To quote Groucho Marx: "I would not join any club that would be willing to have me as a member".

Cheers

/Tim Shirley/

/tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare/

On 3/09/2014 2:48 PM, Mike Borgelt wrote:
So only 23 years after the Gawler Gliding Club was formed the GFA gets around to enabling such clubs? So why should people who want to do this have any kind of club at all? Why not the scenario put forth by Al Borowski?

How about a club of ONE member?

It is hardly a radical concept as it is exactly what is done in the RAAus. There are RAAus members and they MAY form clubs. They aren't forced to.There are also commercially run flying schools and privately run airfields which provide a runway and hangarage.
I'm not aware that anyone in RAAus finds this a problem at all.

Mike




At 02:22 PM 3/09/2014, you wrote:
Hi all,

I think that the last person to have any interest in naked emperors was named Josephine, before this thread exposed a whole new concept in glider pilot fetishes.

But I digress.

At its recent meeting in Adelaide, I understand that the GFA Board approved a change that will allow non-training clubs to form under the GFA system.

This will mean (as I understand it) that a group of suitably qualified members can form a club that has no CFI, no 2 seater and no training operation.Â

The qualification requirement would be a GPC for each member.

Pilots would still be responsible individually for getting their annual check (somewhere else, obviously) and maintaining their medical status.

I don't know any other details, so no point in asking. But I do know it happened. I expect the official announcement won't be far away.

Go for it, guys.  And girls.

Disclaimer 1: I hold no official position in the GFA apart from looking after some IT systems. This is, therefore, not an official statement of any kind and may be complete bollocks.

Disclaimer 2: No crickets were harmed in the writing or sending of this email. A large number of electrons, however, were seriously inconvenienced.

Cheers

/Tim Shirley
/
/tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare
/On 3/09/2014 1:10 PM, Ron Sanders wrote:

If I had a license for gliding just like my PPL I would probably
(most
likely) still join a club. I still like talking gliding at the end of
the day, I still like comparing cross-country flights at the end of
the day.

At the end of the day, I still don't like being beholden to the duty
pilot or the day instructor, when I am fitting in, just going about my
business and enjoying the day.

Nobody forces instructors to do what they do, so they must get some
kind of reward out of it.

Ron

On 3 September 2014 10:35, Robert Izatt

<thebunyipboo...@gmail.com>  <mailto:thebunyipboo...@gmail.com>  wrote:

The salient point in Mike's comment is the GA Instructor/commercial
pilot
spends the cash or bums hours to get his rating because there is an
income
stream at the end - he/she hopes. But so does the swim coach at your
local
State School. Long gone are the days when any sort of quality coach or
instructor was a pure volunteer. Join a yacht club (similar
infrastructure
etc) and the sailing instructor and the club will give you a bill for
her
time and you are happy because you got value for your money.
Gliding instructors do spend big dollars getting a ticket and then
volunteer
a full day, drive 250kms at their own expense, on 40 degree days only to
be
told by some snot nose Treasurer, who couldn't find his way 10kms from
home
without a GPS and thinks that's OK, that instructors don't work hard
enough
for the club.
Club's are good things but this whole discussion revolves around an
antiquated volunteer system. Club's need volunteers to function but
gliding
holds up its most valuable resource - knowledge, skill and experience -
and
says or rather boasts that it has no dollar value and we all know the
world
ain't like that Toto.
Rob Izatt

On 03/09/2014, at 10:49 AM, Mike Borgelt wrote:


Ullrich,


  Rob Izatt is correct.

"when operating independently" is the catch phrase.

Don't forget also that an L2 independent operator rating can fail to be
renewed by a club at a whim. If you don't believe that this can't happen
due to personal feuds and vendettas or political differences I think you
are
naive. I know of one club where nearly half the membership was grounded
and
left the club because they had the temerity to call a special general
meeting to get the club to buy its own tug so that the club would own a
launch means  which it owned instead relying on tugs owned by a
syndicate of
the old guard which were only intermittently available and were
restricting
flying. The old guard called up people they knew whose membership had
lapsed
years ago, signed thm up with a current year's subs and won the vote by
3
votes whereupon the losers were grounded by the club.

