RAAus non renewals.

[shags_j]

OUt of interest do we know what sort of pilots the board is made up of? Are they majority fast LSA (what terms shoudl we use here)?

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Regarding people unhappy and not renewing membership - Part II

 

Another issue which runs deeper - People don't like change - seems the older you get the more so (you can shoot me now... I'm over 50)

 

RAAus is changing, and the way they do business is too. I went through this in an earlier post regarding RAAus and should their representatives have management training etc.

 

When the organisation was small and young, everyone was a volunteer and there were few rules. There were few enough that most knew each other. Fatalities and accidents were high but AUF fought for advances that made the sport safer (2 seat trainers, higher cruise levels etc). Some look back at this as the golden age - minimum rules, great friendships, lots of innovation and experiementation (and they were in their prime).

 

Then the world moved on - not just aviation - workplace rules, plans, safety, regulation etc. I have pictures from 30 yrs ago with our workforce in singlet & shorts, sandals, no hat, with cigarette. Same workplace now steel capped boots, hard hat with leigonairs flaps, long strides, orange reflective shirts, leather gloves, safety specs, hearing protection, blue, pink & ID cards hanging round the neck, safety site induction or you can't work and the first half hour of every day is spent going through the safety assessment, then the next is record keeping and reporting against key indicators and doing staff communications and assessments.

 

Its not surprising that aviation has gone the same way. By increasing the weight limit in order to improve safety (carry 2 and plenty of fuel etc) it opened the door to more aircraft. The organisation got bigger and it could no longer be run by part time volunteers - paid staff started to arrive. Then the world's love affair with paperwork, safety regulation etc meant more staff, but we also gained more members and aircraft as the RAAus was seen as being less bogged down in this stuff than GA. We are a little to blame for our own success.

 

The way RAAus does business changed too - as a result Natfly is no longer synonymous with Narromine - some are not happy. It hasn't been forgiven for changing from AUF (which rolled off the tongue) to Ah-Ray-Oss (which doesn't).

 

Has the magazine changed? I grabbed the first "old" AUF mag I laid my hands on - Aug 1992 B&W 40 shiny pages, ads on nearly every page (3,000 members). Surprisingly the content isn't much different - the airworthiness guy getting up pilots who don't put in defect reports, a rant on illegal low flying, articles on flying techniques, trip reports, reports by AUF reps, over 2 pages on HORSCOTS/CAA/AUF regs and policy, A page on FAI/AUF relationship, classifieds, events etc. The biggest change is colour and photographs, more press release stuff and a more professional image.

 

For those looking for historical prices Tocumwal was offering $69/dual, Spring Creek $85/dual, Holbrook $78 trike dual, $42 solo, Thruster $15,990, Quicksilver from $23,800, Aerochute $12,500.

 

I have complaints at home about RAAus getting away from the grassroots - but same gentleman owns 2 aircraft he wouldn't have in his ideal AUF. And I am GA and wishing and hoping I can get my tinnie into the fold.

 

So the issue is complex (why people are not renewing) given the aspirations I hear around me. Some don't like the way the world is going and would like their organisation to stop and not follow, some miss the camaraderie, feel lost in a larger organisation, miss the chance to do what you feel like and be responsible for your own safety (although an adverse outcome impacts on all members), resent over regulation and more paperwork from HQ. And some have moved on in life and have other priorities - how many did we lose in the 1970's to work and committment to young families? Remember we are now seeing the baby boomers moving past retirement and possibly reassessing their ability to continue flying.

 

That's my second depressive moment for today. Maybe we can start a thread on Then & Now to compare prices etc.? I fear we were getting a little off topic. I have confidence that RAAus will come out of this the better for the experience.

 

Sue

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Well what a response to a simple question. Why are people not renewing their membership?. As usual it did not take long to turn into a shooting match but the replies do point out that not all are happy with the way things have turned out. Myself included. So i will have to put forward my reason as to why i have been considering flicking the RAAus out of my life.

