[Kharon]

What a bizarre LMH this week.

Hitch - “But it seems that facts can be twisted more ways than a Rubik's Cube. On several occasions, evidence was delivered in good faith that was wrong or out of date.”


Seems to me Hitch should lay out his evidence of “wrong' or, out of date” and who it was wotdunit – “on several occasions”. Incorrect statement made or the telling of  faerie tales to a Senate committee is a risky business and a fairly serious offence.

Hitch - There was very little new information presented; all of it was dredged up from as far back as the Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR), of which CASA was the target.


'Dredged' is a fairly derogatory descriptor. I'd not call the Hirst or McDermott evidence 'dredged' rather I'd call it excellent, clearly defined, compelling, well presented, fully factual, completely supported and pretty much 'Bang on'. “Much of it dating back to the ASRR” is a better way to describe a still open, untended wound. I'd say that was because despite the best efforts of the Senate RRAT committee, Sen. Fawcett and the Rev. Forsyth – despite the money invested – despite the time invested – despite over 60 recommendations being made – nothing has changed; so why should the 'evidence' change? CASA have simply ignored the ASRR, the minister, the Senate committee and the industry. Tut-tut Hitch. 

Hitch - “I feel mostly for the senators, to whom has landed the job of centrifuging out all the agendas to leave only the true facts in the bowl. That's going to be a challenge for a group of people for which aviation is not their first language.”

No, no, no! – bad Hitch. That statement deserves a clip in it's ear. That Senate 'team' was not only on top of the game, fully bipartisan, united, but affronted. Watch the little segment where the lunatic requirements imposed on the chopper pilot check flights was kicked out of the paddock – then try and tell me this 'panel' were 'babes in the wood'. Bollocks; they were brilliant, well briefed and fully across the brief; and, not likely to swallow the 'wrong' information you hint at being presented. Call out your liars and fools Hitch; or, leave it alone.

Nope: no choc frog for Hitch this week. And so say all of us.

Toot - toot.

[P7_TOM]

The Klaxon.

Anthony Klan has for a good while now chased down some important aviation related 'points of interest'; as have others in the mainstream media. When Sandilands departed the fix, aviation lost an advocate and a strong voice, unafraid to to speak out. We can only hope that 'The Klaxon' can fill the gap left by Ben; and, at least try to publish some of the true horror stories related to airports, airlines and the dreadful international reputation Australia, through CASA and ministerial negligence, have gained, at least by the blatant non compliance with the ICAO agreements and standards. There are some very real questions which need to be answered, at ministerial level that someone, with a voice should be asking.

Let's see if the boys and girls at 'The Klaxon' have what it takes to shine a bright light on the shambles.

[Peetwo]

The last LMH for 2021? - 

(P2 OBS - Hitch skips a year of aviation scribbles and half-arsed opinion - wishful thinking perhaps??)

Via Oz Flying:

---

 

The Last Minute Hitch: 11 December 2021
11 December 2020
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

I knew several years ago that I would one day write an obituary for Chuck Yeager. I also knew it would be one of the most difficult things I would ever have to write. Yeager was a person who I had immense respect for, but found it very hard to actually like. To like someone you must have some level of understanding of them. Yeager was a supremely-confident, AAA+-type personality who was comfortable in the knowledge that he had never been proven fallible in his field; something I struggled to understand and be comfortable with myself. His personality was not one designed to make friends easily, characterised with a brutal honesty that could be considered rude and arrogant. Dumping on other aviation heroes like Armstrong and Crossfield is never popular, and I won't repeat here his opinions of Buzz Aldrin, even though Yeager would have been quite happy for me to do so. The legacy he leaves, one he guarded fiercely, is of a truly great aviator. A mega-celebrity after becoming the first person to break the sound barrier, he was nevertheless a very, very good pilot. Some might say the best there ever was. He was dedicated to the USAF perhaps beyond reason. He flew the Bell X-1 because it was his duty, he stayed in the USAF when commercial manufacturers were waving big dollars in his face and even after retirement became a USAF consultant for $1 per year ... and all the aeroplanes he wanted! It has to be remembered that Yeager also set up his own foundation for children and regularly flew sick kids in the EAA's Fokker Trimotor. That too is part of his legacy. Yes, other people saw Yeager different from how Yeager saw himself, but I suspect he would have been comfortable with that too.

the RRAT committee is determined to do a good job of this

Yesterday the senate RRAT committee tabled its interim report on the GA industry inquiry: a one-page letter to the senate president that basically said we are reporting that we have nothing to report. That's not an admission that they found nothing to say, but rather that the extraordinary year of 2020 prevented any real inquiry from going ahead. With only one public hearing completed–and that was largely by video link–the committee hadn't been able to drill far enough down into the issues plaguing the industry to produce conclusions of much integrity. That's a good thing for GA because it shows that the RRAT committee is determined to do a good job of this rather than make it another lip-service inquiry. The final report is not due until November, which means the committee has to squeeze nearly two years worth of work into 11 months. In a hopefully COVID-canceled 2021, the RRAT and the entire GA industry need to commit to putting their heads down and making sure the final report tabled in November 2021 is a circuit-breaker for GA.

AOPA Australia appears to have life it yet despite the analysis of some industry commentators that may have been coloured with wishful thinking. Delays to the financial report and the AGM fueled all sorts of conspiracy theories, most of which resulted in AOPA being insolvent. What people seemed to be forgetting is the impact of COVID-19 and the difficulty in getting auditors to visit remote locations. In a year when everybody needed to be cut some slack, none was being extended to AOPA. The financials show that AOPA made another operating loss for 2019 and a down-turn in memberships, but with an improved cash position, no-one's calling in the administrators just yet. Where the news is not so rosy is that AOPA needed to reverse the operating loss in 2020, a near impossibility in an industry heavily burdened by coronavirus. The state of the association really won't be known until May 2021, when the financial reality of 2020 will be laid bare.

One question that the aviation community has never been able to get a satisfactory answer to is "is CASA first and foremost an aviation organisation or just a bureaucracy?" In name it is supposed to be an authority, but the expertise within the organisation is lacking that much that it really can't justify that title anymore. We may be given a clue in the coming weeks when the new Director of Aviation Safety (DAS) is announced; the type of person selected should be giveaway what the government believes CASA should be. If you appoint an aviator you get an aviation organisation; if you appoint a bureaucrat you get a bureaucracy. In the past 10 years we've have a little bit of both. The board will select someone whose strengths align with the direction the government wants CASA to go. The last thing the aviation industry needs right now is the appointment of someone who has succeeded in generating animosity with the GA community and failed to build trust and integrity. Regardless of whether CASA is an aviation organisation or a bureaucracy, if it ever wants to be an authority it needs the stakeholders' buy-in moreso than just a government pronouncement.

Our re-scheduled Facebook seminar went off last night without the gremlins that infected the original attempt. We had a good 90 mins going over the options for fresh PPLs to kick off their aviation careers. Thanks to guest speakers David Pilkington, David Geers, Chris Wakefield and Charles Gunter who provided some great insights to their respective areas of expertise. We are also very grateful to Garmin Australia for their support. If you missed it, you can watch a replay of the seminar on the Australian Flying Facebook page.

And that is LMH done for 2020. It has been a tough–almost depressing–year that challenged everyone's positivity and it was not easy to find good things to write about. However, the GA community has fought its way through to this point and we can only hope our economic recovery is in lock-step with the improvement predicted for the economy overall. There are some encouraging signs that 2021 could be a watershed year for GA, but there are so many variables that impact the industry right now that it's impossible to say with any certainty if we can make any great strides. LMH will be back on board late January next year, at which time we're going back to the weekly format rather than the fortnightly editions forced on us by COVID measures.

Thanks for being with us right throughout the year.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

---

Hmm...incoming - err maybe? 


MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

OFCOL.

What a nasty, small, narrow minded, self aggrandising piece; not worthy of Oz Flying.