To get any kind of instructor rating in power you need a commercial
licence
(at least 150 maybe 200 hours or so depending how and where you do it)
and a
proper instructor course which involves something like 30 to 40 hours of
flying and a similar amount of ground instruction. Don't hold me to that
as
it was a while ago at the aero club where a couple of blokes were going
through that. I'm sure the requirements haven't decreased. Seems a
reasonable thing to me.

When you talk of discouraging people by raising the instructor hours
required the question arises - what problem are we trying to solve with
the
gliding instruction system? Are we trying to provide free flying for
instructors at the students' expense? If so, the system is successful
albeit
at a fairly horrendous cost in dead and injured students and large
numbers
of discouraged would glider pilots. If we are trying to turn out
competent
glider pilots I'd say the system is very inefficient.

The pity is that just about everyone (including I'm sure the people who
own
the private "non profit" organisation known as the GFA)*
recognises that
gliding is in a fragile state but nobody with the ability to do anything
about this wants to change anything about the way business is done.

* Mark is wrong about one thing in his other wise excellent post - the
GFA
is not membership based. Take a look at how to get on the Board. You
need
nomination by existing Board members. The Board (membership by
invitation
only) are the effective owners of the GFA and there is NOTHING you or
even
all the rest of the membership can do about it. The GFA can continue to
exist without any members other than those on the board.

Which, Ron, is why all you are hearing from the direction of Christopher
Thorpe is the sound of crickets.

Mike




Mike, you are probably referring to the L1 IO rating (which in my
opinion
should be abolished -- why should anyone be responsible for my flyying
unless
I am in training).

The current MOSP says:
âEURoe13.2 LEVEL 2 âEUR~UNRESTRICTEDâEUR^(TM) INDEPENDENT OPERATOR
Unlike the Level 1 Independent Operator authority, where club
responsibility
of independent operations is of primary importance, holders of Level 2
Independent Operator authority are solely responsible for all aspects of
their operations when operating independently. This includes airways
clearances, tower clearances, SAR notification and accident/incident
reporting.âEUR?

To my knowledge it has been like that for many years.

I agree with you that the minimum hours for instructor ratings seem low
but
in practice it requires a lot more hours to gain the abilities and
convince
the CFIs and L3 instructors to give you an L1 let alone L2 rating. What
should the minimum be in your opinion? No matter where you set that it
will
not be enough for some and increasingly discouraging for others the
higher
that number is.

On the rest, including independent control checks for IOs, IâEUR^(TM)m also
with you
although I would choose less GFA-bashing words.

Ulrich

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: Tuesday, 2 September 2014 11:07
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Competition licenses - the emperor has no
clothes

At 11:02 AM 2/09/2014, you wrote:

Let's stick to the facts please. A Level 2 Independent Operators Rating
does
that and with less bureaucracy and overregulation than "in other
parts of
the world". It is also a product of the GFA - let's acknowledge
that.



No, you are still under an instructor if one is present, last time I
looked.

200 hours? You can get a PPL for powered aircraft in 60 to 70 hours from
scratch.

You get a bi annual and a medical every two years. Apart from that you
are
completely free to go wherever and whenever you like with as many people
as
fit in the aircraft.





A shame really that the GPL was not based on the L2 IO rating, perhaps
with
the bar lowered a little (e.g. reducing the 200hrs requirement - the
100hrs
for an L2 instructors rating seem to be sufficient to allow the holder to
be
responsible for OTHER peoples flying). At least we would not have the
current inconsistencies. I cannot imagine that negotiations with CASA
would
have been any harder on that basis.



I consider giving anyone an instructor's rating of any sort with 100
hours
an act of gross irresponsibility. I wouldn't let anyone I cared about
learn
to fly with somebody like that.



It will be interesting to see whether the first GPL holder rocking up
somewhere in Europe will be allowed to fly without more hassles than
European license holders.



Maybe EASA will find out the GPL doesn't work back home. As I said
before
the ICAO deal is that you get the foreign licence on the fact that it is
valid at home in your own country.

