Fred

I guess it would depend on the particular school Nev. for example the CFI where I have done my BFRs for the last 10+ years, includes a partial engine failure on take off in every BFR.

And the point of that statement is?

The big difference between commercial and private flying is what is EXPECTED of a professional pilot. (leaving aside the issues of duty hours & overloading) Both are using forecasts and everybody accepts the variations involved there. The major difference is at the planning stage - if the flight is ”legal“ including fuel reserves, alternates etc. the competent pilot is expected to complete the task - the option of I’ll just wait another day as in private flying Is not a option (Call it commercial pressure if you like). The issue that arises is when the conditions change from the forecast ones. This then becomes a human decision (occurring at 150-200 kts). Yes the relevant rules still apply but the only one who knows what the actual conditions are is the one in the cockpit. Mistakes are made unfortunately but more more rules will not change that. It is easy to make decisions in hindsight but human factors (& I dislike the overuse of the term) is what comes into play. Management will never say get in or crash trying. CoR legislation will not address these type of situations - certainly could have an effect on matters such as maintenance shortcuts and the like.

Given up !

?????? No opinion or seeking opinion of MM???????

Been there done that until the constitution change, I refused to nominate or have any part of what IMO was a very backward step handing effectively full control to 4 individuals - an Australia wide organisation with effectively NO regional input, it was never going to represent member’s views. But hey, 800 people gave them their proxy votes so I accept I must be the one out of step, so instead of beating my head against a brick wall I am just watching the predictable outcomes. (I was the RAA regional representative on the RACPAC committee also but resigned from that after the change as I refused to be a regional representative for an organisation that doesn’t believe in regional representation. Remember the voting by post code repetitive comments from Canberra - enough said)

It was forecast - from the time we let these clowns to have total control of what was previously a members organisation - it has been all down hill. No doubt the usual supporters of “GA mini” will come out in support of this approach with LAME maintenance and class 2 medicals unrealistic and unsustainable fees - it is time to get rid of this tripe. There is no point in paying membership fees AND registration if maintenance & medical requirements are the same - just go GA and forget MINI GA. OR regain control of RAA.

I paid $215 last year and $245 this year. - that is a $30 increase to me pretty simple

Obviously with the RPL not limited to Townsville Only like the proposal (as I read it).

2 GA schools. Both doing fixed wing GA. One also does rotary the other does also RAA. Both train in Townsville class C. They have different names for their rotary & RAA operations but in fact are only 2 operations. A different RAA school at Woodstock & nil currently at Bluewater. RAA & GA flight school at Ayr does RPL CTA training into Townsville also which has resulted in several Jabiru owners going into & transiting YBTL class C at will. The comical situation arises when you see the RAA/GA school in Townsville using 3 Foxbats - one registered GA and the other 2 RAA. Same aircraft type, same instructors, same building but different CFIs. The Ayr operation has the same CFI for both.

Townsville

Just renew my RAA membership, increase of $30, is there no end to this BS.

There is already RAA training approved & happening for some time in class C.

Funny really, progressively more people are coming to realise the major mistake we made a couple of years ago. At some stage enough will realise what is happening, hopefully before it’s too late to regain control of what was once a members organisation. The horse may have already bolted though.

CTA for suitablely equipped RAA aircraft is already available by virtue os CAO 95.55 with a RPL. Any CTA endorsement for a RPC would be the same as a RPL i.e. content and medical so nothing gained.