Lesser of the two Weevil's.
I have to wonder; just what, in the seven hells are AOPA playing at? I know the US version is. You can only ‘negotiate’ from a position of either power or knowledge, preferably both. Unless you are a salesman, then you must rely on ‘good will’. Unless of course what you are trying to flog is either the ‘Ducks nutz”, a bargain or unique. I cannot see where any of this shines through. CASA and other entities must, by default, entertain ‘a public group’ and be seen to be consulting and advising and listening and making all the right PC noises. Until they get to the pub afterwards.
Members of AMROBA, RAA and TAAF; Warbirds, RAOz, GFA, AHIA, AAAA can, with the sureness of expert knowledge and hard won respect, present an argument, with ‘legs’ which may; just, possibly ‘sway’ those with the juice to make changes consider doing so. That is no small thing; the Senate and the Rev. Forsyth had no success whatsoever; but then, neither did any of the many other ‘inquiries’ and suchlike either. So, while the pathway mapped out and the strategy employed by the ‘senior’, expert groups may not suit some minority groups; it has been proven to work and is given both due respect and a ‘fair’ hearing. I don’t put much faith in their ‘influence’ on the grand scale of things, but slowly with certainty they have gained trust, respect and; most importantly – entre to the ‘upper’ levels.
Once, I was once attacked by a dog as I was going home one night; a big, loud, aggressive not too smart animal which was off the reservation and had no idea what it was dealing with. It got at least seven bells kicked out it before I dragged it back where it came from and ‘re enforced’ the lesson. It didn’t learn of course; it only dimly remembered that attacking me was not the best idea it ever had.
The initial ‘shock’ tactic of Tamworth had an impact, it did. But the capital gains which could have been of benefit have been lost. Credibility is paramount; the current AOPA leadership have NFI about airspace, let alone airspace reform. The current AOPA leadership have NFI about aerodrome ‘master plans’ or; the subtle, but highly effective manipulation of definitions, policy or ‘Commonwealth’ involvement. Ignorance of this I could, perhaps, tolerate, but ignorance, arrogance as a sales pitch to join AOPA’s dwindling numbers leaves me stone cold. I will leave twitter comment to wrap this up.
"..I'm just ashamed this arse clown is "representing" the industry
I mean it's about time AOPA got up and said something
But he needs a mentor with experience other than the Sunday arvo crew at the aero club reminiscing about the 1950s .."
I have to wonder; just what, in the seven hells are AOPA playing at? I know the US version is. You can only ‘negotiate’ from a position of either power or knowledge, preferably both. Unless you are a salesman, then you must rely on ‘good will’. Unless of course what you are trying to flog is either the ‘Ducks nutz”, a bargain or unique. I cannot see where any of this shines through. CASA and other entities must, by default, entertain ‘a public group’ and be seen to be consulting and advising and listening and making all the right PC noises. Until they get to the pub afterwards.
Members of AMROBA, RAA and TAAF; Warbirds, RAOz, GFA, AHIA, AAAA can, with the sureness of expert knowledge and hard won respect, present an argument, with ‘legs’ which may; just, possibly ‘sway’ those with the juice to make changes consider doing so. That is no small thing; the Senate and the Rev. Forsyth had no success whatsoever; but then, neither did any of the many other ‘inquiries’ and suchlike either. So, while the pathway mapped out and the strategy employed by the ‘senior’, expert groups may not suit some minority groups; it has been proven to work and is given both due respect and a ‘fair’ hearing. I don’t put much faith in their ‘influence’ on the grand scale of things, but slowly with certainty they have gained trust, respect and; most importantly – entre to the ‘upper’ levels.
Once, I was once attacked by a dog as I was going home one night; a big, loud, aggressive not too smart animal which was off the reservation and had no idea what it was dealing with. It got at least seven bells kicked out it before I dragged it back where it came from and ‘re enforced’ the lesson. It didn’t learn of course; it only dimly remembered that attacking me was not the best idea it ever had.
The initial ‘shock’ tactic of Tamworth had an impact, it did. But the capital gains which could have been of benefit have been lost. Credibility is paramount; the current AOPA leadership have NFI about airspace, let alone airspace reform. The current AOPA leadership have NFI about aerodrome ‘master plans’ or; the subtle, but highly effective manipulation of definitions, policy or ‘Commonwealth’ involvement. Ignorance of this I could, perhaps, tolerate, but ignorance, arrogance as a sales pitch to join AOPA’s dwindling numbers leaves me stone cold. I will leave twitter comment to wrap this up.
"..I'm just ashamed this arse clown is "representing" the industry
I mean it's about time AOPA got up and said something
But he needs a mentor with experience other than the Sunday arvo crew at the aero club reminiscing about the 1950s .."