Jump to content

The shiny new-look RAA?


Recommended Posts

Just read the outcome of the RAA board elections. I voted and although my selected candidate placed as an 'also ran' I'd like to offer congrats to the blokes who made it in and wish them well in their roles.

 

Must admit I voted against the proposed changes to our organisation last year but am giving the new board benefit of the doubt despite my initial reservations. What do you blokes make of the shiny new-look RAA so far? Any reflections on how we're traveling nearly 18 months in?

 

Alan

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 361
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

so what's changed?

We are being sold out to a CASA wishlist by our own Chairman. With the new board set up no discussion entered into just full steam ahead for increased fees, more stringent maintenance requirement. Possibly requiring a professional to perform even simple maintenance tasks. ie L1 qualification taken away requiring sitting an exam to be legally able to do tasks we used to be allowed to do. (God help you if you own a Jabiru.) We will loose our "point of difference" if increased weight limits (up to 1500kgs) come into being. Why is Mike M pushing for access to controlled airspace for us - if you want to do this go GA. RAA was about low cost, minimum regulation for maximum fun we are literally going to end up "GA mk2" costing as much as our GA cousins are paying now. CASA has ruined GA and if allowed to continue their influence on our leadership they will do the same to us.

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
We are being sold out to a CASA wishlist by our own Chairman. With the new board set up no discussion entered into just full steam ahead for increased fees, more stringent maintenance requirement. Possibly requiring a professional to perform even simple maintenance tasks. ie L1 qualification taken away requiring sitting an exam to be legally able to do tasks we used to be allowed to do. (God help you if you own a Jabiru.) We will loose our "point of difference" if increased weight limits (up to 1500kgs) come into being. Why is Mike M pushing for access to controlled airspace for us - if you want to do this go GA. RAA was about low cost, minimum regulation for maximum fun we are literally going to end up "GA mk2" costing as much as our GA cousins are paying now. CASA has ruined GA and if allowed to continue their influence on our leadership they will do the same to us.

That is the point Bill. The high cost of access to CTR is a disincentive for quite a few. Consider flying around Nowra, or Coffs Harbour or Gold Coast and Brisbane. The need to have a CASA Licence and a class 2 medical drives the price of flying Rec Australian in these areas to intolerable heights. So much for low cost flying.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the point Bill. The high cost of access to CTR is a disincentive for quite a few. Consider flying around Nowra, or Coffs Harbour or Gold Coast and Brisbane. The need to have a CASA Licence and a class 2 medical drives the price of flying Rec Australian in these areas to intolerable heights. So much for low cost flying.

The problem is there are thousands of members who don't know that, don't care, and will only come to life when their flying access is shut off.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is there are thousands of members who don't know that, don't care, and will only come to life when their flying access is shut off.

If ever Turbs, there is an apathy amongst a major portion of RAA's membership that is mind numbing !.

 

Mike M is counting on this to achieve his agenda. (Another 3 year term should just about do it.)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the point Bill. The high cost of access to CTR is a disincentive for quite a few. Consider flying around Nowra, or Coffs Harbour or Gold Coast and Brisbane. The need to have a CASA Licence and a class 2 medical drives the price of flying Rec Australian in these areas to intolerable heights. So much for low cost flying.

This situation is particularly annoying when pilots of motor gliders don't require a GA licence and operate on a self certified medical in controlled airspace now!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Only 10% vote in elections so maybe not take many to push priorities

Really comes back to the removal of "regional reps". A lot of input was made under that procedure but was removed. A few of the overt supporters of the NEW approach to running our organisation will no doubt disagree but an "active" representative reflected the views/opinions of less active members but that is not to be - at least in the short time anyway. We have what we deserve being represented and voting for (in most cases) individuals who you don't know and based on a CV which most people in the reaL world know is BS.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
If ever Turbs, there is an apathy amongst a major portion of RAA's membership that is mind numbing !.Mike M is counting on this to achieve his agenda. (Another 3 year term should just about do it.)

Hello billwoodmason, I do like your comment, "Another 3 year term should just about do it. (??????????????????)

KP.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
We are being sold out to a CASA wishlist by our own Chairman. With the new board set up no discussion entered into just full steam ahead for increased fees, more stringent maintenance requirement. Possibly requiring a professional to perform even simple maintenance tasks. ie L1 qualification taken away requiring sitting an exam to be legally able to do tasks we used to be allowed to do. (God help you if you own a Jabiru.) We will loose our "point of difference" if increased weight limits (up to 1500kgs) come into being. Why is Mike M pushing for access to controlled airspace for us - if you want to do this go GA. RAA was about low cost, minimum regulation for maximum fun we are literally going to end up "GA mk2" costing as much as our GA cousins are paying now. CASA has ruined GA and if allowed to continue their influence on our leadership they will do the same to us.

Well billwoodmason you are making some very good points which have been ignored my management.

The L1 fiasco:- how can one do good maintenance when there is only an academic questions on regulations and information learnt in parrot fashion. When it is all said and done the L1 test is only an exercise in ticking boxes not education to learn correctly one has to have a practical content.

 

You mentioned Jabiru:- I went to a Jabiru engine maintenance course that course is not recognised by RAAus, the plot thickens deeper. RAAus tells us their micky mouse L1 certificate is ample, when the hands on is no good.

 

Controlled Airspace:- That is only a dream because of the medical fiasco.

 

CASA has ruined GA:- Who is allowing that push to influence RAAus?

 

KP

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The L1 fiasco:- how can one do good maintenance when there is only an academic questions on regulations and information learnt in parrot fashion. When it is all said and done the L1 test is only an exercise in ticking boxes not education to learn correctly one has to have a practical content.

Controlled Airspace:- That is only a dream because of the medical fiasco.

