[Peetwo]

AOPA on song; & SBG UP!

Just in case anyone still questions the resurrection, direction and motivation of the very much revitalized AOPA, then take the time to read the following from Shawn Kelly, Director AOPA:-
>

Good morning!
>
> First, apologies. Ben asked for a quick email, but once I started, it sort of got out of hand...
>
> As any of you that have heard me speak would know, even after ten years in Australia, I have an American accent. I come by it honestly, having lived there for most of my life. I feel truly lucky to now be an Australian citizen, and I love this country.
>
> That said, I don’t love CASA quite so much. I have spent a large portion of my flying career flying under a different system, and therefore have extensive experience with a different way of thinking about regulating flying. I would love to be at the Summit, but am unable to attend, so I’m going to share a couple of thoughts with the Board for your consideration.
>
> I agree that the Act is in need of change, but I’m afraid that the actual underlying problem may be even deeper.
>
> When I moved here, and started the process of converting my American Certificates to Australian Licences, the only written test I had to sit was Air Law. Fair enough. I started studying by taking various on-line sample tests, and looking up the answers using Google to find the appropriate sections of the Casa regulations. Once I was comfortable that I was getting high enough marks that I would be likely to pass, I rang the flight school that I had been working with and told the course coordinator that I was ready to take my test, and could she please help me arrange that? She asked if I had taken the tagging and highlighting course. “No” I said, “but that’s ok. I’m pretty comfortable with using an index, and I’m sure I’ll be fine.”  She was VERY sceptical of my confidence, and insisted that I needed to sit the course. She asked if I had at least tagged my books myself. I said that I had not, as I didn’t have them yet. I live a couple of hours from the nearest place that I could get them, and I was planning to pick them up on the way to the testing site. For some reason, this really seemed to upset her. Finally, she said that she would have to speak with the CFI. She came back, and with an air of a jump master who had just been instructed to send the new guy out of the plane without a parachute, agreed to set a test date for me.
>
> Now, you have to understand that I wasn’t being arrogant or cocky, I was just terribly uninformed. In America, all of the regulations that govern you as a pilot or an A&P (engineer), as well as generally useful information like what airport markings look like, survival in the event of an emergency landing in winter in Alaska, etc, are contained in a paperback book that is slightly smaller than a typical best selling novel. And it has an index in the back. It’s a bound book, costs $14.95, and once a year, you throw it out and buy a new one.  Having never seen a paper version of the Aussie regs, I assumed that they would be at least somewhat similar to their American cousin.
>
> Imagine my surprise when I showed up at the local(ish) pilot supply shop to pick up my copy on the way to my test. I was presented with a stack of papers and a stack of empty three ring binders along with a separate stack of dividers. That will be $895.00, thanks.  What the hell??!!! $895.00? You have to assemble your own books? And where is the index? “Oh”, I was informed, “there is no index. I mean there are some commercially available ones, but you’re not allowed to use them.”  
>
> And in the last two paragraphs lies, in my opinion is the beginning of understanding the problems with the Australian system.
>
> To start, the reason that the Australian regs take up a stack of books a foot and a half high is that they are a list of all of the things that you can do in an aircraft. The American system generally comes at things from the other side. It’s a list of things that you can’t do. If the regs don’t say you can’t do it, you can.
>
> Simply put, Americans have the right to do whatever they want, as long as there is not a rule against it. Australians have the right to do whatever the Government tells them they can.
>
> And, I think that this points to an even deeper difference. Americans trust individuals, and tend to distrust Governments and large organisations. Australians seem to, at least on a government level, distrust individuals.
>
> This is even apparent in the papers we carry as pilots. In America, I had a Commercial Pilot Certificate. Here I have a Commercial Pilot License.
>
> According to Webster’s dictionary a certificate is  a document certifying that one has fulfilled the requirements of and may practice in a field.
>
> A License, on the other hand is a permission granted by competent authority to engage in a business or occupation.
>
> Similar, but different.
>
> This is extremely evident with the differences between CASA and the FAA. And these differences are one of the main things that create extra costs for aviation.
>
> Starting with your medical certificate. In the States, any Aviation Medical Examiner can issue a second or third class medical certificate on the spot, and a Senior Aviation Medical Examiner can issue any Aviation Medical Certificate on the spot.
