gt; From: "Peter Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 5:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
>
> > What Brian has written sounds good to me too.
> >
> > However, the one
533940 mobile
Fax +61 (0)3 9830 5345
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Patrick Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
> In my view there has been a
In my view there has been a good deal of horse-sense written about this
subject. In the past I've been a bit cheesed off by the amount of anti-GFA
stuff written on this forum. Perhaps I don't keep myself well enough
informed. When I belong to organisations where people are willing to take
on t
Quoting Peter Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> No wonder our BBL insurance premuims are so high when we have no checks
> in place to monitor instructors medical ability to fly with students.
Peter
Can you REALLY back up this claim ?
My personal thoughts are that gliding has been thrown into the
Well, our Club (CGC) was a Charter holder and have kept on the medicals for
Instructors and AEI's.
PeterS
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [aus-soa
TECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
> Peter and Phil,
>
> Might I suggest that you continue your medical discussions on a 1 to 1
> basis.
>
>
> --
> Brian Wade
>
> Personal Computer Concepts
>
> Uni
>
>Where is the evidence that GP medical certificates which are required at
>the
>moment for instructors and AEI's have let us down?
>
This is incorrect, there are no additional medical requirements/checks for
Instructors other than the Medical declaration that every new GFA member
must sign.
Hi Peter,
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
> Hi Phil,
>
> Where is the evidence that GP medical certifi
In a message dated 13/6/02 5:30:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Will all pilots require a
head scan with contrast in the future? >>
Well, I think I could name some to start a short list!
--
* You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list.
* To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PR
scan with contrast in the future?
PeterS
PS Is your charge at your discretion or set by CASA?
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Rosewarne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
ems.
Phil Rosewarne
From: "Peter Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Recreational Licenses
> What Brian has written sounds good to me too.
>
> However, the one problem
Peter,
Why do you feel that the medical requirements for passenger carrying in a glider
should be less than that for a PPL?
There is no medical requirement for the proposed RPL (unless you wish to fly over
populous areas...)
Presumably from the lack of debate, everyone is happy with the propo
What Brian has written sounds good to me too.
However, the one problem which needs to be opposed by GFA is the
requirement to have DAME (Designated Aviation Medical Examiners) carrying
out the medicals for passenger carrying which is in the proposed licence. I
am a non-DAME medico (family docto
13 matches
Mail list logo
