CAO 95.4 , exemptions , (l) subregulation 207 (2) as far as the carriage of a gyroscopic turn and slip indicator and an outside air temperature indicator as prescribed in Appendix I of Civil Aviation Order 20.18 is concerned;
> On 21 Apr 2016, at 8:55 PM, Noel Roediger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Emilis - I agree totally with your thoughts and agree that it would be > prudent for GFA to utilise the knowledge of senior members. > > Justin: I have no idea of your capabilities re GFA operational and > regulatory issues - nor do I have knowledge of your GFA authorities and > qualifications or personal aviation qualificationsl. Please advise. > > Your Utopian past really did exist and we had sufficient capability with the > statesmanship of GFA and DCA officers to develop a very sound and > universally admired operation which was adopted by many other international > authorities. > > You may question my authority to make such a statement so see following. > > I was besotted by aviation at a very young age and was adopted by members of > the Adelaide Soaring club at the time GFA was formed. > > I am probably the only member living that experienced its formation and > proceeded through its entire existence to this day. > > I' ve lived, achieved and performed their dreams and my wife and I have > mentored numerous youth into an aviation career. > > I'm appalled that current GFA officers have caved in to junior and > unqualified CASA emplyees. > > FYI I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire unless you can provide info. > otherwise. > > Noel. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aus-soaring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Justin Couch > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:26 AM > To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. > Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] T&S as a mandated instrument > >> On 21/04/2016 8:40 AM, emillis prelgauskas wrote: >> There was a very good reason that gliding had 'exemptions' globally in the > Regulations. To avoid this mismatch between commercial aviation and our > sport specific needs. > > It's probably worth some time to chat with you privately to get some details > on where these can be found. Unfortunately I am now far more intimate with > both Oz and international airworthiness regulations than I really would like > to be. If these exemptions do exist written down that you are claiming, I > cannot find them, nor can anyone else at the GFA - perhaps they went up in > smoke with the rest of our paperwork a few years ago? > > The regulatory framework that existed in the utopian past has changed, > rather dramatically on us, so things that may have been in place before just > don't work any more - if we can find the documentation of them at all. I see > a lot of what is happening now as no different to then - someone finds yet > another stupid rule, everyone mulls it over for a time, an exemption gets > made according to the paperwork framework of the day, everyone shakes hands > and moves on. > > I'd like to understand how you find this particular issue (T&B on MEL) any > different to the fire-extinguisher example you cite. Both seem to involve a > silly rule that doesn't apply to us, someone working out a way to get an > exemption within the rules of the day, and everyone just moves on (and then > 30 years down the track someone recounts it as a funny story of "Kids these > days! Back in my day...."). > >> Including that the best results are achieved when GFA told CASA to stick > it - that we are the experts in our sport, which needs to operate in > specific ways in order to be safe. >> Remember the primacy - SAFETY. > > And, they in turn can tell us the same and stop gliding in it's tracks > completely, or make it so financially uncomfortable for us to have the same > effect. Neither is a good outcome for us. So, work out when to bend with the > wind, and when to stand firm against it. Everyone has a different > interpretation of that point. > > We, luckily, have some very good people on the GFA side that know the system > inside and out as they deal with it professionally every day. So, when weird > stuff like this happens, they already know what to do and slip in that extra > one sentence into our paperwork so that the guys on the ground like you and > I can continue to operate mostly unaffected. > >> How does making the paper mound higher and in multiple mounds (the > compliant, the interpreted work around, the reality) contribute positively > to this? >> The argument that 'society demands this' is so hollow - as if the public > bystander leaning on the aerodrome fence is able to tell the operator how to > do things because of the unformed opinions - regulation by social media. > > The utopia of the good old days no longer exists and we do have to put up > with this stuff whether we like it or not. I bet 40 years ago the elders of > the time were decrying "adding more mounds of paperwork" too, comparing it > to pre-WWII gliding. The more things change, the more they stay the same. > > Yes the world is getting more litigious (specially insurance companies!). On > top of that, we now have a bunch of know-it-alls on social media condemning > everything that can gut something almost instantaneously regardless of good > intentions or not of the target. We can't live in a vacuum and pretend the > world doesn't exist around us. If genetics have much to say, I have at least > another 40 years of enjoying this sport - I'd like to still be able to have > that option should I, and all the younger guys I'm trying to mentor, be > interested. > > Anyway, I'll shoot you (emillis) a private email to see what we can dig up > from historical paperwork and get into electronic form and weave into the > current reality. > > -- > Justin Couch http://www.vlc.com.au/ > Java 3D Graphics Information http://www.j3d.org/ > LinkedIn http://au.linkedin.com/in/justincouch/ > G+ WetMorgoth > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Look through the lens, and the light breaks down into many lights. > Turn it or move it, and a new set of arrangements appears... is it > a single light or many lights, lights that one must know how to > distinguish, recognise and appreciate? Is it one light with many > frames or one frame for many lights?" -Subcomandante Marcos > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
