Heads up for LAA (PFA) groups.
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
Heads up for LAA (PFA) groups.
Just renewing the Permit on our aircraft to find the rules have changed and now all group members on a permit aircraft have to be members of the LAA - used to be just a recommendation not a requirement.
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
“It was not the case last year when we renewed!”
The rule was in but it was not being enforced.
Rod1
The rule was in but it was not being enforced.
Rod1
How are they going to enforce this?
What percentage of syndicate members has to have signed up for the Permit to be issued?
What if there is only one dissenter in a big(gish) group?
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 276
Likes: 3
From: N Ireland
Here we go once more.
Think this subject has been mentioned once or twice before and the geneneral concensus is that most would expect that all group members should be LAA members but there doesn't seem to be a way to enforce it legally.
It would appear to be a feeble attempt to gain some revenue for the LAA which I don't think will enhance their coffers greatly.
Think this subject has been mentioned once or twice before and the geneneral concensus is that most would expect that all group members should be LAA members but there doesn't seem to be a way to enforce it legally.
It would appear to be a feeble attempt to gain some revenue for the LAA which I don't think will enhance their coffers greatly.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“How are they going to enforce this?
What percentage of syndicate members has to have signed up for the Permit to be issued?
What if there is only one dissenter in a big(gish) group?”
Why ask me? I think it is a very stupid approach to a very simple problem. There has been considerable opposition to it and now the LAA will suffer. I wish things were different, but no organization is perfect and the LAA is better than most.
Rod1
What percentage of syndicate members has to have signed up for the Permit to be issued?
What if there is only one dissenter in a big(gish) group?”
Why ask me? I think it is a very stupid approach to a very simple problem. There has been considerable opposition to it and now the LAA will suffer. I wish things were different, but no organization is perfect and the LAA is better than most.
Rod1
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
I see that the charge for doing this via the PCS is Ł35.
I thought that on permit aeroplanes you either have to be the sole owner or their spouse and that the instructor had to hold a CPL and class 1.
Don't know if any of the coaches are CRIs but CRIs are not always CPLs.
I thought that on permit aeroplanes you either have to be the sole owner or their spouse and that the instructor had to hold a CPL and class 1.
Don't know if any of the coaches are CRIs but CRIs are not always CPLs.
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
CPLs are not required for BFRs and I think the Association ensured that all the coaches now have CRI status.
Indeed no need for a CPL for BFRs, a CRI will do, but most CRIs will not have CPLs I hazard a guess.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“I was wondering if they had developed some policy on how to deal with dissenters, which I am sure there will be.”
The “hierarchy” and I differ on this! I cannot see how a permit can be withheld from 19 fully paid up members if the 20th owner refuses to join. I assume the LAA would back down if this happened, but that is just a personal view. There are 100’s of problems with implementation and policing and the unscrupulous will slide through the cracks generating even more ill feeling.
I apologize if I came across as defensive, but a surprising number of people have tried to give me a hard time about this and I have opposed it from day one.
Rod1
The “hierarchy” and I differ on this! I cannot see how a permit can be withheld from 19 fully paid up members if the 20th owner refuses to join. I assume the LAA would back down if this happened, but that is just a personal view. There are 100’s of problems with implementation and policing and the unscrupulous will slide through the cracks generating even more ill feeling.
I apologize if I came across as defensive, but a surprising number of people have tried to give me a hard time about this and I have opposed it from day one.
Rod1
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
I apologize if I came across as defensive, but a surprising number of people have tried to give me a hard time about this and I have opposed it from day one.
I am just curious how they will deal with it as I agree with your view that coming down like this and then not enforcing it will create more ill-will amongst the consenters.
Anyway I have asked the question on the LAA BB so hopefully someone from the hierarchy will take the time to read and respond.
Joined: Feb 2001
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 2
From: Worcestershire, UK
Fine in principle Ken, but would you ground an aircraft perhaps owned by several paid-up LAA members if just 1 dissenter in the group refuses to join?
If I ever sell shares in my aircraft I will insist on LAA membership. However thats because I consider its the right thing to do, not because of some daft rule.
If I ever sell shares in my aircraft I will insist on LAA membership. However thats because I consider its the right thing to do, not because of some daft rule.
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
From: BERKSHIRE
If the person refuses they are not entering into the spirit of the PFA (LAA) although it has had it many faults since it started, without it aviation would have been alot more expensive for many permit pilots.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“If you run a PFA (LAA) aircraft you should be a member!”
Completely agree with the above. In fact I think all who fly an LAA aircraft should be members. I think they should join out of choice, not through some ˝ thought out rule, which will bring the LAA into disrepute! I was a member for over 10 years before I built an aircraft and I do not want to share the association with a load of press ganged guys who will do nothing for us.
Rod1
Completely agree with the above. In fact I think all who fly an LAA aircraft should be members. I think they should join out of choice, not through some ˝ thought out rule, which will bring the LAA into disrepute! I was a member for over 10 years before I built an aircraft and I do not want to share the association with a load of press ganged guys who will do nothing for us.
Rod1
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
Just join you miserable so an so!!
If you run a PFA (LAA) aircraft you should be a member!
If you run a PFA (LAA) aircraft you should be a member!
Happy to concede that I am a miserable so and so!
However I have been a member for 10 years or so; and I don't even have an LAA aeroplane nor am building one.
I joined because I support(ed) the cause of the PFA and one day may well want to build an aeroplane and because I enjoyed the annual Rally.
With the latter gone and some of the attitudes that the LAA/PFA has/had that is something that needs to be reconsidered.