If that's the best you can do or can offer as constructive input, and I'm not sure which of the AOPA Board members you are, but I can guess, then I say good luck to AOPA, they are going to need it. It's as good a demonstration as any as to why nobody can any longer be bothered.
Your ministrations have been soooooooooo good for them so far, 280,000 reasons NOT at the last count, 6,000 ex members and who is seriously listening?
Oh and the BFR, medical and currency business, yup it's absolutely dead set true. Don't forget folks, these are the
same guys who prepared and passed a resolution to allow a single named individual serious rights not available to normal member. Me, couldn't then and can't get for the moment a medical, strange coincidence NO.
It died a death as it should have, but I wonder who else on the board might have had similar problems? You're right who cares and why should it be an issue.
You say 10 years on the ground as if it is a fact, I say tell it to the marines, you may well ask Dick Smith the same question.
Problem is I have been here/there since the beginning and I don't intend to see the lifes work of many many dedicated professional and respected aviators, regulators and businessmen who put this industry on the map in a way not seen elswhere and admired in the world, trashed because of the personal agenda of a few johnnies come lately.
If you voted for me then, why didn't you support me. My position before during and after was hardly a secret and
never changed on
anything.
Any way you lot go for it and if you need any more effigies to burn at the stake to validate yourselves, let me know and I'll send some more. It's quite fun watching really.
And whilst I'm on the subject, this is from Hamilton in an "open letter".
" In my opinion Lawford could not accept that AOPA ( along with AUF,RFACA,ASAC, Qantas senior management, Dixon, Borghetti and Manning, Virgin senior management, the Minister, DOTARS and ATSB, and a majority of the Airservices Board) supports NAS, period. His statement since his resignation confirms this opposition to NAS. In my opinion, he and Gaunt were alone on the AOPA Board on this issue. (He and I do not resile for one nansecond for our efforts in demanding the detail of the 2b implementation before signing AOPA up to it, which as we suspected was fatally flawed in its execution despite our best efforts.)
Indeed, on one occasion in a meeting of the AOPA Board with senior CASA management, he and Gaunt supported a position going back pre AMATS, Nov.1991. ( (We actually and simply passed on some member and board concerns in the manner of "how do we confirm the operation of transponders on aircraft that spend their lives operating outside radar coverage, beyond their mandatory 2 year operational check, if they are being used as a primary 'TCAS' separator ") yup turn im on, if you remember, light goes on, but how do you know it's actually working?, until you get hit))
It is increasingly obvious that NAS 2b is a resounding success, as everybody learns how to exploit the new freedoms safely. ( There's that 'ol parallel universe again) Indeed the acceptance in WA has been such that one "rollback" proposal envisaged no change in the west, only in the J-Curve, because of the complaints of a small number of domestic airline pilots, with their proposals for "commercial" airspace, with quite severe restrictions on people like yourself entering "commercial" airspace, a quite outlandish proposal. my bolding.
There are some excellent candidates for the 04/05 Board, in my opinion not including any of those recently resigned, I hope and trust that once again AOPA will have a united and effective Board, as I enjoyed in the time I was AOPA President.
This from the single most destructive member of that board; publicly advising a potential member to sign up to the AUF (a fine organisation) as a more relevant organisation for the future of GA than AOPA (and he might be right, he, after all claims responsibility for their formation whilst an office holder of AOPA) cuckooo
?, handing out promotional material for a Munro organisation at an AOPA sponsored NAS function, "appearing" unauthourised and unininvited, claiming to represent AOPA at an ATC invitation only event
to their understandable disgust and hijacking the press conference, appearing at all manner of industry consultative committees and groups as a "representative" of other organisations whilst a Director of AOPA and whilst the authorised AOPA Director was present, that
he personally deemed as having the same agenda (without the authority of the AOPA Board.) in fact for any organisation he could round up to be heard. Are the authorities confused. Nope
Like his mate, he suffers what has been identified here as, "Limelight Deprivation Syndrome"
Smith/Munro "user pays"
ask your average punter out there how he feels about that nowadays. hey. We've now got user pays coming out our ears.
Be careful what you wish for you might just get it.
And they still fly over the nest you know