SAGPA

[fransstrydom]

John,at least now we know why one person is unhappy with SAGPA.It would be totally sensless attending a meeting that you don't understand.It would be interesting if there are others that are also unhappy,maybe for different reasons.If nobody complains SAGPA will be of the opinion that everything is well,maybe it is.SAGPA needs inputs to keep the gyro pilots happy,remember,they must represent us.Constructive criticism wil be informative.
Scary pilot

[John Boucher]

Hi Frans

I can agree with that and such situation needs to be treated with respect and amicably resolved I'm sure. This thread seems to be a conglomerate of issues clouded with personal comments, of which I have also been guilty, but those that know me very well, will attest to the fact that I'm a reactive person - point a finger I will most surely point back. That only the respective ARO can resolve with the members (and those that are supposed to be) is really apparent and I am aware of many more issues and if resolved may just change the way certain people have done "business" in the past.

The CATS/CARS is quite specific (and I posted that as info) as to one operating a non type certified machine and being a bona fide member of the respective ARO. With SAGPA not having had it's ARO at the time of the AGM 2011 (the ARO was only issued for the first time on 28/11/2011 if I am correct) one could easily by-pass the system as many have done. With the awarding of this status however, the ball game changed.

[fransstrydom]

John,don't you think that maybe this is part of the problem.The SAGPA committee (and MISASA) worked very hard last year in order to establish an ARO,and maybe neglected to give proper feedback to the members (because they were very busy).What VT is trying to communicate is just that.
With a new committee elected the status quo should change.SAGPA should have much more visibilty (which they must organise themselves) as to what they are doing.I feel that now all the requirements have been met it is time that SAGPA return to its members,they should work for the members,not the authorities.
SCARY PILOT

[John Boucher]

I agree...

MISASA also went through that phase and then obviously the education process of what post ARO status and that what the regulation really says. We cannot expect RAASA to police the compliance (they are really only an administrative arm) and this function then really be the pilot/owner's responsibility and we were also told this.

So those with gripes on those thread need to then itemise them without finger wagging and then the relevant committee resolve them as such. SAGPA & MISASA have an excellent working relationship and share similar communication platforms. Problems you may be having may in the end not be unique. For example, the SAGPA MOP is modeled on the MISASA MOP and really the two classes of aircraft are really very similar (3-axis).

JB

[THI]

For those that have fair and positive comments / suggestion please send them to info@sagpa.co.za

Your call is important to us

VT - It is a pity you missed the last AGM as it was conducted in english. 1 problem solved

[John Boucher]

Hi Thinus... I think the thread will now follow the correct course

[THI]

Hi Thinus... I think the thread will now follow the correct course

John, I hope so. But you remember the horse and water dilemma? Hopefully this will not be applicable

[John Boucher]

Put some sugar in the water...