From: "Geoff Kidd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in
Australia."<[email protected]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in
Australia."<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS 2005
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:46:44 +1100
Graeme
Your comments & accusations are now more serious & nasty so I am
compelled to reply.
1 We all have a right to raise issues here. And while I am not as
experienced or jaded as your earlier post makes you appear,you are not
(yet) the thought police.
You are also misguided or wrong as set out below.
2 You said "Yes, you can. An email to this news groups is not
volunteering, it's just grandstanding. Nobody in the GFA has heard from
you."
And you said "If YOU want it fixed, in a voluntary organisation, you
need to do it yourself. But writing to this list is just (as I said)
grandstanding. If you're serious, you have to talk to the responsible
people in the GFA - privately."
Where do you get your info from before you pen this attack? I made a
written submission to the GFA Board on this issue, which was considered at
their last meeting, in which I volunteered to get involved if that would
assist them. Discussions have been ongoing since that time with responsible
people in the GFA and they are being very professional and reasonable about
all of the issues.
3 There is a difference between "attacking the GFA" as you say, and
urging for a degree of change on a couple of issues, which is what I think
I have done.
Go back and re-read the Flarm stuff again. It commenced about July 4th
last (before Nigel put OzFlarm on the market) with the words ..... if the
spectrum is available .."the GFA should consider lobbying/acting to ensure
that the system is picked up for OZ" ........... Please tell me how that or
anything else I have posted is attacking of the GFA. It is good that the
GFA has supported this development, but it has been the competition and
other interested pilots who have voted with the cheque books which will
make it a success.
Ditto with this Accident & Incident Reporting stuff. All I have ever
done here and in the submissions direct to the GFA, and to others, is urge
them to consider more expansive reporting of Accidents and Incidents to the
membership.
4 I also confess ..................... I made a written submission
last year to the GFA's M&D committee urging them to consider a couple of
different marketing initiatives. I guess you'll get up me about that as an
attack on the GFA too.
5 Please give me a quote of where I've "attacked" the GFA.
6 Your said ..."But you'll have to hang around aviation a bit longer
before you really understand the wisdom of it". It is certainly true that I
am relatively new to the sport, but I'm a paid up member and surely have
the right to have a say on matters that I think are important to the
progress and future of the sport ......... and those issues are
Flarm/proximity warnings, Safety Reporting and Marketing, not necessarily
in that order.
7 But I have to say that I'm getting a little tired of this "We are too
busy to do a good job on Safety as we are just volunteers" waffle that you
espoused in your first response. But I hasten to add that your attitude to
this hasn't raised itself from the real people that I have spoken to in the
leadership at the GFA.
8 There seems to be a "thing" in this sport that some, like you, attack
the man whenever they make a suggestion or put a case that you don't like.
Why can't you play the ball and not the man?
Geoff
----- Original Message -----
From: Graeme Cant
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS 2005
>From: "Geoff Kidd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>G'day Graeme,
>
> That's a good spray. Do you feel better now?
Yes, I do, thank you.
>
> Herewith a couple of replies:
>
> "Your reason is plain, vulgar curiosity" - That is too easy to say
in
>order to dismiss this issue. I don't believe you are right. I think it
>would help our pilots and have given the result of a survey on this in
the
>past where other have agreed.
That only shows how widespread is the interest in a good piece of
gossip. I
gave several arguments to back my claim that all you're after is crash
comics but you seem to have ignored the hard bits.
>
> "YOU WANT IT. YOU DO IT!!" - Have volunteered to help. Can't do
more
>than that.
Yes, you can. An email to this news groups is not volunteering, it's
just
grandstanding. Nobody in the GFA has heard from you.
> "YOU WANT IT. YOU DO IT." - I heard you the 1st time.
Actually, on this list it's about the tenth time. It's my hobby horse.
You
haven't heard it earlier so I thought I should raise my voice a little.
Besides it's a serious comment. YOU see this as a problem. I don't and
a
lot of other people don't. If YOU want it fixed, in a voluntary
organisation, you need to do it yourself. But writing to this list is
just
(as I said) grandstanding. If you're serious, you have to talk to the
responsible people in the GFA - privately.
>
> "If more near misses were reported and publicised as you
apparently
>wish ......" - I just asked a question. Your logic is understood -
don't
>report them so CASA won't know. That's good stuff.
Yes, it is. But you'll have to hang around aviation a bit longer before
you
really understand the wisdom of it. It was a bit extreme but I plead
provocation.
If you haven't reported an Airmiss yourself, and I haven't, that's
because
we didn't have them. In fact, if only two reports were made, only two
occurred. If you think more occurred, who had them? I put it that way
because you aren't interested in the facts, only in vivid stories to
publish. Research like that done elsewhere on radar traces - where
neither
pilot knew what happened - won't satisfy you. You're after reports.
Tabloid newspaper stuff. Crash comics.
> "Weren't we having a discussion about why people leave gliding?" -
>Can't you handle more than one topic? Or surely you aren't hinting that
my
>post might cause others to leave the sport. If the latter is your
position
>you have a bit of a problem, so keep taking the pills.
