[Peetwo]

P7 - Re posted – failed link.

And; the IOS throw down 'the gauntlet'.

One of the great things about today's world is the internet; and, the ability to actually call a full IOS meeting – no Pub, no darts, no BRB, just the computers working overtime.

After we'd all listened to AOPA's (long) opinions and position; followed by Buckley's damning, evidence supported claims; it was decided to set AOPA a challenge; a puzzle if you will. For if AOPA 'really' want to expose the resident 'evil' inherent in the system, then the following case should – open up a whole new world to the Senators who are 'allegedly' paying so much attention. It is, and make no error 'a teaser' – but followed both forward and backward – it will reveal, properly examined, so much more than Buckley ever experienced or could even imagine about 'how' CASA actually 'do' business.

'We' shall e-mail just one critical document to AOPA – let's see what they do with it. Lots paying attention to this – it is all about 'clout', real integrity, real accountability and – real political will.

Morgan will have the document by 0830 hrs – LMT – tomorrow – we shall, as they say in the classics – see what we shall see.

The IOS do mean business – let's see if AOPA are capable of taking the lightweight 'Buckley' sparring bout to the next, heavy weight level. If the gloves are really coming off – the before and after – surrounding this singular, fatal event and the data provided – matter; they really, really do.

Capt. Andy Wilson. RIP. - K9 – Edit - Flawed link and scrambled data version removed – Senate version - HERE – for easier reading.

P2 Addendum: For the benefit of BM some more background on the ATSB Canleyvale investigation etc..etc

References from the 2013 Aviation Accident Investigations Senate Inquiry report:
(Ref: Para 6.32 - Chapter 6)

6.37      While the committee acknowledges it has not had the opportunity consider this report, or the transcript of the AAT hearing, in detail, it would like to express concern about the following matters, given what the committee now knows about the Pel-Air incident:

• while the incident occurred in June 2010, the ATSB only issued its final report on 20 December 2012, some two and a half years later. This is a similar timeframe to the Pel-Air report, which is discussed in Chapter 3;
  
  
• the ATSB concluded that ‘it was unlikely that any deficiencies in the pilot’s PA-31 endorsement training contributed to the accident’,[46] despite acknowledging in its report that the pilot had not received training in mid-flight engine failure. The committee notes that the ATSB reports engine surging led to the pilot’s actions, which resulted in the crash[47];
  
  
• the ATSB also concluded that ‘no organisational or systemic issue was identified in respect of CASA’s surveillance that might adversely affect the future safety of aviation operations’[48]. This is despite the fact that a post-incident Special Audit by CASA led to a suspension of Skymaster’s AOC because of a ‘serious and imminent risk to air safety’ [AATA 61, point 5]; and
  
  
• the ATSB excused CASA’s lack of oversight on the basis that the companies had two separate AOCs and therefore CASA investigators may not have been aware that Avtex owned Skymaster[49]. However, during the AAT review, CASA justified the cancellation of Avtex’s AOC due to CASA’s opinion that ‘because of the close relationship between Avtex and Skymaster, and the joint resources shared by those companies, if Avtex continued its operations under its AOC, that would also result in a serious and imminent risk to air safety’ [AATA 61, point 5].
  

6.38      The committee considers that this report, and the associated evidence from the AAT review, could point to a disturbing trend where the ATSB disregards or excuses CASA failures. It appears, from the publicly available material, that there are significant similarities between this and the Pel-Air report. The committee is of the view that the establishment of the independent panel (recommendation 8) should play a vital role in ensuring no such reporting trend continues.

Plus from Additional Comments by Senator Nick Xenophon:

1.19      It is also important to note the committee's discussion of the ATSB's Canley Vale report. This incident (also a medical flight) tragically resulted in the deaths of both the pilot and the nurse onboard. The ATSB's response to this accident was similar to its report into the Pel-Air ditching. The ATSB also made it very clear in its report that it did not consider CASA's failure to oversee the operator appropriately as relevant.  The validity of that view is, I believe, a direct parallel to that exposed by this inquiry for the Pel-Air ditching and equally alarming.

