> On 30 Jan 2017, at 18:08, Al Borowski <al.borow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 30/01/2017, Mark Newton <new...@atdot.dotat.org> wrote: >> Why do you want ranks? >> >> - mark > > Because an untrained beginner with 2 hours experience should be given > different privileges and responsibilities to a trained pilot with > 2000? >
But they aren't "ranks." Rank denotes hierarchy. In the ranked GFA world you've asked about, where you've proposed that a qualified pilot sits between a trainee and an instructor, the instructor is a higher "rank" than the trained pilot with 2000 hours. Even if the instructor only has 200 hours. I don't think you get rank in any other non-military form of aviation in Australia. Hierarchy is one of GFA's problems, IMHO. Shouldn't be encouraged. > Under the GFA system an Open license wouldn't exist. You'd need the > blessing of the driving school to continue to drive anywhere. If you > had an accident it would be the responsibility of the driving school. > If you drove somewhere where an existing driving school was located, > you'd suddenly fall under that school's control - even if they had no > idea about your history or personal vehicle. Pretty much. I reckon GFAs systems had military influences after WW2 due to the origins of the founders and initial intake of members. Chain of command, rank, hierarchies of control over subordinates, doctrine issued from HQ with distributed implementation. Authority filtering downwards, responsibility filtering upwards. All very comfortable to 1940s ex-Army Air Force pilots, they'd slot right in. The rest of civil aviation moved on from that. GFA never did. - mark _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.base64.com.au http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
