In my case, for example, would the FAA have pulled my "membership" for testifying against Air California Adventure (ACA)? No. For speaking to the San Diego City Council? No. For starting the U.S. Hawks? Of course not. But USHPA has done all of those things ... and is still doing them today.
Ben Reese recently posted a comment to the Oz Forum suggesting that the FAA could become more directly involved in tandem regulation. Of course he will be flamed by the "USHPA loyalists", but what have they done to curb USHPA's abusive, irresponsible, and corrupt behavior?
Here's Ben's post:
Ben Reese wrote:Re: A small business instructor responds
Mon, May 6 2019, 10:00:22 pm
So then, I will ask the direct question and offer an answer.
If Jonathan is referring to our Letter of Authorization "Tandem Instruction Waiver"?
If yes, then why have our BOD not sought a permanent solution?
One answer:
If there was a category FAA Glider Instructor under Part 103 it would reduce
the power of USHPA, a reduction in power/control.
One can easily conclude this reasoning based on the Power Grab of the Reform Vote.
I propose that there is no need for USHPA to pursue this since any organized effort
can perform it. In fact it would be a compelling argument to make with the FAA that
USHPA has not managed its Waiver well enough to justify getting it.
Only direct FAA ratings for tandem instructors can be impartial and safer.
Not controlled by an organization receiving revenue..
Torrey Pines Glider Port "ACA" is a continuing example of why this has not worked.
Further, there would be no insurance crisis without their gross negligence.
Yet further, it is convient that Bob K. was so perfectly painted as a reason for this crisis.
He publicly warned about poor practices of ACA, and not the only voice.
He did not approach them to testify.
He did not want to testify at 1st.
He did not lie in court.
His stand against ACA and his testimony was a Cardinal reason for his expulsion in 2015.
There were many warnings before the 1st Crisis in 2013 at ACA
Continued warnings before the current crisis in 2019 at ACA.
Before the earliest date 2013 going back more than 5 years and between
this 2019 current year. Clearly more than 12 years of stern warnings!
What has USHPA done to protect us from this one mega school?
Expell Bob K.
Allow ACA to get an independent commercial policy!
Otherwise their rate would be really high compared to other schools since their
revenue is so high.. That Margin thing again…. Oh, and our losses..
Some instructors got disciplined also.. Is it really a few instructors or a culture?
If the FAA directly managed the tandem commercial ratings, it would end the bending
of the rules that got us in so much trouble with ACA and currently threatens our
Tandem Waiver.. When you carry passengers, it's a big deal…
Lastly, Para Gliding and Hang Gliding are different skills and different aircraft.
They need different rules, Period..
I do not trust our BOD to manage these things anymore.
1. Tandem Waiver.
2. HG Instructor, School needing multiple site policies.
3. Governance under new Reform or the Old rules which got us to this..
4. A bi-wing organization combining HG and PG, forcing we share the risk evenly.
USHPA failed to listen and act on info that has been a constant topic for HG since RRRG.
The many letters and posts from Hang Gliding's best most successful people right here
proves it.
USHPA put Governance Reform as the top priority despite these warnings.
A mega failure or a succes for the take-over crowd. We will see?
This tells you all you need to know.
The attempts to placate us with how well the PG's are doing, along with "Hope and Change";
Alan's attempt to put his finger in the gaping hole in this DAM is further proof.
We need to start over at USHPA and begin some recall elections!
The sooner the better.
Update:
For those who will respond below who think I want to change Part 103
for single pilot foot launched flight?
Not true.
Only commercial paying customers for rides or tandem instruction.
There needs to be an official authority to manage these Paying Tandem
Operations.
Otherwise all of Part 103 is at risk of being changed.
USHPA has disregarded its responsibility to manage its own "Waiver"
entrusted to them by the FAA, for the purpose of real instruction.
The casulities only shine a spotlight on this illegal practice.
It is illegal, failure to acknowledge this open practice by ACA which is
the most visible and largest joy ride provider shows USHPA is the enabler..
If we don't fix this ourselves, another lawsuit will eventually be aimed directly
at USHPA for aiding in this continuing violation of FAR's and abuse of an exemption.
I am pointing this out. Will I be the next person to be expelled?
I do not enjoy writing any of this post.
This should never need to be said.
That is the reason we are in this mess.
Not enough of you really care enough to protect our freedom to fly.
Caring means speaking up and telling some popular people "NO"!
Saying, "This is wrong and will result in a very bad end."
So far we have been lucky.
But not really, since this is one reason our insurance was canceled.
Not individual pilots, our commercial policy abused by ACA!
B R