guys Like others i have a PPL (fixed and rotary). i never got my IFR.
the question I would like to know is what skills and knowledge are required to attain L2 ops. if this is just some subjective thing under some random control of a CFI, how is that in anyway acceptable. Having gained a PPL is was a very structured process. Its all layed out and highly repeatable, why is gliding not the same. GPC seemed to have improved that a bit, but still seems random in comparison. how is that good? > On 5 Feb 2017, at 11:45 PM, Al Borowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry Noel - I'm confused as well. Is your point that too many people > in RAA or PPL are flying when they shouldn't be? > > I'd assume the purpose of a successful Gliding Endorsement (or > whatever you want to call it) is that instructors consider that pilot > responsible enough to look after themselves. If they don't demonstrate > that level of skill/judgement they don't get the endorsement. > > After I got my driving license I didn't need to go back to my driving > school each year and justify why my license should be extended for > another year. > > Cheers, > > Al > > > >> On 05/02/2017, Noel Roediger <[email protected]> wrote: >> Jim. >> >> >> >> I have personal knowledge and experience to back up my statement. >> >> >> >> Check accident / incident reports re. glider pilots and RAus. pilots up to >> CASA PPL’s. >> >> >> >> Noel. >> >> From: Aus-soaring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >> Of James McDowall >> Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2017 8:38 PM >> To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. >> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] MEMBERSHIP AND A WORLD REVIEW >> >> >> >> Hi Noel, >> >> What is the basis of your reservation? It is worth remembering that there >> are many people deemed to be qualified in all sorts of endeavours that you >> and I would not regard as competent but the law and other conventions >> regards as qualified. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Noel Roediger <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Jim. >> >> >> >> Your suggestion implies you think those pilots you refer to up to PPL are >> qualified to operate freely within Australian airspace. >> >> >> >> I assure you – unreservedly – many are not. >> >> >> >> For that reason your idea will not work. >> >> >> >> Noel. >> >> From: Aus-soaring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >> Of James McDowall >> Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2017 5:10 PM >> To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. >> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] MEMBERSHIP AND A WORLD REVIEW >> >> >> >> What about anybody with a RA-Aus pilot certificate and anybody with a RPL, >> PPL, etc with an endorsement for self launcher? >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Richard Frawley <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> i put my hand up to take this to the exec. who else (must be GFA member) i >> can count on for support? >> >> >> >> step 1: anyone cleared to fly a Self Launcher automatically has L2 OPS >> annotated on GPC (will that work?) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5 Feb 2017, at 4:10 pm, James McDowall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Elsewhere in this discussion it was noted that the majority of GFA new >> registrations last year were powered. The interests of these people need to >> be accommodated NOW, not when the powerless gliders can't be launched >> because it is too expensive or I just cant move my zimmer frame fast enough >> to run a wing. This will encourage investment. Also GFA needs to develop a >> system of permitting retrofits of power systems (by using the experimental >> certificates provisions) to add value to un-powered gliders. Cutting loose >> independent operators (from clubs) will remove the liability that CFI's and >> RTO's fear. That is operators hold a GPL or GPC issued by GFA and simply >> agree to fly according to the operational arrangements approved by CASA >> under CAO 95.4. >> >> I am reminded of a couple of quotes attributed to Edmund Burke: >> >> "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do >> nothing." and "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good >> conscience to remain silent." >> >> but most all a common saying: >> >> >> “Some people make things happen. Some people watch things happen. And then >> there are those who wonder, 'What the hell just happened?” >> >> >> I think most of the gliding fraternity will wake up one day and "what the >> hell happened"? >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Richard Frawley <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> It is well know that the biggest resistance by far to the current GPC change >> (which was a good step forward) was by instructors and especially CFI’S and >> RTO’s >> >> >> >> I would be more than happy to help champion the issuance of GPC as >> equivalent to Level 2 Independent ops, but I can tell you now it will the >> CFI’s and Panels that will resist the most >> >> >> >> Given however the small number of self launchers, this requirements is still >> moot. >> >> >> >> As long as you still need others (tugs, wing runners, ropes) there is no >> true independence and their in lies the root cause. >> >> >> >> Bring on the world of electric self launchers and true independence, the >> sooner the better and even then it only really comes if its private owner or >> small syndicate. >> >> >> >> Club aircraft will always be over protected. This is the nature of a shared >> asset. Shared asserts by human nature are never as well looked after as >> those owned. (rental cars + public transport vs the private car) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5 Feb 2017, at 2:28 pm, Future Aviation Pty. Ltd. >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi James, hello all >> >> >> >> I have argued along exactly the same lines when I was on the panel as the >> head coach for SA. >> >> >> >> Coming from a different country I was bewildered that there is no formal >> qualification for glider pilots in Australia. I argued >> >> for a Glider Pilot Licence (GPL) instead of a Glider Pilot Certificate (GPC) >> but I was told that only CASA has the authority >> >> to issue licences. The GFA wanted to retain control and for mainly this >> reason we are now stuck with a certificate rather >> >> than a licence. A certificate is (almost) worthless but a licence implies >> that you can operate free of interference by others. >> >> >> >> For years (or should I say decades) I have argued that the current system is >> no longer appropriate and need urgent fixing. >> >> Please let me commend Mark Newton for articulating this major problem >> accurately and publicly. He has expressed what >> >> many disgruntled glider