I would rather like to read Yeager's obituary for Hitch. In which possible dimension could Hitch be weighed and measured against a first class military pilot? That Hitch found Yeager 'hard to like' is completely irrelevant to anything remotely related to Hitch's experience of the world and those who fly military fast jets, let alone test pilots and the like.

The thing I find distasteful is the converse 'brag' and 'big noting'. As if Hitch was on the same planet as Yeager, closely associated and qualified to form an objective opinion. Yeager wouldn't know Hitch from a bar of soap; not in any meaningful way at least. Yet Hitch feels free to claim an 'acquaintance'. That Hitch cannot fathom a man like Yeager is about the only honest comment – but then, how could he? The percentage chances of Hitch gaining access to the inner circle of Yeager's world are astronomical; the chances of him understanding that world are exponential.

I've never met Yeager, never had a beer with him, never worked with him, so how etc. Aw, forget it. Waste of bandwidth......

[Peetwo]

Via Oz Flying:

---

 

Looking Counter Clockwise
7 January 2021
Comments 0 Comments


As aviation years go, 2020 will be memorable for a viral uncertainty that stymied any chance of growth and made even sustainability seem unachievable. That's the sort of thing that happens when a once-in-a-century pandemic dominates every industry, not just aviation. It was almost impossible to remain optimistic, especially for an industry so prone to pessimism. But it was not without cause; income streams ran dry for many operators and financial support from the Federal Government was nebulous despite the trumpeting from Canberra. For many regions, none more than metro Melbourne, the fun part of aviation had to be put on the backburner as pilots and operators focused on simply making it through the COVID storm.

Despite all of that, general aviation, as it always does, went on regardless. Some charter companies reported a boost in business as travelers, devoid of the usual reliability of the airlines, turned to GA to fill the gaps. It wasn't quite a silver lining, but it was better than nothing at all. And there were other stories than COVID.

Goodbye ... and thank you

Aviation was weakened by the losses of several of our most passionate supporters. Perhaps the most high-profile was Chuck Yeager, the first man to break the sound barrier and an iconic name in aviation history. We also lost Rudy Frasca, who's flight simulation systems have cultivated thousands of IFR ratings. Closer to home, Australian Flying was devastated by the death of former executive editor and GA champion Paul Phelan, the man whose writing dogged dubious regulation at every turn. The Australian Women Pilots Association mourned the iconic and much-honoured pioneer Senja Robey, who, as an instructor, nurtured the careers of many aspiring pilots.
Aviation Legend Chuck Yeager dead at 97
Aviation mourns Simulation Pioneer
A Champion Rides Away
Senja Robey, Pioneer Aviator

Inquiry goes on

The senate inquiry into the state of the GA industry should have been the largest story of the year, but COVID measures and border closures prevented any great progress. In the end, only one public hearing made it onto the schedule, and most of that was done by video link. Not even the chairperson, senator Susan McDonald was in the committee room. Submissions were, as always, strong and passionate. In the end, the committee fulfilled their reporting obligations by stating they had nothing to report due to COVID. But that was only the interim report; the inquiry will go on in 2021 with the final report due in November ... COVID permitting.
CASA under the Microscope: the Scrutiny begins
Buckley levels Accusations of Misfeasance against CASA
Sport Aircraft Association calls for End to ASAO System
CASA shackled on Risk-based Regulation: RAAA
Pilot Union bids for Seat on Advisory Panel

End of the Airvan

Australia was forced to swallow a very bitter pill when the 20-year production run of its pride, the GippsAero GA8 Airvan, came to an end. The most successful certified aircraft made in Australia in terms of numbers, the Airvan found a niche right around the world as a very capable utility. GippsAero's parent company, Indian conglomerate Mahindra Aerospace, began to re-think its involvement in aircraft manufacture, although the reasons for the decision were never made clear throughout the year. Culture clash was often cited as a reason for the aircraft's demise; over-engineering and wasted resources was another. Late in the year, Mahindra put GippsAero on the market, but burdened the offering with a desire to re-coup the investment they put into the company over their 10-year tenure as owner. By the end of 2020, it was thought that GippsAero had several suitors, but no deal had been announced. It could be that 2021 sees the revival of this Australian classic.
Airvan Production to cease within Weeks
Has Internal Conflict destroyed GippsAero
Poor Shipment Figure fuel GippsAero Sale Rumour

A matter of stalling

Possibly the great controversy of 2020 was the issue of stalling the BRM Bristell LSA. After accidents related to stalling, CASA issued a warning to owners about stalling, saying they had information that the aircraft did not conform to LSA standards despite the manufacturers assurances that it did. That later transformed into a stall ban on the aircraft even though BRM Aero handed over the test data. The issue went loud when BRM Aero representative Edge Aerospace contested almost everything CASA stated as reasons for the ban. They took the issue first to the Deputy Prime Minister, then lodged a complaint with the Commonwealth Ombudsman. Process was called into question as perhaps a larger issue than any problem with the aircraft.
BRM alleges Inequity in Bristell Overweight Issue
CASA referred to Commonwealth Ombudsman over Bristell
CASA issues Warning over Bristell CoG
CASA doubles down on Bristell Stall Ban
Letter to Minister urges Rethink on Bristell
BRM hits back over CASA Stall Ban
CASA to ban Stalls in Bristells
CASA issues Safety Alert on Popular LSA

The show must not go on

One-by-one they fell as COVID-19 skittled the aviation calendar. Bans on outdoor crowds caused a rapid cancelation of largely every air show, convention and exhibition planned for 2020. Avalon, Wings over Illawarra, Ausfly, Warbirds Downunder, Rotortech ... postponed or canceled outright. Wings over Illawarra was postponed twice as coronavirus measures and uncertainty robbed the aviation industry of its parties. These events take mammoth amounts of organisation and work on behalf of very dedicated people, and it must have been twice as heartbreaking for them to have to make the call to postpone as it was to the potential attendees.
Australian International Airshow postponed to November 2021
Coronavirus claims Ausfly
Warbirds Downunder postponed
AMDA defers Rotortech again
Wings over Illawarra falls Victim to COVID-19

These were the largest stories, but we also saw two high-level administrators moving on: RAAus CEO Michael Linke and CASA Director of Aviation Safety Shane Carmody. Defying the COVID-wobbles, new aeroplanes in the BRM B23, Tecnam P2010 TDi, DA50 RG, Pipistrel Velis Electro and others joined the ranks of the GA aircraft fleet, displaying an underlying confidence that, as usual, GA will go on.
It will be very interesting to see how far it can go in 2021.

[Peetwo]

 
 



The Last Minute Hitch: 22 January 2021



– Steve Hitchen

Shane Carmody's corner office in Aviation House has been cleared out and his security pass turned in. No longer is he the CEO and Director of Aviation Safety at CASA. Right now, no-one is. Carmody departed on 31 December without a successor ready to move their stuff in. The man holding the reins at CASA right now is Group Executive Manager Aviation Graeme Crawford. It's not unusual for an acting DAS to be appointed in these circumstances–Carmody himself was acting DAS for eight months before getting the gig full time–but history shows the acting DAS is in the box seat to get the keys to the corner office. However, I have had many discussions with industry insiders (including some who work at Aviation House) and when it comes to ideas of who would make a good DAS, Graeme Crawford's name is yet to come up. As they do with every incoming DAS, the GA community is looking for someone to champion change, but there is some doubt about whether that's a priority for the CASA board or the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. Crawford is not thought of as a change agent, but rather as defender of the status quo. That may be appealing to the board, but it is generating nervousness with the GA community.