..plus refer to the AP forum thread: Closing the safety loop - Coroners, ATSB & CASA

MTF? - Yes much me thinks...P2

[Kharon]

Hats off -

To the Peninsula Aero Club; Bravo and well done.

Their 'tale of woe' may not carry the interest levels the Buckley story attracts, but when you think about it, there is much to admire. No small feat, standing alone, raising not only the funds needed but gathering local support and having the determination and intelligence to not be beaten into submission by the opposition.

A great effort and an excellent demonstration of what 'men of goodwill' can achieve. A  lesson for every aerodrome and flight operation under threat from the bulldozers.

Nothing but praise and respect for this fine aero club. Thanks, is not much of a reward for the efforts – and the lessons learned. But Thank you anyway gentlemen.

I should also mention AOPA, this is now the second aerodrome story they have not only promoted but been effective in helping to save it. Looking back at some of the posts on this thread – it would be hard to gainsay the continuing  AOPA efforts on behalf local aerodromes and operators.

Well done all concerned – well done indeed. AOPA do need your support – and grass roots aviation needs the advocacy of AOPA – join up if you can pay the modest fee, be part of the solution. 

Toot – toot.

[Peetwo]

AOPA Oz 15/09/20 Facebook session

---

 AOPA Australia

132 subscribers

CASA AVMED:  MEDICAL BUREAUCRACY

Join the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia for an open and candid conversation with Ms Nicole Mitchell and Dr Sean Runacres, discussing the difficulties faced by Australian pilots dealing with CASA Avmed.

THIS WEEKS PANELISTS
- Mr Benjamin Morgan: Chief Executive Officer - AOPA Australia
- Ms Nicole Mitchell:  Private Pilot (a) & (h)
- Dr Sean Runacres:  DAME, Aircraft Owner & Pilot

JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION - LIVE
AOPA Australia invites you to post your comments and questions during the live panel broadcast.

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

AOPA Australia | Your Freedom to Fly

Plus via FB for over 75 comments so far - : https://www.facebook.com/AOPAaustralia/v...785189804/


MTF...P2

[P7_TOM]

There are two ends to a plank...

Much as I admire the McKenzie 'sang froid'; respect the logic and calm, reasoned argument which I can, and do, fully support – I wonder. Only small worries around the 'bigger' picture, hardly worth the mention – but.

I hasten to add that if we had a man of the McKenzie calibre in a position of power within CASA, I would not, not for a moment be concerned – Alas.,...

So, in order of magnitude:-

1 Professional pilots mostly belong to one of the 'major' union or associations and are almost guaranteed 'support' from not only the company, but also their 'federation'. Members of AOPA – those of the private sector do not have that luxury – in fact as Clinton did, they are essentially on their own hook and bank book. AOPA cannot possibly provide much more than moral support, letters written and not much else in the way of fiscal or legal backup, not when push comes to shove. Clinton spent a fair old whack of his hard earned (bless) and has had enough backbone to 'tell the tale'. For which I, for one, am grateful. Bravo Sir..

2 Let's say Fred Bloggs hits the same brick walls. Fred has the usual encumbrances, mortgage etc. and only flies for 'private' reasons, when it can be afforded. No harm in that, many do exactly that – save up and the go away for a tour or a visit. Suddenly; Fred has a 'medical' complication – no CASA medical – not without a brawl which he may or may not win. Either way he is down the costs. So the coin he must flip is a loaded one – abandon all hope of a CASA medical – or; spend the dollars on a high risk AAAT hearing and pay-back for winning; or, simply transfer to the RAOz system. Given the 'Missus' don't really care for 'flying' and the AAAT lottery is an uncertain bet – will Fred follow the McKenzie route; or, simply let the CASA PPL slide away? No brain-er really.

That is the other end of the AOPA plank. What AOPA is showing through the never ending broadcast of 'serious' medical issues and scary, expensive AAAT battles is actively promoting the RAOz case. If I flew, casually, for recreational purposes and heard about 'the potential' drama – well.

