norman

Hey Fanman, You catch more flies with honey than a swat.

Stricktly? Waht´s that? Anyone who can´t tap-dance and speak Spanish is Gay! "Ratttatttatttta - ole!"

The requirements for PPG1 navigation exercise will be well met quite easily during the event.

Ahh, we crossed Simon. Sorry. I will leave this post here.

leoibb, You are quite right, there is no insurance policy available to protect the incompetent or those that do not exercise a duty of care - except an airline ticket out of the country. Insurance policies generally cover third party liability for damage to property and legal fees in the event a defence needs to be mounted after a claim is made against you. If you can prove competence and that you exercised a duty of care then you are on firm ground. This costs money and that cash comes from your insurers if you are covered for that risk. Your question might not be,"can you make me safe from any claim?" but, "if someone claims against me, can you help me defend myself?" As I understand it that is the problem with litigation - being able to adequately defend yourself in court. I have tried to illustrate for you the difference between a system of licensing and that of certification and the need to structure training for pilots and instructors. If you can't get your head around that I suggest you find someone who can spell it out for you. Anyone wanting PPG training in this country has a choice, either go with an organisation that shows their members how they propose to train/educate their pilots and instructors - or go with the route that has been in place for anyone in the UK since PPG started - trial and error or working under someone who is an unknown quantity and may have no training whatever. The PMC is not selling a cast iron system where non exists, are you inferring that it is? If you want details of what Onrisk offer with their insurance policies, ask them. Simon has passed our documentation through the hands of a friend who is a QC, that person has offered advice which the PMC is endeavouring to follow. That is Simon's business. If you want a chat with a QC - pay for it. The advice you get will almost certainly mirror what we were told which isn't far from what you were saying earlier. Again, the PMC are pouring effort into training to make this game as safe as it can and exercise that duty of care, not sell courses that promise things they can't deliver at inflated prices to make money, which is what I think you seem be inferring? Our courses generally pay those running them a fair wage but do not make a profit. Talk to the guys running them if you don't believe me. This is a sport that has risks attached to it, there is no magic piece of paper to absolve ANY instructor in ANY aviation related activity that absolves him of the duties described above. THINKING, PLANNING and TRAINING and ANTICIPATION AND AVOIDANCE OF UNACCEPTABLE RISK are the best defence against error and accident - not pieces of paper. Put your effort into these areas and you will see a reward, trying to find a cheap insurance policy and a lawyer who can put your mind at rest is a pretty futile way to pass your time.

I doubt it leoibb but that is amatter for Simon, and your point is?

leoibb, She is a QC so it could cost you an arm and a leg! 'Would hate to see that happen, physically or metaphorically.

Would that be Helen the QC Simon?

Whitters, I have feigned a wooden leg, tried to escape at 0300 and talked of an ageing auntie with dropsy. All to no avail. I thought at one stage we would be away in Lisbon but that got changed and got me all excited, then unfortunately this re-emerged. Sometimes sacrifice is a glorious thing, at others its diplomacy that get you where you want to go - like France in 2010.

Meteorology section pages are broken linked.

Great software, nice design. Well done guys!

I'm at Blenheim (horsey stuff) unfortunately with friends for the weekend.

It is a sad fact of life that every flying machine has its limitations. Paramotors are no exception, they are for balmy mornings and evenings with the excitement of the thermic mid part of the day for a few adventurous individuals with the developed skills available to deal with them. Not a club for heroes but one for 'technicians with training'. High winds (above 10-12 knots) bring problems that a collapsable ripstop nylon wing cannot cope with without sharp and competent handling and then not always successfully. A reserve parachute and a brave but foolish heart are no match for them. If you fly within your personal limitations, which should be well within those of your machine, this remains a safe and thoroughly enjoyable sport. Trite comments or pearls? - you decide. Don't let this poor soul die in vain, when the accident report emerges, let's all learn from his mistakes or misfortunes at whatever point he made or experienced them.

It looks as though this large trike (the US call them Powered Paragliders I gather) almost stalled on crossing the power lines then pitched down to recover and set up a large rate of descent. A very foolish move - Poor kids ... sh1t PR. Dropping sweeties would be illegal in the UK without a dispensation.

Thanks Dan, it will take time to roll the whole thing out but it should be worth the wait.

I have just updated the CIs heads-up PDF flagged on the first page of this thread. If you are using this it please download the new file using the PDF 'button'. Several manual pages have been added. Ta.

GPS units are passive as Gordon says, we have no ban on our aircraft. The sensitivity to their use is probably down to the crew having no reference available in their Ops Manual and therefore taking a 'safe' line which is, "Not for takeoff or landing."

