On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 10:47:28AM +1000, Peter Rundle wrote:
> The suggestion by Mark that the GFA should make a counter licence
> proposal is a bad idea. One of the major benefits of the RPL/PPL is
> that it is a single licence with ratings which would allow it's
> holder to transfer some of their flight experience to reduce the
> cost of getting other ratings. The idea of a GFA alternate
> licence will not have any of these benefits, the idea of training
> glider pilots to fly the tug for example, the idea that people
> wishing to learn to fly might see the $160/hr minimum
> charge by GA as being too high and realise that learning to fly at maybe
> $90/hr in a motor glider and then finishing at $160 to get their
> GA is a better path as they still get an RPL/PPL but with both
> ratings at less cost. None of these benefits would be possble with a
> GFA alternative licence.
That's not entirely true - we have a system at the moment which permits
transfer of flight experience in gliders to the GA system (if you
have a Silver badge you can count glider hours during your PPL training).
I know several PPL holders which saved thousands of dollars by doing
exactly this. If it's possible with the present GFA alternate system
then there's no rational reason why it couldn't continue to be possible
in the New World Order.
What you say about training people to fly the tug is probably true --
But that isn't the beef that most of the people who care about this
have with the present GFA system, is it?
I don't see my counter proposal as a "bad idea". I acknowledge that
it doesn't carry all the benefits of the RPL proposal, but it goes a
good way towards addressing the concerns which most of the people I've
heard debating the issue seem to care about. It's a compromise.
[ any outcome here will be a compromise, including the RPL: You can
bet your arse that the RPL will have some aspects which are very,
very bad for the gliding movement, and that it isn't a panacea by
any stretch of the imagination - see Simon's recent message for an
example, and think about how my alternate proposal would actually
keep pilots in the GFA system, and hence be more likely to keep
them in a club environment too ]
The GFA has historically had a monopoly on glider regulation. It is
true that it's possible to go outside the GFA system (Cathy Conway
used to work with a pilot who resigned from the GFA and received CASA
approval to continue to fly gliders), but generally speaking the
regulatory overhead involved in doing that is so onerous that nobody
bothers - it's easier to work within the GFA system, even if parts of
it are clunky or outdated.
But that means GFA's monopoly is purely at the indulgence of the market.
If it becomes easier to work outside the GFA system than within the
GFA system (either because the GFA system becomes unworkable or because
the GA system changes for the better) then that market-imposed monopoly
will disappear.
There is a proposal on the table at the moment which makes the GA system
very easy to work with. We've seen that there is a significant number
of pilots who approve of that proposal, so GFA is faced with the very
real danger of (permanently) losing its monopoly position due to a
change in the marketplace.
The only rational response to that is to make whatever changes are
necessary to continue to ensure that operating within the GFA system is
less onerous and more beneficial than operating in the GA realm for
*most* pilots.
At a fundamental level, very little is changing here. As far as the GFA
is concerned, the big difference between a pre-RPL world and a post-RPL
world is a simple difference in the market dynamic (in that it'll be
easier to choose a non-GFA regulatory scheme than it is now). The way
the GFA chooses to adapt to that new market dynamic is probably the single
most important decision it has been asked to make in recent times; that
one decision will either doom it to irrelevence or ensure its long-term
survival.
- 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.