I know it's unbelievable but, yes. And I don't think I have the
problem. I
don't think I'm unique in finding the way you seem to regularly attack
the
GFA as distasteful. You want to do something, do it and more power to
you.
You want to attack people or expect other people to dedicate their lives
to
your private enthusiasms, I'll attack you. Even with Flarm you kept
complaining about the GFA's lack of activity. As it turns out, the GFA
have
been in the project for some time and it's flourishing. Back off the
GFA.
>Best personal regards Geoff
...And to you too,
Graeme Cant
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Graeme Cant
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:32 AM
> Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS 2005
>
>
> >From: "Geoff Kidd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > However I would still recommend and lobby for the GFA to
further
> >expand on many or all of those, to allow members to gain a further
> >appreciation of the circumstances of each or most of them. The
reason
>being
> >that the membership can learn from the mistakes of others and will
give
> >actual factual data more weight.
>
> No. Your reason is plain, vulgar curiosity.
>
> > What use is it to new and older members to read that
description
>from
> >29.12.04 or the description of the accident on 13 May 2005 which
states
> >"Loss of control while landing"? Other than the motherhood lesson
>"Don't
> >lose control while landing" & "Don't let your wingtip touch the
ground
> >while turning onto final".
> >
> > More details are surely (or sorely) needed, and would benefit
all
> >members. If the reason for this brevity should be that the GFA
don't
>have
> >more details, then the reporting system needs to be expanded.
>
> Well, I for one won't be joining in that expansion. Gliding is not
my
>whole
> life and I spend more than enough time doing administrative stuff
that
>other
> people think is needed but which benfits neither gliding as a whole
or
>my
> club. Even where there is some benefit, the time required to
collect
>data
> is grossly out of proportion to the benefit gained.
>
> In the case of accident and incident reporting, I believe large
slabs of
> many other people's time would be used largely for your personal
> titillation. You just want a crash comic gossip column.
>
> YOU WANT IT. YOU DO IT!!
>
> Nobody gets paid for this stuff. I know of NO RTO/Ops who has the
time
>to
> do it. I know of nobody with genuine qualifications in the area
(and I
>know
> quite a number) who has the time or inclination to do it. Do you
have
>the
> faintest idea how many man-days work are involved in investigating
the
>cause
> of even a "simple" accident if the report is to have any sort of
> credibility? That's why I say all you want is crash comics. The
GFA
>hasn't
> anywhere near the resources to produce anything more respectable.
>
> You began by saying you would "...lobby for the GFA to...". If you
have
>the
> energy to lobby, you have the time and energy to do the reporting
>yourself.
>
> YOU WANT IT. YOU DO IT.
>
> Send out the forms to all the clubs. Email them every month to make
>sure
> they know they should be sending in reports. Keep up the address
>changes of
> secretaries so the emails don't go astray. Collate all the reports
you
>get
> and when you know of incidents you didn't get a report on, phone
them
>and
> castigate them for laziness! Phone them again two weeks later when
>they've
> ignored you. After you've read the reports, send back to the clubs
for
>more
> information the ones that said "wingtip hit ground in turn onto
final"
>and
> make them smarten up their reporting and amplify the cause. When
(if)
>you
> get some better reports back, prepare all the reports for
publication
>and
> then send them to the magazine on time. Remember it's important
that
>all
> this is timely. We don't want 3 month old stuff published. Then do
it
>all
> again. Do it for 10 or 20 years because you think it's important
and
>nobody
> would take it off you after the 2 years it took you to get sick of
doing
>it.
>
> >(2) Am I correct in the reading of these reports of occurrences
>between
> >13 Nov 2004 & 19 Nov 2005 that, perhaps with the exception of the
>"Canopy
> >opening in flight" incident(s) that none of our Accidents or
Incidents
>was
> >due to a structural of other failure of an aircraft?
>
> Yes. Should we abolish Form 2s?
>
> >(3) There are two "Near Miss" incidents that have been reported.
Do
>you
> >think there might actually be more than that?
>
> Yes, I do. Because a fair amount has been published on that precise
>topic
> and that's what the research shows. Why don't you Google a few of
the
> papers, read them, collate them into a form suitable for publishing
in
>SA,
> get the authors' permission for your abridgement of their work, ask
the
>GFA
> for money to pay the copyright fees and then publish a brilliant
article
>in
> SA. I'm sure you've got more in you than just whinging in email
groups.
>
> By the way:
> If more near misses were reported and publicised as you apparently
wish,
>all
> that would happen would be that CASA would drastically curtail our
>operating
> areas (small glider danger areas would be declared in about a dozen
> locations and gliding anywhere else would be prohibited). CASA
would
>not
> accept the risk we pose to other traffic in the way we currently
operate
>if
> they really understood what goes on.
>
> Weren't we having a discussion about why people leave gliding?
>
> Graeme Cant
>
>
> >Regards Geoff
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Aus-soaring mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >To check or change subscription details, visit:
> >http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [email protected]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>_______________________________________________
>Aus-soaring mailing list
>[email protected]
>To check or change subscription details, visit:
>http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