 

I am still flying the same aircraft as i was flying long before the RAAus/AUF or CASA came into being. I am still flying those aircraft under the exact same conditions and locations as i was in 1976. IE on private property mostly at low level at less than 40kts. The only and i mean only reason i belong to the RAAus is because i was told if i did not and was seen flying anywhere i would be jailed. I fly mainly during autum usually less than 20 hours a year. I cannot fly my Lazair as it was designed to be flown, i cannot turn the engines off legally and thermal, i cannot fly close to a hill and ridge soar, gotta remain 1000 ft horizontially away from terrain. i have to have ugly rego numbers on my beautiful wing that affects the performance. i can't fly low unless i have written permission from the property owner. Try and get someone to sign anything these days. So when i do have a great day i do so in fear that some mug will dob me in for doing so. Hell my Lazair is only legal because it was flying before the RAAus/ AUF came along (one engine one prop rule). Everytime i have approached the RAAus to have some ammendments made to let me enjoy my machine to the full i get a either no response or some wimpy excuse like 'we don't have the resorces as we are persuing other things for the heavier mob'..(no offence guys you can afford them). Then me and a mate rebuild 10:001 and try to put back on the register and get no reply. we did not find out why until i spoke to Tony Hayes and found that the rego number was appropriated by a past president for his own aircraft. The same had happened to Tony with his 19:001 rebuild. Tony sent me an email telling me in detail of some of the low life actions of past exec officers of the AUF of that paticular time period, that if i pass on to ASIC will cause heaps of problems for every one. Wanna wind me up a bit more?

 

So some poor mug who wants to fly a real grass roots machine on his own property has to pay at least 3 grand for 20 plus hours of lessons in an aircraft that does not even remotely perform to his, plus what, another 500 bucks for all the ground school stuff, then membership, rego insurance he does not need. The cow he may kill, he possibly owns. If he does not comply he goes to jail. Lucky country?. The RAAus descriminate against me as the HGFA have a Nano Light class that does not need rego and has a minimum rating for it. They can shut down, thermal, ridge soar and don't need a note from mummy to fly the back paddock. I'd be in that group except it's weight shift only. Hey Middo where is my Nano Light 3 axis class. So i have been considering another option. One being that the Lazair stays locked in it's trailer and each year i head off to the USA for a month and take full advantage of their FAR103. I have been offered full use of a series 3 Lazair, a great location to fly from with a group of similar minded guys. Other option for other types of 103 machines including a single seat hot air ballon. No regs, no BS. Just have fun.

 

Now as for the RAAus mag. Yep one sitting flick thru it, read the crash comic section, (best bit) and the classifieds toss it in the pile with the rest. Received my EAA Sport Aviation mag last Thursday and i am still reading last months. Sums it up.

 

Now while i am in a real bitching mood. (i had a great day at work) let me have a go at the CASA CEO. Refering to the recently revoked Parallel Paths. IT IS OF MY OPINION, Sir that you are in contempt of court. It was deemed in a court in the ninties that no one can have a monopoly not even a govenment or regletory group and that a PARALLEL PATH must always be available to individuals and groups. I refer to Mathews vs the CAA and APF. So the next mug who threatens me with jail gets a thumb in the eye.

 

whew, OZZIE feels lot better now.

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

Bear in mind that, apart from the executive reports, there seems to be very few members reports. Perhaps the members could claim ownership of the magazine by putting some contributions forward.

I sent in an email to the editor in December (roughly) suggesting an idea for an article or articles - not an actual article, but an idea for one. I didn't hear a word back from them then in the March issue I see my email has been published. It honestly never crossed my mind that they'd consider publishing my email (otherwise I would've taken longer than 5 minutes to write it!)...perhaps it was a slow letters month this month?...and even after they've published it I still haven't had any sort of response about my actual idea, not even a 'no thanks' or a 'we'll consider it'... :confused:i_dunno

 

 

[jetjr]

OK..... a hot topic

 

Id reckon RAA will have an inherant group of members who join up, have a few lessons or get Cert and then simply stop flying or move on to boats, camping, fishing, fast bikes whatever

 

When things are going well, just keep on paying, when things grow a bit tight or even if people PERCIEVE things are going to be tougher they may drop out. They can always rejoin later.

 

Issues regarding changes and adds in magazine etc, the adds there will be for the big ticket items which make money and can pay for the space - nothing to do with what represents the board or members.

 

Talk of forming separate groups threatens to loose our strength, those who think by breaking off, CASA etc will ignore them are mistaken. You just wont have the strength to have the opinions heard. Now forming different "classes" within RAA may have merit but its a slippery slope.

 

Like any large member organisation, lots of commentators and valid comments

 

 

[Robert]

Hi All

 

What worries me about RAAus is I feel that at one time it was an organization that represented its members/pilots but seems to be turning into a burocracy dictating to the members/pilots!!!!!!

 

Also regards the mag I dont think a mag that is sold to anyone at newstands can have articles in it for members only therefore I feel a membership supplement should be included in the mag for members only.

 

Unfortunatly there will be breakaway groups if RAAus doesnt sort membership dissatisfaction out and talking to various members there is dissatisfaction growing

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

I just got the RAAus mag and read the article - where is this big crash of membership numbers due to non renewers? There's a 23% growth over 12 months in members and 8.3% growth in aircraft registrations. From 2007 - 2009 there was an average 18.8% growth, so it has actually gone up, not down.

