No more IMC rating
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by englishal
AOPA UK is not run anything like the US AOPA - if it were I'd join. Their website is rubbish, it has very little useful info on there, other than listing the board of directors
As battle lines are being drawn against EASA, the obvious thing to do is pool the resources of the other European organisations that use the AOPA acronym. However, if it's that obvious, there must be a fundamental reason why it's not happening. Could someone please explain this to me?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As battle lines are being drawn against EASA, the obvious thing to do is pool the resources of the other European organisations that use the AOPA acronym. However, if it's that obvious, there must be a fundamental reason why it's not happening. Could someone please explain this to me?
It is not that I have "bashed" AOPA UK in the past for the sake of it, but because this is vital.
AOPA US tell us how many members they have quite openly on their web site. Why dont AOPA UK?
AOPA US have a complete tab telling us about the important regulatory issues at any point in time and what they are doing about it. Just try and find any of these issues mentioned on AOPA UKs web site.
The trouble with AOPA is good people like Bose tell us they are trying BUT why dont AOPA tell us - people need to know someone is fighting their corner and then they will sign up and support them. As the old fashion evangalists new only to well unless you deliver the message to the people they sure aint going to give up cannibalism.
So to come full cirlce I wish I knew the answer.
I dont believe it can be as simple as funding.
A decent web site being your shop front these days is hardly costly - I could do something a great deal better sitting on my throne than AOPA UK manage.
I mentioned it previously on here some months ago and they tinkered with it a bit.
That picture on the lead page now just scares me to death every time I look at it!
Come on chaps you must do better.
Bose what is going on at AOPA towers?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quite agree the website is not good enough, it has been a constant source of discussion within the MWG and will be raised again at tomorrows meeting.
The problem with a lot of the issues is that they are contained within the various working groups surrounded by non disclosure. A lot of the stuff that appears for discussion in these forums is often not quite in the public domain and therefore offered as conjecture. A lot of the time people see it for the heads up that it represents but a lot of the time they just shoot it down and then when it goes public as fact later are outraged that they knew nothing about it......
At lot of other things are more dynamic and difficult to keep updated.
It also comes down to funding, AOPA do not have a full time web team, they have a guy based in Australia (AFAIK) that does the website amongst many clients. AOPA do not want to divert essential funding from fighting the GA cause to having a spangly website.
I personally would like to see that nasty picture from the front page replaced with something more neutral and a hot list of current issues. Something I will push again at the meeting.
AOPA does not have the membership of its licensee in the US for the obvious reason that we are a much smaller country, with a smaller pilot base and the vast majority of that base wants to complain endlessly about the poor job being done but not actually support the cause....
As for the comments about the directors of the company, these are unpaid positions and the people are vastly experienced in aviation giving freely of there time to represent GA. Just like the MWG does.
AOPA is not perfect and trust me I have had more than one disagreement about how things are handled and how internal communication often does not communicate. But it is improving.
The problem with a lot of the issues is that they are contained within the various working groups surrounded by non disclosure. A lot of the stuff that appears for discussion in these forums is often not quite in the public domain and therefore offered as conjecture. A lot of the time people see it for the heads up that it represents but a lot of the time they just shoot it down and then when it goes public as fact later are outraged that they knew nothing about it......
At lot of other things are more dynamic and difficult to keep updated.
It also comes down to funding, AOPA do not have a full time web team, they have a guy based in Australia (AFAIK) that does the website amongst many clients. AOPA do not want to divert essential funding from fighting the GA cause to having a spangly website.
I personally would like to see that nasty picture from the front page replaced with something more neutral and a hot list of current issues. Something I will push again at the meeting.
AOPA does not have the membership of its licensee in the US for the obvious reason that we are a much smaller country, with a smaller pilot base and the vast majority of that base wants to complain endlessly about the poor job being done but not actually support the cause....
As for the comments about the directors of the company, these are unpaid positions and the people are vastly experienced in aviation giving freely of there time to represent GA. Just like the MWG does.
