mark king wrote:
This gets back to what the role of the GFA is. In my view the obsession with being the "regulator" and keeping CASA at bay has been at the expense of what GFA should be doing which is getting out there and developing gliding on the ground. Is the USA system of the government through the FAA regulating gliding any more onerous then the system we have here with the GFA regulating gliding? GFA have to get CASA approval for their regs anyway don't they?
I think you are very much on the mark here. For a view on what the exec thinks is the right split in activity, take a look at the business plan - heaps of detail on the regulatory side and very little detail at all on everything else. (Perhaps I should say "thought" as the business plan is currently being reviewed).
I am not advocating we adopt the US regulatory system for gliding, but the SSA knows that it has to do worthwhile things for its members or they simply won't join. I wonder how many members the GFA would have under such circumstances in the current state of things?
-- Robert Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] +61 (0)438 385 533 http://www.hart.wattle.id.au _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
