bull

[ATTACH=full]37763[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]37764[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]37766[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]37767[/ATTACH]Six months of work - first photo on 6/3/15 and last photo on 7/3/15 and there are lots of photos in between

Whats that single seater in the rafters planet?

 

 

Thanks Aldo

 

Bull

 

I don't think you are looking at this from the correct perspective, I fly drifters and Jabiru's as part of recreational aviation, I fly Cessna's, Pipers and beech aircraft as part of GA, any time I flown into an event I have never been worried about what aircraft anyone was flying or what it looked like just happy to see them there I don't care what type of aircraft you fly just as long as you are flying. The event and whether it is good or not is not dependent on what you arrived in but who you are as a person. The other thing it is easier to get more of the family (for family feel) in a 6 or 8 seater than it is in a single or 2 seater but not sure what you consider family.

Thanks Aldo, Yes you are right about what you say I,m sorry for my misconceptions about RAA and I totally agree, it really does,nt matter what you are flying but I had not had my Valium today and was getting a bit loose. So my apologies to any that I might have offended with my posting esp,Don as I know how hard he has worked to make RAA what it is today.My reference to family was meant the family of fliers as a group sort of thing, as we used to feel sort of special in the old days as not many people would see them selves in those dangerous looking rag and tube things and I suppose we might have been just a little mad to fly them in the first place ,and today it just feels different so sorry to all from me Bull...................

 

 

Can you not organise your own fly in and invite only rag and tube type aircraft?

yes

 

 

Did you read the actual post from MrRamsay that you moderated my reply to , (yes all posts read and moderated)

(Both yours and Mr Ramseys posts have been moderated to stop the slanging from both directions and bring some sanity to the discussion...mod)

 

 

An interesting post Ian, I too would like to hear the answers to your questions but it seems the silence is deafening?At some fly in's I have heard people complain about the lack of rag & tube basic aircraft, but no-one is stopping them or turning them away. Event organisers can only put an event on, they can't make certain aircraft come along.

The thing is I think,{and this is only my opinion} that the mutation of an organisation for ultralights ie rag and tube , that has slowly but surely eaten away at casa to allow such high performance and heavier aircraft such as we have now with the plastic fantastic etc . Has taken over something that was special and restricted to a certain weight and speed etc that always had more of a family feel to fly ins etc and was fun ,,,where now it,s more like,,,HEY LOOK at my new 100000 plastic fantastic, she is so much better then those old rag and tube thingy,[they should ban those things they are dangerous sort of attitude.

 

 

Ok sorry Emu ,/QUOTE]Sorry Emu I could not stop my fingers, have now taken my Valium and sedatives (edited by mod)

Edited by mod

 

 

Righto, you two. Cut it out the personal attacks and get back to attacking the topic.

Ok sorry Emu , (edited by mod)

 

 

I am just an ordinary member of RAAus, same status as every other ordinary member.

I like to offer opinions based on facts and logic whereas some feel free to offer opinions based on, well, nothing.

 

Such is life.

Mr Ramsay the problems with RAA aka AUF can be directly related to that plastic thing that you are so proudly sitting in ,in your avatar and the people that wanted to fly them............................................................................

 

 

A baseless opinion is rarely of value.No response to reasonable questions.

 

edited by mod...stop the personal attacks people, it does not do you any justice. People are entitled to their own opinion...right or wrong. No need to play the person...MOD

$27.50 p.a.? That cannot be directly compared with the RAAus annual fee. The insurance you get from RAAus costs more than that and to me is good value. Personally I pay for extra cover on top of the RAAus cover. I could never recommend pilots flying without Liability cover. So, what do you get for $27.50?RAAus does a lot of work for CASA. That work costs RAAus members about $1.8 million p.a. and CASA recompenses about $107,000

 

Will CASA ask less of E&LAAA? Level playing field?

 

How will E&LAAA fund their first year of existence? Is it likely that they will be profitable from day 1? Will the shareholder stump up say $500,000 to ensure they don't go bankrupt before the first year ends?