AOPA is not perfect and trust me I have had more than one disagreement about how things are handled and how internal communication often does not communicate. But it is improving.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also comes down to funding, AOPA do not have a full time web team, they have a guy based in Australia (AFAIK) that does the website amongst many clients. AOPA do not want to divert essential funding from fighting the GA cause to having a spangly website.
Secondly, it doesnt take a web team to produce something better. Moreover it doesnt need to be flashy - I think most pilots are a bit more mature than that - just solid content that makes it clear we arent a bunch of amateurs that should be treated as such. Unfortunately image is all important.
Thank you for raising it.
What is going on at 'AOPA Towers'?
Quite a lot, actually. But some activity is 'delicate' in nature at this stage.
In any case, there are meetings of both the AOPA Instructor Committee and the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators' Education and Training Committees in a week or so which will focus on these issues.
At the latter, an EASA person will be present. He should expect very forthright and robust debate.....
I have very little confidence in the 'negotiating power' of our 'UK representatives' in these matters.
How can you voice your outrage?
1. Join AOPA and lobby the CEO. Or rather, add your voice to his existing concern!
2. Join the PFA and do the same.
3. E-mail the CAA and do the same.
4. E-mail your MP and do the same.
5. E-mail the DfT and do the same
It probably isn't the done thing on PPRuNe to reveal private e-mail addresses - but if the UK EASA-apologist doesn't wake his ideas up pretty soon, I shall have no qualms in telling you to whom to write!
Quite a lot, actually. But some activity is 'delicate' in nature at this stage.
In any case, there are meetings of both the AOPA Instructor Committee and the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators' Education and Training Committees in a week or so which will focus on these issues.
At the latter, an EASA person will be present. He should expect very forthright and robust debate.....
I have very little confidence in the 'negotiating power' of our 'UK representatives' in these matters.
How can you voice your outrage?
1. Join AOPA and lobby the CEO. Or rather, add your voice to his existing concern!
2. Join the PFA and do the same.
3. E-mail the CAA and do the same.
4. E-mail your MP and do the same.
5. E-mail the DfT and do the same
It probably isn't the done thing on PPRuNe to reveal private e-mail addresses - but if the UK EASA-apologist doesn't wake his ideas up pretty soon, I shall have no qualms in telling you to whom to write!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigbloke
BTW
I THINK WE SHOULD - roll out a petition that is.
It is a start, it cant do any harm (as far as I can see), and it starts to demonstrate we are interested and more imporantly we are united!
Lets come up with some background and some wording between us?
I would be happy to run up a web site also linked to the petition.
We should get coverage in all the GA mags and some flyers to as many of the flying clubs as can be covered woudl be a start.
Pilots in Europe know nothing about the IMCR - when they find out they are amazed that what many of them do illegally all the time they could do legally!!
They love it and we need to target them.
BTW
I THINK WE SHOULD - roll out a petition that is.
It is a start, it cant do any harm (as far as I can see), and it starts to demonstrate we are interested and more imporantly we are united!
Lets come up with some background and some wording between us?
I would be happy to run up a web site also linked to the petition.
We should get coverage in all the GA mags and some flyers to as many of the flying clubs as can be covered woudl be a start.
Pilots in Europe know nothing about the IMCR - when they find out they are amazed that what many of them do illegally all the time they could do legally!!
They love it and we need to target them.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bose-x
It also comes down to funding, AOPA do not have a full time web team, they have a guy based in Australia (AFAIK) that does the website amongst many clients. AOPA do not want to divert essential funding from fighting the GA cause to having a spangly website.
Originally Posted by FujiABound
Pilots in Europe know nothing about the IMCR - when they find out they are amazed that what many of them do illegally all the time they could do legally!!
They love it and we need to target them.
They love it and we need to target them.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about:
Tim
We the undersigned petition the PM to...
