"Your comment would carry more weight if you were a paid up member of the GFA." What a silly and illogical statement. The authors of the BSE take the document off to lawyers for an opinion on liability who, if you really want to be pure and holy should not be members of the GFA lest they be accused of conflict of interest, and yet much weight is paid to that opinion. Mikes point about advisory documents is very valid. This approach is used widely in many industries in situations where the absence of legislated mandates enables a variety of solutions. Aviation is not the only litigious aspect of life. As CAO 95.4 does not mandate approval by CASA of any document other than the GFA Operational regulations, every other document produced by the GFA should be an "advisory document". To do otherwise implies that GFA has been delegated the ability to make laws, something which no parliament will ascribe to a private organisation such as the GFA. The sooner that GFA recognises that it is NOT a regulator the sooner it will escape the spiral dive that the organised sport is in.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Sean Jorgensen-Day < [email protected]> wrote: > 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:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Mike Borgelt > *Sent:* Friday, 15 April 2016 6:45 AM > *To:* Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. < > [email protected]> > *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* > 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 > [email protected] > http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring > >
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