Over time, complaints began to emerge

Sudden, unexpected or just a matter of time? The collapse last month of controversial training academy Soar Aviation has many commentators taking up an "I told you so" position. Soar based its primary operations on using mainly LSAs to deliver CPL training and tertiary qualifications. Over time, complaints began to emerge about the quality of training, which led to a class action leveled by former students who said promises weren't being delivered even though money was taken. That's still to be settled by the courts, so I am not accusing anyone of wrong-doing here. The tsunami resulting from this earthquake is doubt over a system that funds CPL training for only academies and not smaller schools that offer CPL training also. Some academies conduct training in aircraft that the GA industry doesn't use (like LSAs!), so if students passing out aren't offered a seat at an airline, the GA path is a hard road for them. A CPL with 170 hours under their belt who has never landed a large single on a gravel strip is not very appealing to GA operators. More than one submission to the Future of Australia's Aviation Sector Issues Paper suggested strongly that funding be made available for traditional training to the 200-hour syllabus as well, a recommendation that I have no hesitation in endorsing.

I can still hear the twisted-syllable twang of the American pilot as he struggled to understand why he was doing another orbit trying to get into Essendon. It was a crystal clear day; he was IFR. It should have been easy, in the US it would have been easy. In Australia he had to orbit three times and was delayed at 11,000 feet. His problem was that he was GA. Sitting down the back, I was embarrased for the entire Australian aviation community. There is a perception in the world that ATC in Australia deals with GA like we are midnight mosquitos in the bedroom: pesky flying things that need to be got rid of. The tragic circumstances that resulted in the death of two people on board Mooney VH-DJU near Coffs Harbour have highlighted the problem. The pilot was refused a clearance to transit CTA because a trainee controller considered their workload was too high. According to the ATSB report, there was no risk of conflict with other traffic at the time, and the transit time for the Mooney was all of seven minutes. For some reason, the controllers weren't awake to the fact that the options provided to the pilot increased the risk of an accident, and that co-ordinating the aircraft between the Class C and Class D controllers was more work than simply issuing the clearance. There were other circumstances that contributed and ATC was not responsible for them. However, had I been conducting that flight, I would have departed presuming that a simple seven-minute transit clearance that kept me clear of cloud would have been granted.

Congratulations to all the winners of the 2020 CASA Wings Awards! With the most nominations we've ever had, it was the most competitive field since the awards began in 2013. The judging panel debated a couple of the categories right to the last minute, showing the strength and dedication of the people nominated and the passion of those that nominated. Thanks to everyone involved, but a special thanks to CASA, who came on board this year as the major sponsor of the Wings Awards as part of their efforts to mitigate the impacts of the COVID-cursed 2020.

Any pilot that doesn't have a misty-eyed story about a revered flying instructor from their past is probably a cowboy. This is the crucial role that instructors play throughout the entire career of a GA pilot, RPL, PPL, CPL and probably right up to ATPL. We never forget the wise words of a good instructor. But is flying instructor the obvious career path that it once was. In our next Australian Flying Facebook seminar, we've invited several instructors onto the panel to give us insights into their careers, the ups and downs of instructing; the highlights, lowlights and scary moments. If you have ever thought of joining the ranks of Australia's flying instructors, log onto our Facebook page at 7.00 pm on 17 February and have your questions answered by those in the know.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

[Peetwo]

 

The Last Minute Hitch: 29 January 2021
29 January 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

There is nothing that will put the frighteners on private VFR pilots more than telling them you're taking away their Class G airspace. Dick Smith once dubbed Class G "dirt road" airspace, but it is a happy zone for private and recreational pilots where they can concentrate on flying and navigating without the pressure of surveillance. Effectively, the Airservices Australia proposal to lower the base of Class E on the eastern seaboard to 1500 AGL does just that, and is therefore not going to get a great deal of support from that sector. Although VFR doesn't need a clearance to operate in E, aircraft must carry a radio and a transponder, both of which are not mandatory in G. That doesn't represent the larger part of private VFR aircraft, but there are still a significant number of aeroplanes that this proposal will now relegate to cruising at no more than 1500 AGL. It will make the RPT crowd happy, because now they can get a clearance down to the overfly height at non-controlled airports. However, VFR doesn't need a clearance and therefore can reject what ATC might suggest, devaluing any IFR clearance handed out. Are you really "clear" to descend if ATC can't actually clear the path ahead of you? Expect a lot of opposition to this proposal.

compliance is not a once-only burden; it's ongoing, and so are the costs

CASA's answers to questions taken on notice at the last RRAT hearing for the inquiry into the GA industry are so frustrating that they are giving the GA community migranes. Senator Glenn Sterle simply wanted to know how CASA approached the requirement to take cost into account when they wrote regulations. In a masterclass worthy of politicians themselves, they've provided a non-answer to the question. Whilst stating that complex regulation does have some impact, CASA dismisses the impacts as being insignificant and states they have their cost estimates checked by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. However, they avoid any mention of how they arrive at the original estimates. Do they ask the operators? How do they know the cost impact is not significant? CASA talks about time lost, but that doesn't cover the fact that compliance is not a once-only burden; it's ongoing, and so are the costs. Did CASA take into account, for example, that most Part 142 schools had to employ an extra person full time just to comply? That means wages, superannuation and payroll tax for one more person that the company normally wouldn't have had on staff. Was that in the calculations? How about lessons canceled or charters turned down because staff were working on compliance. Was that in RIS? Laying all that out was what I suspect Senator Sterle really wanted CASA to do. The other frustration comes through CASA taking the questions on notice then providing answers that they should have been able to give on the spot!


Carbon monoxide gas is the silent killer of aviation, and in the case of the Beaver crash on the Hawkesbury, it did its job very well indeed. With avgas burners out front of most GA planes, CO poisoning is not something that we can just pretend isn't there, but realistically, how often do we actually check the colour-change, stick-on CO detectors? I'll stick up my hand for one and say hardly ever. And would it do any good if we did? The ATSB has labeled them unreliable and suggested we all buy electronic CO detectors. They will warn you by alarm once the levels are on the rise, hopefully giving you time to act before you start to feel the effects. The Hawkesbury River crash highlights how easy it can happen in a classic holes-in-the-Swiss-cheese example. Had the exhaust ring not been cracked the gases may not have escaped into the engine bay. Had the correct bolts been used in the firewall they may not have fallen out and given the CO gas free passage into the cabin. Had the pilot not done a 27-minute taxi with the door cracked he might have still been below the danger level at the time of the accident. But all those things happened, and things that can happen once can happen again. We have been warned.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

[Peetwo]

The Last Minute Hitch: 5 February 2021
5 February 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

Airservices' proposal to lower the base of Class E on the eastern seaboard is being seen as an attempt to wipe out Class G airspace. When the justification for the proposal is so thin in the public sphere, it's hard to dismiss those claims as the output of conspiracy theorists. Class G is the playground of the silent majority of private and recreational VFR pilots; somewhere they can commit their minds to the aeroplane without bothering ATC, or IFR pilots. Quite fairly, Airservices points out that if you have a radio and transponder you can play in Class E without a clearance, but many pilots won't want to do that even if their aircraft is equipped, because it exposes VFR pilots to IFR pilots who are not likely to be looking out the window. The 1500-foot AGL level betrays what this proposal is about: keeping RPT flights under control all the way down to the overfly height at non-controlled airports. However, setting the level AGL means that the top of the underlying Class G looks like an inverted Manhatten chart that follows the contours of the ground. The GFA, in their opposition to the proposal, points out the difficulty of trying to stay out of the Class E if you have to, being forced to constantly recalculate the base of the Echo airspace by the elevation of the ground below. It also damns those pilots to the lumpy inversion layers. And, although Airservices says more Class E will increase safety, they have failed in their assessments to offset that with the increase in risk to private and recreational pilots who may have to fly closer to terrain than is prudent.

"old clunkers are beginning to expire right around the world.."

