Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Competition licenses - the emperor has no clothes
(Mike Borgelt)
2. Re: Competition licenses - the emperor has no clothes
(Mike Borgelt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:35:53 +1000
From: Mike Borgelt <mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Competition licenses - the emperor has no
clothes
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>
Message-ID: <83067c$5qe...@ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
At 01:24 PM 3/09/2014, you wrote:
>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
It is worse than that. The instructor can ground you for any reason
whatsoever. Been there, done that, for writing to the club committee
about an "insurance" levy they wanted to impose during the membership
year. I was concerned that calling it "insurance" would compromise my
own glider insurance and pointed out that the club could, under their
Constitution strike a membership levy at any time, just don't call it
"insurance". I heard no more.
Next time I turned up to fly I was very rudely told by the paid club
employee "piss off we don't need your kind around here". Charming. I
fronted a committee member about this to be told "oh, but we wrote
you a letter about this. It must have got lost in the mail". Lying bastard.
I know Mark has another GFA/Club horror story too from the more recent past.
We have the law of the land. CASA is charged by parliament with
making regulations under the Civil Aviation Act to regulate what is
done in civil aviation. Their primary duty to the people
of Australia is to protect people on the ground from having
aeroplanes fall on them and secondarily to protect people why fly
because they wish to be transported from A to B and air is the most
reasonable means for them to do so. I don't have any problem with
that concept, it is the execution that falls down in the corrupt
cesspool of Australian aviation regulation (ask Kingsford Smith and
numerous others over the years).
I don't even have a problem with the GFA being allowed to regulate
how its members operate under a CASA delegation. I do have a problem
with CASA and GFA having a cosy little arrangement where GFA has an
absolute MONOPOLY and is allowed to prevent any possible competition,
particularly when CASA and the Minister have been deliberately
mislead by GFA officials.
I've written about the 2003 CASA Recreational Licence discussion
paper before. Meertens and Hall and Middleton from RAAus went to the
Minister (John Anderson) and had the inclusion of gliding and
ultralights excised whereupon there wasn't much point in it anymore
and the whole thing died. If instead the proposal had been supported
we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Back in the mid 1990s CAO 95.4 actually made it plain that the
exemption from the regulations regarding licensing was only there for
those who didn't hold a PPL or higher flight crew licence. There was
also none of the nonsense that a glider maintenance release was only
valid when the glider was flown by a paid up GFA member. An aircraft
is either airworthy or not. It can't tell who is flying it. You
could even operate a glider without a licence if you wrote the
Secretary of DoT and told them you would operate to GFA standards.
After 2003 GFA, in collusion with CASA employees, gradually re wrote
95.4 until we have the current situation. Until 2009 they actually
pretended that there would be a parallel path. They lied yet again,
aided by the appointment of the now thankfully departed McCormick and
with the acquiescence of the GFA Board including Anita Taylor.
Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20140903/d9b96bd6/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:48:57 +1000
From: Mike Borgelt <mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Competition licenses - the emperor has no
clothes
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>
Message-ID: <83067c$5qe...@ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
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.?
>
>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 ?? fare c' ?? 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
>><mailto:thebunyipboo...@gmail.com><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:
>>>???13.2 LEVEL 2 ???UNRESTRICTED??? 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.???
>>>
>>>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, I???m also with you
>>>although I would choose less GFA-bashing words.
>>>
>>>Ulrich
>>>
>>>From:
>>><mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soaring-b
o un...@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:
>>><mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soaring-b
o un...@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:
>>><mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soaring-b
o un...@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
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>>_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>>_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>><http://www.borgeltinstruments.com>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
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>><http://www.borgeltinstruments.com>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
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Aus-soaring mailing list
>>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.int
e rnode.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
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Aus-soaring mailing list
>><mailto:Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net>aus-soar...@lists.inte
r node.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
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
Borgelt Instruments - design & manufacture of
quality soaring instrumentation since 1978
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20140903/548ca450/attachment.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
End of Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 132, Issue 32
********************************************
