SAAA want to run the RPL

[impulse coupled]

SAAA announced at Wagga on the weekend that they want to run the RPL.

Some are for (do away with the regulatory burden) some against (it would destroy GA, put instructors out of work etc).

What are the thoughts here???

[xinhua2]

The SAAA weren't even mentioned here.


Alphabet groups form Union.


Russel Berterand, spokesman for The Airplane Outsiders and Pisspots Amalgamation, (AOPA), announced today that they have joined forces with The Angry Women’s Poledancing Activists, (AWPA), and The Anatomically Misfits as Rolemodels of old Bastards Australia, (AMROBA), The Recreational Artists and Artificers (Aus), (RAAus), The Glad we saw you First Association, (GFA), The Special Rotary Revilers Around table movement, The (SRA), and The Supporting Amateurs who build Airplanes of Australia (SAAA), who hardly got a mention, and the Royal Order of Ornithopters Group (South Pole), (ROOG), to form a Union to combat rampart activism by Right Wing Unions hell bent on destroying our faith in the Left Wing.

Berterand said in an off the cuff expose’ that we have had a sh!tload of this crap and I’m just the man to bring the Country to it’s knees. We are sick and tired of old and bold pilots trying to run the show by legal means so we are going to go ape and amalgamate with some of what’s left of the more radical Unions like Air Traffic Controllers, CASA friendly societies, and The Canberra Lunch time good time Guys, and my Grand Pooba has told me all this is OK. That'll fcuc you millionaire bastweads.

Yous guys are all fckutwits and need a brass shovel up yous arseoles, (said Berterand) and as a combined Union we can get over our individual prejudices (did I spell that write)? And kick arse.

Those that don’t agree with me, well just get prepared to be shat on from a Grub (if I get my arse out the door), from a great hight. Probably in controlled airspace and I couldn’t be bothered getting a clearance from the dickheads watching their TV screens or talking on the wireless.

Russel.

[rmcdonal]

xinhua2 Bad day? :E :ouch: :ouch:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

xinhua2....was that realy necessary? Whomever gets unity in this sorry mess gets my support. I'd even follow the drover's dog if it got some sense out of the political sheep that run this country.

Instead of throwing rocks at these guys....why don't YOU get off your tinny (yes-cheap!) analy retentive sphincter AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!....Oh sorry, your getting your probe put in today.:mad:

Why is it that anything that gets going in GA gets howled at from under the rocks where snakes live?


...OK I am much calmer now. SAAA as the regulator for the new RPL. Can we have a sensible argument about this. I can see pros and cons for this. SAAA would dearly like the revenue stream from administering the licences. (As would any group, I might add) SAAA is already part of GA regulatory regeme. Homebuilts thru SAAA are VH- registered. CASA would still have to give the knod on certification. Which leads back to original argument. If CASA has to certify the aircraft then there would be no benefit handing over regulatory control to another group for the licences. SAAA is not developed for monitoring standards of training nor certifying instructors. SAAA is primarily to facilitate construction and certification of home built aircraft. I am not a member of the SAAA. I would also throw a spanner in the works and say neither should AOPA.

EAA in the US is gunning for introduction of RPL but I think FAA will still retain regulatory control.

[impulse coupled]

Oz

Thanks for the considered opinion. Don't worry about our pretend asian rocket friend, on this site one gets good opinion, kids that try and loons like that.

Even gaunty (who I sometimes disagree with) will agree that this particular loon gives WA a bad name. Does B25J give you a clue :E

[gaunty]

xinhua2 bwahahahah. ROFLMAO Oooops that should get me banned for at least another 12 months on another forum.

Now you've gotta admit ic it was funny, like the Jehova post.

But seriously;Some are for (do away with the regulatory burden) which they insist is destroying GA.

and some some against (it would destroy GA, put instructors out of work etc). seems like a hiding to nothing to me.

If I may.

GA is NOT all about flight training providing instructors to teach more instructors who teach more instructors whilst they get hours to go somewhere else who train an ever an ever increasing cadre of CPL for jobs that don't exist. :rolleyes:
If that is all that is keeping it alive then it has been dead for some time.
It's like a giant pyramid scheme, only those who get in the front end get to keep the money. :{

I'm here to tell you real GA is alive and well, it's had the staggers occasionally, another 2,000 aircraft on the VH register in the last 10 years or so, and I've just facilitated the purchase of another new GA turbine for delivery next year and two other clients about to do likewise.
Yes it will cost heaps more to operate than the superannuated old clunkers being touted in the market place, but as the non aviation enthusiast cheque writing man said "please don't put me in one of those again".
But what would an old fraud like me know.

There's heaps more, but that'll do for the moment.

SAAA to run the RPL, why not?
There's the recreational flyers and there are the business flyers, two totally different imperatives.

Trying to regulate both with the same cudgel just doesn't make sense.

The business guys expect and are prepared to pay for a completely different set of standards than the recreational guys either want or can afford.

.

[impulse coupled]

gaunty

since I know that you know who that is I must say you are relaxing a lot these days :E

your argument re RPL makes sense to me. In fact why 'regulate' training at all. Why not just set a standard and allow flying schools to do theory, conduct exams and send licence forms off for a licence to be automatically generated. You could even allow senior instructors todo the flight test.

Oooops, am I dreaming, wasn't that what I did in 1978??? Ah, I see, all we need to do is turn back the clock :)

[gaunty]

Exactly, the infrastructure is already there in the flying schools, all CASA have to do is define the RPL requirements, restore delegate status to the responsible schools and you're away.

Mind you that was being seriously abused by some in the past.

Spot checks as in the past and Bruce is your uncle. :}

There is IMHO no direct role for any of the alphabet soup orgs other than advocacy and a watching brief.

The first time I ever met a DCA dude was in 1966 when we started commercial operations, we knew what the rules were and even helped invent more than a few, they then let us get on with it.
And every body was surveilled equally, even to the point of auditing every flight plan for flight time, weights and fuel. It was the price we were happy to accept, to keep the dodgy bros under pressure.
The clients learnt pretty early on to ask the operator for the results of a ramp check and who was pushing the boundaries and not. They voted with their feet, and that is the way it should be.

[Sunfish]

Amen Gaunty! By the way, I don't think GA is dieing either. Try renting an aircraft at YMMB on any weekend.

[impulse coupled]

Bruce isn't my uncle ;)

However heard a good one from a mate who is a CFI in the states. We were talking about one of my employees who has 27 hours but not yet solo (or past circuits). Chuck said 'His name must be BOB'

Better Off Bowling.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Hmmmmm, I wonder. Is this leading to instructor ratings on a PPL?

[impulse coupled]

Why not :E

Better than a 175 hour pilot with MECIR, Baron and 'manually adjustable propellor ratings' becoming one.

Probably safer too.