Solutions, parity and equity are needed – not horror stories. For 'private' operations the same medical standards should be applied. As it stands now, the only reason to hold a CASA PPL is if there is an intention to progress to a higher grade. This is wrong. OK, if you have to put a PPL through the medical wringer before a CPL etc, so be it – but FCOL what can it matter for those with no intention of progressing to a professional licence. Nothing is the answer – nothing whatsoever. RAOz -  QED.

Time AOPA stopped the 'negative' diatribe and developed a pathway, supported by expert advice toward a 'one standard' medical for those who fly for 'fun'. That is a cause I could support. While I'm 'at it' - this endless advertising for 'membership' has a very real negative impact – a simple change of wording would remove the used car salesman pitch for your dollars – what about - “Need support? Call AOPA”.

Yes, well I've wasted time and wind on other matters, this one is no different. The only real difference is my enthusiasm to support it. Borderline now....

[P7_TOM]

Did anyone understand what Lovell said? Really get 'it'?


"Thus, I do not see what use there is in those mills of the gods said to grind so late as to render punishment hard to be recognised, and to make wickedness fearless.

Amen – Plutarch aeons ago – the 'mills of the gods grind slowly' – but they are greyhound quick in comparison with the laggard government 'inquiry' into why aviation is a basket case; who dunnit, why and what must be done to fix it.

AOPA presented Rod Lovell tonight. A winters tale to chill the heart and freeze the marrow of the hardiest. HE IS NOT ROBINSON CARUSOE – not the first or anywhere near the last. It simply has to stop.


If there is any doubt that the aviation industry survives only by not rocking the CASA boat – with history supporting – then Lovell's dichotomy (one of the many) should spur any government – with a conscience – to immediate, serious action.

Look at it this way – if his embuggerance was a once in decade 'disgruntled' soul, then it could just be 'the Authority' were correct – a one off aberration. Incorrect. He is on quite a long list of those who, through no fault of their own, have had a working life decimated; and, believe it or not – he actually had the 'kid-gloves' version of embuggerance – troo dat.

If AOPA and Morgan are 'shocked' by the RL tale of woe – I wonder how they'd react to the real deal – the full on, no holds barred CASA pogrom, backed by fact.

As the actress said to the Bishop – you ain't seen nuthin' yet. Lovell titillates – the 'facts' terrify. But who can listen at RRAT speed – we'll all be dust before McDonald finds her way through the cobwebs and dust.

Someone once said “you can't handle the truth”. And that, boys and girls is the absolute truth – government simply dare not – cannot – and most certainly will not be exposed the the unbelievable mess they have allowed the 'administration of civil aviation to wallow into. Shame on 'em.   

Ale!- More! – more Ale here barkeep; the fires of fury burn hot and strong – Ale. quencheth and cools the flames......... ”..-. -.-- .- “ Cheers.

[Peetwo]

Did anyone understand what Lovell said? Really get 'it'?


"Thus, I do not see what use there is in those mills of the gods said to grind so late as to render punishment hard to be recognised, and to make wickedness fearless.

Amen – Plutarch aeons ago – the 'mills of the gods grind slowly' – but they are greyhound quick in comparison with the laggard government 'inquiry' into why aviation is a basket case; who dunnit, why and what must be done to fix it.

AOPA presented Rod Lovell tonight. A winters tale to chill the heart and freeze the marrow of the hardiest. HE IS NOT ROBINSON CARUSOE – not the first or anywhere near the last. It simply has to stop.


If there is any doubt that the aviation industry survives only by not rocking the CASA boat – with history supporting – then Lovell's dichotomy (one of the many) should spur any government – with a conscience – to immediate, serious action.

Look at it this way – if his embuggerance was a once in decade 'disgruntled' soul, then it could just be 'the Authority' were correct – a one off aberration. Incorrect. He is on quite a long list of those who, through no fault of their own, have had a working life decimated; and, believe it or not – he actually had the 'kid-gloves' version of embuggerance – troo dat.

If AOPA and Morgan are 'shocked' by the RL tale of woe – I wonder how they'd react to the real deal – the full on, no holds barred CASA pogrom, backed by fact.

As the actress said to the Bishop – you ain't seen nuthin' yet. Lovell titillates – the 'facts' terrify. But who can listen at RRAT speed – we'll all be dust before McDonald finds her way through the cobwebs and dust.

