Gerry 111;


Short answer, nothing resembling a cure to the problem. However it's the squeaky door that gets the oil. Most here aren't whingers but out of touch whistleblowers without legal standing.

NtT,
That's what surprised me too.
I initially thought, 'Nah, that supposed leak can't be genuine'.
How did he get to the rank of AVM with that level of communication skill?

So, given AOPA's 20 odd year record of sleeping with the regulator, how long till they dump 90% of what they are asking for in return for 10% by exemption?

The Australian way of doing business is adversarial...no wonder no result.

As yet I've seen nothing from the AOPA management saying the leaked email was genuine or otherwise.

Nor for that matter - importantly - how a member's private email came to be publicly released.

Did they suffer a hack to their system as someone has speculated (which brings it's own concerns for member's data), or was it deliberately leaked by someone for political gain?

OR Skidmore CC'd someone in or forwarded it after.

Given the circumstances it might be something that he wanted the rank and file in CASA to know.

Aussie Bob;


I've left your post go all day hoping someone would correct your assertion about 20 years in the bosom of CAsA. Nobody has challenged you and left uncorrected would become fact by modern journalistic practice. I would suggest your claim would include Dick Smith, Boyd Munroe, Bill Hamilton, Tony Mitchell, Jim Dawson, Bob Murphie, Chris McKeown, and a plethora of others.


All the above would challenge you and have good cause. CAsA grant exemptions, AOPA could only in the wildest of dreams present this as cause for a regulatory reform program. Intermediaries at AOPA have walked both sides of the fence and it gives me some happiness to know they are no longer there.


Facts please or be doomed as a literary prostitute.

Humour me a bit Frank, exactly how long is it since Dick and Boyd tried to run AOPA?

And hasn't the AOPA policy for the last decade or more been; "it is better to work with the regulator"? When I quit, pointing this fact out, how come no one bothered to dispute it despite my resignation being in writing? Surely if I was wrong, someone would have pointed out the error of my assertions instead of simply accepting my resignation without comment.

Hasn't the AOPA web site been actively promoting a lot of CASA initiatives, including taking advertising money off them for the last decade or more?

Maybe I have it all wrong, certainly feel free to correct me, even call me a literary prostitute :ok: although I am not so sure what context that is in.

Oh, and finally, how many meetings with CASA has AOPA management had in the last 20 years? Have they all been totally transparent?

Everyone in GA knows CASA is broken and unfixable, continuing down the current path will see the end of general aviation sooner rather than later. AOPA only seem to have discovered this fact very recently and despite this, I am sure there are still a few in the organisation who would still rather "work in with the regulator".

Time will tell and we will see however I am prepared to give AOPA the benefit of the doubt and rejoin.

I'll allow you ten years. Long after Dick and Boyd ran AOPA.

I must admit that this thread has provided me with more than a certain amount of bemusement!

I have not flown as PIC anything now in Australia for just over 10 years but the last position I held was on a casual basis for a now defunct Regional Airline.

And I can still remember the sad joke that was doing the rounds of the Pilots in this particular Regional at the time.

It went; What does AOPA mean?

The Answer was ; Amateurs Opposing Professional Aviators.:sad:

What makes it worse is that I have heard that reference used in the recent past as well.

Unfairly or not; It merely indicates to me that, in the Aviation Industry that there are serious problems to be solved and bridges to be built! How, where, when and by whom is beyond me. I have been out of it for too long.:sad:

"Ozbiggles. I like people who disagree with me. What do I do? I open up friendly conversation". Just like with Caroline Thulip??

Spot on, Pinky.
Your last paragraph hit the nail on the head.

Those problems within the GA industry which, from my observations, seem to have developed over the last twenty five years simply must be addressed before any progress can be made with the CASA issues.

It seems that only now are people realising the consequences of years of ego-driven power-tripping disguised as "positive competitive practice".
This, in turn, has led to the internecine squabbling and, in some cases, all sorts of dirty tricks.
And, of course, this has made it all too easy for that old 'masonic principle' of "Divide and Rule" to be applied.

As for myself, while I've been away from the industry for some years now, I've maintained an interest in what goes on via social contact with friends and acquaintances.
Time for that bridge-building to get under way before it's too late.
I could be wrong and perhaps a bit hopeful, but rallying around what seems to be the new AOPA flag might just be the way to get that essential unity back into the industry.
Oh, and the HIA needs to be brought back onto the team, as well.

Just sayin', like.
.

VH. If Caroline Tulip had ever spoken to me and discussed how some of our ideas differed and others coincided I would not have have had to spend a lot of money to ensure that happened.

Hard to have a friendly conversation with someone who remains anonymous while they write incorrect things about you.