 

So where is our problem? I know people who have not renewed - so I guess we are growing much faster than 23%, and retaining membership.

 

Sue

 

 

[KB59]

Hi All

 

As a new pilot and just going though the process and cost of obtaining my wings I have concerns to the changing face of RAA. I fly a Grass roots type aircraft (a Drifter) but don`t see all change as bad.

 

However I think before we all jump the gun it would be good to see what the ratio of student dropout is to the pilot members.

 

What I have seen over the last 3 years is a lot of people start training and then run into a brick wall for whatever reason.

 

I know I was one of them.

 

Flying schools are a business and need to make money but I think sometimes high turnover or should I say high numbers starting training is not the best thing for the big picture.

 

Quality of training should allways be first on the list.

 

Also when statements are made, of 23% growth of new members it looks good on paper but what if the pilot numbers are only a small percentage of that growth with the rest new students.

 

 

[Guest pembs]

Fair one so how to reduce the costs in an ever increasing membership? One way would be to loose the mag in it's current form and publish it online, with member logins to access it. This could also be done for the membership with on line forms thereby reducing the cost of administration. The only way to keep these spiralling costs down is for the membership to help by suggesting ways to help and not bleat about it. Let's come up with viable solutions and give the committee something to work with. The membership seems quite apathetic, this was has become apparent with the lack of people voting, there you go another way to save money cast your vote on line, more printing and stamp savings…..every little helps so start suggesting ways to your State rep, I already have to mine. Shame the committee only meets twice a year!:thumb_up:

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

cash flow don't seem to be a problem for the RAAus.

 

The magazine should always be available in it's present form. several years ago it was changed to it's present format and placed on the news stands to help put the RAAus 'out there'

 

Rentention rate is the thing that has to be worked on. most trainging facilities are doing ok never hear of one closing due to lack of abnitio start ups and some on this forum have spoken of having to book lessons well in advance and in blocks.

 

getting more students to start up and get their own aircraft would be the go but the cost of entry level affordable aircraft is at the moment way to high. young people can't afford them but they could afford single seat take home basic machines if they were promoted and had simpler rules for them. way things are now it does not lean towards enjoyable, affordable flying. Rec flying and the RAAus have only reproduced the woes of the GA world. Getting to be a well heeled game these days.

 

ozzie

 

 

[Modest Pilot]

Membership Loss

 

As we move to a lot of aircraft more like small G A types I think we have attracted a much wider section of the population. As an old G A instructor; (way back my boss learned to fly on Hawker Tomtits!) a rule of thumb was that 50% might go solo, of those 50% to PPL and 50% of those go to CPL. It seems to me that's what is going to happen when you expand into a mass market. I don't see this as a problem, attract more people and you are going to find that more just won't like flying. Better to have 10% of these people flying than 100% of none. Maybe we could look at a program like the EAA Young Eagles program. Basically it encourages pilots to give a kid a ride in an aircraft; over a million kids so far and rising. They have sorted the insurance, consent forms etc. and I guess over here you would need a Blue Card.

 

 

[skybum]

Oh, if only. I am currently a non-member. This is entirly due to business climate and nothing to do with aviation. My flying is a very expensive hobby and got curtailed before I realised I needed to get my five hours done BEFORE my medical lapsed. Such is life.

 

I can see the same thing happening in GA, every one has the dooms and glooms about the industry. However, I just go down to my local aerodrome and just watch the planes abuzzing around and realise that in my little part of the pond, flying is still OK.

 

Be a glass half full person FIRST AND FORMOST and then look to see where you can be of help if there is a need for a change. You may find that things are going along swimmingly. There will always be a problem with the how things were brigade..I mean, when I started flying Solo was $18.00/hr and dual was $25.00/hr in a C150!!!!!!

 

Just be careful of this little gem...In my AOPA mag, one Dick Smith thinks about why he cannot register a brand new C182 on the RAA register...JUST SO HE CAN DO HIS OWN MAINTENANCE!!!:Flush: Food for thought.

 

If I had the bucks, I would buy two Eurofox's get a mate to do the instructing and get the costs down to something pretty affordable. Aeroplanes live for a very long time, maybe, we shouldn't be trying to recoup the costs so quickly. Servicing costs and wages for something that is recreational and NOT a job makes it difficult to get up a business plan. Aeroclubs yes and not for profit yes..but dedicated flying schools for delivering on a product???? and make a profit for the owner????Is this recreational????

 

Just spitballing here but sometimes I do wonder if things are really that bad.