(to balance out the light hearted post, a meaty one-)
In my workday world there are now so many regulations and standards which change so frequently that often the documents have to be dated just so that when being built it can be figured out how many editions before apply to when the job was put together on paper. The result to the surprise of the beauracracy is a decline in construction standards which matches the increase in paperwarfare. Because the major industry is in creating paperwork for its own sake, rather than creating any outcomes. Not surprisingly, similar forces are at work in aviation, and hence filter on to sport aviation. John Giddy wrote about AOCs:- >Now it seems that we will be *forced* to get one to be able >to offer our own members tuition. There are several possible beauracracies than just CASA advocating more regulation of training activities. One alternative proposal raised previously was that ASAC become an approving authority that give approvals to all sport aviation bodies which are members of it to do their flying training as an alternative to the CASA mandatory AOC. (ASAC = Aust Sport Aviation Confederation to which we pay fees via GFA. As far as I'm aware Henk Meertens = GFA Exec Officer also = ASAC Prez, if I'm current) The contest seems to be between which beauracracy gets the job, and thereby the billing rights. To Derek's query:- >How are small clubs going to cope? Previously the creation of the AEF books has encouraged some clubs to consider the effort-in vs results-out of flying TIFs (another archaic term), and some small clubs decline passenger enquiries saving themselves insurances, rostering, fleet and notional billing administration imposts. When a mandatory AOC with processes and fees comes, this will encourage some small clubs to consider foregoing flying training. And thereby also save the club the pressures of revalidation requirements, insurance requirements, which each also become more demanding over time. There may also be a view that only 'proper' larger clubs and training organisations should be doing flying training anyway. There may be a view that only wealthy people should be permitted to aspire to become glider pilots anyway. The only pity is the decline in glider pilot numbers which is proportional to the increasing number of 'controlling' beauracracies, duplicate regulations from each, and their billings. -- Emilis Prelgauskas B.ARCH ARAIA [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list. * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.