> Finish your exam, walk out to the front desk and the receptionist hands you your shiny new certificate.
>
> Because that person is a Doctor that has passed the FAA training and has actually examined you. And the FAA trusts that person, even though they are not part of a bureaucracy. CASA doesn’t trust that individual, and requires the actual Medical Certificate to be issued by a trusted government bureaucrat. That hasn’t ever even met you. And, is that trusted bureaucrat personally reviewing over 100 medical applications per day? Of course not. There is a team of trusted bureaucrats to do that. And being government employees, they are all on a very nice wage, all of which must be paid for by the pilot.
>
> Flight training is obviously the next stop on your expensive journey to becoming a pilot.
>
>
> In Australia, you must go to an approved Flight School that has an AOC that probably cost the school $75,000.00 to $100,000.00. The school must employ a Chief Flight Instructor (who we would hope must be earning at least $100,000.00/year). To have any hope of making any money, the school has to have LOTS of students, which means lots of staff, all on $50,000.00/year or more, as well as a building large enough to house all of these people. This has to be paid for by the student. Typical cost: $25,000.00.
>
>
> In the States, once a pilot earns his Flight Instructor Certificate (just one level, thanks) he or she is considered to be competent to teach people to fly. Because, you know, they have passed all of the tests and earned the certificate. They are free to go to work for a flight school or to just hang out their shingle and start teaching on their own. Or any combination thereof. This, of course, creates a bit of competition. There are Flight Instructors that will work for free, just to build hours. There are Flight Instructors that charge a lot of money, if they can demonstrate to the market that they are providing value. There are flying clubs and Flight schools. Typical cost of a Private Pilot Certificate through a Flight School is about $7,500.00, including check ride. You could do it much more cheaply, of course, if you have your own airplane and an instructor that would teach you for free.  
>
> How does this work?
>
> Quite well, thank you. Given that the purpose of regulating Aviation is to ensure safety, the proof of a given system should be in the accident numbers. Even though the US system is SIGNIFICANTLY less bureaucratic, the end result as measured by accident rates is quite good. The GA accident rate per 100,000 flight hours in the US appears  to be similar to or less than in Australia. And this in spite of the much more challenging terrain and weather in the US.
>
> Think about that. $7,500.00 vs $25,000.00. For commercial pilots, the difference is even more amazing. $30,000.00 in the US compared to $70,000.00 in Australia. And the main difference is due to the extra regulation that produces NO measurable safety benefit.
>
> When the time comes to renew their Instructor Certificate in the US, all a busy instructor has to do is to provide proof to the FAA that they have recommended at least 5 students for a new certificate or rating and that at least 80% of those have passed the check ride on the first attempt. The FAA doesn’t actually care HOW the students were taught, as long as it was effective. Because, the best demonstration of your competence as an instructor is your ability to transfer knowledge to the student.
>
> If you have not recommended at least five students or if at least 80% of those five didn’t pass, you have the following options
>
> Submitting a completed and signed application with the  FAA and satisfactorily completing one of the following renewal requirements -
>
> (ii) A record showing that, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the flight instructor has served as a company check pilot, chief flight instructor, company check airman, or flight instructor in a part 121 or part 135 operation, or in a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots.
>
> (iii) A graduation certificate showing that, within the preceding 3 calendar months, the  person has successfully completed an approved flight instructor refresher course consisting of  ground training or  flight training, or a combination of both.
> That’s right. You can renew your Instructor Certificate with on on-line course. Available all day long for $99.00. No flight Test required. What?? That’s right, because you still need a BFR, don’t you?
>
> Compare this to the Australian system, where you basically redo your entire flight test every two years. The last time I renewed my Grade One Liscence in Australia, it cost me nearly $2,000.00, and took me all day. Expensive if you’re making your living as a Flight Instructor, pointless expense if you’re not. And since I hate pointless expenses, and since I was making a living flying a floatplane at that point, I didn’t renew. And most Instructors wouldn’t once they were no longer instructing full time. So now instead of a potential student flying with me and gaining the benefit of my 4,000 hours of dual given and over 7,000 hours of GA flying experience, they are flying with a Grade 3 with 250 hours total time. Where is the safety benefit?
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> SHAWN KELLY
> Director – Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia

