shags_j

No it is a newer version but there will be more scrutiny before we vote on it I believe.

Anyone want a 172 syndicate in Brisbane?

AKRO: probably need to defer this to someone who deals in VFR routes etc. I have no experience with them at all.

Ok, I have found out that this is still an early draft and that the errors will be fixed in due course before voting. These shouldn't be an issue going forward.

What do you reckon... Some cheap 172's might be up for sale soon ;)

I just did another thread why it should not be allowed (14.3 is my pet hate as well) However noone should vote for this as there are errors in it.

If the atc doesn't know where it is, they Will just tell you

One of the reasons I wanted it changed.

In hindsight that sounds a bit harsh against the board members. I guess I am more ticked at the CEO for letting this through. I know he received my email regarding this in the first place. I did also tell my local member however I guess all he would have done is tell the CEO and we can't expect all the members to be lawyer types when it comes to this stuff. Sorry Board, my criticism's in the above thread are not levelled at you. Maybe even the CEO is innocent in this but if he is who is the responsible person for the draft. I guess that is a more pertinent question and why wasn't that person on the ball regarding these mistakes?

So these are the reasons that I won't be voting in favour of the new constitution. All of these concerns went to both my local member and the CEO (yes Don Ramsay, in spite of your pithy accusation that I have just sat on these forums "complaining" while everyone is working etc, I had already made my objections known. My new objection is that you slandered me for no reason. I find this behaviour abhorrent... rant over) and evidently were not taken under advisement. I'm not sure if I am allowed to quote the relevant sections on here so will reference them only. Here is the link to the draft... https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/2-raaus-draft-constitution-and-explanation.pdf My biggest concern is that we are relying on Board members and CEO's who have issued this draft, AFTER BEING ADVISED THERE WERE REFERENCE ERRORS IN THE LAST ONE, with still more reference errors (see below). I find it hard to rely on a document with that many errors in it at all but given that these errors exist this constitution MUST NOT be voted in. I hope I am wrong regarding the reference errors. I would expect this in an undergrad at a local law firm, not from an association the size of the one we have. 14.3 - Basically directors can choose not to allow a person to become a member without even telling them why. 16(d) - Could be a way to get rid of someone they don't like. If you are 1 day late paying your fees they can terminate you as a member... 17 - Dispute resolution - Will there be a new dispute resolution procedure (as referred to) or will it be the same as the existing one. Hard to vote on this without knowing. I am ok with the vagaries being in the constitution to allow easier change to the procedures but we should have these procedures before voting 30 - The Chairman is able to veto a members right to vote at an AGM. If you want a member not to vote then why not allow the quorum to vote on this. Chairman shouldn't be able to just veto someones right to vote. OMG there are still errors pointing to incorrect clauses. Seriously this is atrocious. On this alone the draft should not be voted in as constitution. clause 36.2 refers to non-existent 35.6 36.4 also refers to 35.6 38.3 (b) refers to delegations of power under clause 43 but clause 43 if about conflict of interest. Maybe this is beyond my layman understanding of this stuff or perhaps an incorrect clause reference? I think this should be 39? 47.2 refers to non-existent 44.3 52.1(d) refers to clause 29. This should be 27? 55.2 refers to proxy per clause 34. I think this should be an earlier clause, clause 34 is for appointment of directors.

An ad or a navaid and you can't go wrong. My airspace is smaller than cornwalls but i still don't know all the Tony little towns out west.

Flying Dog: Of course can't speak to those specific situations but the only time I would turn down Flight Following would be if I was really busy. Of course the sector Ian and I are on at the moment has seen a large decrease in traffic so we are not particularly busy most of the time and pretty much everyone gets flight following from me. The other reason flight following may not be available is that you are not on radar. You have to be identified for flight following. Definitely a flight plan lodged makes it really easy for us to know what you are doing and we can quickly give you a squawk code etc.