We will see, edited by mod...sarcasm does not become you. Play like grown ups please...

 

 

So are we going to have more of this Keith, because you should leave it lie, at some point. You have your show and it will go or not go. What we don't need is ongoing sniping , for the sake of aviation and those who sail in her. Nev

You had better wear a lifejacket and carry some flares facthunter, because the FACTS are RAA is unseaworthy and entering a very rough bit of water..............And I don't think Keith was sniping, his and caspers replies are just in response to the seemingly disregard by those at the top of RAA have for members in a job that they do for the MEMBERS and I along with many members I know are disgusted with this attitude from people who actually work for the members not them selves,and are not listening to MEMBERS concerns,,,,The way RAA has now gone is like a private little club for those who want to do what ever THEY want without listening to MEMBERS the people they are working FOR..........................

 

 

Does anyone know the location of the Catalina photo. It looks a bit arid.Cheers, Willie.

Suadi arabia I think , it was fitted out as a flying caravan with luxury interior and was on a world tour or something . They had landed to overnight somewhere and wher fired on by arabs and abandoned as unable to takeoff because of damage evidently ??

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPG-mvQe3C8

This may be wrong, but do you need to use hearing aids with headsets? As I understand, hearing aids just amplify and the whizz-bang ones do some noise filtering. This is similar to what ANR aviation headsets do. Just take the hearing aids out when you put the headsets on and if needed turn the radio/intercom/headset volume up.

I use hearing aids for all normal activities, but when I,m flying I have found that with the volume turned up full onmy headset I have no problem hearing calls etc, but with the aid in I get too much interference

 

 

Anything that flies for the pure pleasure of flying has a place,And Peter unfortunatly what you say is so right ,it,s the fast quick go places GA mob that want the cheaper option of using and taking over an organisation designed for ultralights in the first place that has created so much divison in recreational flying against cheaper GA flying The sad truth is ,,we DO need another way to represent the flyers who want to fly just for the PLEASURE of flying,not as another means to get from city to city etc etc .................

 

 

Cosmick on the forum here is a owner of a GT500 and he got parts in from Air-Tech no problem once they got all their inventory together

So did I as I needed a new tail skid for my gt500 and was delivered 8 days after ordering ,so I was impressed.And was the correct part too.

 

 

Hi all. Been lurking for a while, thinking of adding an RA-Aus pilot certificate to my resume to go with my PPL. Love my GA flying, but coming to the realisation that much of it might be done cheaper, easier and better in RA registered aircraft. The possible MTOW increase would make that even more likely (and they did a pretty good job of selling me on RA-Aus at Narromine this weekend).

JOIN UP MATE, THE PEOPLE RUNNING THE SHOW HAVE TURNED AN ORGANISATION FOR ULTRALIGHTS INTO A GA CLUB NOW, SO you would be welcomed with open arms as per Narromine

 

 

This morning I was contacted by the CEO Michael Monck by phone about the matter of the resolution notice times and why Kasper,s resolution motions where disallowed. He was very straight forward and helpful and I now have no more questions about this matter,and whole heartedly apologise to the CEO and the board for any perceived blame or improprietry to anyone. I will now publish his reply to all in full here thankyou.

 

www.raa.asn.au

 

www.raa.asn.au

 

 

Hi Scott,

 

Your email has been forwarded to me to respond to as a lot of the staff (including the CEO) are in Narromine putting in considerable effort to ensure that upcoming airshow goes as planned for members. As discussed this email is just a follow up to our chat on the phone. It’s rather lengthy so stick with me!

 

With respect to the topic at hand, Michael Linke has not misinterpreted the constitution. He, and the board, have implemented it in the correct manner and, it is worth noting, in the same way that it has always been implemented.

 

The 21 day requirement is imposed on the company (RAAus) and not the members. Clause 21.1(a) of the constitution compels the organisation to give each member notice of a meeting and clause 21.2 says that this notice must be given “at least twenty-one (21) days before the meeting”. With this in mind it is worth considering the dates of the upcoming meeting and how this clause requires us to act.