 

CASA has ruined GA:- Who is allowing that push to influence RAAus?

 

KP

The L1 training originally had 3 components, the first was to establish a level of knowledge regarding rights / responsibilities. That's in place. The second was to be education on the practical / hands on aspects of maintenance. The third was to assess the L1s ability to perform maintenance by way of inspecting completed work - at the time of a flight review would've made sense. Parts 2 and 3 were never put in place.

Airspace - simply insist that all SAOs have the same privileges - including airspace. Gliders and private hot air balloon pilots do not require a GA licence or medical to access controlled airspace. Simply cut and paste the GFA controlled airspace syllabus - job done. No need to waste time and effort on jumping through CASA hoops. The airspace limitations go back to the 95.10 types like Skycraft Scouts etc and when there were no medical requirements at all.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Caution 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Really comes back to the removal of "regional reps". A lot of input was made under that procedure but was removed. A few of the overt supporters of the NEW approach to running our organisation will no doubt disagree but an "active" representative reflected the views/opinions of less active members but that is not to be - at least in the short time anyway. We have what we deserve being represented and voting for (in most cases) individuals who you don't know and based on a CV which most people in the reaL world know is BS.

Same old, same old. Unless you were in Tasmania or maybe NT there was a good chance that you were more familiar with a bar of soap than your were with any of the candidates or board members. Can you work out what the individuals on the board have done since corporatisation. Could we work out what they were doing before?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Same old, same old. Unless you were in Tasmania or maybe NT there was a good chance that you were more familiar with a bar of soap than your were with any of the candidates or board members. Can you work out what the individuals on the board have done since corporatisation. Could we work out what they were doing before?

In defence of Frank, he was elected, he went to the board meetings he got to know the personalities, he got to see the patterns of behaviour, he got to see the adherence to procedures standard, he got to see the decision process in place, he got to air his views person to person; and he got to form his opinions based on first hand experience.

The comments that you make might be applicable to you Col, but if someone comes along and feels strongly enough to post what they've seen first hand, it is very wrong to try to fob them off with these sorts of baseless comments.

 

Throughout the past ten years, and even in this thread there are people who, without having any facts at all paint a picture which is designed to squash anyone who expresses a concern.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
...Unless you were in Tasmania or maybe NT there was a good chance that you were more familiar with a bar of soap than your were with any of the candidates or board members. Can you work out what the individuals on the board have done since corporatisation. Could we work out what they were doing before?

Col that also applies in all three tiers of government. The vast majority of we voters haven't a clue about what goes on even in our local council. Plenty of dedicated, hard working councillors have been voted out in favour of attention-seeking candidates with little idea of what the job entails. Lots of them sleep thru the interminable meetings and briefings.

 

 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Same old, same old. Unless you were in Tasmania or maybe NT there was a good chance that you were more familiar with a bar of soap than your were with any of the candidates or board members. Can you work out what the individuals on the board have done since corporatisation. Could we work out what they were doing before?

The way I understand it, our new board has been focusing on getting members access to CTA and securing a MTOW increase for registered aircraft. Personally, I have no real interest in the former but lots in the latter, but I appreciate for many members the opposite will be true. However, while we have been told that this is what our board has been doing, I myself haven't yet seen any of the documentation that has been submitted to CASA get a clear idea of what actually is being proposed. Is there a good business case to be made as to why the board shouldn't be more transparent with the membership and share its submisisons? Would that undermine their negotiating position with the regulator -or something like that?

 

Just curious

 

Alan

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The way I understand it, our new board has been focusing on getting members access to CTA and securing a MTOW increase for registered aircraft. Personally, I have no real interest in the former but lots in the latter, but I appreciate for many members the opposite will be true. However, while we have been told that this is what our board has been doing, I myself haven't yet seen any of the documentation that has been submitted to CASA get a clear idea of what actually is being proposed. Is there a good business case to be made as to why the board shouldn't be more transparent with the membership and share its submisisons? Would that undermine their negotiating position with the regulator -or something like that?Just curious

Alan

The good reason is that it is a Company, and only has to comply with its legal obligations.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This CTA stuff gives CASA a chance to impose many more requirements generally and few will be exempt from the push. More and more complexity and cost.... I DID tell you so. Be wary of what you wish for. You have a management that wants to "grow", rather than stick to it's values. U/L's are off the radar. You are now the NEW GA, but it's far from over. I can't see the other sections of non "commercial transport" flying going along with a take over by the RAAus. They haven't been consulted. That would be the tail wagging the dog for them. RAAus has some numbers of people, but not the depth of involvement in aviation (which shows). CASA doesn't have it either. They are an authoritarian bureaucracy of Lawyer types intent primarily, on covering their @r$e, even if it means killing off low cost flying. Nev

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet they're still flying long after the last set of wings fall off (fatigue) the current lightly built slippery machines.

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Winner 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably about the same amount as we have now. The HF/maintenance issue ratio is about he same everywhere in the western world. They aren't complex, and they are more structurally sound..

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
The good reason is that it is a Company, and only has to comply with its legal obligations.

Yes, good point. But to take your analogy further, do 'shareholders' in other companies have to pay the company annual fees? Remember, we are members of an organisation that is being run as a business, but the purpose of the business is to run the organisation for its membership. Without the membership there would be no company, surely?

 

Sorry if the above reads naïve, I have very little knowledge in the legal implications of RAA being run as a company, but I'd like to think if there is no valid reason why we members shouldn't have knowledge of the content of the boards submissions, then maybe we should... It would certainly put to rest any of the bickering on here about the performance of the board. If they're doing a good job (as I suspect), they have nothing to lose from a little transparency, and everything to gain.

 

Alan

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...