Pearo: for individual visits anyone can Call the centre or tower and organise a visit (i will get the phone number when i am at work next). For bigger groups they do a pilot information night which i have heard good things about and includes visits to the room etc. The bigger groups can't really plug in behind us as it would be hard to organise but certainly of you are coming in on your own you can organise to plug in and listen to what happens. Edit: next pilot information night for Brisbane and Sydney is 5th April. Details here: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/flight-briefing/pilot-and-airside-safety/ga-pilot-information-nights/

Hey all, Someone asked for it so here it is. We have a few ATC in the house (Myself, Nathanc, Ian0098, Rhys(unsure of username) and perhaps even more. I may have dobbed the others in for this but if you have a question we will see if we can answer it. Admins, if this is in the wrong forum, please feel free to move it. Cheers, Shags

Wow some weird information in here. The Green frequency isn't always the one you should call. That is the class G frequency so if you are flying in class G then yes, that would be the one you would call. Be careful using blanket statements. Otherwise Ian is right. You need to speak to your instructor to find out who is the most appropriate to call. Basically as far as ATC is concerned you call first sector for a clearance that you will be entering CTA. However since DAH is a bit dry I suspect you won't necessarily know which sectors are which. For example the 119.5 is actually an approach sector (Sunshine) that sets the aircraft up for the CTA approach sector (BAC - Brisbane Approach Cooloongatta) which is 123.5. Yes it is confusing hence why you should always check ERSA, check any VFRG's and last but not least, if you really don't know, call ATC on the current frequency you should be on and ask us. We are not that bad. I regularly get guys as far south as Coffs calling and asking for their Gold Coast squawk code so they can get it on the txpdr early. No problem with this also. Pearo and Rage are also right in that last post. However don't only check out the towers, come in to Brisbane or Melbourne center. If you want you should be able to get in and see how we work and maybe plug in behind one of the controllers and have a listen. If you are worried, one of the ATC's on here (I'm happy to oblige) might be able to help organise this for you. Alternatively there are regular pilot nights held in the center here that include a trip into "the room". These are for VFR and PIFR pilots more than the RPT's so make use of them. EDIT: Aplund or whoever was saying that Approach were dicks, remember these guys have the stressful jobs and are under high workloads, you may not be able to hear it so perhaps give them a break...

Ok let me reiterate: If the draft goes through in current form without the changes made as outlined then I will not be voting for it and will active advocate against it. I'm sorry are you trying to offend me because I am commenting on a constitution that has been put out for comment? I have no skills that will be able to assist RAAustralia. I am a relatively low hour pilot compared to the rest of you who likes to fly occasionally. However if something like this comes out where we are invited for input then I will, particularly if I feel particularly strongly about it, provide input.Mike suggested I provide all the errors in the constitution that I have found and was originally quite taken aback but if it is prepared by the board and not a legal firm then I will actually do this. I'm not setting out to offend anyone. Just because I haven't run for the board or anything (reason being that I have no skills or experience to be a board member or helpful in any way) doesn't mean I don't appreciate the hard work all of the board put in.

Don: I have sent my concerns to the ceo and my local board member. I started listing I another thread here all the incorrect references etc but stopped when i ran out of time that particular day. I outlined my major 6 concerns but neither the ceo or the member agreed with my concerns. I assume (perhaps wrongly) that a legal firm prepared the draft. Hence my comments on appalling. If it was prepared by you, am unpaid board member, then of course i rescind that comment. If it was a law firm then the comment stands and i question the advice prepared by a firm that pays that little attention to details.

Yeah the report shows the details of his inputs

I agree with everything you have said Jim. And this is the biggest issue I have with the draft constitution. There is too much power to be able to stop people from joining placed in the directors hands. This is an entity for the ability to license aircraft and pilots as allowed by CASA. The ONLY reason that anyone should be denied entry is due to disciplinary issues surrounding either breaking the "flying" rules or aircraft registration rules. Hence why I want that particular clause removed from the constitution. Seems no one in power wants that so that they can have the ability to remove a member without cause (or prevent them from joining). The quality of the draft constitution supplied also speaks to the amount of "effort" that has been put into it. I think it's appalling personally and will NOT be voting for it. I am not however putting down anyone on the board. This isn't a personal attack on board members or ceo etc. only that I disagree with the constitution as presented.

Man that is scary.

Sorry Neil. I tried to understand this

No not yet. I Will be now fast taking my rpl though and Will likely do so then.

That's is why i raised it With the CEO. I won't post hisb response but i urge everyone to email him and your local delegate if you disagree with these clauses. Its yourv association. Make your voice heard.

Excellent thanks heaps

How on earth do we find out who our local rep is and how too contact them?