The Last Minute Hitch: 17 February 2023
17 February 2023
– Steve Hitchen
One thing you have to remember when you embark on a campaign of reading between the lines is that the most common thing you find there is nothing. Sometimes you'll find hidden messages, but most times that space is just blank. Take, for example, the post-implementation review (PIR) report into the flight paths at Sunshine Coast. The report has identified higher levels of GA movements on the new runway 13/31 as a contributor to noise, simply because the noise modeling used on the original project presumed that GA would still be able to use runway 18/36. That runway was closed when the new one opened, so you can throw the noise model out the window. Another pertinent piece of information is that circuit training for fixed-wing aircraft (presumably this is mostly GA) was among the top five operations that the community complained about. As GA accounts for around 80% of movements at Maroochy, there is some justification in saying the airport is largely a GA airport that has some heavy RPT movements. But that doesn't stop pressure being bought to bear on GA operations there, and that's what appears between the lines. Closing 18/36 has dumped more GA into the noise mix and despite the weight of movements, GA is vulnerable to restrictions to satiate the demands of a noise-sensitive public. No more circuit training (a'la Essendon) and curfews could be real possibilities in the future. These are the go-to measures when the clamour for quiet gets too loud. Alternatively, the space between the report lines could be completely blank, with the airport preferring to support the sector that accounts for 80% of their movements.
"..it's an attempt at the former producing a case of the latter.."
Normally I like to get responses from government agencies about something I've written; it shows that they've been reading it. Sometimes that is tempered by the subject matter. Last week I got one from the department media team pointing out an error of fact in my story about the white paper. I had said that they were taking submissons to the paper, which is, they pointed out, wrong. The department is taking submissions only on the terms of reference. I corrected my story. Whilst beating myself up about how I missed that, I asked myself this question: when was the last time a government agency of any type asked for feedback on the terms of reference? Normally they are decided behind closed doors and handed to the aviation community as part of the initial call for submissions. There could be, as the AAA alluded to this week, some targeted industry consultation before the terms are drawn up, but the community at large are generally not asked. So, right now I can't decide if gathering feedback on the terms of reference is a sign of transparency, or consultation overkill. Probably it's an attempt at the former producing a case of the latter. With the GA community in particular suffering from inquiry fatigue, the white paper may have a fight on its hands to get a decent weight of submissions. Adding one more round of consultation is like throwing another log into the cart when the horse is already buckling under the load. I suspect that many in the GA community will shy away from submissions on the terms of reference and prefer to keep what consultation energy they have left for the green paper later this year.
With 10 days to go after a four-year wait, if you're not getting excited about Avalon 2023 then you may not have enough aviation platelets in your blood. The international aviation community and industry is coming to Avalon in large numbers, so much so that the exhibition space is 100% subscribed for the first time ever and the number of official delegations is also expected to break records. That's a damned good measure of how big this event is going to be. But what's in it for general aviation? Actually, a lot, perhaps more than ever before. The organiser, AMDA Foundation, has set aside a new area to the south of the pavillions called the Lawrence Hargrave Oval, which will be a dedicated GA zone. And again GA organisations and associations have been offered ground space free of charge to promote themselves to both the aviation community and the general public. There's even a conference centre tent set up. The only downer for GA is the loss of Avalon East, which won't open this year in favour of bussing GA pilots in from Lethbridge. Lethbridge has some good facilities and a sealed runway; things Avalon East always lacked. The trade-off from operating directly in to Avalon is that camping is permitted at Lethbridge, so you may have to prepare yourself for a bit of a party on the Friday and Saturday nights in particular. I'll be down there all week floating around the place and sticking my nose in where it may or may not be wanted. I'm always up for chat when my calendar lets me.
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch
Sandy in reply...
MTF...P2
17 February 2023
– Steve Hitchen
One thing you have to remember when you embark on a campaign of reading between the lines is that the most common thing you find there is nothing. Sometimes you'll find hidden messages, but most times that space is just blank. Take, for example, the post-implementation review (PIR) report into the flight paths at Sunshine Coast. The report has identified higher levels of GA movements on the new runway 13/31 as a contributor to noise, simply because the noise modeling used on the original project presumed that GA would still be able to use runway 18/36. That runway was closed when the new one opened, so you can throw the noise model out the window. Another pertinent piece of information is that circuit training for fixed-wing aircraft (presumably this is mostly GA) was among the top five operations that the community complained about. As GA accounts for around 80% of movements at Maroochy, there is some justification in saying the airport is largely a GA airport that has some heavy RPT movements. But that doesn't stop pressure being bought to bear on GA operations there, and that's what appears between the lines. Closing 18/36 has dumped more GA into the noise mix and despite the weight of movements, GA is vulnerable to restrictions to satiate the demands of a noise-sensitive public. No more circuit training (a'la Essendon) and curfews could be real possibilities in the future. These are the go-to measures when the clamour for quiet gets too loud. Alternatively, the space between the report lines could be completely blank, with the airport preferring to support the sector that accounts for 80% of their movements.
