greybeard

Who's Gavin?

That's my point, "rumour and innuendo on a web forum" and an expectation that the board will involve all of the members in every thing they do. Yes, there's a lot of areas that could be improved, but maybe try asking instead. Here's a contact list for RAA. http://www.raa.asn.au/contact/ Communication works both ways. If enough people contacted their elected representatives and spoke to them, maybe there'd be a little less rumour and innuendo causing high blood pressure. You do acquire flight planning information don't you?

Some of you guys need to join a bowling club to find something else to winge about. Either call yet another general meeting and put forward a motion to kick out everyone you don't want in your committee, change the constitution to allow a vote by every member before anyone can get out of bed in the morning, engage a QC for every member to provide legal argument. Or, for the majority of people who are taking affront, pick up the telephone, actually talk to a human being, get even one fact, then start sprouting off. Some of the discussion about the committee is reasoned and logical and has a basis in fact, far to much of the discussion is reminiscent of a bunch of school kids playing guess what I don't know. I'm pretty comfortable saying that most of you are involved in aviation, are mature, reasoned and can put together a logical argument / discussion. After all you mostly seem to be capable of aviating. How about it? Put the speculation aside, stick to facts, even try finding out a few, and put a fraction of the effort and passion from castigating anyone who doesn't ask your personal opinion before doing anything into moving forward. You never know maybe everyone, including the dastardly committee, is actually doing the best they can to forward RAA and it's members interests.

I think you may have been led astray regarding a GFPT being required for a PPL. It isn't a prerequisite for a PPL. I never bothered with the GFPT and completed my PPL without ever having sat a GFPT.

Well I did manage to work out that it wasn't near Perth in Tasmania

Hmmh, interesting. It's all RAAF controlled airspace up that way. RAAF GinGin field has the Pearce flying club operating out of there on the weekend.

Where is it located? N, S, E or W?

FWIW, I've got a PPL and haven't flown for a number of years. I'm now getting back into things again. I compared RAA and doing an AFR and enabling my PPL. If you take into account the annual cost of RAA pilot certificate against two yearly class 2 medical there's not much in it and I get forced into going to the Doctor every couple of years to see if I'm still alive :) Yes, flying costs are typically greater in GA, but I've got a lot more choice of hire in GA than for RAA in Western Australia. Comes down to if you can afford the $'s to complete your GFPT now or not. It'd take you a while ( read $'s ) to get back into it and relearn to do the GFPT after being away from things for a number of years. I skipped the GFPT and went straight through for my PPL ( did it in a total of 43 hours ). I was taking lessons at least weekly though, as well as burning through some money :). If I had the money, I'd do the GFPT now. But only you know your financial situation.

Maybe a civil response actually quoting the relevant regs and/or a link would be useful instead of RTFM! Those who are so up with the relevant rules and regs would obviously find it a trivial exercise to do this as they know what they are. Yes, we could all look up the rules and regs but every now and then imparting a little knowledge or reference instead of sniping wouldn't hurt and might make this a nicer forum to frequent and gain some knowledge. But we all get our jollies in different ways. You deserved a better response Phil.

As far as I know there is no requirement to broadcast to centre ( VFR ) when changing frequencies. I'd maybe do an all stations call advising position and intentions depending upon circumstances. An issue with the broadcast is someone nearby may be on CTAF and/or just changing frequency and may miss the call. That said I tend to do broadcast as I come up to a significant feature ( not many in WA ;) ) when doing long xcountry flights. If you're concerned about getting a SAAB as a new hood ornament then by all means give an all stations broadcast. Don't forget that most IFR know where they are relative to a nav aid and may not be full on with a position report relative to a ground feature. If that makes sense. [edit] fully agree with your first paragraph

Here ya go http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/

maybe power poles are like car keys, you can look for ages but can never seem to see them or maybe with an overcast sky, a little stress, no shadow to highlight thin objects, observing other power lines and thinking you've seen them all........ or perhaps something completely different as I wasn't there.

I thought the rules were set by an expert panel on an internet forum, same as the accident investigation reports

I found this link http://maps.google.com.au/maps/ms?msid=208172682501724513260.0004ab2697c752a1eb177&msa=0&ll=-25.005973,137.021484&spn=41.56424,48.251953 on this site http://www.stolspeed.com/ He's got some great adventure stories on their as well

section 2.07 of the ops manual http://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Section-2.07-Flight-Crew-Certificate-Pilot-Certificate.pdf subsection 2

And you'd have to think twice about going for a streaker flight

Seems to me that if you don't like what's happening you stick your hand up at the next election and get on the committee or find someone who is sticking their hand up that you support. It takes a lot more effort to change things from the floor of a general meeting than it does from the committee/executive room.

errr, check the date of the thread and quoted post ;)

What state / town are you based?

Thanks for the summary, it pretty much summarises what I have read in the 'other thread', hence my comment regarding how anyone could 'illegally chose not to resign'. A resignation may be refused, or accepted, legally or illegally but to accuse someone of 'illegally not resigning' is illogical and detracts from the argument. Yes, the subject matter is emotive, but creating drama by the use of emotive and illogical accusations does the discussion no benefit. Educating people with facts, clearly stating when speculation has occured, all allows for an informed decision. Once you start down the slope of making up events to support an argument credability suffers. There is more than enough information out there to make the point without statements like this, ironic or not. Let the facts speak, I'm very confident that the people who read this forum are smart enough to reach a valid conclusion.

I'm intrigued, how could the President 'illegally chose not to resign'? He may have chosen to 'not resign' but isn't the issue with the acceptance of any such decision? Surely any acceptance ( or not ) of the decision 'to not resign' was taken by someone other than the President? I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what happened but it tends to weaken an argument when using an 'created fact' as emphasis a statement on irony.

errr, check the date of the post you've replied to. Things may have changed in the last 4 1/2 years ;)

Bottom line to me is that if you are going from differing types of aircraft, high/low/CSU/retract/tail/conventional etc then it's a good idea to get a refresh /check on the skills with a qualified instructor. Only you can make that decision to do so. The BFR ( to me ) is a legal requirement along the lines of the old Democrats idea of 'keeping the bastards honest' ;)

Which is a little contraditory as you could do a BFR in a GA Skyfox Gazelle ( low performance as it has a cruise under 80kts ) and it only counts as a high performance BFR for RAA. Do the same BFR in a RAA registered Gazelle and it's considered low performance. Similar issue with the endorsements.

Reply I received from RAA on 20/9/12 We accept BFR’s conducted in VH registered aircraft as suitable for an RA-Aus BFR provided they aircraft is under 1500kgs MTOW, single engine and the review was conducted under day VFR (no multi-engine or IFR renewals). Likewise, if the 90 day currency requirement of three take-off and landings prior to carrying a passenger are conducted in an aircraft which can be registered RA-Aus but holds VH registration, this is also acceptable for RA-Aus currency.