Could there be two more contrasting stories in the same news week? From Bundaberg we have Jabiru Aircraft laying out the near impossibility of GA manufacture under the CASA regime, and from South Africa we have a story of the first flight of a new four-seat type. Building GA aircraft in Australia has proven to be the stuff of nightmares over the years, mostly due to government indifference and the power of the US aircraft makers. But people have tried and will try again. Part of what lures them is that it should be as easy to do it here and it is overseas. The reality is, however, that CASA's lack of genuine understanding about certification and the Federal Government's apathy continue to be millstones that can be carried only so far. With COVID having run roughshod over the economy, it seems the Coalition has woken up to what many people have known for years: we need to build things in Australia and aircraft are one of those things. There is still the issue of cost. It has been estimated that the cost of certifying an FAR23 aircraft from brainwave to first customer delivery is around $100 million depending on what you're doing. The return on investment time doesn't look great. but take into account that old clunkers are beginning to expire right around the world, and it is time for us to let go of our precious and look to new types. Those new types could be made in Australia if we can set up an encouraging environment. How good would it be to read a news story about a new four-seat type made in Australia?

I had the pleasure absolute this week of flying the new Tecnam P92 Echo MkII. This is an LSA with shades of the old P92, but is a completely different aeroplane. Of composite body and metal wing, the construction means the airframe has sleek contours that encourage airflow, but a wing that is addicted to flying. On a CAVOK day over the shore near Barwon Heads in Victoria, it was the perfect aeroplane for reaping aviation joy those conditions usually foster. It really is an amazing aeroplane and I thank Tecnam Australia and AirItalia for handing me the keys to this little ripper. Expect a full report in the next print edition of Australian Flying.

Instructing was once the most logical path for CPLs with wet ink on their licences. Today, not so much, thanks to an academy system that fast-paths so many straight into the airlines. However, people will always need to be taught to fly, and there would be very few pilots in the GA community that don't constantly carry the advice of a good instructor in the cockpit with them. To bring instructing back into focus as a career, Australian Flying has scheduled a Facebook seminar for 7.00 pm on Wednesday 17 February. We've loaded the panel with instructors of all levels to talk about the trade, swap stories and answer your questions. The experts we've lined up are:

• Linda Beilharz – CFI and RAAus Instructor, Bendigo Flying Club
  
  
• Abby Boston – Grade 2 Instructor, Avia Aviation
  
  
• Amy Muscat – Grade 2 Instructor and RAAus Instructor, Pacific Flight Services
  
  
• Shelley Ross – Grade 3 Instructor, Ward Air
  
  
• Alex Thorsen – Flying Instructor (Helicopters), Melbourne Helicopters
  

It should be a great fun evening with a bit of information thrown in to boot, so join us on the Australian Flying Facebook page at the appointed time and get your questions ready.


May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

Sandy comment...

Hitch has clearly and logically put the E class airspace proposal in close proximity to a dustbin. Thank you Steve. Most of GA will be pushing it in one direction, rightly so, the idea of a 1500 AGL surface is between E and G airspace one of the most unreasonable and bizarre concepts I’ve heard in my fifty five years of flying.

For those of us spending plenty keeping our venerable but beautiful and much loved aircraft, many and varied, in excellent condition the put down term “old clunkers” is not welcome, might I say inappropriate? But well said the problems of aircraft manufacturing in Australia this is an issue that must be near the top of GA’s long list of areas of outstanding need for explicit Government action. The overhaul of legislation to allow our aviation industries to grow and compete is a paramount necessity. Not just for aircraft but also component manufacturing and the question of interchangeability, including aviation workforce personnel, must be considered if the Government is serious to maximise post COVID economic activity. The current CASA trajectory is not sustainable, the model of an independent Commonwealth corporate has proven itself incapable of providing Australia with a rational environment for GA. This thirty three year experimental form of governance, divorcing real Parliamentary and Ministerial oversight and responsibility from full accountability, is a failure and must be rectified.

[Peetwo]

LMH - 12/02/21

---

 

The Last Minute Hitch: 12 February 2021
12 February 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

The collapse of Soar Aviation has precipitated a lot of good aeroplanes onto the second-hand market. Fifty-six good aeroplanes to be precise. The Pickles auction schedule reveals the extent of the Soar fleet, although to anyone who ever drove past the ranks of yellow trainers in the school's Moorabbin paddock, this wouldn't be a surprise. At a guestimate, the sticker value of the fleet as new would have been around $10 million, which was likely under finance, but still a Herculean burden for any company trying to make its mark in the flight training game. Another burden worthy of a Greek epic is the ongoing class action launched against the company that claims they failed to deliver the training students paid for. Adding both those factors together only deepens the mystery of how a flying school could acquire a fleet worthy of an air force in such a relatively short existence, then burn out. That's for KPMG to sort out. In the meantime, there are 56 good aeroplanes looking for homes. True, they are mostly yellow, but so were most of the Tiger Moths that flooded the market after WWII!

What were once spot fires for CASA are beginning to join up into a major fire front

CASA has responded to Glen Buckley's allegations of misfeasance; we should expect nothing less from any regulator than to defend its people. However, the CASA response cannot be the last word. Allegations like this must be treated extremely seriously and the matter of their veracity shouldn't be decided by anything less than a court. And if my mail is correct, it may not be the last time CASA is faced with this. Buckley seems to have spurred others to start assembling documents of their own that stand to back-up what he said. I have said before that Glen Buckley is not a man to go gentle into the good night, and there are other people in the general aviation community that are shaping up to stand at his shoulders. What were once spot fires for CASA are beginning to join up into a major fire front. There is no point in second-guessing the way courts will rule, except to say that the onus is going to be on Buckley and friends to prove misfeasance. That's no easy task given that CASA has hinted that they will use their obligations as the authority on aviation safety as justification of the way they have handled themselves. We are in for a mammoth battle, and one that Buckley has no qualms about fighting in the public eye.


My e-mail inbox and my mobile phone have earned their keep this week fielding calls and texts about Airservices' Class E proposal. Among the deluge of communication, there is yet to be one person supporting the idea. That bolsters my original opinion that this is one of the worst ideas ever proposed for aviation in Australia. Not only is the concept completely unworkable, it adds more risk than it mitigates. It also promotes the ridiculous situation where an aircraft flying straight and level will pass into and out of different airspace classifications in rapid succession because the base of the Class E would be variable depending on how high the ridge below an aircraft is. But where the most angst is coming from is the secrecy that clearly surrounds this proposal. Most of the benefits listed by Airservices have been discredited and debunked, and fairly-posed questions are being met with answers that betray that not enough homework has been done. Take the issue of a safety case. When questioned, Airservices has batted that back by saying it's not their policy to make safety cases public. This is simply not good enough to say that and declare the question has been answered. Several other questions about how the concept would work have been answered with lines such as "we are developing", "we are working with", "we are investigating". What we can draw from that is that Airservices has given the industry only a month to analyse a proposal that Airservices has not completed properly themselves.

Our instructor seminar this coming Wednesday night is generating a lot of interest ... much of it from instructors themselves! The panel of experts will be talking about the instructor rating and career path, so if you have any questions at all or just want to join in the fun, get on the Australian Flying Facebook page at 1900 Wednesday 17 February for a great hour or so. If you're Victorian, it's not like you'll have anywhere else to go ...

May your gauges always stay in the green,

Hitch

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

LMH - 19/02/21:

---

 

The Last Minute Hitch: 19 February 2021
19 February 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

Tackling some issues makes me feel like I am stilt-walking through a paddock of spinning propellers: one wrong step and you're cut to pieces. Facebook banning media streams is one of those issues. The Australian Flying FB page is currently in the hangar for maintenance, which you all know means we have no idea when it might be back. That doesn't answer the question of right verses wrong, of social media verses curated media, and who should pay for what. Both sides are armed wth compelling arguments, which often results in a stalemate. However, the legislation looks like it will go through, which puts the future of curated news on Facebook in serious doubt. It's frustrating for all of us. All I can guarantee the general aviation community is that Australian Flying will continue to provide the best news feed we can for as long as we can; curated media that you can rely on. It may not be on Facebook, but it is still on our website and will continue to be delivered into the inboxes of our newsletter subscribers.

"I have yet to find a reason for the GA community to support it..."

