nomadpete

After trying to tie together all the little snippits on this forum ,My summary is: RAAus has been aware of the need for inventing a SMS, for over two years (maybe many more than two) but due to lack of consensus by the board nothing has been done. And it looked like nothing was continuing to be done in spite of all the board's deliberations. To await due process would be tantamount to giving up all hope of ever complying with this CASA requirement. Our options on that are to either comply, or to negotiate out of it. Neither options were addressed. Furthermore, I have heard that having a safety officer is a requirement of Part 149 of the new regulations being implemented later this year. So if Ed had not forced the situation, where would we be? Still unaware of our obligations and still in breach of our deed of agreement? Still leaving our training schools open to litigation because of failure to put in place a control for a known hazard? But I don't really know. I'm still guessing. It would help to unify our membership if only we were presented with open honest communication by all stake holders. Peter T

Thank you Kaz. Your input is invaluable to those of us who don't speak legalese. At last I have enough information to get a grasp of the constitutional position. As you said, not much comfort there. And still no communication from our 'leaders'. Peter T

Well, that sure got me bogged down in my old highschool english grammar ! Now I am not sure about the constitution except that it is poorly written. But now that it has been pointed out, I would go with the word "and" meaning "together". Anyway we can expect the Reform Committee to fix that.... oh rats! Now Ed has another fire to put out - who will chair the constitution reform committee now that Myles has become an employee? Or will it be disbanded again? And if not disbanded, will Ed be seen as inconsistent? Just one more consequence that has not been explained to us members. While we are splitting hairs, it occurred to me that there is a world of difference between Ed getting an assurance of "full support of the board" and being granted "absolute power to do whatever you want without consultation". Anyway, it seems to have ended up highlighting the general temperature of the members who bother to read the news. Pity that the only thing we can count on is a continuance of the traditional RAAus poor communication. Still disappointed, Peter T

Turbs, You have conviced me. I was not aware of those clauses in our constitution. So it appears that our constitution allows Ed's method. It is remiss of me to condemn without checking our rules first. I had never doubted the need for a safety officer, but felt betrayed by the way it was done. Now I am ready to accept Ed's action as not transgressing our house rules, but I am still not reassured that his methods show leadership toward a new RAAus which acts with good integrity. Lack of transparency and lack of open consultation clouds the outsider's view of things. And please note that members should NOT be considered "outsiders". Please treat us, the members, (and others such as staff or board) with more respect. I though that we had made that clear enough back in Feb. Ed, Please accept my apology for my strong comments ( in previous posts) regarding your perceived lack of following our constitution. I was unaware of those clauses. You could have referred us to those clauses in your 'Press release' if you wished to avoid some of the criticism. Yet another communication failure. If we accuse you of giving us more of the "same old" that we used to get, then you must accept responsibility for failing to honour a commitment to open transparent communication with the members. So, please give us the full story. You have not yet fully explained all the causes, expected costs and possible consequences (good and bad - a cost/benefit analysis) of the appointment. Nor have you explained what you have previously exchanged with the board on the issue. Nor have you shown us the scope of Myles' expected contribution to our safety. Nor have you explained why the position had to be salaried at this early stage when Myles could have taken up the role temporarily on a volunteer basis whilst the job description was formulated. So, again I ask, please include us members in the information loop. Allow us the opportunity to offer our input or services. We still need to understand how it all came about, why it couldn't wait a day or two, and how you saw your method as being the "best all round" answer to a festering problem, when you probably knew that it would be a contentious move. We still await more information on the new "Air Safety Roadmap". Your urgent action creating the position and instantly appointing Myles, should result in urgent action by this new employee. Peter T

Ed, Firstly thank you for coming to this group of concerned RAAus members, and expanding on your motives. We need to hear more from you. We need more open communication from you and the board because it is the only way to defuse the rumor mill. If a forum like this was available on the official RAAus website. I'm sure we would all be over there airing the same concerns. But that is another separate issue. It should be obvious that most here are outraged by what seems to be your impulsive actions, and operating outside our proper processes. We do appreciate that you are operating in a possibly hostile environment, and definitely under a lot of pressure but that does not excuse the way this has been done. BUT - Why didn't you work around the problem just a little? If you HAD taken the proper course and asked the whole board for permission, and they had voted it down, You then had the option to make an immediate press release to members by email and forums and RAAus website - a President's Report to advise us what is happening (the urgency, the consequences and the board rejection) so that we the members would see where the problem lay (and not blame you) so the members could then contact their board member/s with pressure to revise their decision. All of which could be done in a couple of days. If a couple of days would have made all that much difference to the consequences, please explain that to us. As members we deserve blunt, spin free honesty. Now I am hearing more snippits, which may be true, or not. When you take drastic steps the whole picture should be seen by all. I feel that your actions have brought the integrity of RAAus into question. All I can say is "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?" As for Myles, well, so far we have not heard from him with any urgently required "roadmap to the future safety for all recreational pilots". If it was all that urgent, then Myles has had enough time to rough out something to make us all know that he is actually doing something that we (and CASA) can connect with his new role. Or hasn't that been discussed yet? I am deeply disappointed. Peter T

