Mike,
As it happens CAD has responded on the gfaforum :- there is
no extra requirement for a Form 2 pack - so hence no extra cost.
The gfaforum has proved very successful in extracting an
answer from the GFA. The answer was informative and did not come with any
"rebuttal/belittlement/denigration of the originator. "
From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
<mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net>
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Mike
Borgelt
Sent: Monday, 3 August 2015 8:19 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
<aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
<mailto:aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net> >
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] New MOSP 3 250hr max Form 2 life
It is pretty obviously just another way of raising money. If the high use
gliders are getting 100 hour/3 month inspections there is obviously no
safety issue here. GFA just wants to charge for another Form 2 pack.
It is just like the brilliant tug pilot tax. Forcing tug pilots to belong
to GFA is just another dumb move. The claim CASA didn't want to worry about
tow ratings doesn't ring true. They still need to issue them for banner
towing. Simplifying the tow rating or eliminating it by just
requiring a proper briefing might actually help the sport.
I've had lots of launches behind pilots who weren't GFA members. At Beverley
in the 1970s Dave Woodward organised not just a towplane but a standby one
that could be called on complete with pilot. There have been times at
contests when ag planes complete with pilots
have been hired. Forcing GFA membership on the pilots will in many cases
either result in the pilots saying "screw that!" when required to join the
GFA or the club/contest organisers will have to buy a membership for each.
Hence the "tax".
Unfortunately there is nothing that anyone can do about either as the GFA
Board own the organisation and aren't subject to either adult supervision or
the discipline of elections by the "members".
As for the GFA chat forum, why would anyone bother? Anything regarded as
controversial by the Board will not see the light of day or if it does come
complete with rebuttal/belittlement/denigration of the originator.
Mike
At 08:11 PM 30/07/2015, you wrote:
In the most recent draft of MOSP 3 (19 June 2015), a new requirement has
been added in by the GFA. A form 2 now lasts only for the lesser of 250
hours, or 12 months (Section 11.3.2). Particularly for clubs with high use
two seaters, this is an extremely expensive burden. For example, at Southern
Cross, this means we'll be almost doubling our Form 2 inspections across the
fleet in any given 12 month period. Our DG1000 will be probably subject to 3
most years.
Is anyone aware of the rationale behind this change? Considering most of
these high use gliders are already subject to 100hrly and/or 3 month
inspections, it seems like an extremely expensive exercise that is will not
make us any safer. These gliders have been operating for years or decades
with a single yearly main checkup.
--
Justin Couch http://www.vlc.com.au/
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
<mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Borgelt Instruments - design & manufacture of quality soaring
instrumentation since 1978
www.borgeltinstruments.com <http://www.borgeltinstruments.com/>
tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784
mob: 042835 5784 : int+61-42835 5784
P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
