David Isaac

I'm driving down to SA Eyre Peninsular to visit my son, daughter in law and grandkids this week and going to the Airshow. Any one on here going and like to catch up?

That is always my fear in a low wing bubble canopy Nev. Wouldn't want any flames!!!

A resolution put to meeting of members under the notice provisions of the constitution cannot be amended at the meeting; It either succeeds or fails. That is why you need to put carefully considered resolutions with good explanations with due notice if you expect them to be understood clearly and passed by those present or by proxy. Put up a bad resolution that doesn't have good support or good explanations and watch the proxies come out of the woodwork and rightly so. This is particularly so when you propose a special resolution to change the constitution or an organisation's rules.

NO ... because I don't have time, I am supposed to be finishing reports and invoicing before we go on a holiday to Sth Oz tomorrow and if Shirley catches me on this forum I am dead meat . LOL.

Agreed, So lets draft some resolutions to fix it.

I don't think that is correct Tubz. Neither is it fair or equitable to not give ALL members 21 days notice of any resolution especially if it involves significant issues and I think you will find the 'model rules' require a company to give all members 21 days notice of a resolution no matter what the individual constitutions state ... not to mention Corporations law. You should not read clause 27 in isolation of clause 21.

33.4 An appointment of proxy (proxy form) must be in the form prescribed by the Company and must be signed by the Member appointing the proxy and must contain: (a) the Member’s name and address (b) the Company’s name © the proxy’s name or the name of the office held by the proxy, and (d) the meeting(s) at which the appointment may be used. 33.5 The proxy form must be delivered to the Company at its registered address or the address (including an electronic address) specified in the notice of the meeting and must be delivered to the Company at least 48 hours before the meeting.

yep but you isolated Clauses under General meeting. go see my reply.

Talk about thread drift ... LOL I assume you didn't read the following ... my underlining ... 21 Notice of general meetings 21.1 Notice of a general meeting must be given to: (a) each Member entitled to vote at the meeting, and (b) each Director. 21.2 Notice of a general meeting must be provided at least twenty-one (21) days before the meeting. 21.3 Notice of a general meeting must include: (a) the place, date and time for the meeting (and if the meeting is to be held in two or more places, the technology that will be used to facilitate this), (b) the general nature of the meeting’s business, © if applicable, any resolution that is to be proposed and the words of the proposed resolution, and (d) a statement that Members have the right to appoint a proxy.

Terry, Firstly the constitution is NOT a mess. There is some confusion around some clauses that has a logical requirement when you work it through. Making small changes could provide a lot more clarity. The issue has been amplified to make a point. The board cannot fix it; it has to be fixed by a resolution from the members which is a simple process. The Board could propose an amendment and they may do so, but so can any member. As long as a resolution is put before the next GM, the issue will go away. Yes it could have been clarified before the vote but it wasn't and that is now history. So lets just get on and fix it.

Very damn sad. What is it with our country and manufacturing?

Where is the risk? But you are wasting your time if you have 40 of flap to use, just dive the bastard, easy to do without exceeding white arc. Sure but a 30 degree 172 might just slip, but I haven't tried it and white arc speed rules apply no matter how you fly. The Auster has a 56 KIAS flap limit speed, gotta be careful with those old girls, but they slip beautifully anyway without flaps. After all they are just a bigger faster Cub.

Kasper is correct on his 21 days, but the Board cannot meet the required 21 days notice to members unless they receive the notice on a business day ahead of 21 days required notice for the GM. So the Board is NOT disregarding the Constitution, the Board is acting n good faith on behalf of the members. The constitution is sloppy and needs fixing, so we must do it and the Board will support fixing it.

Yes, And the 21 days notice of a resolution is a definite requirement of the new constitution and the Corporations Law AFAIK. The fact that falls on a weekend means the Board cannot provide the required notice to members unless received on a business day in time to get the resolution to members. Its is unfortunate the new constitution is sloppy in this area, so it needs to be fixed.

Yenn, Again with respect, the constitution is NOT being ignored by the Board. The Board believe they have acted in good faith on behalf of all members, read their response to Bull.