Airservices consultation on the Class E proposal is closed, but by no means over. According to the organisation, they received around 1000 submissions, which they are now wading through and will give us all an update next week. Their website shows a summary of the main issues the submissions have raised, and most of them concur with what the GA community has been saying since the proposal was released. At least we know they have listened, but as yet we don't know if that listening is the type defined by the strict sense of the word or the type defined by the marketing department. It's an easy prediction to say that the proposal will have garnered a lot of opposition; I have yet to find a reason for the GA community to support it. But putting the proposal aside, the industry is perhaps more angry over consultation path Airservices mapped out. The proposal stands to have an impact beyond what Airservices first thought, but the three-week consultation period was insufficient for the GA industry to rat-out all the side-effects. And again, the lack of a safety case left everyone bewildered as to why the changes were being asked for; the briefing material lacked anything that wouldn't yield easily to even the smallest amount of scrutiny. The GA community is worried that all of this indicates that Airservices is hell-bent on a path they haven't thought through.


Glen Buckley is absolutely right about at least one thing: his accusations of misfeasance need to be dealt with by an independent investigation. They are very serious and need to be treated as such, not fobbed off with the flip of a disinterested hand or scoffed at as being ridiculous. CASA has a severe image problem at the moment that is characterised by a siege mentality and rapidly eroding trust, so any attempt to dodge this issue without subjecting themselves to scrutiny exacerbates, not alleviates, that problem. It may be that the CASA managers have no case to answer, but that needs to be determined by proper process and not just a declaration. The entire GA community will use this case as a benchmark by which they will judge CASA in the future, so now is the time to get it absolutely right.

With Facebook having done a runner on curated media, last Wednesday night's Instructor Rating seminar had a very short life on the platform. Consequently we've uploaded it to You Tube ready for you to catch up on what went down. 

All-in-all it was an enlightening evening sprinkled liberally with wisdom, laughter and far too much modesty. Our panel provided some very good advice on what it means to be a flying instructor from the basic to the philosophical. A great night that is well worth looking back on if you haven't already done it. Thanks to Linda, Amy, Alex, Shelley and Marlon for creating such a special resource for the GA community.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

LMH 5/03/21:

Via the Yaffa:

---

The Last Minute Hitch: 5 March 2021
5 March 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

Greater rumour hath no industry like general aviation. It has its minor-league furphies about new avionics or club finances, but it's the Frankenrumours that get the most air, like "CASA is going to be disbanded" or "the government is going to ban all VFR aeroplanes from CTA". Usually they start as a pea-sized fact, then get pumped up to beachball size with the over application of pessimism or wishful thinking. Right now we are dealing with one that says the department is going to rip the heart out of CASA and the jobs of everyone employed there are on the line. The seed from which this one has sprouted is likely the fact that the Department of Infrastructure and Transport is looking at new funding models for CASA in the future. That's usually pollie-speak for budget cuts, lay-offs and increases in charges. In that context, it could be that CASA is about to learn about "right-sizing", a nebulous and often nefarious concept that is a smokescreen for staff cuts; I am yet to have any experience with an organisation that got bigger through right-sizing. If indeed the finances are going to be reshaped, the need to pay for many roles within CASA could be under scrutiny. Similarly, the regulator's income is likely to be examined for fees and charges that might be increased to help with the bottom line. Generally these sort of measures do result in upheaval in an organisation, but it could be over-optimistic to believe that any changes are done in the name of philosophical reform that stands to cure the ills of GA.

it will foster a belief that everyone is in this together.

It seems the ball is well and truly rolling towards RotorTech. The helicopter industry is heaving at its tie-downs to get together in Brisbane in June, and after three years without, you can't blame them. Rotary pilots and operators have been battling to stay afloat during COVID as much as any fixed-wing company, with tourism particularly flattened by international travel bans, which has a knock-on effect all the way down to the training schools. RotorTech is seen as being crucial to industry recovery, giving operators and pilots a platform to share ideas to get things going again. But it will do something else, which some members of the helicopter and rotary aviation community are beginning to realise; it will foster a belief that everyone is in this together. The health of an industry isn't measured by how well one or two companies are going, but rather by the overall performance of the community and its importance to the general public of Australia. RotorTech has grown at an unbelievable rate, thanks to a desire within the community to work together and celebrate what they have and what they've achieved. The fixed-wing sector could learn a lesson or two from Rotor Tech as well.

Flying cars or roadable aircraft (or any other terminology) are not a new idea. Imaginations have run rampant over the years from the Hafner Rotabuggy of 1943, 1947's ConvAirCar and the of course the flying flubber-powered Model T Ford of Disney fame. But it seems now we are on the cusp of reality, with several designs racing towards certification. The AeroMobil and PAL-V seem to be in the van of the technology and are likely to be ready for market in the next couple of years. So it seems the science is ready for the world, but is the world ready for the science? Aircraft design is by nature a compromise, and these are machines that have been traditionally designed for no other environment than the sky. What compromises have been made to adapt a vehicle to be at home in the air as well as on the road? Is the market willing to put up with those compromises? It seems to me if your shelling out $US 1 million for a supercar, you want it to be a grade above a Ferrari or Aston Martin, or if you accept that price tag on an aircraft, maybe you want it to go faster than a Piper Archer. But that is approaching the matter from the point of view of a driver or a pilot. It could be that the flying car concept will appeal to someone who is neither of those, but someone who identifies with the machine in a whole new way. Aviation is already changing thanks to the inexorable march of RPAS, and flying cars will need to find a niche for themselves somewhere in that new paradigm.

Congratulations to Jared Parker for winning himself a Garmin D2 watch. Jared tuned into our Facebook seminar last month on flight instruction, asked some very good questions and made himself part of a very successful evening. We have no doubt he'll have a great time learning the benefits of the D2. Thanks to Garmin for making this possible.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

LMH 5/03/21:

Via the Yaffa:

---

The Last Minute Hitch: 5 March 2021
5 March 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

Greater rumour hath no industry like general aviation. It has its minor-league furphies about new avionics or club finances, but it's the Frankenrumours that get the most air, like "CASA is going to be disbanded" or "the government is going to ban all VFR aeroplanes from CTA". Usually they start as a pea-sized fact, then get pumped up to beachball size with the over application of pessimism or wishful thinking. Right now we are dealing with one that says the department is going to rip the heart out of CASA and the jobs of everyone employed there are on the line. The seed from which this one has sprouted is likely the fact that the Department of Infrastructure and Transport is looking at new funding models for CASA in the future. That's usually pollie-speak for budget cuts, lay-offs and increases in charges. In that context, it could be that CASA is about to learn about "right-sizing", a nebulous and often nefarious concept that is a smokescreen for staff cuts; I am yet to have any experience with an organisation that got bigger through right-sizing. If indeed the finances are going to be reshaped, the need to pay for many roles within CASA could be under scrutiny. Similarly, the regulator's income is likely to be examined for fees and charges that might be increased to help with the bottom line. Generally these sort of measures do result in upheaval in an organisation, but it could be over-optimistic to believe that any changes are done in the name of philosophical reform that stands to cure the ills of GA.

 "..Right now we are dealing with one that says the department is going to rip the heart out of CASA and the jobs of everyone employed there are on the line..."

Speaking of the Department the following is a record of their appearance at Sterlo's Aviation Sector Inquiry last Thursday...

  

Listen up DITRDC and PM&C Mandarins (& there Minions) here is some freely available subject matter expert advice - courtesy of KC and AMROBA: https://amroba.org.au/wp-content/uploads...ssue-2.pdf

3. Possibilities?

Governments have created the current situation over the last 30 years. Without the political support for civil aviation manufacturing, general aviation operations and maintenance, servicing etc., the steady decline in general aviation will continue. The Commonwealth airport leases regulatory standards say one thing but the Minister approved airport master plans says another.

We cannot blame the airport property developers when Minister after Minister approve Master Plans that do not promote aviation businesses over non-aviation businesses.