Someone once said “you can't handle the truth”. And that, boys and girls is the absolute truth – government simply dare not – cannot – and most certainly will not be exposed the the unbelievable mess they have allowed the 'administration of civil aviation to wallow into. Shame on 'em.   

Ale!- More! – more Ale here barkeep; the fires of fury burn hot and strong – Ale. quencheth and cools the flames......... ”..-. -.-- .- “ Cheers.

P2 Addendum: 

---

AOPA Australia
143 subscribers

ROD LOVELL:  HERO TO ZERO IN 1994
AOPA AUSTRALIA FACEBOOK LIVE, 7PM TUES 29th SEP 2020

Join the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia for an open and candid conversation with Capt. Rod Lovell about his April 1994 ditching of a Dakota DC3 in Sydney's Botany Bay, and the ensuingyears spent fighting for his pilots license.

THIS WEEKS PANELISTS
- Mr Benjamin Morgan: AOPA Australia CEO
- Mr Rod Lovell:  Commercial Pilot and Author
- Mr Dominic James:  Commercial Pilot & AOPA Australia Director

JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION - LIVE
AOPA Australia invites you to post your comments and questions during the live panel broadcast.

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

AOPA Australia | Your Freedom to Fly

And for comments, via FB: https://www.facebook.com/AOPAaustralia/v...838994625/

---

MTF...P2

[Kharon]

Well; I turned it off.

Being interested in the general state of aviation – top to bottom – I have dutifully tuned into the AOPA broadcasts. The opportunity to listen to Doc Liddell and other industry 'experts' in their field is always a priority. There are some telling points made, good ideas expounded and generally those invited to speak make good sense. When they are allowed to.

Tonight I simply turned it off – 'click' – end of. This action has been a little while in coming; I suspected it was inevitable when I started the stopwatch on the I-phone a few sessions ago. The endless 'ticker-tape' advert running across the bottom of the screen irritates and distracts – reminds me of those truly awful advertorials that the morning commercial TV stations run – offensive IMO. AOPA is not flogging used cars or second hand, pre loved bicycles; they are attempting be a serious player in an important contest.

But that is not why I simply tuned out of the 'discussion' – for there was none. When Morgan starts to speak – tap the stop watch; when he eventually shuts up – tap the stop watch. Subtract that total for the broadcast from the total time logged and then do the maths for yourself. You can of course take the 'easy' road and time the 'guests' - same result - just less stop watch action.

Tonight there were two dedicated, experienced, calm, clever men who were quite prepared to logically explain what is, to a 'reasonable man' a sensible, realistic appraisal of a fairly important subject. No doubt they would like the time to make that explanation and perhaps, maybe, even get a message through to those who can assist in making the pleaded for changes. That is after all why they gave up an hour or so of their life span.

I would have liked to hear more from both – a lot more. Alas. This is simply becoming the 'Ben Morgan hour' – that's when I lost count, early in the piece, of how many times 'I' was said and how many times either John or Tony were shut down – mid stride; and, my hand reached for the STFU button.

The 'broadcast' is a fantastic idea – brilliant; or it would be if we could actually hear the 'guests' state their case – in full. Tonight Morgan shut down Tony White – mid stream and stated “we only have 25 minutes left of this episode”. Then time how much of that time remaining was spent in another Morgan 'gabfest'. I did -He don't even make sense on topic - Click.

This;  Mr Morgan. is what true  'harmony' sounds like. Catchy though ain't it.

Toot, click click, toot, click click, toot, toot, toot.

[Peetwo]

Courtesy AOPA Oz Youtube channel:

[Kharon]

Great Symphonies.

Probably a bit 'much' so I'll keep it light. The great masterpieces of 'music' combine many various 'sounds' into a thing of great power. Isolate any – and I do mean any of the individual parts and it becomes 'noise'; uncoordinated, irritating and unpleasant. On t'uther side of the ledger – a banjo can sound like a symphony – right place, right time. But; to get an orchestra coordinated takes some skill – timing and emphasis matter – which is why the big conductors earn big bucks. It takes some skill to combine 40 or 50 different 'noises' into a harmonious, emphatic statement. One which  takes the heart and mind to another 'realm'. Bugger up the coordination and it becomes nothing but a lot of noise – click! - No one listens, they will even move away to avoid the cacophony; 'bad' sound distresses all manner of beasts. The old adage 'music soothes the savage beast' was no idle comment. Now I digress.

