[Peetwo]

Turnbull government 2017 report card on aviation policy - Part I

Mr. Carmody might believe that the ASSR recommendations are largely implemented and that industry trust of the regulator is being restored.

Too bad that the General Aviation industry is still in a nose dive and that as every day that passes fewer pilots are flying, more aircraft are lying about unused and depreciating in value.

Where there used to be hundreds of flying schools, especially in country areas, this once busy scene is still virtually a desert. One senior instructor nearby to me paid $8000 up front with a flying school AOC application eighteen months ago, still nothing but grief from CASA and no AOC. In the USA this instructor would have been making a living from day one and been able to put $8000 into a suitable training aircraft.

The GA industry is still strangled by all the disastrous strict liability criminal sanction and unworkable rules of Part 61. What used to be a biennial flight review is now a flight test. No consideration or incentives are built into the regime. For example no amelioration for aircraft owners, commercial licence or instructor ratings.

Same for the outlandish ASIC requirements, $283 two years only. No clarity or help to industry which the AVID could easily substitute and the excuse that this is controlled solely by the Department of Infrastructure won’t wash. How many pilots actually have either of these two security identification cards? I have enquired for comparative figures from ten years to the present, same for flying school numbers but CASA doesn’t bother keeping such unimportant numbers. Living in the Can’tberra bubble.

The best potential real reform in years is Mr. Carmody’s belated medical changes which, if implemented in the present form actually will induce pilots to either drop their instrument ratings or not bother obtaining such in the future thus depriving flying schools from valuable work Forget that Instrument Flight Rules is a higher and safer standard of flying operations.

The separating out of the low weight category to induce thousands of flyers into less capable and less strong aircraft remains one of the worst decisions ever perpetrated on the flying industry. Hats off to all those that have had to design down to an extremely low weight and all segments should have a fair go but there’s so many that would have been much better off in fully certified (IFR capable) aircraft. But no, CASA in its lack of wisdom still supports this massive error of public policy.

The whole fee gouging and unsupportable system is still in place and no amount of twiddling at the edges and hoping against hope that some ‘just culture’ attitude change will materially alter the outlook is not realistic.

Only legislative changes, political determination, will cause a true revival of GA. Expecting CASA reforming itself is a forlorn hope, it’s just not capable.

And today from Annabel Hepworth, via the Oz:

Aviation’s slow regional burn

1:23pmAnnabel Hepworth

The aviation sector that provides critical regional services has been in decline since 2010, with warnings of “destruction”.

---

A landmark study has confirmed the decline in the general aviation sector that plays a crucial role in serving regional communities.

A day after a cabinet reshuffle that sees Barnaby Joyce take on aviation, a long-awaited Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics report has found the sector has been decreasing since 2010.

But while private flying and flight training have faced “significant” decreases, this has been partly offset by growth in other areas including aerial mustering and search and rescue activity.

The report was announced last year by former Transport Minister Darren Chester.

It came after warnings that the sector had been hit by red tape and skyrocketing costs.

Businessman and aviation veteran Dick Smith has previously warned that the sector faces “destruction”.

Internationally, general aviation — which serves roles ranging from enabling regional families to fly to town to get their groceries rather than doing huge drives to flying training, firefighting, mustering, private flying and aerial surveying — has been in decline or static in nations including the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.

“Like many other industry sectors, the demand for and supply of the services offered by GA has changed over the past few decades and will continue to do so with developments in aviation technology and the way in which our economy operates,” the report said.

It finds that “while overall GA activity is declining, it is not accurate to say that all sectors of GA are declining”.

“What is apparent is that for some aviators, operating a GA business is a way of funding their passion. Some aviators continue to operate the same way they have for decades, in aircraft that are decades old, and at airports with few GA operators remaining.”

Among the “challenges” confronting the sector are the cost of pilot and maintenance training, airport leases and charges and regulatory changes including multiple reviews of aviation safety rules by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

As well, the fleet is ageing, with the most popular group of small single engine aeroplanes used by the sector at an average age of 36.4 years.

“While they are very robust aircraft, many are beginning to develop age-related faults such as corrosion and metal fatigue, which are very expensive to repair,” the report says.

“Most still require leaded fuel (aviation gasoline or avgas), which is becoming increasingly harder to source and more expensive, with production likely to cease over the next decade.”

According to the report, people from the GA sector “ have clearly expressed concerns that aviation safety regulatory changes are having an unnecessary adverse impact on the GA sector”. Among these concerns were that a “one size fits all” approach meant changes were introduced for all aircraft that were not appropriate for the smaller planes used in general aviation.