Save the Instrument Meteorological Conditions rating which improves the safety of UK private pilots by allowing them to train and qualify to fly in poor weather outside controlled airspace, without the cost of obtaining an Instrument Rating as required for commercial operations.
Save the Instrument Meteorological Conditions rating which improves the safety of UK private pilots by allowing them to train and qualify to fly in poor weather outside controlled airspace, without the cost of obtaining an Instrument Rating as required for commercial operations.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soay, with all due respect do you have any idea how a website is produced? There is no such thing as a 'software package' to do this.
At the entry level you are looking at a home developed front page or iWeb type page non interactive and requiring nothing but a bit of space. As you move up a league the platform requirements become more intense and the support requirements behind it. AOPA US are well funded and have significant investment in technology, these includes the heavyweight hardware and development skills to keep it all running. AOPA UK do not have the type of funding to be able to operate the US style infrastructure to run such a site and neither do they have the size of user base to provide the scale of content that comes from having 600,000 members compared to around 4,000.
AOPA Uk have a budget of a few thousand AOPA US have a budget of hundreds of thousands for the web. If AOPA UK had a super spangly site the next discussion we would have would be around how much they were spending on that instead of representation where it's needed.
Either way they can't win!! So have to work inside the constraints that are out there. We do take input from members about content and the MWG constantly providing feedback on what we want to see. We really can't start changing things to suit people who are not even members on the promise they might join if the website was better. Lets face it, representation is about what gets done not about how spangly the website is. AOPA also have the GA magazine.
At the entry level you are looking at a home developed front page or iWeb type page non interactive and requiring nothing but a bit of space. As you move up a league the platform requirements become more intense and the support requirements behind it. AOPA US are well funded and have significant investment in technology, these includes the heavyweight hardware and development skills to keep it all running. AOPA UK do not have the type of funding to be able to operate the US style infrastructure to run such a site and neither do they have the size of user base to provide the scale of content that comes from having 600,000 members compared to around 4,000.
AOPA Uk have a budget of a few thousand AOPA US have a budget of hundreds of thousands for the web. If AOPA UK had a super spangly site the next discussion we would have would be around how much they were spending on that instead of representation where it's needed.
Either way they can't win!! So have to work inside the constraints that are out there. We do take input from members about content and the MWG constantly providing feedback on what we want to see. We really can't start changing things to suit people who are not even members on the promise they might join if the website was better. Lets face it, representation is about what gets done not about how spangly the website is. AOPA also have the GA magazine.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 2nm due S EGLK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point taken.
But can't they at least update the front page to have something more relevant than a poll on people's options about a London LARS service? Perhaps... something IMC related?
TPK
But can't they at least update the front page to have something more relevant than a poll on people's options about a London LARS service? Perhaps... something IMC related?
TPK
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My reading of AOPA UK is this:
They are run by a couple of out of touch characters who go about things with the finnesse of a bull in a china shop and who as a result (I am very reliably advised by insiders) are nowadays held in very poor regard by the regulatory bodies with whom they have to regularly interact.
They do have an impossible problem representing UK GA as a whole, which is a movement with its fair share of back stabbers. Anybody who is an aircraft owner and is based at a proper airfield (not some remote farm strip) will have had an introduction to airfield politics, and that is just a microcosm of the larger picture where you have different organisations each doing their own thing and screw everybody else. To give just one little example, UK's PFA pilots would happily trash all IFR GA privileges just to get a more favourable regulatory scene for themselves for flying VFR. However I don't think this is particularly British or anything like that; it is a symptom of most of UK GA scraping out the bottom of the barrel financially and this puts the whole scene under pressure, in which everybody looks after "number one". US AOPA has many times more members and many of them are well funded people who use GA for utility. In Europe, the utility value of GA is relatively poor. So.... I guess UK AOPA concentrate on the issues which are sure to unite most people, e.g. airfield closures.
Historically, and I am not sure to what degree this is true today, UK AOPA has been dominated by corporate members; basically flying schools. These have their own interests: licenses/ratings which are of limited use for revitalising GA but generate training revenue (the NPPL); the abolition of the FAA option especially if it includes UK based training, etc.