Australian aviation is, at present, an uncoordinated 'noise'. Many reasons for this; most valid and on an individual basis, supportable. The entire industry must, repeat must, learn to take each individual 'noise' and make the work 'harmonious'. Gods know there is enough 'common ground' on a wide view basis to promote 'harmony'. Aircraft maintenance – a one man operation in the bush faces pretty much the same radical problems Qantas has (they do). A smallish Air Charter operator out the back faces the same pilot regulatory headaches (in essence) as RFDS or even Big Q; those who wish to utilise the aerodromes about the country face the same 'development problems. All; boiled down – same same. There's more; but, I hope you get my drift. Yet there is great divides between all 'branches' of the industry; each playing the same tune – but not coordinated.

Having now sat through the entire last 'estimates' inquiry – I can hear the theme – but; the AOPA donkey braying, the RAOZ cats 'mewling', the new director (Barch) of Rex having his clapped out ex minister spruiking the latest mumbo-jumbo; and, a few episodes of pure emotive tautology; well it is 'discordant'. No clear 'theme'. 

The McDonald committee is a supporter of amateur music, no doubt about it. But unless the 'music' is powerful, coordinated, melded to deliver all the noise – as a single 'experience' – well; its just another street band playing against the sound of cats yowling. No harmony; no theme – they may buy a ticket once – but never again.

From Qantas, down to a single aircraft weekend joy flight operator– Violins to Banjo need to be playing the same tune. Donkeys braying in the background, for longer than necessary just take away the cohesion and 'magic' of any music. It is (for an example) of absolutely no value to have AOPA banging away on a rented tin can, when the AAAA is displaying virtuoso expertise with the violin section; or, the McDermott crew on Woodwind – in complete 'simpatico' with the theme is lifting the music to the Gods: this while the AOPA donkey is braying away in the wings, trying to read the music.

Translation? Easy – the big professional guns are firing very real, very educated, very experienced, very factual, big business bullets, which, to a sensitive audience all makes good, solid, common sense. Morgan just talked a lot and lost whatever small credibility he may have had.

Listen (even if just the last 5 minutes {volume UP}) – Learn harmony – this is 'really' how you meld a thousand sounds into something more than just a 'bit of noise'; and how a 'director' of that noise should make it work. Think on. - MTF.

Toot – toot.

[P7_TOM]

Well – I had to answer the question.



Honour demands it, so here we go.  Do you know, apart from Qantas, there actually other airlines which fly internationally? Well there are; and, I miss their crews attendance at the BRB meetings – however – there are such things as 'E-mail' and (recently discovered) a thing called 'Skype'. I was amazed – a guided tour of a busy base, far, far away, with deep snow, engineers working, pilots flying - and wildlife ambling about the place – all in a telephone call. Wow!.



Anyway; the point of the call was to ask a simple question. The man who asked it is an AOPA (USA) member (just a bit). “WTD are AOPA (Aus) playing at”?



We chatted while I had the guided tour – then, pushed, the short answer, I have NFI – not having watched the session, what AOPA was about. But, I have now. In fact, I have now spent a good part of a day of my life, listening to the entire thing; while fixing 'K's' dodgy joint (properly).



There was only one passage of play which mattered – it was the only one on which the Senators 'acted' – not reacted – but immediately saw the lunacy and took a hand. Ayup, the Chopper 'part 61' mandated check flight. Which, stand alone, is a bollocks and anyway. But 'act' they did. Why, well and IMO, the CASA mandate was not only deeply flawed, but ridiculous, in the extreme. The simple disparities alone were more than enough for 'lay' folk to see and ring the changes. The 'Chopper' case was 'clearly defined', in straight forward terms; easily understood. Bravo – well done Senators.