 

The meeting is planned for 15 October 2016 which is a Saturday. We hold meetings on a weekend to facilitate the attendance by members despite the fact that staff will have to forego family time and this creates a wrinkle. The preceding Friday, 14 October is one day before the meeting, the Thursday is two days and so forth. This means that 21 days before the meeting is Saturday 24 September. So you can see, meeting our obligations under the constitution immediately means that 21 days notice becomes a minimum of 22 days. That is, in order to meet the minimum notice we are required to give we need to send, in this case, the notice on Friday 23 September 2016. This is not an issue as we are still compliant with the “at least” portion of the constitutional requirement and will meet the timing requirements contained therein.

 

We then need to consider another administrative aspect of this requirement – the receipt of member resolutions. In order to send out notice in the required timeframe we need to have the notice finalised and ready to go prior to that. Receiving a request from a member a few minutes before close of business on that same day would not be reasonable and similarly, requiring members to submit such a request weeks in advance is not reasonable.

 

In light of this, and not knowing how many requests would be received, an administrative decision was made to ask members for their requests a day prior to our obligation. This allows us a full working day to compile the requests and get the notice distributed within the required timeframe. To this end we published many calls asking for such a notice to be sent to us “prior to September 23”. This notice was published on 2 August in the magazine and several times again in subsequent magazines, enews, etc. This amounts to us having given around 7 ½ weeks notice for resolutions to be submitted by members. Making such a request is well within the rights of the board and management.

 

The strategy that was implemented was designed to give members ample time to gather their thoughts and prepare any submissions in order for other members to an equally ample amount of time to consider those submissions. Moreover, this allows other members to have their say on any proposed resolution and have their statement published in accordance with clause 27.3. This clause says that a member who wishes to comment on a proposed resolution that was published 21 days prior to the meeting, can request RAAus to publish their statement but in order to do so, they must make this request 7 days before the meeting.

 

So we have the following:

 

· A call for resolutions – made 2 August and several times after.

 

· Publication of any proposed resolutions – must be at least 21 days prior to the meeting.

 

· Opportunity for members comments – for 15 after the publication of the notice.

 

· Publication of member comments – requests must be made 7 days prior to the meeting.

 

· The meeting itself – voting on any proposed resolution will take place.

 

We only received one set of proposed resolutions for the upcoming meeting and these were received at approximately 8pm on 23 September, well after the office had closed and staff had left for the weekend (many of whom had gone on a short holiday owing to it being a long weekend). Had we sent notice of this resolution to members it would not have been until Tuesday 27 September (Monday was the public holiday) meaning we would have breached members rights by only providing 18 days notice. Perhaps, if the notice had been received before the close of business it could have been accommodated but given it was some hours later, calling staff back from holiday plans was not feasible.

 

There seems to be a conspiracy theory that the board and staff are out to get members and is somehow self serving so at this juncture it is worth considering a few points. I myself am taking time to respond to your email and I don’t get paid for this. In fact it costs me money as I can’t bill my clients for this time. I won’t moan about this but simply mention it to highlight the fact that board members get little, if anything, out of performing this task. The staff, as I mentioned in my opening paragraph, are currently working away from home and their families to coordinate efforts for the upcoming flyin at Narromine. They will give up their weekend in an effort to deliver an event that members have requested. Moreover, on the following weekend they will repeat this exercise and give up another weekend for the general meeting. It seems to me to be quite the contradiction to the paranoia that a select few members display when they level serious allegations against staff and the board.

 

As a final point keep in mind that the process we have followed for the general meeting, the elections that the resolutions relate to and so forth is in keeping with the advice that we have received from professional legal practitioners. While we have had accusations of impropriety made against us, none of these have come from anyone who holds the appropriate qualifications and practising certificates to give such advice. That said, when we do receive comments from members (such as the one you sent in) we do consider it and give it the attention that it deserves. In fact, when we received the late notice of proposed resolutions we sought legal advice as to what action should be taken. Not only did we pay for that advice, we heeded it so as not to impinge on other members rights for the benefit of one.