Anybody who looks after the interests of pilots (rather than flying schools) will be supporting the FAA option, or any move towards that in Europe. It seems to me that UK AOPA has moved in this direction only recently and only reluctantly.
UK AOPA has massively valuable London premises, which don't give it any benefit other than appreciation in value but as with any property this is not realised until you sell up. They don't need to be based there at all.
A website is a minor issue. With motivation, a nice website can be knocked up in days.
They are run by a couple of out of touch characters who go about things with the finnesse of a bull in a china shop and who as a result (I am very reliably advised by insiders) are nowadays held in very poor regard by the regulatory bodies with whom they have to regularly interact.
They do have an impossible problem representing UK GA as a whole, which is a movement with its fair share of back stabbers. Anybody who is an aircraft owner and is based at a proper airfield (not some remote farm strip) will have had an introduction to airfield politics, and that is just a microcosm of the larger picture where you have different organisations each doing their own thing and screw everybody else. To give just one little example, UK's PFA pilots would happily trash all IFR GA privileges just to get a more favourable regulatory scene for themselves for flying VFR. However I don't think this is particularly British or anything like that; it is a symptom of most of UK GA scraping out the bottom of the barrel financially and this puts the whole scene under pressure, in which everybody looks after "number one". US AOPA has many times more members and many of them are well funded people who use GA for utility. In Europe, the utility value of GA is relatively poor. So.... I guess UK AOPA concentrate on the issues which are sure to unite most people, e.g. airfield closures.
Historically, and I am not sure to what degree this is true today, UK AOPA has been dominated by corporate members; basically flying schools. These have their own interests: licenses/ratings which are of limited use for revitalising GA but generate training revenue (the NPPL); the abolition of the FAA option especially if it includes UK based training, etc.
Anybody who looks after the interests of pilots (rather than flying schools) will be supporting the FAA option, or any move towards that in Europe. It seems to me that UK AOPA has moved in this direction only recently and only reluctantly.
UK AOPA has massively valuable London premises, which don't give it any benefit other than appreciation in value but as with any property this is not realised until you sell up. They don't need to be based there at all.
A website is a minor issue. With motivation, a nice website can be knocked up in days.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bose-x
soay, with all due respect do you have any idea how a website is produced? There is no such thing as a 'software package' to do this.
Originally Posted by IO540
A website is a minor issue.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are run by a couple of out of touch characters who go about things with the finnesse of a bull in a china shop and who as a result (I am very reliably advised by insiders) are nowadays held in very poor regard by the regulatory bodies with whom they have to regularly interact.
A website is a minor issue. With motivation, a nice website can be knocked up in days.
I am involved both with large companies that administer their own web sites and web site designers as well as tinkering myself. With such a small user base I can assure you it is not a difficult or an expensive job to come up with something a great deal better - and clearly at the moment not much bandwidth is required.
Sorry to shout but in all of this we must not be side tracked from the issue in hand. Personally, and I can only judge this on the history, I am not convinced this can be entirely left in the hands of AOPA, or any of the other organisations. We need to do something about it ourselves. Any advance on the petition so far?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
UK AOPA has massively valuable London premises, which don't give it any benefit other than appreciation in value but as with any property this is not realised until you sell up. They don't need to be based there at all.
Premises in Cambridge Street. Why? It is clearly not a cheap site, so a significant proportion of the AOPA UK income will inevitably be going on its upkeep. I could almost understand a central London location when the CAA were at Kingsway, but now?
The upkeep of the premises is dwarfed by the appreciation of the asset.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
I am not convinced this can be entirely left in the hands of AOPA, or any of the other organisations. We need to do something about it ourselves. Any advance on the petition so far?
