The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Proactive AOPA America

Old 5th Sep 2002, 06:51
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,496
Proactive AOPA America

In the current newsletter for AVWeb there is a good article and website by the US AOPA. It should be recommended reading for some of the GA knockers that seem to be flourishing lately. A damn good site, maybe our own AOPA should put something like this in the domain as well.

For anyone who is interested-

http://www.gaservingamerica.org/

Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 5th Sep 2002 at 06:56.
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2002, 05:22
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YSBK
Posts: 45
We should do something the same here in Australia to counteract the negativity towards GA Aviation. It is an excellent web site.

Maybe AOPA Australia could do something the same?

Piper Arrow is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 03:09
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 61
http://www.dotars.gov.au/transsec/fact_sheet6.aspx

Transport Security
General Aviation


Aircraft theft measures
General aviation aircraft including private/corporate non-jet aircraft that are not required to have a security program will be required to put measures in place to reduce the risk of theft.

Practical measures to mitigate against the risk of theft would be determined by the aircraft operators as appropriate and might include fitting auxiliary locks (for example to propellers or prop controls), securing aircraft in hangers or fitting door locks.

DOTARS Transport Security Investigators will be auditing compliance and undertaking random compliance checking in relation to aircraft anti-theft measures.

Background checking and licensing of pilots
All pilots and trainee pilots will be required to undertake background checking prior to being issued with new photographic licences by 1 July 2004.

Ensuring that pilots and trainee pilots are subject to background checking will reduce the likelihood of persons who might pose a threat to aviation gaining access to aircraft through legitimate means.

The cost of background checking and the photographic licence will be borne by individual pilots. Licences will be valid for two years and will cost around $200.

Please note: Sport aircraft are not included in the category of aircraft required to be secured from theft. Background checking will not be carried out on pilots of sport aircraft and they will not be required to have a photographic licence.
C182 Drover is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 08:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 3,701
So are AOPA going to stand up for me against me having to pay $200 for a new licence?
compressor stall is online now  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 09:49
  #5 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
AOPA are in close contact with AOPA US on this and the many other issues on foot.

The US have a fair bit of experience on this issue they can share.

A previous AOPA Board somehow thought it fit to sue AOPA US at a very very significant financial cost to AOPA.

We have this year reengaged with them and now enjoy a very proactive relationship.
AOPA US are now fully supporting us again, making their considerable resources available to us, and we them, as it should be.

We have attended the DOTARS briefing with the airlines and peak industry body and will be formulating our response over the break.

There are a number of proactive alternatives being considered that can deliver a win win solution for all of us.

I, personally, don't believe it will be necessary to man the barricades and roll out the tumbrils.

And whilst I am on the subject, when I were a lad, getting an pilot license issued was a similar process to getting a passport. That is positive identification, birth certificate, signed passport photo, the whole schlemeil.

As the issue of a license then allowed you to operate as a crew member or exercise the privilege of your license internationally using the license without necessarily the benefit of a Passport .

Why should it now be any different?
gaunty is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 11:28
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,496
Authority to carry passengers (bus licence) background check will set you back about $160.00. This cost is solely for the local constubulary to ensure that you are not a paedophile or the like and are a fit and proper person. I suppose this background check is to ensure we are not members of any proscribed organisations.

Price of vigilence? Cannot be a bad thing considering I believe most of the charge will be taken up by ASIO/ AFP/Local Const. Blogg.

Gaunty There is no mention if this will be a once only charge. I hope that will be the case.
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 11:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 424
Gaunty..

A previous AOPA Board somehow thought it fit to sue AOPA US at a very very significant financial cost to AOPA.
I think they saw fit because if they didn't, you wouldn't be on the board today (daresay there would be no aussie aopa). Do some more research before making misleading comments.

Dog
Dogimed is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 16:12
  #8 (permalink)  
ulm
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
It is a bi-annual fee.

It is not for security per se, but to balance a public 'perception'.

I have posted a 'just released' AOPA statement on another topic.

Perhaps if we are to have licence fees we should make them throw in free maps, I bet they'd stop changing them every 10 minutes then.

Chuck
ulm is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2003, 22:24
  #9 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
Dogimed

Oh really and you would of course know the unvarnished facts, I suspect that you were still in school at the time.

Pray tell what is misleading about the fact that around $250,000, that we know about, was squandered, to "stop" AOPA US from selling their excellent mags on the newstands alongside the dozens of other US aviation publications.

For what benefit, so that Aussies might not get the crazy idea that AOPA US might be able to represent them to our Government.?

We should be so grateful.

It's a bit hard to get to the bottom of it all really, as the Minutes do not appear to have survived from that period. If they did it would be useful to have them.

It really doesn't matter as we are now back in full contact and working together as we should.

Can you give me a single rational reason why this should not be so as a matter of course. And that is a rhetorical question only.
gaunty is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2003, 05:22
  #10 (permalink)  
save_dan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Lightbulb Proactive AOPA Australia

I believe AOPA US achieves the results it does by having a huge staff and a proactive membership.

AOPA Aus will never be able to achieve the staffing levels of AOPA US because of the different sizes of our respective industries. Should we have more staff? You bet, can we afford more staff? Don't think so

AOPA Aus needs a proactive membership. I have the feeling from this forum and others that the Board has been isolated from the membership in the past (if this is wrong I'm sorry but its just a feeling, I wasn't there, I was chasing girls with a newly broken voice and a pimply face at the time )

The current Boards plan to have regional representatives as a link between the members and the Board/Organisation is promising.

AOPA also needs its members to start selling AOPA to others. How many AOPA members know that if you sign up 5 other people you get your membership for one year free?