The Parliamentary system does not hold Ministers to account.

1. No Change:

Accept the fact that civil aviation manufacturing and general aviation have no priority from any political party or government departments and agencies.

a. Minister signed airport master plans have prioritised non-aviation development for the past couple of decades or more. They are all publicly available.
b. Commonwealth leased airports will be converted to non-aviation business parks in the future.
c. Governments have accepted this direction and affected industry just have to accept.
d. Without airport tenancy guarantee, who will invest in an aviation industry.

2. Over Regulation – Increasing red tape.

Instead of streamlining the regulatory burden, it appears that politically there is an unwritten policy supporting the ever increasing regulatory burden. The aviation regulatory systems have become over complicated and not harmonised with the other major aviation country, the USA, in the Asia Pacific Rim. Is this being done on purpose to make it too expensive for civil aviation manufacture, general aviation and private operations in Australia? Is it to stop our industries from competing in the global aviation market? It definitely appears so.

Thirty years of regulatory review and development and governments and the public service has only increased the regulatory burden.

a. Australia’s aviation regulatory review and development being performed by a system that has no end goal to create a system where Australia’s civil aviation system is recognised in its own right by foreign countries.
b. Can we manufacture civil aviation parts and sell them in the global aviation market? NO.
c. What government department or agency is responsible for obtaining civil aviation trade agreements so Australia’s approved civil aviation businesses are recognised in foreign countries? NONE.
d. Are our maintenance personnel skill qualification acceptable by other foreign countries like they were pre regulatory reform and development? NO
e. Will regulatory review and development change the Minister’s airport property development policy approved in Airport Master Plans? NO

3. The most favoured outcome is that nothing will change and Ministers broken policies of either party will continue and the number of aviation businesses will continue to decline.

a. General aviation will not return to being an accumulator of pilots and maintenance engineers that supported the fluctuations of the airline industry.
b. Civil aviation manufacture with off-shore ambition will continue to relocate off-shore.

And from Sharpie and AIPA here: Hansard out

"..Where you have to be careful is that some councils, not all, put the capital that has been given to them by the Commonwealth into a terminal or a runway. They use it to gold plate it. In other words, they build things that aren't necessary. They build things that people don't need, but the local council like to think looks good and makes them look good in the local community. They gold plate it. As a consequence of that, we have infrastructure which is not necessary. Somebody has to pay for the infrastructure. And so the council then uses the capital that has been given to them, that has been invested in the airport, as a reason to argue that the depreciation of that capital has to be added to the operating costs of the airport, and those operating costs of the airport therefore need to be covered by the regional airlines that operate to it..."

---

"...The other thing that comes up is that we lobbied for years to get VET help extended into the pilot training or aviation training areas. We need to review that as well to make sure, as Teri O'Toole said, the support measures are targeted at the individual, not at rent-seeking companies who use them as a government revenue stream and get a whole bunch of people in on the basis of headcount and don't care whether they produce anything or not, so long as they've got money coming in from the government based on the number of students. I think these sorts of support payments need to be tied to the individual so that they're released to the supplier, on the basis of the person achieving a particular milestone, so that it doesn't become a free kick for people like Soar Aviation..."

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

 

The Last Minute Hitch: 19 March 2021
19 March 2021
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

That Airservices would come back to the aviation community with a revised proposal for Class E airspace on the eastern seaboard was predictable. Their original plan to lower the 8500-foot bases to 1500 AGL was a disaster that so few in the community supported. The new idea is to revert to an AMSL reference (smart move) and now bases of either 4500, 6500 or 8500 depending on the terrain below. It's a better idea, but still has some cracks in the welding. The revised concept will still result in some pretty funky airspace design, with polygons of Class E tacked onto the airspace design that will make VNCs and VTCs look like Picasso paintings. For example: most of the airspace west of Melbourne will have a A045 base to the E, except that sitting over the Grampians, where the E base will be lifted to A065. And if you're tracking Albury to Canberra, you can expect to have an E base of A045, A065 or A085 depending on your heading. It seems a complex answer to a problem that is really yet to be defined. Reading between the propaganda, it seems Airservices wants to make the changes simply because they now have the technology and want to use it, not to solve any identifiable safety issue. That would certainly account for the ongoing absence of a safety case.

"..what would remove the doubt if not an EASA-approved testing company.."

CASA needs to understand that BRM Aero and Edge Aerospace are not going to go away. These two companies have been fighting CASA's decision to apply operating restrictions to the Bristell LSA for over a year now, and they are constantly reinforcing their arsenal with new weapons. The latest is an independent opinion that the Bristell complies with the standard even though CASA has continually said there is doubt. So, what would remove the doubt if not an EASA-approved testing company and the Federal Aviation Administration? From my own analysis, it would seem to be that CASA's doubt hasn't been defined very strongly except in their own minds. They have agreed in writing that there is no evidence that the Bristell doesn't comply with the spin requirements, but they say they also don't have enough evidence that it does. Then they've countered by saying they don't believe BRM is capable of certifying the aircraft. This would be a manufacturer that has just had an aircraft certified to CS23, which is much more stringent than the LSA standard. Now there is independent opinion that the aircraft complies, issued by people with more experience at doing so than CASA. So now we wait whilst CASA mulls over what to do next. They've been backed into a corner slightly and now either need to find a good reason for rejecting the independent opinion or they must rescind the safety notice. This has gone on too long and hurt too many good people.
Angel Flight was back in court in Melbourne this week in its own long-running battle with the regulator. After a couple of fatal crashes, CASA applied restrictions to who could and couldn't fly community service flights. To name a couple: a minimum of 400 hours or a CPL, and increased maintenance for the aircraft. Ironically, neither of those would have prevented either of the accidents. So, Angel Flight wants the restrictions struck out arguing that CASA acted ultra vires, which is to say outside their power. The question is one of whether or not CASA has to power to tell you who you can and cannot carry as passengers in your aeroplane. Unfortunately, this week's court case did not wrap up the matter as the legal arguments are deep and many, extending as they will to examine the very perimeters of CASA's head of power. In the meantime, the industry is left to examine the motivations of an action that CASA has admitted will have no impact. We'll keep you updated on when the matter returns to the Federal Court.


Have you jumped on our Easter subscription deal yet? If not, get on board and grab yourself a bargain subscription to the print magazine that give you a 30% discount off the normal price. Why would you not? Go to Great Magazines and sign-up for Australian Flying soonest. It won't last past Easter! And while you're there, have a look at some of our sister titles like Bicycling Australia, Fishing World, Australian Photography and Great Walks. Aviation might be the best part of life, but it isn't the only part!

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

[Peetwo]

LMH, yet again, catching up -   

Via OzF: http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...am-at-casa

---

 

 

Minister appoints New Leadership Team at CASA

26 April 2021
Comments 0 Comments

Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development Michael McCormack announced a new leadership team for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on Saturday.

Experienced government administrator Pip Spence will take on the role of CASA CEO and Director of Aviation Safety (DAS), whilst Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin AC (Retd) will join the board as Chair from August.

“These appointments are a critical part of shaping the make-up of the CASA Board and the culture of the organisation more broadly,” McCormack said.

“The depth and breadth of experience that Ms Spence and Air Chief Marshal Binskin bring to bear show the Government is serious about ensuring CASA performs its critical role effectively.

“Their combined skills and experience will be essential for leading this critical regulator in keeping Australians safe while flying, as well as supporting an efficient, effective and reliable aviation industry – which is economically crucial for communities right across the nation."

Spence held the role of Deputy Secretary at Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development, with responsibilities that included aviation and airports, transport policy and portfolio research. Previously, Spence worked for the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, was closely involved with the NBN roll-out and served as aviation advisor to the Minister for Transport.

ACM Binksin served as Chief of the Air Force from 2008-11, then as Chief of Defence Force from 2014-2018, after which he retired from the RAAF.