Originally Posted by David Roberts
The time to 'protest' is when the EASA draft Implementing Rules for EU licences are published for formal public consultation, probably towards the end of Q1/08. This is a requirement of the EU process of law making. And having worked inside EASA as an 'industry' expert (representing Europe Air Sports) for the last three years I know that the response process culminating in a Comment Response Document, is taken seriously. Responses have to be rational and constructive to be 'registered' and have impact. Emotional stuff is ignored. Just as petitions are by and large.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I give up.....
The reason GA is in such a mess is that it tears itself apart from the inside out, spending more time bringing down those that are doing something than actually doing anything else.
IO, your last post has to be the worst piece of ill informed and probably even libelous rubbish I have ever seen you write.
I have spent significant time around the regulator and can assure you that the AOPA staff are taken seriously. They work very hard to represent and should be given support.
If you think you can do it better than please step up. But equally I could point out that many could and have posted unfavorable comments about your own interaction with authority. To be fair and about me as well....
The reason GA is in such a mess is that it tears itself apart from the inside out, spending more time bringing down those that are doing something than actually doing anything else.
IO, your last post has to be the worst piece of ill informed and probably even libelous rubbish I have ever seen you write.
I have spent significant time around the regulator and can assure you that the AOPA staff are taken seriously. They work very hard to represent and should be given support.
If you think you can do it better than please step up. But equally I could point out that many could and have posted unfavorable comments about your own interaction with authority. To be fair and about me as well....
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aopa UK doesn't represent me, nor do they seek to, given that I'm based outside their remit. So I'm neither supporting nor critising them. I'll leave that to those in the UK.
But I must comment on this.
I understand their determination to hang onto an appreciating asset, and I think that's a good decision. However they might consider, renting out their asset, and using the proceeds to rent or even purchase, somewhere else more suitable to their needs. That way they reduce cash out flow, and hold onto their appreciating asset.
dp
But I must comment on this.
The upkeep of the premises is dwarfed by the appreciation of the asset.
dp
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As any homeowner with a financial brain must realise, there is no meaning to property appreciation unless one is planning to sell downmarket.
All the time one is planning to stay put, the property value has no meaning (unless one is borrowing money against it, which I doubt applies to UK AOPA).
All the time one is planning to keep moving up, one will benefit from a falling property market.
Glad to hear things have improved, bose x. Not sure what you refer to re my "interaction with authority"... I can't remember the last time I had any "interaction with authority".
All the time one is planning to stay put, the property value has no meaning (unless one is borrowing money against it, which I doubt applies to UK AOPA).
All the time one is planning to keep moving up, one will benefit from a falling property market.
Glad to hear things have improved, bose x. Not sure what you refer to re my "interaction with authority"... I can't remember the last time I had any "interaction with authority".
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before trying some "Save the IMCR" campaign, it would be useful to look at the IMCR from the perspective of people in other European Authorities and other pilot groups such as pilot unions.
All the above have safety high on their agenda.
Now from the outside, the IMC Rating.......
10 or 15 Hours Training often by pilots who don't homd more than an IMC themselves.
Training almost totally completed at a single aerodrome with very limited enroute training.
The CAA who are the authority who issue the rating segregate IMCR holders from the commercial enroute traffic system and from the more heavily used airspace areas in the UK.
Three of the privileges of the IMCR - able to fly out of sight of the surface on a VFR flight, teh removal of the 3Km lower visibility limit when VMC is defined as a visibility less than 3Km eg 1500m in class G below 3000ft and the removal of the 10Km restriction on SVFR flights are not applied under ICAO or elsewhere in JAR-FCL. So the only issue if the ability to fly IFR in IMC and fly instrument approaches at aerodromes and depart IFR etc etc where under ICAO an IR is required.
The UK CAA reminds IMCR holders that it is not designed for prolonged flight in IMC and in many CAA documents it is a "get you out of trouble (without having to tell the CAA you got into trouble) rating".
Do I as a commercial pilot want to be in the hold and be delayed by a pilot who can not be put in the hold above me but get's put ahead of everyone because they can not hold as it is in class A, B or C airspace?
