On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:49:48PM +1000, John Giddy wrote:
> I agree, Christopher, that is the *present* situation.
> However the proposal from CASA seemed to require an AOC to
> do any training for hire or reward.
> (i.e."commercial training") It comes down to what is meant
> by "commercial training". The fact that the student pays
> for the launch and hire of the glider (either at the time,
> or via an "annual flying fee") could be construed as a
> "commercial operation" by a suitably bureaucratic regulator.
On the other hand, the fact that they're paying for the hire of the
glider and the launch, rather than the actual training, would seem
to work as a counter-argument.
If that rule could be construed to be targetting anyone, I'd suggest
that it's aiming at those clubs which charge a premium for training
(such that the *training* part of the operation is for hire or
reward).
- mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried an internal modem, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton
----- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 ------------- Fax: +61-8-82231777 -----
--
* 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.