 

As I noted above, I am open to discussing this matter with you further. Feel free to give me a call or, if you are attending the flyin this weekend, track me down. I’ll be there from tomorrow (again, at personal expense to me) and will be happy to take the time to chat. I’d also ask that if you publish your email then you give me the same right of reply by publishing this response in its entirety in the same forum for all to see and I’ll reserve the right to do the same.

 

I look forward to hearing from you or crossing paths at an airfield sometime soon.

 

Cheers,

 

Mick

 

 

 

 

 

Well I for one would like an explanation about this matter from our CEO or board , so to this end I have emailed RAA admin with the following email.and I advise all members concerned by this disreguard of our new constitution to do the same................ .....Dear, sir/madam As a concerned member, member number 012031 it has come to my attention that Michael Linke has miss understood or disregarded the wording of the new constitution of RAA by denying the resolutions put forward by a concerned member {in advance of the required 21DAYS, not hours or times but DAYS]as per the wording of the new constitution that he fought so hard to get passed .As this is a blatant breach of our new constitution i along with many members was wondering if you would be so kind to explain this seamingly attempt to not have his resolutions put forward at the next agm as well as notice to members distributed out to all members ,be this by snail mail or email[which would not cost the quoted $10000 dollars of MEMBERS FUNDS that we entrust to the ceo and board] to be to either" ,1, cover up a breach of our constitution or, 2,To cover up a mistake made by our ceo or ,3, To totally disreguard members wishes afforded to members by your new constitution.A timely answer to my enquiry would be greatly appreciated Thank you, Scott Evans member number 012031 [ps a copy of this email will be distributed via social media to other members for comments]

 

 

If your emails were received at 4:55pm they still would not have been acted on as Linke states the office closes at 5pm. Also, it stated the date NOT the time i.e. "prior to 5pm...." therefor to me it is a real cop out and an attempt to find any little thing to not have the issue see the light of day...if they wish to quote the constitution and stand by that then you again are also right as it also does not state a time only "DAYS".I am finished with RAAus much like so many others I have spoken to recently...Linke and Monck have destroyed any passion I had for them

You are not alone............

 

 

G`Day Bull, Sent!Frank.

thanks Frank

 

 

My apologies to Don if the way I have addressed this issues seems to personally blame him,,,i don't ,But his replies to member inquiries on this forum seem to state that these inspections are good for raa as it will make them """"seem'''more on the ball to casa which is not really the case is it?

 

 

I`ve photo copied the publication but the file is too large to post here! Anyone who wants it simply has to give me their Email address, either by private message or post it here and I`ll send it to you.Frank.

[email protected] Frank would love a read,,,,,I did remember hearing about this one when driving trucks at Alice springs,and was told that the landing was so good that if more fuel was obtained he could have flown it out.thanks

 

 

But casa did not

 

How do you know it's not on the cards for them too, no one says the rules have to be the same.If it is or not justified is a separate issue if CASA did push it.

CASA has NOT pushed it mate ,,so you are defending these regulation changes by RAA without good cause, Hopefully we will soon see an organisation for ULTRALIGHTS that caters for its members and use,s common sence and is there for the love of flying and not run by med failed GA pilots flying GA aircraft masquerading as ultralights who have a serious problem with ego bloating to impress CASA can,t wait......................ps RAA had probably better pick up it,s act or it might suddenly find it will not have the members to pay for all those high flying exec,s

 

 

How do we know CASA didn't push for this inspections and we got a good result by being allowed to be L1 rather than say L2?Plenty of other differences between Experimental VH and RAA amateur build

Because Casa did not push for them ,,,as they have not pushed for SAAA to have 4 compulsory inspections of build quality based on accident causes and failure records because those records of failure simply do not exist, so over regulation and cost is not justified is it Jet