can be done cheaper than a competing solution (considering ALL costs and the externalities). This is a properly engineered solution. we don't always get these. Fx, a properly engineered solution might consider moving Parliament House and the politicians to Parramatta. The political solution insist that we move everything else. Another solution would be to move the politicians over the sandstone curtain to, say, Temora and force them to commute to work each day.

So a "Decision" has no binding force on the organisation nor on the board members not committed nor does it bind the board members committed to remain committed? And a "Resolution" binds to organisation and all board members? Or is the board castrating mosquitoes (again)?

I understand that no "Resolutions" have been made since October and those have been reported. I also understand that a number of "Decisions" have been made but not reported explicitly. What the difference is between a "Resolution" and a "Decision" is I can only guess but I don't think we will find it in the ACT Incorporated Associations Act. A magazine is a good place to report board and association business but the news cycle is over in 24hours. The proper place for decisions is on the website where we can see what was proposed, those for and against and the final resolution (decision taken) in the matter. It would also be nice if the action sheet was posted to see if anything is being done with these resolutions eg "Set up a Constitution review panel" agreed - progress? None, the (then) board decided that it was all too difficult.

No Hydro in SA. NSW, Vic and Qld have pinched all the water

Hi Nick,what are you flying? Enjoy the trip

I understand that Lee Ungermann will be at the CASA stand at the Avalon Airshow. Any contributors might seek further info from Lee and pass it on.

Not all that easy to find. They are not exactly where one would expect them. They are in https://www.raa.asn.au/members/meetings/ but not https://www.raa.asn.au/members/meetings/minutes/

You should watch the Peter Cook movie called "The Rise and rise of Michael Rimmer"

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014L01806 and see post #1 in this thread. (if this is what you mean)

I must confess that I didn't look in the right place for the financials as I had burned all my calm searching for the, now revealed, secret location of the minutes and resolutions - bugger. I am impressed with the detail in the financial reports but, as I indicated to Michael, I will need a large pot of tea (maybe even a somavar) while I go through it. Keep well.

Hi Andy @ https://www.raa.asn.au/members/meetings/minutes/ the latest minutes are the draft from Temora in April last year. The last board minutes are from September 2013. Are there any intentions of releasing the current budget or YTD Accounts? Cheers

Where do you see the cost increases coming from FT? You will probably find that the large number of plastics and the ease with which they can pass the registration process means that they are already providing more of the RAA operating revenue than their costs eg RAA makes a profit out of plastics and their pilots. Most of the load of fighting CASA is actually done by honoraries rather than paid staff eg Presidents and Secretaries through the ages including people like Eugene Reid, Steve Runciman and Michael Monck.

Do you want 9,000 members all ringing you up?

The stall speed applies to RAA Planes (Regulations and Tech manual). The regulations and Ops manual constrains the PC holder to only flying RAA planes (unless they have a non RAA licence as well). Rather than the pilot "the need for safety only applies for some types" of planes wrt stall speeds.