[Peetwo]

Latest on TAAAF Aviation Policy 2016

TAAAF also suggests ASA privatisation -  

Courtesy of Oz Aviation:

TAAAF calls on government to privatise Airservices

April 28, 2016 by australianaviation.com.au 
 
The Australian Aviation Associations’ Forum has called for the privatisation of Airservices, with the funds used to set up an Aviation Future Fund.

The Forum says the current Airservices’ model is “no longer capable of effectively responding to emerging aviation opportunities or the need for greater efficiency”.

“The partially-corporatised model under which Airservices Australia has operated for almost 20 years is increasingly incapable of delivering efficient and affordable air traffic services in a growing aviation market,” said TAAAF’s 2016 policy document, which was released on Thursday.

“Airservices should be privatised along the lines of the Canadian air traffic provider, Nav Canada, which has operated successfully and safely for over 20 years.

“Nav Canada is a not-for-profit regulated monopoly owned by industry stakeholders who are represented on the governing board and surpluses are reinvested in the corporation or used to reduce prices.”

As part of the privatisation of Airservices, TAAAF also called for major airport operators to be responsible for day-to-day management of aircraft noise reporting and take over aviation rescue and fire-fighting services.

TAAAF estimates the privatisation of Airservices would generate about $1 billion. Of that, $500 million should be spent on a developing training, research and leadership programs.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia (AOPA), which has 2,600 members and aims to represent the general aviation sector, has also called for Airservices to be privatised.

The federal government has said previously it did not support the privatisation of Airservices.

With a federal election likely to be held on July 2, TAAAF is also calling for the federal government to appoint a Minister Assisting for Aviation, whose role would be to “oversee and coordinate a new aviation strategy for Australia”.

A national aviation strategy and integrated aviation infrastructure master plan were also needed to meet the forecast growth in demand over the next two decades.

“The Forum believes there are significant savings for industry and government through a more efficient planning process,” TAAAF said.

TAAAF has also proposed changes to the Civil Aviation Act, given Australia’s “highly prescriptive approach to aviation safety” had “hindered the development of the industry for little discernible safety benefit”.

TAAAF chair – and former Airservices chief executive – Greg Russell said the association’s proposed policy initiatives offered “real pathways to improved services, savings for the taxpayer and more effective regulation”.

“It is estimated that over $2.2 billion in benefits to government, industry and society would be realised from the adoption of these policies,” Russell said in a statement.

“A new approach to aviation challenges through a government/industry partnership would make Australia into a regional aviation leader and drive growth and opportunities across the nation.”

Don't reckon Harfwit would be happy with that idea, he might actually have to work hard to justify his esteemed position and his cut of the trough - then again he may not even keep his job in the real world of big business...

Also from Hitch off the Yaffa:

TAAAF releases 2016 Aviation Policy

28 Apr 2016

The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF) released its 2016 policy paper in Sydney this morning.

According to TAAAF, the new policy is aimed at "establishing a new partnership between industry and government that focuses on job creation, industry growth, and a major overhaul of aviation structures."

Chair of the Forum, former Airservices boss Greg Russell, said that the policy provides a unique opportunity for government and industry to take a more mature approach to fostering an industry that is capable of significant jobs growth.

"These policies represent a milestone opportunity for aviation policy in Australia," he said. "A new approach to aviation challenges through a Government/Industry partnership would make Australia into a regional aviation leader and drive growth and opportunities across the nation.

"These policies offer real pathways to improved services, savings for the taxpayer and more effective regulation. It is estimated that over $2.2 billion in benefits to Government, industry and society would be realised from the adoption of these policies."

At the centre of the new policy is the recommendation to sell Airservices Australia and create an Aviation Future Fund to support the aviation industry. TAAAF points out that Airservices has operated for 20 years funded largely by fees paid by the aviation industry.

The group estimates that the Federal Goverment could reap $1 billion from the sale of Airservices and pour half that back into industry via the future fund.

TAAAF uses as an example the Canadian Nav Canada not-for-profit model and links the creation of an Aviation Future Fund to improved training pathways, export opportunities and international harmonisation.

"Airservices' current model is no longer capable of effectively responding to emerging aviation opportunities or the need for greater efficiency," TAAAF states. "Forum policies would establish a new structure that has proven to be more effective for the management of safety and cost-effective service delivery."

Other policy announcements included a revamp of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to align it with international standards and reduce costs and delays, and a realignment of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and CASA to drive policy implementation.

TAAAF costings show a benefit to industry of $1.63 billion and $0.608 billion to the government if its policies were to be adopted.

The complete policy will soon be available for download from TAAAF member organisations as below.

• Aerial Application Association of Australia
  
• Australian Association of Flying Instructors
  
• Aviation Business Association of Australia
  
• Australian Helicopter Industry Association
  
• Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association
  
• Australian Warbirds
  
• Regional Aviation Association of Australia
  
• Royal Federation of Aero Clubs Australia
  
• Recreational Aviation Association of Australia.
  