Binksin began his defence career in the Royal Australian Navy as a Skyhawk pilot and was qualified on Mirages via an exchange with the air force. After the Navy disbanded its fixed-wing capability, he transferred to the RAAF full time, later serving as CO 77 SQN at Williamtown and Air Commander Australia. Binskin also held senior command positions during operations in Iraq.

Binskin is a member of the Temora Historic Flight Club and owns an O-1 Birddog and an amateur-built F-1 Rocket.

Spence is expected to assume her new role as CASA DAS in the coming weeks and Binskin will take over as Chair in August when the term of current Chair Tony Mathews expires.

---

And Sandy's (yet to be moderated) comment in reply...

I’m sure its normal and polite to wish both new incumbents well in their new positions and on a personal level we will wish them well. 


Is there any hope of reform?

Unfortunately the General Aviation (GA) survivors of the CASASTROPHE have not one scintilla of evidence that the trajectory of CASA will change. We can hope that behind the scenes the Government and Minister McCormack have decided on reform but this is unlikely because had there been any willingness to listen to the GA industry we would have already seen at least some steps in the right direction.

A failed model of governance. 

The experiment of creating an independent Commonwealth corporate body (1988), which, unlike a Department, can be sued, has failed with disastrous consequences for GA, resulting in the loss of hundreds of flying schools and charter operators and aircraft maintenance businesses. Removing the administration of aviation from a Minister’s Department and creating what in effect is a monopoly provider of a host of new permissions, for which extortionate fees must be paid, inevitably has meant that CASA works for itself, pushing up salaries to the point where the upper echelon earns more than the Minister.

Apart from the Act, which has the extraordinary exhortation that safety has primacy (so all flying should stop?) CASA has no other particular direction other than the occasional ‘Statement of Expectations.’ These are written by or with advice from CASA. One essential element of the Westminster system is ministerial accountability for the administration of the portfolio, this concept has been virtually discarded with nothing put in it’s place. 

What reforms are imperative?

The Act must be changed to disband CASA and put the administration back into a Department, creating a Civil Aviation Agency. 
In the mean time some urgent actions should be implemented. Personnel changes at the top and an apology and compensation to Glen Buckley would be heading the list. Followed by advice to Government that a moratorium be placed on any further alienation of irreplaceable Commonwealth airport property. 

Independent instructors as in the USA, delete the Cessna special maintenance instructions (SIDS), allow private Pilot medical standards to car driver standard (similar to the USA and our own successful history in the low weight aircraft category). 

Recommend reform regarding holding the Aviation Security Identification Card (ASIC, controlled by Home Affairs). 

Until and unless there are immediate reforms to at least some of the glaring problems and mistakes of CASA then it will soon be plain that hope will be misplaced as it has been many times in the past. Only by Parliament discharging it’s duty by recognising it’s responsibility and realising that here is a great opportunity for growth of jobs, businesses and services will we see real progress...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

The Last Minute Hitch: 14 May 2021
14 May 2021
Comments 0 Comments

– Steve Hitchen

Angel Flight's latest attempt to overturn CASA's restrictions on pilots conducting community service flights has foundered on the rocks of the Federal Court, but that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be salvaged. It's not easy reading the decision as it shows how much the court accepted the submissions of CASA whilst rejecting nearly all those of Angel Flight. It's a disappointing result on a number of levels, not the least of which is that the imposed conditions will stand even though CASA is on record saying they will have almost zero impact. This is a position not easily understood and has done nothing but generate anger, frustration and hostility in the general aviation community. The decision also enshrines CASA's inference that a 350-hour PPL must be more dangerous than a 150-hour CPL and, perhaps more damaging, that CASA is under no obligation to justify its decision to apply conditions on a class of operations. There are several operators who have fallen foul of CASA's reluctance to supply meaningful justification for any decision, not just Angel Flight, and now the courts have confirmed what we've always feared: there are no shackles on CASA, a regulator that has a track record of getting things wrong then hiding behind a barricade of legislated authority. It will always be a struggle trying to overcome the barricade, which is what Angel Flight has discovered over the past few years.

there was no mechanism for stemming the toxic flow

The news of CASA moving to a national oversight model instead of a strictly regional one should give the aviation industry some reason to start hoping again. If it works, it could spell an end to the empire-building practiced among some CASA regional staff that has been the font of much poison in the relationship between the regulator and the regulated. Too many times people in the aviation community have been confronted with martinet inspectors that have sought to be their own authority within the authority, and with the Certificate Management Team (CMT) structure in place, there was no mechanism for stemming the toxic flow. Now, from 1 July, CMTs are gone and operators can expect a broader oversight position. Fingers crossed it produces a greater consistency in decision making and a reliability of advice, something that constant feedback has fingered as a serious problem for years. It might also restore some respect to the regulator if they get it right, but that will only happen if CASA shows it is prepared to extend that respect right back at the aviation community. Listening to the feedback, believing the feedback and taking action is a very good start, and tacit recognition that there was a problem all along even if the company spin thus far has refused to acknowledge it.


Next Monday, CASA's new CEO and Director of Aviation Safety Pip Spence is scheduled to stroll into Aviation House and assume the command seat. The big question is what she will do with all the power the minister has handed her. Her recent predecessors have immediately taken the step of sweeping the place a bit; changing things around to suit their own management philosophies, but in the end the momentum of inertia has been too great. It will take a DAS of drive and energy to overcome the rolling resistance of CASA's old-guard middle managers who are pre-programmed to resist any initiative they didn't think of first. Is Spence that person? She has the background and credibility to swing a organisation as large as CASA, but can she change its direction so that it's going the same way as the aviation community needs it to? Either way, I believe Pip Spence will be a DAS like we've never seen before and we're all in for something completely different.

I traveled to Adelaide during the week to attend the very first FlySafe forum. This is one part of a two-part strategy to replace the Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committee (RAPAC) system, which served its purpose for around 40 years. FlySafe forums dovetail with the AvSEF website as a platform design not only to gather feedback, but also connect airspace users with the various agencies involved in aviation. Nearly 80 people showed up to Adelaide on Wednesday, which is a very encouraging start to the experiment. One of the benefits that became immediately obvious was that the SA aviation community became exposed to the process. Under the RAPAC model, dedicated people would show-up for every meeting, but it failed to capture a broad base of followers, meaning that the majority of aviators probably couldn't have told you what RAPAC actually was or what it did. FlySafe is likely a better fit for what most stakeholders respond to, and the attendance in Adelaide tended to concur with that. Onwards now to Darwin, where CASA is hoping to consolidate its great start.

RotorTech is now only a month away and the rotary aviation industry is getting very excited now! After a COVID-corrupted year, everyone is looking forward to injecting energy back into a flagging industry. To do our part, Australian Flying is holding a RotorTech on-line forum at 7.00 pm on Wednesday 26 May. Streamed live on our Facebook page, the forum will bring together industry experts and identities in a panel to discuss the state of the rotary aviation industry now, where it has to be and how we get it there, as well as previewing RotorTech 2021 and its importance to the general aviation community all over. Rotary aviation is in a position to write a GA recovery playbook, and we expect the forum to contain some valuable material for everyone who has that passion for flight.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch

Comment in reply from Sandy...

Angel Flight has found, as in many previous appeals, that rational evidence based reform is not available through the courts:-

“ there are no shackles on CASA,”

With our embedded hierarchical system of government G.I. (Government Industries) will always prevail. The justice system is no outlier in the pecking order of all things political in Australia.

CASA has no incentives, in reality the reverse is true, to make the reforms that are necessary in order to save General Aviation (GA) from further decline, minor sops to distract notwithstanding (think Fly Safe from RAPAC or let’s have another inquiry).

Only continuous engagement with MPs and media can make any real difference. Only with leadership by the Commonwealth will we see any recognition down through the chains of control including State governments and Councils. The lack of Government and Ministerial leadership is no more evident than the further alienation of even more irreplaceable airport property at Moorabbin.