---

And from the CC HR: post #86

A little more of AOPA logic from Shawn Kelly (director).  A 'change' in culture has been a long wished for item. Probably from both sides; however, (IMO) until the threat of a liability matter, being raised against  CASA is removed, it seems to me CASA is hidebound: locked within the toils of their own legal knitting. It is terms like 'CASA must be satisfied' which create the second edge to the knife. If the approval legislation was 'un-ravelled' to a simple USA style system where if you have (A), (B), ©, and (D) you're good to go pay the fee and get on with it, CASA would benefit. But because of the legalese, mumbo-jumbo and arse covering built into the rules, an approval becomes a legal minefield.  That said - Shawn makes a valuable, reasoned comparison analysis, which heralds the way forward for the AOPA efforts to make life just a little better for the aviation community.    

> Subject: Re: Another example of CASA regulation making things VERY difficult.
>
> It might have, but I’m a bit skeptical. Keep in mind that CASA proactively and aggressively pursued this. I think that the bigger problem is that the overall mindset is that they are a police agency and we are a bunch of shady characters that are always trying to get away with something. 
>
> Unless we can somehow change the culture at CASA, I don’t see much improvement, and I think that that is a very big project. No impossible, but certainly a big project. 
>
> I AM, however, convinced that a change of the basic underlying regulations to the American system would yield very positive results. If we were allowed to do anything that wasn’t prohibited I think that it would change the power dynamic. Even though it seems like a simple difference in semantics, it I think that there is a a very real, if subtle, difference in the perception of power. The individual is the one with the rights, and those rights cannot be usurped unless there is a specific rule that allows them to be. Plus, it allows for more flexibility and less cost. 
>
> Ben told me something the other day that’s an incredibly powerful argument in favour of the American system. There are as many GA aircraft movements in Southern California in one day as there are in Australia in a year. 
>
> Think about that! 
>
> Having flown quite a bit in Southern California, I can believe it. And most of that flying is taking place in the smog in the Los Angeles Basin. Going into the sun, visibility is very limited. Most of the time you are flying over densely populated city with few if any acceptable emergency landing spots. And yet, they have a safety record equal to or better than ours. 
>
> Adopting that system would involve trusting individuals to be competent and to do the right thing. It would involve a lot of people in CASA giving up a lot of power. And would probably result in a reduced number of bureaucrats. I think that makes it a bit of an uphill battle.

From BM (courtesy AOPA Oz Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/AOPAaustralia/) overnight; IMO follows on in perfect harmony to SK's (above) email...  

OVER-REGULATED? Initial Aircraft Registration Application

There has been much discussion over the past year about over-regulation of Australia’s aviation industry, with plenty of debate on both sides of the argument. However, how does over-regulation impact the average aircraft owner or pilot?

Let’s take a quick look at an Initial Aircraft Registration Application, purely comparing the application form to assess simplicity and efficiency;

In the United States, an Initial Aircraft Registration Application is a three (3) page form;
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Form/AC8050-1.pdf

In Canada, an Initial Aircraft Registration Application is a two (2) page form;
http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/…/forms-form…/download/26-0522_BO_PD

In the United Kingdom an Initial Aircraft Registration Application is a four (4) page form;
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CA1Issue08_Enabled.pdf

In Australia an Initial Aircraft Registration Application is a seventeen page form;
https://www.casa.gov.au/file/136066/download?token=dwOjPdS_

The clear winners in this comparison are Canada, requiring just two (2) pages and the United States, requiring three (3).

Australia on the other hand struggles in with an uncontested last place, with a hefty seventeen (17) page form!

Over-regulated? Leave your comments below.

NOT A MEMBER? WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT!
Join today: www.aopa.com.au/membership

MTF...P2 


Ps This week's SBG is now up on the blog and AP Forum thread:

One more sleep: wake up in Wagga.

• Posted by Sarcs
  
  
• • Leave a comment
  
  
• • ASA, ATSB, Aunty Pru - First solo, CASA, Minister for Transport, Senate Estimates - Unplugged, Whimsy and Waffle
  
  
• • Edit
  

One more sleep: wake up in Wagga.– AP Forum version. Wagga set to host aviation leaders from around the nation | The … The Daily Advertiser Wagga to host the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia’s aviation summit next week When you awake on the morning of a hunt, you have choices. You may […]

---

Continue ReadingOne more sleep: wake up in Wagga.



Wagga set to host aviation leaders from around the nation | The ...
The Daily Advertiser
Wagga to host the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia's aviation summit next week

---

When you awake on the morning of a hunt, you have choices. You may go along for the sheer thrill of hearing the hounds give voice, the surge of the animal you ride as it flies toward a thicket hedge and the adrenalin rush as you clear the thorns, to arrive back, dirty, tired and happy as the proverbial pig. Or, you may elect to adopt a more pedestrian role; amble along at the back, happy to ‘hack’ around and spend the day ‘a-chatting’. Lots of options, you can even stay home and watch MKR repeat episodes – up to you. However, if you turn out, then which ever way you decide to spend the day, you are involved. I’ve never been certain which came first – hunting or racing horses: you certainly ‘race’ when hunting; and you are effectively ‘hunting’ a prize when racing; no matter. The prize at Wagga is political understanding of the deep problems Australian aviation faces; the basic, fundamental, deeply entrenched, bitterly disputed, never ending or ever going away, AUD400,000,000 dollars worth and three decades old ‘troubles’. Racing or hunting, both demand courage, cunning, stamina, intelligence and ability - from both beast and man. The prize is elusive, the hunted a cunning dangerous creature. But as TOM say’s –Want a rabbit pie? – first you must catch your rabbit.