Maybe I didn't express myself clearly enough so you may have misunderstood. I kind of meant to explicitly exclude the unrelated issues in far fewer words than you kindly provided. Good lessons though.
You have a good point, however, about the log book entries in the GFA system - there is a low threshold against misuse. I'm not sure how that is handled in the GA world but I bet the commercial operators talk amongst each other if there are serious issues with certain candidates. I'll take my leave from this thread now. Ulrich From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Mark Newton Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2014 12:55 To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Competition licenses - the emperor has no clothes On Sep 3, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Ulrich Stauss <usta...@internode.on.net <mailto:usta...@internode.on.net> > wrote: * That is a very 'elastic' phrase (which should be better defined). If you use club equipment or want to fly from a club owned airfield you are of course dependent on their whims. Even the "proper" licensing overseas does not change that. But if you operate at a location where neither the aircraft/equipment nor the airfield are owned by the resident club (and all else including the independent control check is in order) I can't see how it would be *illegal* for you to choose to do so independently against the screams of a red faced club CFI. I'm not saying there wouldn't be ramifications. Whoa, hang on. There are a number of concepts wrapped up in there that are independent from each other. Use of a privately owned airfield: That's not an operational issue, that's a property issue. If the property owner doesn't wish you to use their airfield in the manner you wish, they can demand that you cease and desist and use trespass law to gain satisfaction if you don't. We've had private property laws in our legal system since the Magna Carta, GFA isn't (or shouldn't be) involved. Use of a somebody else's aircraft/equipment: That's also not an operational issue. When you use someone else's aircraft, you enter into a hire agreement with them where you gain access to certain goods and services in exchange for some kind of consideration. Maybe the hirer or their insurer will place conditions on the hire, or maybe not. That's not an operational issue, it's a contract; GFA isn't (or shouldn't be) involved. Separate from all of that is the set of air legislation in Australia, which includes GFA's OpRegs and MOSP by delegation. That legislation provides for obligations on pilots which are utterly indifferent to notions about who owns what. In non-GFA regulatory systems, if you hire an aircraft and violate the terms of your hire, the hirer can refuse to hire to you any more and take their aircraft back. The civil aviation regulator is not involved, you can rush out and hire another aircraft from someone else whenever you like. In the GFA system, if you hire an aircraft and violate the terms of your hire, any instructor can, at their option, write a logbook annotation which grounds you. The grounding takes immediate effect, and applies to all of your flying nationally, including flying in other peoples' aircraft, including in aircraft you actually own yourself. The grounding will probably be maintained until the GFA MOSP's pilot discipline procedures have run their course, which could take months. Because logbook annotations cannot be altered or erased, every club you ever choose to fly with in the future will always be able to see that you've been grounded when they flip through the pages of your logbook. That's what "dependent on their whims" means in the GFA system. - mark
_______________________________________________ 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