The report finds that while the fees charged by CASA “were relatively small, the true cost was higher as additional wages and administration costs are required to achieve regulatory compliance in areas such as flight crew licencing, flying training and maintenance”.

According to the report, “key opportunities” include for CASA to review the hourly rates it charges, fleet renewal, measures to boost the training and retention of pilots and maintenance staff, and for CASA to look at harmonisation of rules.

& from a IOS/PAIN email chain:

Folks,
I have had several long discussions with Barnaby re. CASA and aviation generally, and he has a pretty good grasp of where the problems are, but particularly CASA being a “lawless” operation that pays no regard to anything but what it sees as its own interests --- “its own” being the “iron ring’s” best interests. I think he probably understands that Carmody doesn’t really control CASA, and Carmody seems to have become very reliant on Johnathan Alec, not a “good thing”.
 
Interestingly, my last discussion with Barnaby included me putting the view, in my usual subtle and understated way, that he should be Minister for Transport etc., he was less than enthusiastic because of the minefield of aviation. I told him the same as I told John Anderson, he may as well exercise real control and really achieve reform, because if there is a major accident, he will be wearing it in the eyes of the public, regardless of the circumstances. The reason for the accident will be reform/lack of reform.
 
At least Mrdak has already gone.
 
We need to inject into Barnaby the same kind of backbone that both John Sharp and Mark Vaile possessed.
 
One of the biggest problems in the aviation community is that there is no idea, let alone consensus, on the way ahead, the “big picture”.
 
Most discussions are about weed control, not getting rid of the weeds.
 
After what CASA did to Tiger, airlines are more timid (and not just in public) than ever, their “consultations with CASA” are all about pre-emptive damage control.
 
Qantas didn’t build the biggest hangar on Los Angeles International Airport just to park their aircraft out of the SoCal sunshine. If you think it is only wage rates, you are kidding yourself.
 
In 1996, the incoming Howard Government had a policy that was implemented, despite vehement resistance from CASA, Airservices and their unions. We achieved major reforms that most of you seem to have forgotten.
 
That policy is about as valid today, as it was then.  As was the way Sharp and Vaile achieved those reforms.
 
Cheers,
Bill H.

---

& KC in reply:  

Bill,
 
Where there was reformists within CASA pre 2002, none exist today.
The iron ring protects their jobs not understanding the functions and responsibilities they hold sacrosanct, have been devolved to industry in the FAA system, TCA system and starting to happen in the EASA system.
 
Instead of adopting FAR Parts 61/91, CASA legal want to create quasi regulators putting volunteers under liability they don’t deserve.
 
This is not the economic reform that was originally being pushed. Part 91 provides the freedoms to flight for all sectors.

Part 61 provides the independent flight instructors so desperately need in aviation.
 
Adoption of the FAR system would empower industry and reduce jobs in CASA.
Parts 43 enables greater flexibility without CASA involvement.
Re harmonisation of Part 21 with amended FAR Part 21 - saved US manufacturing $136M for $2M cost to implement. FAA devolved functions to industry.
 
Until we get a smart Minister, hopefully Barnaby, that directs adoption of the FAR system then the anti-modernisation, non-reformists will continue to exist.
 
Merry Xmas to all, will raise me glass to Barnaby if he can break the ring.
Best chance we have had for over a decade
 
Regards
 
Ken

    
BITRE GAS report:

General Aviation Study
Listen
A A A


Publication Type: [url=https://bitre.gov.au/publications/publications.aspx?query=e:"commissioned%20report"&link-search=true]Commissioned Report[/url]

Publication Subject(s): [url=https://bitre.gov.au/publications/publications.aspx?query=s:"aviation"&link-search=true]aviation[/url]

ISBN: 978-1-925531-77-0
Release Date: December 2017

General aviation is a diverse sector that is undergoing change. While overall GA activity appears to be declining slowly, it is not accurate to say that all parts of GA are declining.
Those parts of GA that are discretionary in nature, such as pleasure flying, appear to decline in more conservative economic times, while those parts of GA that are a key part of an expanding industry, such as aerial mustering, have been growing strongly. Detailed economic analysis of these relationships is not currently possible due to the current lack of financial statistics for GA, however this report outlines some of the key challenges facing GA and identifies some key opportunities for the industry and Government to respond to these challenges.

• General Aviation Study [PDF: 2599 KB] []
  

TICK..TOCK Barnaby, TICK TOCK indeed...


MTF...P2