pilots have long complained about privately and what >> has caused a lot of bad publicity for gliding >> >> over the years. I know that it has prevented many other potential aviators >> to join. This will continue until suitably qualified >> >> pilots can freely operate outside of the supervision of instructors who in >> many cases have much less knowledge, less >> >> know-how, less experience and far less competence than the pilot(s) >> involved. >> >> >> >> I hasten to add that I have not experienced an abuse of power by instructors >> panels or CFIs but I’m aware of the fact that >> >> this has occurred in other parts of the country. In too many cases the >> affected individuals have left the sport or switched to >> >> power flying where they were treated with the respect they deserve. Let’s >> not forget that the power jockey's gain came at >> >> our expense! Their member base is still increasing while our numbers are >> largely on the decline. >> >> >> >> I can’t help but feel that we have lived with the current system for such a >> long time that many of us are unwilling to even >> >> contemplate a system that makes for truly independent pilots. In the medium >> term it will undoubtedly be another nail in the >> >> gliding coffin down under. >> >> >> >> However, gliding is not yet in the coffin, and we should not lose hope >> altogether. Some of you might recall my series of articles >> >> with the title “Time for a change?”. These articles were published in >> 'Gliding Australia’ and proved to be the trigger for the GFA >> >> to implement the GPC. However, to my way of thinking this should have only >> been the first step. The logical next step would >> >> be to bring our system in line with best overseas practices. Unfortunately >> it won’t happen if we don’t get organised and if we >> >> don’t drive the necessary changes at grass root level. Only when we push >> very hard and collectively will we stand a chance >> >> to convince the GFA to act and that is time to act NOW. >> >> >> >> Kind regards to all >> >> >> >> Bernard >> >> >> >> PS: On request I will make my articles “Time for a change?” available to >> members of this great forum. I just love it!!!! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5 Feb 2017, at 9:13 am, James McDowall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> CFI's (Cheif Flying Instructors) responsibility should end when you get a >> GPC (which really should be a GPL valid in Australia). >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Richard Frawley <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Yes, the GFA has operational responsibility as that is what is imparted and >> set up to do, but the key and central relationship still remains between >> CASA and the Pilot. If you breach airspace are they going to chase the GFA? >> >> >> >> If anyone thinks that you can get a better deal from CASA in terms of the >> required process and structure, then you are most welcome to get on the GFA >> exec and give it a go. >> >> >> >> Given what CASA demanded in order that the community keep what freedom we >> have (ie not go to a GA style process), no one will will argue that what we >> have is not a compromise, but I can tell you that without the 2+ years lot >> of effort went into the last major round with CASA we would be a lot worse >> off. >> >> >> >> If you think that anyone in the last few series of GFA exec teams wanted to >> keep any of the current structure for their own personal empowerment, how >> wrong you are. It simply means you have not met or known the people involved >> nor being involved the activities that were required. >> >> >> >> The only abuse of ‘power’ I have personally observed has been at the CFI and >> associated Instructor Panel level. Unfortunately, in the current structure >> they are not actually accountable to anyone and can put rules and process in >> place as they wish. In this sadly, I have seen some club members treated >> quite badly and without justification. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5 Feb 2017, at 7:28 am, James McDowall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Nonsense, as the document says the parties to the agreement are the GFA and >> CASA. Sure, I agree to the rules of the association which may include the >> Operational regulations referred to in CAO 95.4 (which are different to >> GFA's Operational regulations) but members are not party to the agreement >> entered into by the incorporated separate legal entity that is the GFA. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Richard Frawley <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Did you know that the Deed with Casa is between the glider pilot and CASA >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4 Feb 2017, at 11:06 pm, Mark Newton <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 4 Feb 2017, at 5:55 PM, Greg Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> One low cost step toward improving the gliding "product" would be to make >> GPC holders responsible for their own flying instead of relying on a L2 >> instructor's presence at launch. >> >> >> >> I can understand how the current system evolved from clubs wanting to >> control pilots in their aircraft but surely it's time for this outdated >> system to be relinquished. >> >> >> >> It didn't evolve from clubs wanting to control pilots in their aircraft. It >> evolved from GFA wanting to control club operations. >> >> >> >> GFA implements a chain of command: >> >> >> >> Pilot -> Duty Instructor -> CFI -> RTO -> CTO -> (CASA, but we're not meant >> to believe that) >> >> >> >> Each link in the chain is, as previously observed, equivalent to a "rank." >> Authority flows downwards, with each layer following the command of the >> layer above. Responsibility flows upwards: The duty instructor is >> "responsible" for the operation (how? never really defined). The CFI is >> "responsible" for the panel. And so on. >> >> >> >> Sitting at the middle of everything is GFA, HQ, setting policy centrally, >> implemented by the chain of command. >> >> >> >> It's all right there in the MOSP ("standing orders.") >> >> >> >> I speculated earlier that it happened like this in the 1950s because so many >> of the early GFA people had military aviation involvement, so setting up a >> command hierarchy would've been a natural way to approach civilian aviation. >> Society was a lot more hierarchical then too. >> >> >> >> It isn't anymore. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Enough discussion here may even start movement in that direction from GFA. >> What do you think? >> >> >> >> >> >> Can't be here. GFA started their own website forums for members specifically >> so they wouldn't need to listen to this one. >> >> >> >> Members need to get upset about this. Get organised. >> >> >> >> - mark >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