Also from Oz Flying Hitch provides an update to the Dick Smith vs Skidmore frequency issue at unmarked aerodromes:

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority regularly creates discussion papers on a range of issues.


Frequency Discussion Paper to be issued
28 Apr 2016

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority announced yesterday that it will produce a discussion paper (DP) on the issue of frequencies at unmarked airstrips.

Under the National Airspace System (NAS), all airfields without a dedicated Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF) were to use Multicom 126.7, but CASA has since released advice that where the airfield is not marked on any chart, pilots should use the VHF area frequency for broadcasts.

The moves comes after Director of Aviation Safety Mark Skidmore held a teleconference with the convenors of the Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committees (RAPAC) and aviation advocate Dick Smith threatened to take the matter to the Supreme Court to force a review of any CASA decision made on the matter.

"The discussion paper will be released during 2016 and CASA will be looking for everyone from sports pilots to regular public transport operators to comment on the issues," the CASA announcement stated.

"CASA will carefully consider all viewpoints before reaching a final position on the most appropriate frequency use in class G airspace. Until the consultation process is finalised CASA urges all pilots to follow the current advice on frequency choice in class G airspace which is to use the VHF area frequency."

Dick Smith has always said that the original concept of the NAS Multicom should be enforced to reduce VFR traffic on the area frequencies. It is believed that internal CASA staff are still leaning toward the area frequency.

Smith first raised the issue in October 2014, drawing a prompt response from CASA reinforcing their advice.

   
Finally I wonder if Skidmore's Tiger team will give this sensible industry cost saving suggestion the nod - again via Oz Flying..

Students at Glen Buckley's Melbourne Flight Training. (MFT)


Innovative Idea aims to save Flying School Costs
28 Apr 2016

Moorabbin flying instructor Glen Buckley has developed an innovative idea to help flying schools cut administrative costs.

The owner and CFI of Melbourne Flight Training has proposed a consortium of flying schools to share key personnel required by CASA regulations.

If it comes to fruition, Buckley believes it could not only reduce c
osts, but could also save some schools that will find themselves unable to afford to transition to a CASR Part 142 school to offer the 150-hour CPL.

Named Australian Integrated Pilot Training (AIPT), Buckey's concept is to share the Head of Operations, Head of Aircraft Airworthiness and Maintenance Control (HAAMC), Safety Manager and Compliance and QA Manager across anything up to 20 different flying schools.

Each flying school in AIPT would contribute part of the salaries for the "super group" of administrators, and in return get high-level expertise to bring their school up to Part 142 standards at a fraction of the cost of going it alone.

Buckley developed the idea after considering the future of his own school in the current economic and regulator environment. With 90% of MFT's business coming from students doing the integrated 150-hour CPL course, Buckley was faced with a large investment simply to keep the doors open past 31 August 2018, the date by which schools must transition to the new Part 142 rules.

"I’m concerned about the future of Australian-owned businesses in the flight training sector," Buckley says, "and as my business is my superannuation, I’m concerned somewhat for my family's future.

"I consistently strive for perfection in my business but increasingly I feel like I can’t keep up anymore. I’m tired of the bureaucracy associated with simply proving that I am already doing the right thing. I get frustrated by the Fee-Help system. I need to get focused on my business at the moment, but I keep getting pulled away.

"Increasingly I have been considering how I can continue to operate my business, and operate it successfully. How can I increase its potential in a time of 'doom and gloom' for our sector?

"I’ve come up with this proposal. I want to get 20 like-minded schools that genuinely want to survive in the new environment; a range of both country and city schools, Australian-owned businesses that really have the intent to deliver on the regulator's requirements, and maintain a robust business."

Buckley says his idea is well down the track, having secured in-principle agreement from some of the key personnel to join AIPT. Buckley has also spoken with people at CASA and says the idea has been greeted with interest.

Under the proposal, each school would no longer require their senior key personnel, and even the Chief Flying Instructor could be renamed Senior Base Pilot as the CFI role would be done by a qualified instructor roving between the member organisations. Buckley also proposes each school use the Flight School Manager program to ensure compatibility of systems and procedures.

Buckley recognises there are some challenges to the AIPT concept that would need to be overcome, such as CASA's interpretation of the key personnel requirements, but understands they need to be taken on as the flight training industry itself is facing new hurdles in the next couple of years.

"A challenge immediately ahead is the transition to a 141 or a 142 organisation," he points out. "A bigger challenge will come soon after when we are audited for compliance against these complicated criteria. The transition is not the big issue. The challenge actually comes after the transition in ensuring you have the resources to maintain compliance.

"[the AIPT] approach will allow us to attend to this challenge co-operatively."
Buckley already has interest from some flying schools, and will soon be approaching others who are facing the same cost burden as MFT.

"The cost of rewriting compliant manuals alone was in excess of $100,000 for my organisation and took far too much of my attention for far too long. This was extremely challenging from a resource perspective. This approach will substantially free up both financial and time resources to allow them to focus on running their businesses."

MTF...P2