What about the coffee shop at Lethbridge Airport? Here’s a classic example, it is being closed by Golden Plains Council because some car drivers were calling in for refreshments. Just another example of our anti-free enterprise mentality and the total lack of appreciation of GA in the state of Bureaucratalia.

[thorn bird]

Ain't it sad and pathetic and more to the point how incredibly corrupt the administration of regulation from the top down and the bottom up is in Australia. The regulator itself admitting that the arbitrary restrictions it placed upon Angel Flight would have zero impact on safety. If that is the case what were they for? and why impose them? Is CASA saying there is something terribly wrong with the standards of Australian private pilots? If this is true then they are admitting that they themselves are at fault for not raising those standards. Of course that hypothesis is hogwash alone with their knee jerk restrictions. I often wonder if CASA reacted because of lobbying from quasi commercial "Charities" more interested in the holy dollar than being of service.

In the USA Angel Flight is just one group of many, undertaking community service flights for many varied reasons.
Angel Flight USA safely conduct over thirty five thousand such flights a year alone, a vital lifeline to their communities.
People donate their time and aircraft as a service to their communities, it also provides a means, or excuse, if you like to commit aviation, which in itself makes things safer because currency, it could be said, is perhaps the greatest safety benefit of all, it also encourages pilots to upgrade their skills and qualifications. A very large percentage of US private pilots hold instrument qualifications, not so in Australia, our regulations make that a very expensive exercise.

Everywhere you look aviation is under siege, from regulation to airports to the very air we fly in, all from entities with no interest than the buck they can make.

[Peetwo]

CASA - Entity resources and planned performance (2021-22 link: https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/depart...0_CASA.pdf) 

Via CASA website: https://www.casa.gov.au/news-article/avi...ral-budget

Aviation safety measures in the 2021-22 Federal Budget

12 May 2021

The Australian Government is committed to maintaining and enhancing safety as its number one priority in aviation. As Australia’s aviation safety regulator, CASA will support the Australian Government to maintain, enhance and promote the safety of civil aviation in Australia. 

Budget measure

The Government has announced the introduction of an annual registration levy from 1 July 2021 for any drones or remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) flown for business or as part of your job. 

Registration levy for drones

From 1 July 2021, an annual registration levy for commercially operated drones will be introduced. 
For drones flown for business or used as part of your job: 

• all drones weighing not more than 500g, will still require annual registration but there will be no associated charge
  
  
• for those drones weighing from more than 500g, an annual registration levy of $40 per drone will come into effect.
  

What this means

The registration levy applies to drones registered on or after 1 July 2021. 

For drones registered prior to 1 July 2021, there will continue to be no associated charge for the registration term. 

Registration is valid for 12 months.

More information

The detail of the drone registration scheme will be published on the CASA website and in CASA’s Cost Recovery Implementation Statement soon.  

For more information on the measures announced in the 2021-22 Federal Budget, see the Portfolio Budget Statements 2021-22.

EWH summary-  : 

 

CASA forecasts $12,000 Surplus for 2020-21
18 May 2021
Comments 0 Comments


The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has forecast a budget surplus of only $12,000 for the 2020-21 financial year, according to figures released by the Department of Infrastructure last week.


Although representing a retained surplus figure of only 0.00057% on the $208 million operating revenue, it is an improved result over the operating loss of $12.5 million booked for the 2019-20 year, when the COVID-forced industry downturn corrupted the regulator's income streams

The 2020-21 forecast is dependent on the fuel levy of $0.03556 per litre reaching expected levels and a special government appropriation of $68 million.

"The aviation landscape has changed dramatically with COVID-19," CASA states in its Entity Resources and Planned Performance statement. "One immediate impact for CASA is that its major funding source, aviation fuel excise, has been significantly reduced.
"CASA’s immediate funding is highly dependent on the recovery of the industry, particularly in the domestic high-capacity regular public transport sector.

"Whilst CASA continues to support industry through significant relief measures including fee relief, CASA is facing several sustainable funding challenges in the near future, with Government providing funding certainty for 2021-22 through additional appropriation."

CASA has forecast their budget will return to surplus in 2021-22, shored-up by continued government appropriations and an annual registration fee on drones weighing over 500 g, which is expect to reap the regulator $1.4 million, blowing out to $26 million the following year.

Cost recovery for regulatory services collected in 2020-21 has been forecast at $10 million, reducing to $7.5 million for the 2021-22 year. The expected result is due to fee waivers granted to support the aviation industry during the downturn.

Staffing levels at CASA are expected to increase by only one person to 832.

Hmm...instead of fleecing industry through fuel excises and inflated regulatory charges, perhaps Ms Spence could  start with a top down culling of the executive and middle management?

Starting with the CASA line here:



Plus: (Ref: #SBG 16/05/21: Of Dante, fell wolves and a fall from grace. )

MTF...P2   

[thorn bird]

FAA USA employs just over 44, 400 people for approximately 220,000 aircraft which is around 5 per aircraft.

CASA employs 830 people (not counting consultants) for approximately 11,129 aircraft which is 13.5 per aircraft.

Silly figures perhaps, its very hard to find actual total figures for active aircraft in Australia and remember the FAA carries out far more aviation related functions than CASA. But perhaps it illustrates that with sensible FAA aligned regulation, aviation would be a whole lot cheaper to commit here, and a whole lot cheaper to administer.

On statistics more than likely a whole lot safer as well.

[Kharon]

Plain English v Legal parlance.

With much fanfare and Sus_Spence speak – CASA are producing their 'plain English' guides to regulatory compliance. Don't waste your time or money; relying on a 'plain' version may get you into the ball-park but; when push comes to shove – and it will one day, it will be the 'words' writ in law used to decide the outcome. That is how both court and lawyers are bound, no option. Fluffy, windy, wordy 'explanations' are about as much use in court as a chocolate firewall for defence. When it comes to 'black letter' law and 'strict liability' it would be a brave judge indeed who ruled against it.

The court is for law – not justice. Hitch provides an example – Spence gives us 'guides' :- 

Hitch – 14/05/21.

"Angel Flight's latest attempt to overturn CASA's restrictions on pilots conducting community service flights has foundered on the rocks of the Federal Court, but that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be salvaged. It's not easy reading the decision as it shows how much the court accepted the submissions of CASA whilst rejecting nearly all those of Angel Flight. It's a disappointing result on a number of levels, not the least of which is that the imposed conditions will stand even though CASA is on record saying they will have almost zero impact. This is a position not easily understood and has done nothing but generate anger, frustration and hostility in the general aviation community. The decision also enshrines CASA's inference that a 350-hour PPL must be more dangerous than a 150-hour CPL and, perhaps more damaging, that CASA is under no obligation to justify its decision to apply conditions on a class of operations. There are several operators who have fallen foul of CASA's reluctance to supply meaningful justification for any decision, not just Angel Flight, and now the courts have confirmed what we've always feared: there are no shackles on CASA, a regulator that has a track record of getting things wrong then hiding behind a barricade of legislated authority. It will always be a struggle trying to overcome the barricade, which is what Angel Flight has discovered over the past few years.

Toot - QED - toot.

[Peetwo]

QE2 birthday GONG for St Carmodious?? 

Via EWH:

Ken Broomhead with a local flying instructor on a visit to North Queensland Aero Club (NQAC), where he learnt to fly in 1963. (NQAC / Facebook)

Queen's Birthday Honour for a Life in Aviation

Ken Broomhead has been awarded an OAM for services to aviation.

****

Former CASA Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Shane Carmody was today awarded a Public Service Medal (PSM) for "modernising air safety regulations and drone pilot licensing." Carmody took over as Acting DAS in 2016 and was the head of CASA full time from June 2017 to 31 December 2020.

From the former patron Saint of Aviation Safety that stated this bollocks...

 
Plus this: 



& this...


Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-13-06-21-the-ti...lrus-said/

Yet another, Mick Mack supported, up yours from the Iron Ring and Can'tberra aviation safety bureaucracy  - UFB!! 

MTF...P2