Could change it to the Light Aviation Association. "Aviation" might be better as the BMAA are that bit more involved in the issue of NPPL's unlike the current LAA. It could be that the licencing dept of the BMAA expands after the merger to process SSEA licence applications and ratings as well.
To be honest I'm struggling to see downsides to the merger.
Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:48 pm
#1719969
The quickest way to fall out with people is, discuss politics.
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:54 pm
#1719981
Association for Light Aviation then.
Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:18 am
#1720019
tomshep wrote:Association for Light Aviation then.
.. which would appeal to classicists ..
(mere guide at) Jet Age Museum, Gloucestershire Airport
http://www.jetagemuseum.org/
TripAdvisor Excellence Award 2015
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction ... gland.html
http://www.jetagemuseum.org/
TripAdvisor Excellence Award 2015
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction ... gland.html
FLYER Club Member
Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:56 pm
#1720046
patowalker wrote: the new association cannot be named LAA. Searching for a name to satisfy that requirement will result in something less appropriate.
OK then Donald , try this one for size ..
Howz about bringing in the gliding fraternity as well and then naming it :
Experimental Aircraft & Sailplane Association .
Would it be a 'Sunny' future ?
Or more like a 'Swift' demise ...
patowalker, JAFO liked this
Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:29 pm
#1720341
The tax levied by the "clubs" is quite high, isn't it? The LAA charges £235 annually for a microlight with a single owner. Add £80 for each syndicatee, it is small wonder that there is a healthy operating surplus.
Sorry this is a bit late but I have not been following the thread. I'm happy for people to post what they like but if it is BS that might be believed by non members that do not know the facts, I believe it is only right that it is corrected.
Not sure where the figures in the above quote come from but they are indeed incorrect. For a 450kg microlight they are: (BMAA equivalent in brackets - from their website)
Permit renewal fee £155 (£173)
Full single member fee £58 (£80)
Full Member Plus fee for using Engineering facilities (needed by only one member of a syndicate) £80 (BMAA not applicable).
As has been mentioned, both organisations insist on all syndicate members being Association members. It isn't a tax, and nobody is forced to own an LAA or BMAA aircraft. If you don't want to pay the dues, go buy an EASA aircraft and see how much money you can save on your annual operating costs. I'm sure somebody who appreciates what the LAA or BMAA do for them will be happy to buy the PtF aircraft,
The BMAA and LAA employ Engineering and admin staff to look after their members' interests and enable them to own and fly affordably in interesting aircraft; how anybody can believe it reasonable not to have to pay a membership fee to use their services is beyond me.
Sorry this is a bit late but I have not been following the thread. I'm happy for people to post what they like but if it is BS that might be believed by non members that do not know the facts, I believe it is only right that it is corrected.
Not sure where the figures in the above quote come from but they are indeed incorrect. For a 450kg microlight they are: (BMAA equivalent in brackets - from their website)
Permit renewal fee £155 (£173)
Full single member fee £58 (£80)
Full Member Plus fee for using Engineering facilities (needed by only one member of a syndicate) £80 (BMAA not applicable).
As has been mentioned, both organisations insist on all syndicate members being Association members. It isn't a tax, and nobody is forced to own an LAA or BMAA aircraft. If you don't want to pay the dues, go buy an EASA aircraft and see how much money you can save on your annual operating costs. I'm sure somebody who appreciates what the LAA or BMAA do for them will be happy to buy the PtF aircraft,
The BMAA and LAA employ Engineering and admin staff to look after their members' interests and enable them to own and fly affordably in interesting aircraft; how anybody can believe it reasonable not to have to pay a membership fee to use their services is beyond me.
Mon Sep 16, 2019 9:16 pm
#1720355
The larger the syndicate, the cheaper the LAA becomes, compared to the BMAA. (£58 per additional syndicate member vs £80 at the BMAA). The discussions on standardising fees should be interesting.
The merged association is going to have 700 less members than the sum of the two present ones
The merged association is going to have 700 less members than the sum of the two present ones
Mon Sep 16, 2019 9:18 pm
#1720358
I suspect most syndicates care little about the aggregate cost; it's the individual cost that counts to the syndicate member.
Which is nuppence, either way.
Which is nuppence, either way.
Mon Sep 16, 2019 9:32 pm
#1720362
You'd think so, but the fuss kicked up by affected members delayed the introduction of the syndicate rule for years at the BMAA.
Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:10 pm
#1720379
patowalker wrote:Yes, as I mentioned earlier, it seems a nonsense that they want to drop Microlight from their name, but insist the new association cannot be named LAA. Searching for a name to satisfy that requirement will result in something less appropriate.
Agreed total nonsense, as ever the focus is in the wrong place!
Hours will be wasted by committees discussing names, logos and corporate colour schemes whilst the foot soldiers that make both associations function will carry on in their usual highly professional manner.
Leave it to the paid professionals to come up with set of sensible proposals and keep the senior volunteers busy arranging tea parties and press releases
Pipster
Sunny Side Up!
Sonerai I - G-LOWE
Sonerai I - G-LOWE
Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:00 am
#1720401
ChampChump wrote:Apart from the fun of renaming it, .
Indeed Nic . Well let's hope it's fun .
How ironic eh ? Both organisations appear to be all for it , most of the membership seem to see it as win/win . At least , that's the impression I get , unless there's a massive silent majority awaiting to stage a last minute ambush . ....[which I'm sure isn't true]
And what's the biggest stumbling block ?
The BMAA want 'Microlight' dropped from the title but don't want to be called the LAA ...
We all know it's not a takeover , simply an amalgamation of two organisations which are doing pretty much the same thing and would be better off as one . NOBODY will be 'losing face' over this ! Just get on with it .
If this minor drawback is just a couple of people's egos at work , then maybe a [metaphorical] slap is in order .
This is a great opportunity on the horizon ,,,,,,,,,,and it doesn't need to be held back by prima-donna's chucking spanners into the works .