RE: [aus-soaring] RPL results

[Stuart & Kerri Ferguson]

Reading between the lines it appears to me that many of those that oppose the licence and the associated medical may be more concerned that they may not pass the medical, therefore loosing their flying privileges.    The AUF has many members who have held Class 2 and Class 1 medicals but for some reason due to their life style OR no fault of their own  have failed the CASA medical standards. The AUF medical standard is "sign a declaration to the effect that their health standard is equivalent to that required for the issue of a private motor vehicle drivers licence in Australia" While there are accidents in ultralight aircraft, I do not know of any that have been attributed to the health of the pilot. AUF flight instructors require a "Medical Statement" that they would pass a Class 2 (PPL) medical, apart from your local DAME who would be able to issue such a statement?     Is gliding much different?  No, except members who are flying members of the public.   The reality is that most of the members of the GFA have above average intelligence, they must to hold down jobs that provide them with the disposable income to be able to afford to take part. For those who join and don't meet that standard, our club system of training and operational supervision soon weeds them out.  Those who are left are normally responsible people who would not risk a flight if they were not feeling up to it. Despite our public image, we are really a group of low risk takers.      Should there be a medical standard, yes I believe so, but the current standard as proven to be more than adequate. However members should review their medical on  a routine basis, our health does change, and many a CASA medical has picked up a small problem before it became a big one. As I have grown older I have found   I need to exercise more to maintain my fitness to retain my Class One medical. This level of fitness driven by my aviation requirements have some very positive effects on other parts of my life.   Do we need a Licence?  No -  A licence is an administrative tool, however we do need a mechanism to recognise qualification and achievement, and we have that. Some people outside the GFA have difficulty understanding a system where their is no licence to recognise qualification, their thought process being imprisoned by their experience, people need licences to drive things legally, cars, boat, aircraft, trains etc etc, so why not gliders???   Those with tug ratting; how many times have you been asked my new members, how can I qualify to fly the tug? Until explained to them, they have no understanding that it is a different administrative "licensing" process.   If we are pushed down the road of a licence we (in reality the people who represent out interests) need to be part of that process. Problem will be, apart from the medical issue, a struggle over who has the power of administration, GFA for those other guys!!!  Which way do you think our representatives will go??   SDF                                 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ronald E Baker Sent: Friday, 21 June 2002 22:57 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [aus-soaring] RPL results Results at 11pm EST 6 no, 29 yes, for a RPL. This may only represent around 1.5% of total GFA membership but it does illustrate the views of those who have responded. There is a dictum "If you cannot say something nice, say nothing! If however you must say something, please make it constructive. So to the several who have insulted me, please don't use aus-soaring, write to me direct.  Cheers, Ron Baker. PS Sorry the results are a rather late tonight, I had a dinner date with a young lady.