"..it's an attempt at the former producing a case of the latter.."
Normally I like to get responses from government agencies about something I've written; it shows that they've been reading it. Sometimes that is tempered by the subject matter. Last week I got one from the department media team pointing out an error of fact in my story about the white paper. I had said that they were taking submissons to the paper, which is, they pointed out, wrong. The department is taking submissions only on the terms of reference. I corrected my story. Whilst beating myself up about how I missed that, I asked myself this question: when was the last time a government agency of any type asked for feedback on the terms of reference? Normally they are decided behind closed doors and handed to the aviation community as part of the initial call for submissions. There could be, as the AAA alluded to this week, some targeted industry consultation before the terms are drawn up, but the community at large are generally not asked. So, right now I can't decide if gathering feedback on the terms of reference is a sign of transparency, or consultation overkill. Probably it's an attempt at the former producing a case of the latter. With the GA community in particular suffering from inquiry fatigue, the white paper may have a fight on its hands to get a decent weight of submissions. Adding one more round of consultation is like throwing another log into the cart when the horse is already buckling under the load. I suspect that many in the GA community will shy away from submissions on the terms of reference and prefer to keep what consultation energy they have left for the green paper later this year.
With 10 days to go after a four-year wait, if you're not getting excited about Avalon 2023 then you may not have enough aviation platelets in your blood. The international aviation community and industry is coming to Avalon in large numbers, so much so that the exhibition space is 100% subscribed for the first time ever and the number of official delegations is also expected to break records. That's a damned good measure of how big this event is going to be. But what's in it for general aviation? Actually, a lot, perhaps more than ever before. The organiser, AMDA Foundation, has set aside a new area to the south of the pavillions called the Lawrence Hargrave Oval, which will be a dedicated GA zone. And again GA organisations and associations have been offered ground space free of charge to promote themselves to both the aviation community and the general public. There's even a conference centre tent set up. The only downer for GA is the loss of Avalon East, which won't open this year in favour of bussing GA pilots in from Lethbridge. Lethbridge has some good facilities and a sealed runway; things Avalon East always lacked. The trade-off from operating directly in to Avalon is that camping is permitted at Lethbridge, so you may have to prepare yourself for a bit of a party on the Friday and Saturday nights in particular. I'll be down there all week floating around the place and sticking my nose in where it may or may not be wanted. I'm always up for chat when my calendar lets me.
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch
Sandy in reply...
Quote:Quote Hitch :- “So, right now I can't decide if gathering feedback on the terms of reference is a sign of transparency, or consultation overkill.” Consultation for terms of reference? Surely you jest, or maybe the Minister is having a laugh!
Well mate let’s have a look back nine years to the much vaunted Forsyth ‘consultation,’ forget all the predecessors of that inquiry. We made hundreds of submissions to Forsyth.
What happened? Ok for one we got SIDs that soaked Cessna owners $millions and depleted the fleet and bottle necked the maintenance sector. And then, wait for it, Part 61 to wreck the training sector, loss of hundreds of flying schools. Then CASA inexplicably quashed Glen Buckley’s umbrella flying school business that might have kept a number of smaller schools going. That is a salutary lesson for anyone attempting to deal with CASA.
Fast forward to Senator McDonald’s fizzled out inquiry, not to mention the 3000 replies to my Change.org including hundreds of comments, virtually the whole lot about all of the extreme and debilitating effects of a runaway regulator upon our much struggling General Aviation industry.
The monopoly corporate CASA created by Transport Minister Gareth Evans in 1988 to rid his Department of the administration of aviation is the root cause and no new inquiry will change the failed model of governance until Parliament places aviation into a Department of Government with a responsible Minister at its head.
The denial of Ministerial responsibility, undeniably a cornerstone of the Westminster system of democratic control, is at the heart of our problem. A problem that is counter to the National interest, aviation mobility is a crucial aspect of our strength from a security point of view, quite apart from the obvious utility of GA, employment and our general prosperity.
MTF...P2