I don't make reference to (PMC) Lawyers specifically leoibb. I don't own the PMC or have any financial part in it. This is Simon's Club, I help out with the washing and ironing. One more thing to add, as we all know well, in the insurance world like any other, you get what you pay for. Third Party cover can be sketchy and the small print needs reading. After the small print has done its job the Loss Adjusters move it to limit the underwriters liability if he can. There is no such thing as a guarantee with insurance, we get the best cover we can for a reasonable price don't we? Does any other organisation have a policy in place for its instructors with the Simon has negotiated?

Leoibb, I wonder what sort of reply you would get if you asked the BHPA for the names of their lawyers so that you could "check out" the quality of their legal advice? Please read this in a gentle voice, I am not trying to beat you with it. LOL I would question this statement. An organisation's administrative structure is something that is examined very closely during litigation for the quality of advice it offers and the way in which it leads the players to act etc. There are several ways of looking at this. If we write nothing down, then lawyers can have a field day with the absence of words. If you write anything down they can take issue with what you write. We are talking about the two ends of this argument. The lack of a syllabus and for that matter any guidance for flying operations says an awful lot in 'the eyes of the law'. NOT producing documentation and guidance for members and instructors makes a bold negative statement about the competence of the organisation and potentially leaves it wide open to attack in a courtroom imho. We are probably outlining the problems the BMAA have had and the reason they withdrew from PPG though they face (as does the BHPA and others) exactly the same issue with their other activities. Remember, we started from a position where we had nothing written down nor was (or is) anything required to be written down by (aviation) law. We are doing these things for PMC purposes to better administrate what we are doing and demonstrate the fact. I think you will find that Onrisk are very satisfied with what we have shown them. As for insurance cover for instructors, some have third party cover with no cover for their instructing activities, others - who knows? Our moves are incremental, each building on the last and we hope to reach a point soon where ALL the questions we have in our minds have been answered. It takes time and .... money.

Hi Gary, What you say is really interesting and conforms to a pattern I have heard others discuss. I can't comment too much as I have limited personal experience of the BHPA and do not wish to enter a destructive circle of criticism, claim and counter claim. What I will say is that some of the contact I have had with them has been very positive, some less so. I can't see a point in the future where I would join but hey ... As for the BMAA, I hear nothing but good about them. As I understand it you are correct. They were unsure about the whole business of PPG, had problems administering their system, had a legal problem of sorts and decided to withdraw. I understand Mike Cambell-Jones was involved at some stage but don't have information detailed enough to repeat what I have heard. To others I would say, if you like what you see with the way the PMC is going then great. If you don't please say so and kick off a rethink.

Alan, I am beginning to think that our summers will be wet and windy and our winters will provide the best flying. Weird isn't it, the last three years have been like that. If you are feeling a bit wimpish about he cold read Ran Fiennes recent autobiography, "Mad, Bad and Dangerous to know." It is a superb rendition of what being a really tough individual means. Phenomenal story of a life well lived and the personification of the ethic, "One should arrive at ones graveside in a cloud of dust, absolutely worn out, at the end of ones tether and running on the last drop of adrenaline available." I don't generally 'do' heroes but if you need someone to admire in life, what an example to revere.

LOL, I hope Gary doesn't think I was being grumpy. The weakness of the written word is that you don't get a tone from it. I hope I am reading this right but... the BMAA like the BHPA are just organisations that have grown and become familiar. Their 'licenses' are just pieces of paper like everyone else's representing a course of training with a competency test at the end of it. It is licensing authorities, government departments that issue licenses, the rest issue certificates of competence as judged by 'officers of the company'. PPG requires no license in the UK as we all know, you can buy the kit and fly it. We are all aware of the potential for trouble and make our own efforts to avoid it. The PMC response is to create a training scheme for its pilots from ab initio through to instructor levels. We do it to satisfy ourselves that we are doing all we can to promote safety within our sport and to generate trust with our ensurers by defining training standards. And all while trying to keep it as simple as we can because who likes 'effin paperwork.

How much to sell it to a good cause? It could end up in Nepal....

We have had a few posts regarding validity, they raise interesting questions and the threads answer the questions raised. If you wander around for long enough looking for someone to endorse what you do you will find the road to nowhere. We don't issue licenses as such, we certificate our pilots. It is an internal matter but recognition from national authorities and governing bodies generally comes for any organisation that demonstrates competence and properly administers a decent system of training and qualification. It's never the piece of paper is it Gary- it's what's behind it?

Simon will pick up on this shortly but Onrisk have a policy for you which will cover liability.