Home Forums Events & Projects AUA ratings

  • Author
  • #16104

    This is a place to discuss AUA ratings and if the club should accept them, when a pilot or instructor only has that. Best to discuss here and have time to think (do research), instead of trying to resolve it in a short amount of time during a meeting. It also reduces the need to discuss politics when we meet and fly.

    I gathered some reasons to vote one way or another, for when that time comes. This is your time & place to share more reasons or clarifications. The more we know, the better.


    AUA Pilot Training

    Thanks for putting that list together Jerome. In your “Reasons to vote Yes on AUA” list you ask: “No need to file accident reports?”

    In the above AUA link it says:

    “6) For the purpose of improved safety, all accidents and incidents shall be submitted in writing, with as much detail as possible, to the AUA Safety Officer for that Category. NOTE: All information in these reports will remain completely confidential to protect all parties concerned. Once appropriately reviewed, originals are returned or destroyed. They will never be disclosed. AUA needs enough information to isolate each incident to prevent multiple reports of a single incident, i.e. date and time it occurred, type of craft, where, etc…….. and enough information to help determine what happened to identify possible remedies.
    Date and Time and/or location, are our primary tracking information.”

    So it seems the AUA also requires the reporting of incidents and accidents.


    Thanks Jana, will update later today.

    Getting good input from many, that I need to merge in (Update: Done).

    Dan DeWeese
    General Member
    CSS Instructor

    Accident reports? Where do they go when submitted to the USHPA?

    Where is the narrative, the story, shared with the tribe?

    Linda Salamone
    General Member

    Right here,  Dan.

    Or you can Google USHPA accident reports

    Linda Salamone
    General Member

    Jerome : nailed it. Methinks this is the rationale by some of the parties proposing this.
    “Possible loophole for pilots/instructors banned from USHPA, to fly/teach at our site. ”

    Very thorough and thoughtful details. Thanks for taking the time and effort to detail this.


    A related piece of information from today’s (2022/7/16) board meeting, which had a good exchange of ideas…

    There will be at least one club by-law up for review/update at the next general membership meeting in October: The one where the club is currently limited to accepting only USHPA (and IPPI) ratings. Stan added that it would have to be approved  by general membership.

    Linda Salamone
    General Member

    So why did Stan say there was NO PLAN to accept AUA alongside USHPA for membership? Did I misunderstand his answer when I asked specifically yesterday? Hopefully the detailed meeting minutes will clear this up.

    Tim Ward
    General Member

    I don’t recall Stan saying there would definitely be a club by-law up for review/update at the next general membership meeting OR that there was no plan to accept AUA alongside USHPA.

    My recollection is that Stan said that a couple of board members have discussed it among themselves (and this is true, I heard about it in passing, but can’t say I’ve discussed it much with anyone on the board. My posts on here, I think, is where I personally have discussed it. I don’t think that’s the same as having a plan. I guess your mileage could vary.

    I also recall him saying that any such change would have to be put on the ballot by the board, and would have to be approved by the membership, because that’s the way the club rules are written. But that’s not the same as saying, yes we absolutely will be putting this question to the membership at the next general membership meeting.

    I suppose if there were a plan, it would have to take those rules into consideration, but I don’t see any big contradiction between saying “The board hasn’t yet discussed it as a board”, and “if the board collectively decides it’s a good idea to move forward on this, it has to be approved by the membership.”

    Linda Salamone
    General Member

    Tim, on my Facebook live at 1:13 (an hour and 13 min in) Stan was very very clear regarding the BODs plan that AUA is not being considered as an alternative to membership for flying CSS.


    Both statements (from Stan during yesterday’s meeting) can be correct…

    1. There is no current plan to accept AUA ratings.
    2. The club by-law that limits the requirement to USHPA (and IPPI) ratings, is up for review (ref).

    So one may deduct that either…

    • There is a desire/plan to accept ratings from another (yet to be named) association, maybe one that does not exist now (AUA could just be used as a template).
    • There is no reason to limit the club to one specific association’s rating system, or use that freedom as leverage in future negotiations (with USHPA for example).

    The future will tell, which of the above was closer to the truth.


    This posting on July 5 2022 clearly states a desire to accept AUA ratings: “We’re trying to add to the bylaws of the club to accept other forms of rating system such as USHPA, IPPI, FAI and AUA“.

    This is difficult to reconcile with Stan’s statement, 11 days later during the July 16 2022 board meeting: “There is no current plan to accept AUA ratings“.

    Maybe there is a disconnect between board members and hopefully the confusion will be resolved at the upcoming (Sept 17, 2022) board meeting, which has on its agenda: “By-laws review for updates at the next general membership meeting“. We will then see if the proposed updates mention the acceptance of AUA ratings (or anything else than USHPA, IPPI).

    Extra info: In the club bylaws, I find no place that restricts the rating providers (to be from USHPA). The only thing close is “Section 2. Qualifications”, but that relates to liability insurance, not ratings. The site guidelines do state rating requirements and provenance.


    Just FYI, IPPI ratings & membership do not provide any liability insurance coverage to pilots, in case it matters to the safety of our site, or our members. Neither does the AUA, which (to me at least) seems very much in it’s infancy as far as rating requirements & training go. They basically rely on you having a USHPA rating to issue you their equivalent rating.


    If having a form of liability insurance is a site requirement for our pilots to keep our flight park protected, then a USHPA membership is the easiest way to achieve this goal. I suppose AUA and IPPI pilots could purchase a separate liability policy, as long as they can provide proof to the club that they are covered.

    Any changes to the club bylaws need to be approved by the majority of the CSS general members via a ballot, like we did about two years ago. We sent out a ballot with the proposed changes about 30 days in advance and discussed those changes on the forum beforehand.



    Update… During the September 17 2022 board meeting, Stan (President) stated that:

    • The board is not currently seeking to change the bylaws.
    • There will be no proposal for changes to the bylaws at the upcoming general membership meeting.
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.