[Peetwo]

CASA Comms team reply to Sandy - 

Via the AP email chains:

OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Reith

Thank you for your email regarding our work to exempt operators and maintainers of Cessna aircraft in the broader private and aerial work sectors from the requirements to carry out Cessna SIDs.

You may be interested to note our General Aviation Workplan which summarises existing and proposed projects aimed at reducing regulatory burdens on general aviation. Details of the workplan are available here.

As well as the Cessna SIDs issue, the workplan includes an initiative to make it easier for flight instructors to operate independently by establishing the option of a simplified application and fast-tracked assessment process for ‘independent’ instructors seeking to obtain a Part 141 of CASR training approval.

I encourage you to continue to engage through our consultation processes, including on medical standards.

We have also sent your request to alter your submission to the AvMed consultation to regulatoryconsultation@casa.gov.au.

Have a great weekend.

Kind regards,

CASA communications team.

Sandy in reply...

Thank you for your reply.

Regarding independent instructors, according to John King of the highly regarded King Schools, who was employed at one time as consultant to CASA, about 70% of USA pilots are trained outside of the Part 141 system. Therefore your idea of ‘fast tracking’ to Part 141 is not strictly relevant to the proposal which would, if implemented, do a great deal to revive our General Aviation (GA) industry.

If you can point to impediments that pertain to Australia compared to the USA situation I think it would be helpful if you would elaborate or explain your concerns. In my experience there are no impediments, and I commenced my flying school in the 70s, I see no differences that would impede going to independent instructors. This should happen quickly because GA is in trouble.

In regards to medicals, your online system doesn’t allow for attachments and I’d be grateful if you could forward the attachments below to those who are considering medical reforms. Again the matter is urgent because we are losing pilots because of the time, travel, expense and having often to make multiple visits to various specialists in order to satisfy AVMED’s requirements.

I will say that no one would object to such medical stringencies if there was a real case to safeguard the public, let alone the pilots themselves. But, as the tables below indicate there is no safety case to cause us to persist with the current requirements. Apart from these tables the c. 30 year successful RAAUS history is proof that a self declared car driver standard is practical and not unsafe. But I must emphasise that a new standard must include IFR and CTA being the safest and most controlled environment, and IFR should be encouraged for the overall health and advancement of our much beleaguered GA industry.

Much appreciated your willingness, and invitation, to continue to engage.

MTF...P2