The GFA negotiation with CASA was just a cosy deal to maintain the GFA
monopoly on gliding in Australia. "Umbrella" my arse, it is a
boot heel.

Mike





Ulrich -----Original Message----- 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
Future
Aviation Sent: Tuesday, 2 September 2014 07:08 To: 'Discussion of issues
relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring]
Competition
licenses - the emperor has no clothes
Hi Simon
You have raised a very valid point here!
I have often wondered why one can have all the qualifications in the
world
but cannot operate a glider in Australia independently and without
instructor oversight. As far as I know Australia is the only first world
country that denies their glider pilots privileges that power pilots,
parachutists, balloonists or other aviators rightly take for granted.
Over the years I have discussed this issue with several GFA officials but
I
have never been given any reason as to why the current state of affairs
exists. Gliding operations based on instructor oversight has now been
standard GFA procedure for many decades. Therefore it is quite
understandable that allowing a competent and responsible glider pilot to
operate without oversight has become a bit too foreign to even
contemplate.
I'm the first to acknowledge that not everyone aspires to independent
operations (or even a licence) and I understand that they can continue
to
fly as usual. However, I firmly believe that denying suitably qualified
glider pilots the right to operate without interference by others is
partly
to blame for our current woes. When our newcomers realise that they will
always be treated as second class aviators we can't blame them when they
vote with their feet.
Isn't it time that suitably qualified glider pilots are treated just
like
glider pilots in other parts of the world? As long as our current system
denies responsibly acting glider pilots fully independent operations many
of
them will find less restrictive and more rewarding aviation activities -
far
too many, if you ask me.
Simon, can you (and other members of this newsgroup) let me in on your
thinking, please?
Kind regards   Bernard


-----Original Message----- 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
Simon
Hackett Sent: Monday, 1 September 2014 2:39 PM To: Discussion of issues
relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Competition
licenses - the emperor has no clothes
Just want to call out one other thing from the thread that I have just
had
confirmed separately.
The Australian CASA Glider Pilot License doesn't allow a pilot to fly a
Glider in Australia.
SRSLY?
Its 2014. Why can't we live in a place where the GFA issues (or
authorises)
Glider Pilot Licenses for Australian glider pilots to fly Australian
Gliders
with (including ... in Australia)?
I'm not bothered about an underlying requirement to be a GFA member in
good
standing (or to be separately authorised by CASA) if that floats the
GFA's
boat.
Rather, I'm talking about the crazy notion that the outcome of doing
everything right in the GFA system isn't an outcome where one can be a
pilot
licensed to fly a glider with a license to fly a glider called a Glider
Pilot License - and where such a thing now exists but it doesn't
actually
work in the country of issue.
I actually *have* a US glider license of precisely that form (a US
pilots
license with 'Glider' as an endorsement on it). I don't see that
cramping
the style of glider pilots in the USA. Quite the opposite, actually.
I'm not really interested in how we got precisely here.
I'm interested in what possible reason the GFA would have, today, to
*not*
to support the notion of a Glider Pilot License as something routinely
issued to Australians to let them fly gliders in Australia - and for that
to
be the thing that people get issued with routinely (when, for instance,
they
achieve Silver C standard).
Is there actually a valid reason for this state of affairs (as opposed
to
'thats just not how we roll, son...') why this isn't the case - or why
it
shouldn't become the case?
In other words, if I have a CASA issued Glider Pilot License, what,
precisely, makes it unable to be sufficient to be permitted to fly a
glider
here (assuming one has a valid and current flight review)?
I apologise for not having (yet) dug up the shiny new 1st
September-onward
regulations that govern the Glider Pilot License (and as already noted,
CASA
haven't yet actually published the application form on their web site
either). But do those legally engaged regulations actually say that you
can't use a Glider Pilot License to... fly a glider with?
Coming at this cold, honestly, this reads like a Monty Python script :)
Regards, Simon

_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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  <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  <mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>
To check or change subscription details, visit:

http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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 <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 5784overseas: 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

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to