Rivets

It's probably unfair to ask too many questions at this stage as we don't know what the cover is...but I will anyway! Will you be discounting the cost of membership if insurance is taken out? Otherwise the annual cost won't look quite so competitive...

Yes. The important thing is that people are insured. Do you even need to look into ratings for insurance? AXA doesn't. Is this more a question of entry into PMC? If so, I'd point you at the diving arena where the two main UK Beginner training organisations (BSAC and PADI) accept each other on an equivalency basis and this is very much the way to go in my opinion. How crucial is it that they are validated? AXA insurance requires no validation and this encourages cover. If validation makes cover cheaper then fine, but if not then I'd leave it open and make the sport better covered to everyone's benefit. Oh yes, you've done a good thing!

Then again, having just read the actual detail from BHPA, I can see more of the logic behind it now. (The intentions regarding Ground Handling on the same form look to be a particularly good idea - I hope that goes through without hitch.) On balance, I think the emphasis should be doing slope/top landing training unless it's blatantly impossible (cf Cyprus). Which, to be fair, is what appears to be the main thrust of the proposals. I also think that there is a big comms issue that the BHPA need to resolve.

Not just spam, but spam selling illegal equipment. Well done. Admins, one for the Delete bin for you...

Yes, my attempt at humour in that thread on PGF rather missed the mark! Strange as it may seem, I did some slope landing training on Day #2 of my EP (EP!). And I STILL find them hard sometimes, coming in hard and fast over rocky terrain especially. I've been taught two different techniques by two instructors and they're both tricky. That said, I do try to eak out every foot of flight in the mistaken belief I'm going to get some lift, I'm a b*gger for it. (And I have done some monster walk outs...) Seriously though, slope landings are a part of UK flying. Take the Long Mynd. There is an official bottom landing field. However, if you scratch too low, or you're at one of the extents of the ridge and the wind drops, what are you going to do? You could upset the locals and land in a field (full of livestock, fences, trees and powerlines if memory serves), or you could bail out on the side of the hill. And it's going to be fast and the slopes are steep. Surely, therefore, this should have been discussed and practiced during training? The Long Mynd is one of the most popular sites in the UK - and you could still come off second best, unless you just loiter round TO. That's before I get into coastal soaring, where the only bottom landing involves a water descent... Top landings? I think these are relatively easy. I think the only issues arise where either the LZ is very small or where the features of the terrain may give rise to rotor. Likewise, I'm bewildered why 360s seem to spook people so badly. However, they are both common elements of UK flying so should be part of training for flying in the UK - wouldn't you agree? So, objections to the change. Firstly, as someone new to PG you want to do training so that you are competent and safe at the end of it. By the end of that training, you should be able to meet these challenges. To find out that there is more to learn having paid over £1000 for training would p*ss me off. To find out that the follow-on training would be delivered by someone conceivably with only 10 hours themselves (I am told this is very unlikely though), unpaid and with no professional qualification (teaching or flying) would be concerning to me. Secondly, I get the feeling (and it's none of my business and I can only go by what I see on the forums) that BHPA comms from top downwards isn't good. I get the feeling that people don't feel consulted and feel imposed upon. That's never a good thing in a membership environment.