Sean,
LOL! You must have missed the part where Justin says: "I'm happy to
take public or private critiques as well"
Seeing as he published that on this forum anyone is free to comment.
Besides I was asked by Justin to comment on the electrical wiring
part and did, as it was being re-written and I've also been consulted
by the last 2 GFA presidents on ADSB. So you know what you can do
with your sanctimonious attitude.
Large companies sometimes pay expensive consultants to look at their
businesses from the outside in case the people too close too the
problem are missing things. What I see in the GFA is an organisation
in denial, run by delusional people.
I was at a large gliding club over Easter and when I walked in to the
clubhouse on the Friday evening my immediate thought was " well not
many of these will still be flying gliders in 10 years". I mentioned
this to Carol who simply said "five".
We have private citizens like Justin beavering away writing what they
think is law when this is properly a government function. The
function of private citizens and organisations like the GFA is to
lobby to make sure any proposed regulations are sensible and the minimum
necessary to achieve the aim.
For those who haven't figured it out the aim of all this regulation is to:
1. Protect people on the ground from having aircraft crash on them.
2. Protect other airspace users from each other.
3. For commercial aviation, give fare paying passengers an excellent
chance of arriving at their destination in one piece.
As aircraft crash all the time and only very, very rarely is someone
on the ground hurt 1. would seem to be fulfilled with minimum
regulation. 2. is taken care of by a decent flight training and
licencing system, something the GFA doesn't have.
GFA has an operations director (or whatever he is called now) who has
no idea about elementary statistics or the principles of risk
management. I also wonder how many more Maurie Littles there are
lurking amongst the 600 instructors? I wouldn't let anybody I cared
about learn to fly in the GFA system.
Why are experienced pilots spinning in, in the circuit? Hint: it has
nothing to do with inability to recover from spins.
If the GFA is merely going to mirror CASA regulations on
airworthiness it may as well just let CASA do it. It won't cost any
more. The people working in professional workshops will then be CASA
recognised and able to expand their businesses to work on powered
aircraft, increasing numbers of which are made of composites. There
is no doubt that in this case the majority of the expertise and
experience in the inspection and repair of light aircraft composite
structures lies with these people.
At present GFA is setting up a system that burdens private citizens
with unnecessary work and responsibility and nobody seems to be
looking ahead to see if all this will be sustainable in 10 years. It
is a potential time bomb for the sport..
Mike
At 06:18 PM 4/15/2016, you wrote:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0344_01D1973F.0F240E10"
Content-Language: en-au
Mike,
Your comment would carry more weight if you were a
paid up member of the GFA.
If you were a member you would be able to propose
changes to BSE and other documents.
If you don't like what GFA do that is not GFAs problem.
Sean
From: Aus-soaring [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.base64.com.au]
On Behalf Of Mike Borgelt
Sent: Friday, 15 April 2016 6:45 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
<aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] BSE Update now published
At 10:06 PM 4/13/2016, you wrote:
There's an official feedback form so that we can collate and
prioritise changes. I'm happy to take public or private critiques as
well, particularly related to the chapters that I worked on. As
always, there will be some controversial changes and expect to cop
some heat, but we have a very fine line to tread between
practicality and lawyers. Sometimes the lawyers won as this is now
considered an official airworthiness engineering manual that needs
to stand up in a court of law.
What you should have done is get a lawyer to write a front page
disclaimer so it CANNOT be used in a court of law. Make it an
advisory/educational publication only.
Mike
Borgelt Instruments - design & manufacture of quality soaring
instrumentation since 1978
<http://www.borgeltinstruments.com/>www.borgeltinstruments.com
tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784
mob: 042835 5784 : int+61-42835 5784
P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au
http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
Borgelt Instruments - design & manufacture of quality soaring
instrumentation since 1978
www.borgeltinstruments.com
tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784
mob: 042835 5784 : int+61-42835 5784
P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au
http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
