Microlighters

In order to get your plane inspected and signed off by an AP you need to be a member of the Aeroclub and one of it's affiliates such as Misasa.

What do you guys think about this?

Personally I think it is a load of bull. When I started flying in 2000 you had to join Misasa. It was then discovered that you cannot be forced to join any association and as a result CAA stopped forcing you and left it up to personal choice. Now it appears to be happening again.

Now CAA does not appoint Authorised Persons, the Aeroclub does, which in my opinion is the first problem. As a result they have told all the AP's that there is an insurance in place that will protect the AP from being sued if something goes wrong with a plane they inspected. This insurance will not pay out if the owner of the plane wanting to sue the AP is not a member of the Aeroclub, so thereby forcing the AP's to abide by the ruling. I understand the need for this insurance, but as far as I am concerned an AP could cover himself from personal liability insurance for just this type of occurrence anyway, they don't need Aeroclub to provide it.

What happens in any case if the plane is inspected in December and the owner does not renew his membership in Jan, then crashes in Feb? Where does the AP stand then. What happens if the pilot flying the plane is not a member even though the owner of the plane is? There are huge holes here.

This also means an AP needs to be a member of Aeroclub as well.

Every plane needs an ATF issued by CAA, which requires an AP to inspect the plane , so IMHO it is not the responsibility of an aviation association, but rather the governing body to appoint AP's and to ensure that they are adequately covered wrt insurance. This insurance could be covered out of the ATF fees, which will ensure the entire flying community is covered, not just those who belong to Aeroclub. Does the Aeroclub appoint AMO's as well? What about staff working at the AMO's? Do they have to join the Aeroclub as well? It's not as if there is a lot of work here, I mean how many AP's are there (+/-100) and there doesn't appear to be a lots of people wishing to become one.

Just does not make sense

Hi Morph
I think you should consider this in the context of how RAASA came about.
We have RAASA now so that we have some sort of say in how our governing body controls our sport.
You always had to be a member of the Aeroclub to get your plane APed but this was never enforced. In fact, the first I heard about it was when I did my AP license exams a couple of years ago.
One of the things that was discussed/negotiated during the formation of RAASA was accountability and responsibility of maintaining airworthiness of the NTCA section of general aviation. Responsibility for this was granted to RAASA and just one of the conditions for this to work was enforcement of this membership thing.
IMHO I would far rather have what we have now, ie; The AP scheme still under the Aeroclub and planes to be APed to be owned by members as well as pilot licenseing than be at the mercy of some the old guard at CAA.
Just take a look at the PPL syllabus mess to see my point. We could very easily have been there with NTCA maintenance.
My 2c worth
Mogas

My AP would only ever sign my aerie out if I was member of Aero club and could provide EAA membership card. Never been a problem for me. Cheaper and more effective than if CAA enforce and we have to pay AMO rates...

Hi Morph, I had a long discussion about this with CAA. Their argument is that if you choose to not be a member of Aeroclub(not Misasa), you are free to have your mpi done by any registered AMO. So they are not forcing you to belong to any club. The fact is as Mogas says, it's about acountability. To be an AP you go to the Aeroclub and get your rating, you are then a Aeroclub AP and can only do an MPI or inspection on Aeroclub members planes. If you choose not to belong to them you have the option of the other 200 odd AMO's to choose from.

KFA wrote:To be an AP you go to the Aeroclub and get your rating, you are then a Aeroclub AP and can only do an MPI or inspection on Aeroclub members planes

That's not how I understood it. I was told the AP can do an inspection whether the owner is a member of Aeroclub or not. Only thing is he won't be covered if the owner is NOT a member of Aeroclub.....

If both the Inspector and inspectee are members of the Aeroclub the insurance cover is in place. This protects both parties but many AP's do not do inspections on non-members planes because they do not want to not have the comfort of the insurance cover. Other than for this insurance comfort both parties can use whomsoever they choose.

Fly safe

Ya Duck you are right

That's not how I understood it. I was told the AP can do an inspection whether the owner is a member of Aeroclub or not. Only thing is he won't be covered if the owner is NOT a member of Aeroclub.....

