<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wikidot="http://www.wikidot.com/rss-namespace">

	<channel>
		<title>Comments for page &quot;Enquiry&quot;</title>
		<link>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show</link>
		<description></description>
				<copyright></copyright>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:58:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
					<item>
				<guid>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-455007</guid>
				<title>Exec review record to be corrected</title>
				<link>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-455007</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Gordon Rigg</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>At the next exec meeting the official record regarding this complaint is expected to be modified to show it was supported by other pilots - as was requested by Richard Lovelace and Malcolm Brown.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-383324</guid>
				<title>outstanding issues with the Exec review</title>
				<link>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-383324</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Gordon Rigg</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>While I am prepared to accept the Exec review panels general conclusions there are some issues that were not addressed and a significant factual innaccuracy in that the complain raised by me was also on behalf of a significant number of other pilots who supported it.<br /> That matter has been raised by some of those other pilots directly with the BHPA chairman so there may yet be a modification of the published response to reflect the true facts.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-378408</guid>
				<title>opps!</title>
				<link>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-378408</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:54:37 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Phil Chett</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>4297</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>And on re-reading my Post I can see how that that conclusion is drawn.<br /> It was not my intention to make it seem so, and my apologies for any false impression given.<br /> Thats what you get for doing things in the wee hours of the morning.</p> <p>I have edited my Original post to make it rather clearer.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-377405</guid>
				<title>BHPA Review of Comps Panel decision</title>
				<link>http://rogallo.co.uk/2009-news:enquiry/comments/show#post-377405</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:56:51 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>hgmeethead</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>18437</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>When I asked Phil to make the review findings available on the website I did not intend it to appear as some sort of leaked document - and should have made this clear to Phil.<br /> The team selection and subsequent request for this review has caused a lot of discussion on our mailing list. I have made it available so that those who contributed to the discussion and others who may be interested can read the conclusion.<br /> John</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
				</channel>
</rss>