Wouldn't you agree that being a SAAA member would have provided much education material over time on the owners responsibilities, the need for education on Maintenance Proceedures,(sic) and having up to date MR's?
Jaba,
I am all in favour of meaningful education, what I object strongly to is a situation where a legislative instrument is used to guarantee a cash flow to SAAA.
The EAA in the US does a wonderful job, all without regulatory compulsion. The services it make available to members doesn't need the force of law (and threats of two years goal/jail) for people to take up what they need. It is all about personal responsibility, and if some clown has a way illegal aircraft, jump on him or her with both feet --- don't impose on the law abiding.
By why, now, after all the years since 1998, with no demonstrated problem, and all the freedoms of the US system, are we regressing, this is the most visible step.
Whether you know it or not, there are those who are proposing that continues validity of your maintenance authority for your pride and joy will require continued membership of SAAA.
This is the sort of thing that inhibited amateur building in Australia before 1998, it would be a tragedy for the movement to regress, but it is happening.
No, I have not done the course, but I do k now the history of the course, where it originated, as an anomaly with a small group who refused to have anything to do with post-1998 rules, you should find out the history.
As for the course content, there is nothing in it with which I am not very familiar, and hence I am able to say two things, firstly, every amateur builder with whom I am closely acquainted ( and that's quite a few) has already developed a good working knowledge of the administrative needs of their project, and secondly, secondly, what is applicable to amateur builders (and that's not much) doesn't need a mandatory course.
For example, what in the name of common sense has ICAO Annex VIII got to do with amateur building, beyond the "nice to know, but not need to know" knowledge that it is completely inapplicable.
Back to Ausfly, I hope it succeeds, but the odds are against it ---- so far not one of you has commented about the gulf between RAOz and "GA". Given the small size of the whole aviation sector, and the shrinking GA, not one of you has suggested joining forces for a truly all inclusive national show, one a year, might be a good idea.
It works at Oshkosh and Sun and Fun (even in the US, Sun and Fun is in trouble)