Most AP's do not want to take the risk. A lot of pressure on them now. Just become a member and support the guys who represent us. All or most of the new legislation of which everybody is drawing the advantage, was their doing. If CAA had their way we would all be walking and only flying commercial.

Morph wrote:In order to get your plane inspected and signed off by an AP you need to be a member of the Aeroclub and one of it's affiliates such as Misasa.

What do you guys think about this?

Personally I think it is a load of bull. When I started flying in 2000 you had to join Misasa. It was then discovered that you cannot be forced to join any association and as a result CAA stopped forcing you and left it up to personal choice. Now it appears to be happening again.

Now CAA does not appoint Authorised Persons, the Aeroclub does, which in my opinion is the first problem. As a result they have told all the AP's that there is an insurance in place that will protect the AP from being sued if something goes wrong with a plane they inspected. This insurance will not pay out if the owner of the plane wanting to sue the AP is not a member of the Aeroclub, so thereby forcing the AP's to abide by the ruling. I understand the need for this insurance, but as far as I am concerned an AP could cover himself from personal liability insurance for just this type of occurrence anyway, they don't need Aeroclub to provide it.

What happens in any case if the plane is inspected in December and the owner does not renew his membership in Jan, then crashes in Feb? Where does the AP stand then. What happens if the pilot flying the plane is not a member even though the owner of the plane is? There are huge holes here.

This also means an AP needs to be a member of Aeroclub as well.

Every plane needs an ATF issued by CAA, which requires an AP to inspect the plane , so IMHO it is not the responsibility of an aviation association, but rather the governing body to appoint AP's and to ensure that they are adequately covered wrt insurance. This insurance could be covered out of the ATF fees, which will ensure the entire flying community is covered, not just those who belong to Aeroclub. Does the Aeroclub appoint AMO's as well? What about staff working at the AMO's? Do they have to join the Aeroclub as well? It's not as if there is a lot of work here, I mean how many AP's are there (+/-100) and there doesn't appear to be a lots of people wishing to become one.

Just does not make sense

Morph, being an AP have become a high risk occupation. Nobody FORCED me to become one. I volunteered. In order to reduce the risk we are running, Aero Club will back the AP`s, BUT in order to be legible, BOTH the AP ANd his "client" must be current members of AC and one of the other sections. No Aero club or Misasa membership. No AP. I am NOT prepared to take the risk alone anymore.

Interesting - RAASA stands for Recreational Aviation ADMINISTRATION of SA. It seems as if they are the Athaurity now.
The moment you force people to belong to an organisation - people will ask questions. What if they told us that we should all belong to a certain political party before we can apply for anything?

Is there any history af sucsessfull claims against APs in South Africa?

Die risiko bestaan. Sal JY bereid wees om so n risiko te loop????? Of te volunteer om dit te doen????

Dit gaan ook nie net oor jou nie. Jou familie gaan nie dink dis snaaks as jy jou G*t sien na 'n MPI nie. Hulle gaan nie 'n saak he oor wat jou persoonlike standpunt oor die ledegelde ens was nie. Iemand gaan probeer om 'n ander se klere van hom af te sue. Al teken jy 'n vrywaringsform kan jou boedel nog steeds 'n eis teen die AP instel, jy is in die graf of vermink en jou familie is uit op revenge, wie gaan dan lag of vir die gelag betaal??

Wat noem n prokureur sy dogter?








SUE.

The Constitution of South Africa, The Bill of Rights - 18 Freedom of Association: Everyone has the right to freedom of association.

Or not! Freedom of choice works both ways does it not??

Jaaaaa swaer. Can`t allways beat the system now. Can we????

Guys it is R425 per annum (Aeroclub = R215 and MISAS = R205), which equates to R35.42 per month or R1.16 per day so is it really such a problem? So far I have 2 x magazines, 1 x MISASA badge and 1 x MISASA cap as well as the support of MISASA and Aeroclub with any of the CAA legislative cr@p.

Stop the bickering, pay your bucks and throw your support behind your sport.