Do I as a commercial pilot want to be in a hold with an IMCR pilot in an adjacent hold who has not been tested on their ability to complete a hold safely?
Do you as a member of the public want to trust your nice Grandmother's life to a pilot with only 15 hours training of which only a percentage was in IMC or even simulated IMC and not had their proficiency checked for over 2 years when the European basic standard is 50 odd hours with annual proficiency check?
Do you want pilots who do not know their limits regarding minima for approaches?
Finally.......do you want the class F and G airspace of your country occupied by flights claiming to be VFR but for a large part of the time are IFR?
The Le Touquet bad weather situation described earlier does not go unnoticed.
From the above you can see that even sections of the UK aviation establishment put out information that makes the IMCR undesirable for many countries.
Thus with the option for a single European Licence to either give everyone the rating or no-one the rating.....the majority view is prbably that there should be no such rating and UK pilots need to remember that they are a small part of the total European pilot pool and as such will need much support from outside the UK to succeed
That is Democracy for you.
Regards,
DFC
PS Removing the IMCR can not infringe your rights since it was not in accordance with international standards or European ones in the first place.
The only case would be for you paying a lot of money for a new rating without being informed of the probable limited validity it will have and that would not be a human rights issue either.
All the above have safety high on their agenda.
Now from the outside, the IMC Rating.......
10 or 15 Hours Training often by pilots who don't homd more than an IMC themselves.
Training almost totally completed at a single aerodrome with very limited enroute training.
The CAA who are the authority who issue the rating segregate IMCR holders from the commercial enroute traffic system and from the more heavily used airspace areas in the UK.
Three of the privileges of the IMCR - able to fly out of sight of the surface on a VFR flight, teh removal of the 3Km lower visibility limit when VMC is defined as a visibility less than 3Km eg 1500m in class G below 3000ft and the removal of the 10Km restriction on SVFR flights are not applied under ICAO or elsewhere in JAR-FCL. So the only issue if the ability to fly IFR in IMC and fly instrument approaches at aerodromes and depart IFR etc etc where under ICAO an IR is required.
The UK CAA reminds IMCR holders that it is not designed for prolonged flight in IMC and in many CAA documents it is a "get you out of trouble (without having to tell the CAA you got into trouble) rating".
Do I as a commercial pilot want to be in the hold and be delayed by a pilot who can not be put in the hold above me but get's put ahead of everyone because they can not hold as it is in class A, B or C airspace?
Do I as a commercial pilot want to be in a hold with an IMCR pilot in an adjacent hold who has not been tested on their ability to complete a hold safely?
Do you as a member of the public want to trust your nice Grandmother's life to a pilot with only 15 hours training of which only a percentage was in IMC or even simulated IMC and not had their proficiency checked for over 2 years when the European basic standard is 50 odd hours with annual proficiency check?
Do you want pilots who do not know their limits regarding minima for approaches?
Finally.......do you want the class F and G airspace of your country occupied by flights claiming to be VFR but for a large part of the time are IFR?
The Le Touquet bad weather situation described earlier does not go unnoticed.
From the above you can see that even sections of the UK aviation establishment put out information that makes the IMCR undesirable for many countries.
Thus with the option for a single European Licence to either give everyone the rating or no-one the rating.....the majority view is prbably that there should be no such rating and UK pilots need to remember that they are a small part of the total European pilot pool and as such will need much support from outside the UK to succeed
That is Democracy for you.
Regards,
DFC
PS Removing the IMCR can not infringe your rights since it was not in accordance with international standards or European ones in the first place.
The only case would be for you paying a lot of money for a new rating without being informed of the probable limited validity it will have and that would not be a human rights issue either.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason GA is in such a mess is that it tears itself apart from the inside out, spending more time bringing down those that are doing something than actually doing anything else.
STEADY ON CHAPS
Bose is right.
AOPA and how they conduct themselves may be an issue, but the issue so far as this thread is concerned is the erosion of our rights in consequence of what is or will take place in Europe. We need to protect these rights.