i suggest you have a reader failure then, do try a reboot.
> On 30 Jan 2017, at 6:08 PM, Mike Borgelt <[email protected]> wrote: > > My iPad sometimes tells me " this message has no content" > I'm surprised it didn't in this case. > > Mike > >> On 30 Jan 2017, at 2:33 PM, Richard Frawley <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> interesting, but in the end perhaps irrelevant. >> >> Analysis will show that the base driving interest that was present in the >> primary age group during the halcyon period no longer exists and likely >> never will again. There was in the people of that time an unsatisfied latent >> demand to express themselves through control and command that flying gave >> purpose to. What developed via clubs was in response to an inherent demand >> and limitations of that time. >> >> That core need is no longer apparent in the wider community. Flying no >> longer offers natural attraction but to a small number of our population, >> which by observation is getting smaller and smaller. As such there is no >> longer the need for response in the manner that was previously provided. >> >> As to what gliding will be in 20 years time will matter little in terms of >> what the GFA does today. As needs change and new services are required then >> those services will be provisioned if demand is sufficient, as that is the >> way of things human. >> >> As new people do cycle into GFA management on a regular basis, that is a >> good thing, as flexibility and adaption are likely to be the nett result >> which is what i observed during my 3 years on the exec. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 30 Jan 2017, at 3:50 PM, emillis prelgauskas <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Thank you all for the delightful conversation at ‘GFA negative >>> advertising……' >>> >>> I thought I’d start fresh, on some items that move away from that thread >>> above. >>> >>> It surprises me that the ‘but you are bashing the GFA’ legion didn’t pipe >>> up. >>> Perhaps it was because GFA are bashing themselves up in their Pravda list. >>> >>> There are diverse views across the glider pilot nation about what GFA is: >>> - Some see GFA as being the whole of ’the sport'. >>> - Some see GFA as an administrative benefit or necessity to the sport >>> - Some (me) see this 67 year old organisation as having had its day and now >>> being in its own generated death throes. >>> >>> For all the reasons already enunciated by others - self destructive, >>> dictatorial, creating silos of irrelevant hierarchal positions which will >>> never be filled because there aren’t enough volunteers left, and so on. >>> >>> The biggest hurdle for GFA is the loss within itself in its corporate >>> knowledge - all the current incumbents came into a fully formed sport and >>> try to re-imagine it in their own image without a skeric of understanding >>> of how things came to be. (e.g. they don’t know what ‘the Valentine Curve’ >>> is) >>> ‘Those who don’t know their history are bound to repeat it’. >>> >>> With the benefit of longevity and a curiosity to track things (yes, I am >>> the dude who did the quantitative measuring of successful and defunct clubs >>> for the whole of Australia in the 1970s) I advise - >>> >>> - In 1949 the GFA was formed to be the barrier between glider pilots and >>> ‘the Department’ >>> - where glider pilots said ‘WE are the people who know how gliders work, >>> they are not power planes, so we set rules appropriate to us >>> - helped by the proposition (a la ‘The Castle’) that the Australian >>> Constitution does not regulate aviation (which didn’t exist when it was >>> first written), hence aviation is regulated federally only by the consensus >>> of the aviation community >>> >>> - That original bottom up driven model of regulation of the sport by the >>> sport, in the best examples of participatory democracy, lasted until 1981 >>> - By then the sport had grown to 100 clubs, about 5000 pilots, and >>> enthusiasm and volunteer inputs to ‘our sport’ which got it there and was >>> propelling it even higher >>> - So GFA has never been ‘the sport’, it has always been the external >>> peripheral administrative element that we ‘needed to have’, and was thus >>> always kept as small as possible. >>> >>> - So in 1981 the world changed, yes Richard, you are right. The system was >>> re-written and has been re-written several more times since, by incumbents >>> of their day who saw a great sport, and thought re-imagining it in their >>> own image would both serve the sport and themselves well. >>> >>> - So gliding the sport declined to 2000 pilots in 50 or so clubs, with the >>> unstated direction being the demise of the small clubs (less than 20 >>> members), leaving commercial servicing, schools and big clubs. >>> >>> We are indeed on track in that direction. >>> >>> The barriers to achieving the goals of that objective (a more >>> ‘professional' sport) is that it is being pressed onto the old model of >>> volunteer cadre to achieve. >>> And people not being stupid, say things (as per the previous thread) ‘ ‘why >>> would I work at making my kind of gliding fail or be inaccessible?’, and >>> stuff like that. >>> >>> Gliding is not a franchise that GFA owns. So people choose to bale out when >>> the onerous impositions exceed the benefit to them, assessed against their >>> definition of ‘the sport’. With many then going to other sport aviation; a >>> barrier to hoped-for flow the other way. (Their tales of woe unimpress >>> aviators from other sport) >>> >>> GFA does not control gliding, despite continuous threats and intimidation >>> issued by it/them. Glider pilots agree to follow rules that make sense >>> because these keep us alive. GFA is overlaying this with rules addressing >>> ‘fear of litigation’ against themselves, to be shifted onto the volunteers. >>> >>> The current conversation, either in its form today or some future time, >>> will result in the demise of the GFA. Glider pilots will find their own way >>> to fly the kind of sport each group within the sport wants. >>> GFA doesn’t have the budget to follow through the promotion and support to >>> create the sport in their image. >>> All the attempts so far (since 1981 to date) have thoroughly failed as >>> noted above, and will continue to fail. >>> >>> Pilots and clubs (particularly the small ones) are right now debating >>> internally what sort of sport they want. Paying lip service to ‘the >>> authority’ and getting on with flying safely is a reality since 1924 (the >>> oldest glider I have in my 2 dozen collection). >>> >>> Some pilots and clubs will decide to be ‘mucking about in boats’ style >>> volunteering, and will attract like minded people. >>> Some pilots and clubs will go ‘hire & fly’ with commercial support; and >>> ditto. >>> And all the other variants between. >>> And really few pilots will aspire to the GFA view of itself. >>> >>> Welcome to the real world folks. >>> >>> Emilis >>> (turn rant mode off) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