Yenn, With great respect, the fact that RAAus is now a company limited by guarantee changes nothing as far as members' rights. We still as members have the same powers to call special meetings, censure the Board, sack the Board etc as we had previously. The fact that Kasper's resolutions didnt get up changes nothing. We need to stop harping this old story and get on with fixing the confusing parts of the constitution. We CAN STILL DO that; it is still our organisation.

Yes well I wouldn't slip a modified aircraft on approach if flaps had been experimentally added, I'd maybe try it at plenty of altitude wearing a chute ... you are almost in test pilot mode doing that with modified aircraft. DJP has just pointed me to the 172N POH which states "Avoid slips with flaps extended" which I have just found under 'Placards'; interesting there is no other detail on slipping in the limitations section like there is for spinning etc. I had it demonstrated by my instructor who let me do it to show me it was a waste of time with 40 out. I must admit I never experienced any buffet of any kind but certainly ran out of rudder and the slip was more of a skid when compared to what I have done in Cubs, Citabrias, Drifters and Austers.

I guess I better ... LOL. All I know from experience under instruction is that side slipping a 150 or 172 with 40 down is a waste of time and diving is more effective.

Not true buddy, however if you are talking about a 150 or 172 still with the 40 degree flaps fitted, side slipping is less effective because the rudder doesn't have enough authority to hold the aircraft in a significant slip. You will never run out of elevator authority in any Cessna I have flown. I'd imagine the ones with the STC reducing flaps to 30 degrees might slip better, just haven't tried. In any case when you have 40 degrees of flap on a Cessna, you don't need to sideslip, just point the nose down steep and stay within the white arc (pretty hard to exceed with the barn doors down), and you will go downhill like an elevator and when you round out, the drag is so high the speed reduces very quickly. Not so Lyell, but always read the POH. The Citabria and Auster slip beautifully with flap down. It just gives an extra dimension to sink rate

Cant argue with that Keith, It would appear the Board at the time didn't agree with some of the proposed changes and in their view published a document that was 'good enough' to start with. Whats done is done. Now the members need to act and put appropriate resolutions to correct any areas of concern and if the general membership agree the changes will be made. Why this has to be a major issue is beyond me. Lets just do it. In your new organisation, a Pty. Ltd. Company, the 'Customers' will NOT be members (shareholders) as we are in RAAus and will have absolutely NO say in your constitution or your ops manual or your tech manual, and will NOT be able to hold your management or yourself for that matter accountable on any issue. You appear to have a disproportionate criticism to what RAAus is doing. It is NOT a good look from where I sit.

Well some certainly appear so. "The whole world is mad except me and thee; and I'm not so sure about thee ...."

I agree, but I think you mean as correct as possible ... nothing is 'correct' first time that is why there are provisions for change within the constitution. A constitution is a dynamic set of rules that changes as needed and agreed by the members. When there are 10,000 members the differing opinions can be interesting. But the test is fair and equitable for the members and within the restraints of Corporations Law.

Keith, IT has NEVER been a colossal task. It is a simple straight forward task we have done it many times with the old constitution. Re registering a constitutional change is a simple administrative process carried out by RAAus management the same as for all other changes such as the annual change of directors..

Keith, Constitutions are NEVER set in stone. Our last one had many changes. It is not unreasonable to change ours as needed and it is NOT a major process. The members should just stop bitching and put up the appropriate changes. But put up balanced and proper resolutions or they will not succeed.

Agree and if rational heads had been held we could have discussed this in a more constructive manner. However, in fairness to Kasper, this issue has highlighted the constitution needs amendment to tidy up some clearly confusing clauses. The members should stop bitching about it and put up constructive resolutions for the change. We have done it many times before and it is a relatively simple process if you hold a rational head.Michael's letter explains the dilemma and even though the constitution appears to imply that a member resolution can be put to members with less than 21 days notice, I don't think Corporatuions Law permits less than 21 days notice to members of any resolution and rightly so. Corporations Law will always override our constitution. That in fact may have been part of the legal advice.