And the dichotomous ironies continue…. Justification for self-regulation/administration and lowered medical standards for gliders have been won using the low mass, low speed and low passenger capacity arguments.
Perversely, suggest that a glider pilot should be able to be responsible for his or her own safety, making their own determination of weather, location, ATC and SAR requirements and suddenly the aforementioned arguments are happily forgotten. So you have a private pilot (powered) operating his personal PCXII (4,740kg, 440kts, 6POB) operating unsupervised into the flight levels in all weather conditions and responsible for his/her own destiny. But should that same pilot trailer his LS4 (650kg, 120kts, 1POB) down to the local gliderport he’s only permitted to fly at the pleasure of a duty instructor. To avoid ambiguity: I have no problem the GFA administering gliding operations in Australia. I have no problem with the GFA setting a standard of competency via the GPC which results in an ICAO compliant licence (GPL) to aid licence recognition overseas. I do however, have a problem with having excessive oversight forced upon me and having privileges I enjoy from powered qualifications in far more complex aircraft taken from me for daring to enjoy unpowered flight. Casey Lewis On 2 Sep 2014, at 13:50 , [email protected] wrote: > From: DMcD > Please? fully licensed SAILPLANE pilots! > > Hang glider and paraglider pilots having passed the novice stage can > turn up at a take off, assess the weather and if they consider > conditions suitable, launch. > It's almost as if the hardware is more valuable than the software? a > hang over from the days of small clubs and wooden gliders when a > damaged glider might shut the club down for months or for ever.
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
