I must admit to being a tad underwhelmed. I was hoping for some more
fundamental changes in return for putting the current GFA Board against
the wall.
One minor problem with democracy is that no matter who you vote for (or
how), you end up electing a politician. Perhaps Mike Borgelt is right
to have chosen a completely undemocratic regulator.
Cheers
Tim
Geoff Kidd wrote:
Mark Newton wrote:
Sounds like much ado about process, and precious little consideration being given to outcomes.
Lets postulate that GFA is overcome by electoral nirvana, and the voting system is reformed to complete perfection.
What different decisions that affect real pilots would you see the board making that they wouldn't make under the current electoral system?
I'd like to have a crack at answering that Mark.
Now I appreciate that this is supposition, however based on what I have observed of the manner in which an equivalent sport aviation controlling
body has acted proactively on issues effecting its members, and also having
seen them raised in this list, I believe a less stodgy and more
attentive organisation would have been driven by its proactive and switched on
(truely) member elected Board to:
1 Lobby for and move to biennial flight reviews in line with most or all equivalent bodies in Australia.
This might be done with an understanding that Clubs or hirers of aircraft may require annual or more flight check reviews for those hiring or
using their aircraft.
2 Lobby for and move to a system that does not require dual signatures for
rigging of modern sailplanes fitted with automatic & foolproof
control attachment systems.
I know with mine that it is impossible to connect the controls incorrectly ......... and then I still check them the same way that I do with my
powered aircraft ..... so why should the rigging of a modern sailplane be
considerd so fraught? Is it because the GFA still considers modern
rigging requirements to be what they were in 1950?
3 Establish an addition & proactive consultative regime to obtain feedback from members on general matters and from the competition
pilots on competition rules issues.
If all of the above is being done, perhaps a board that truely reflects the grass roots members would move to see that these issues are
being progressed better.
Can anyone think of any more?
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