Call the AOPA office and they will help you to do this (Dont call til 5th Jan, no one is home )
 
Old 22nd Dec 2003, 18:57
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 424
Gaunt

Gaunty

Not meaning to get in a tussle, (I know this is off topic, sorry people) although you did get personal...
Oh really and you would of course know the unvarnished facts, I suspect that you were still in school at the time.
And would you know what I was reading at the time, in lunch breaks and on the bus home... why it would probably have been an AOPA mag, bit boring for me, but still I read it. More ads than now, and the mag was a different size back then. Did you know it changed sizes?
Pray tell what is misleading about the fact that around $250,000, that we know about, was squandered, to "stop" AOPA US from selling their excellent mags on the newstands alongside the dozens of other US aviation publications.
Perhaps it was the term "squandered"? Your opinion? or is your word fact now?
For what benefit, so that Aussies might not get the crazy idea that AOPA US might be able to represent them to our Government.?
Okay, this is how I saw it, AOPA US mag comes and starts selling their mag in australia.. Make losts of dollars out of aussie pilots, but bugguh all representation, why would they care, they have to keep check on FAA. Or should we have just had a yankee board too? So, the biggest asset that aopa australia has is the magazine, it's a great mag and has been for a very long time now.. (Decades) but lets be realistic, we cannot compete with the US mag, it has many more resources and much more money invested in it. So we sell out our magazine, and request a ..what do you think they would have given us,...A4 flier to go into it? so that it has an "ossie" feel to it? Where would the money for Australian AOPA come from? nil advertising, dropping membership as a few only get it for the mag.....
Personally... and this is only my opinion, not a generalised view.. It was an unfortunate blemish in the history of the two aopa's. It should never have happened as they cannot step on other regions toes, as far as IAOPA goes..(From what I can remember)
But lets continue this..
It's a bit hard to get to the bottom of it all really, as the Minutes do not appear to have survived from that period. If they did it would be useful to have them.
I agree!
Can you give me a single rational reason why this should not be so as a matter of course. And that is a rhetorical question only
Okay, lets stick to what I said and not what you want to portray me as saying. I think it is FANTASTIC that we are talking to AOPA US. AS you said, they have a wealth of knowledge and talent that we can access. Well done to the bright spark who suggested such a thing.
But remember.. all I said was this...
I think they saw fit because if they didn't, you wouldn't be on the board today (daresay there would be no aussie aopa). Do some more research before making misleading comments.
Bit different eh...
Regards

Dog
Dogimed is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2003, 03:13
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 61
We have a lot to learn from AOPA USA.

Check out their web site http://www.aopa.org/

Is there anywhere in Australia we can pick up their mags?
C182 Drover is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 08:44
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,496
This is what AVWEB had to say about us in the latest newsletter


the Aussie government didn't immediately publicize that a pilot's privilege of being fingerprinted and having his or her closets searched for skeletons would cost those pilots $200 each, and recur every two years. Here in the U.S., an estimated $1 billion a week to support elevated security has not so directly been passed on to GA. We're not complaining. And while we can imagine what U.S. alphabet groups would have to say about such a proposal, the Aussies seem to accept their charge without a whimper. AVweb's cursory search of Australian pilot and aviation group Web sites could find nary a disparaging word about the new tax, but maybe we weren't looking in the right places.

OUCH!

Regards

Mark
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 12:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 3,701
$200 every 2 years? That is a disgrace.

There is a good reason that the aussie pilto group cannot find out about it - cos bugga all details are publicised about it.

Guess that the Yank's don't understand "Yes Minister" politics, and that they are alive and well in the current obfuscation of aviation reform.

And I ask again - what is the position of AOPA (Australia) of this $100 a year licence tax? Yay or Nay?
compressor stall is online now  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 17:32
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 139
on the AOPA forum Daniel Parsons mentions Ron Bertram and himself were informed by Dotars last Thursday.

Daniel says the primary concern is that despite the fact that the ASIO Threat Assessment found there to be a small risk associated with GA aircraft theft, DoTARs wishes to implement measures based on a "Public perception"

AOPA say they will vigorously oppose this.
ugly is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2003, 07:33
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 61
http://www.avweb.com/newswire/9_52b/.../186347-1.html

December 25, 2003

...Pilot Background Checks Find Toehold...
subtitle_line/subtitle_line

story.byline_byline.credit_lineBy Russ Nilesstory.byline_line/story.byline_line story.byline.credit_line
Newswriter, Editor/story.byline.credit_line /story.byline_byline.credit_lineimage_line/image_line

Is the terrorist threat lower here or does the TSA believe these checks are worthless ... or is someone actually standing up for our "freedoms" ... or maybe our pilot lobbying groups are just better than theirs? Whatever the case, it's Australia -- not the U.S. -- that will have all pilots submit to a background check by their Security Intelligence Organization prior to the issuance of photo licenses. Australia's new security measures for GA were announced a few weeks ago, but the Aussie government didn't immediately publicize that a pilot's privilege of being fingerprinted and having his or her closets searched for skeletons would cost those pilots $200 each, and recur every two years. Here in the U.S., an estimated $1 billion a week to support elevated security has not so directly been passed on to GA. We're not complaining. And while we can imagine what U.S. alphabet groups would have to say about such a proposal, the Aussies seem to accept their charge without a whimper. AVweb's cursory search of Australian pilot and aviation group Web sites could find nary a disparaging word about the new tax, but maybe we weren't looking in the right places. The new annual $100 tab is not the only added cost for GA, however. The government is also ordering extra anti-theft measures for GA aircraft. Although the measures will be "determined by the aircraft operators as appropriate," according to the new regulations, some suggestions include prop locks, door locks and securing hangars. Government inspectors will be doing random security checks, although no penalties are mentioned for non-compliance. Sport license holders and sport aircraft are exempt.



Copied from www.agacf.org
http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview....readID=1204723
C182 Drover is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.