Sue, In a normal world, all you say is absolutely right and is what we expect. But it seems that our board collectively have not operated successfully in a normal world for some years now. And I sincerely apologise to those individual board members who have tried so hard to drag the others into the normal world. Peter T

If Myles provides us with a list of his action plans and timeframes in the next couple of days, it will restore some faith in the urgency of his appointment. And may ease some of the pain caused by the unconstitutional way it was achieved.

Good point Dazza. At first sight it looks like more of the same old behavior of past exec. However, bear in mind that we have all been bitching about the perceived ineptitude of the board, so in this instance I am prepared to accept that maybe Ed is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to getting RAAus into safer waters. He is privy to inside information that we don't, stuff that may not be appropriate to publicise. We have to take his decisions on trust. At least until we see the longer term results. Would you put every important decision through a board that so many of us seem to have no faith in? At this time we may be better off with a benevolent dictator than a puppet. Come September I may change my mind. PeterT

The way I see it, Given that action was urgent, the options were: 1. Engage the services of professional recruitment agency and in maybe a couple of months get someone to fill this role. 2. Act now and work with personnel known to have skills adaptable to the role. There is always the option to cast the net properly later. I feel that the wording suggesting that RAAus is "guilty of conducting almost ZERO essential safety training" is a bit offensive to all our CFI's who (in my opinion) are already conducting essential safety training on behalf of RAAus, and being audited by RAAus. If that were not so, I would probably not be alive to write this. However, CASA need to be reassured that it is being taken seriously and action has been taken to keep us looking clean. In the company I work for, we have a person filling a similar role, and they are only a tenth the size of our membership. Just my take on it, Peter T

Gary, There two answers here - 1. I'd really like a touring MG so I can go see the outback and experience the Morning Glory. 2. I'd really like a single seat self launching glider to do gliding x - country with the security of not having to have a retireve crew or the inconvenience of needing a tuggie every time I have the urge to go 'feeling up' the air. I'd love to see what you are cooking up though. Peter T

My 'signature' is borrowed from a poem by Robert H Smith. For the full poem, google the first line of it.

Cam home from work and the wife was stretched out on the lounge, naked. There was soft music. There were candles. Can you believe that - Candles! I looked at her and said "What is this?" She purred "Its my love dress darling" I said "Needs ironing, whats for dinner?" And thats when the fight started........

Saturday morning I got up early, quietly dressed, made my lunch, and slipped quietly into the garage. I hooked the boat up to the van and proceeded to back out into a torrential downpour. The wind was blowing 50mph, so I pulled back into the garage, turned on the radio, and discovered that the weather would be bad all day. I went back into the house, quietly undressed, and slipped back into bed. I cuddled up to my wife's back; now with a different anticipation, and whispered, "The weather out there is terrible." My loving wife replied, "And, can you believe my stupid husband is out fishing in that?"

And that's when the fight started.......

I'd have believed it if BEX had posted it.....

Preflight? Just a quick walk around should do... Anyway, you can always check it later.....

A lifting body aircraft would be suitably easy to build, and it is reported to have benign handling characteristics. The structure is robust, which improves pilot safety. I'd like to see one in the flesh and since the only ultralight one is residing in the USA, I cannot afford the tickets just to get a look at it. This one was at Oshkosh in 1994, I believe.

That's Great news! I was always told (by my mother) that it was only girls who could change their minds. How can I earn this new privilege?

If you want to have a cheap aircraft for fun, and also want to fly yourself out west to pester your rellies, then I suggest the practical way to achieve this is to make the fun machine for most of your flying and cross hire a plastic fantastic for the occasional long distance tour. One single design can't be all things to all people.

Clifton is a great place to commit aviation. Except for the cold winter mornings. The training, the scenery and people make every visit great therapy. Congratulations on mastering the drifter.

What were you drinking? I'd like some......

If I don't like Nick, does that make me Xenophobic?

Glider Rope break - Turn back procedure: Perhaps I didn't make it clear in my post describing a glider 180 turn back. The initial move is to veer downwind, then turn back into the wind, to minimise the turn radius, and allow the dropping airspeed to work with the crosswind component to drift you back to the centreline of the strip without allowing the airspeed to drop below 1.5 Vs. This makes the slight downwind turn happen when airspeed is highest. If you want to call it a teardrop turn, then the first part of it is really a downwind 'S' turn before making a 'U' turn into wind. My other point remains - it is a very dangerous thing to try consider in a low mass, draggy aircraft such as our RAAus aircraft.