But, to the point we must go. Morgan had two very valid points available. The 'big' one should have been the focus of his 'informal' (no submission) chat with the Senate panel. It is an easy, no brain required glaring disparity. The 'medical'. There is evidence, out the ying-yang, that for private flying the RA Oz medical standard is not only safe, but generates 'flying'. The same 'flying' under the CASA 'system' demands all manner of 'other' expensive parameters to be met (for similar aircraft) and even then; there is no certainty. A clearly deformed system which penalises one group and let's the other romp away – unfettered by huge medical bills. Not mentioned in any serious way by AOPA (Aus). The USA boys got it stopped in almost a heartbeat – unacceptable- end of....



I seriously question WTD Morgan thinks a Senate committee would care if he slept or not (on Hansard FDS) has, world wide, made AOPA look like a bunch of bleeding heart amateurs. Waffle, will never, not in a million, ever replace 'fact'. Fact is, a large proportion of Australian 'private' pilots are subject to an inequitable system of medical certification. It ain't fair, and, had 'the man' been up to snuff – then he too could have had a win – instead of embarrassing himself, his 'followers' and the international people who would, whole hearted, supported his call for medical parity. That call was never made. What we had was someone clearly unable to match the professionalism, expertise of others, and provide a simple explanation of a gross 'injustice'. A proven winner. But no.

Keith Page “What was being hidden in the medical issue?”



Morgan had video and a clearly defined 'cause and case' to present – but, instead he wasted Committee time rambling on about how 'he' (as if it mattered) had not slept. As if, really?



To my friends and colleagues in Alaska and Canada; I can only apologise. But, you do understand that we hold no sway within your cherished AOPA. - Few of us depend on a PPL, even fewer ever go 'flying' for fun. Had they put Shaun Kelly up to speak – stuck to the medical inequity – then thing's may have turned out differently. Alas....



There: I have, as honestly as I can, answered the questions posed and have posted a short version in an attempt to explain where (as 'we' see 'em) AOPA's Australian problems lay. Now, it's time for an Ale, a quiet smoke, alone, on the verandah, while I gaze at a clear sky and blow cigar smoke at it.

[Peetwo]

Clinton McKenzie OP piece, via AOPA Oz & FB - 

---

CASA’S ADVICE ON MAINTENANCE RELEASE ENTRIES: BEWARE THE RISKS ARISING!
December 2, 2020 By Benjamin Morgan

Canberra Aero Club member Mr Clinton McKenzie provides an opinion.



Canberra Aero Club (CAC) member and erstwhile CAC Pilot Education Director, Clinton McKenzie, in his personal, private capacity, urges pilots not to follow some advice in CASA’s CAAP 43-01 v 2.0 dated November 2018.    The advice was repeated in a relatively-recent CASA Flight Safety magazine edition.

CASA’s CAAP advises that: When a pilot, LAME or appropriate authorisation/authority holder assesses a defect as not being a major defect, an entry should be made in the Clearing endorsements column to the effect that the defect is not a major defect.

According to Clinton:
“So far as I am aware there’s no rule that says you can’t use the ‘clearing endorsements’ column of an MR to record your opinion that a defect or damage is not major.   But nor is there any rule that says you can’t write your weekly grocery shopping list in that column.   That doesn’t make either practice a ‘good idea’.

“The clearing endorsements column is there for clearing endorsements.   The clue is in the name.   A clearing endorsement describes what was done to rectify a defect or repair damage, or the ‘transfer’ of the entry to another Part of the MR for further action.  i.e. what someone did, not what someone thinks.   Any other writing in the ‘clearing endorsements’ column is apt to cause confusion, and potentially risky confusion at that.

“A critically important concept for pilots to understand is that some ‘non-major’ defects or damage may still prevent the aircraft from being lawfully and safely engaged in certain operations.   For example, a randomly blown undercarriage position indicator light bulb is not, of itself, a major defect or major damage.    But it still prevents you from lawfully going for a flight in that aircraft (absent a PUS or SFP) and may be the source of unnecessary and potentially risky distractions.   As another example, a randomly blown landing light bulb is not, of itself, a major defect or major damage.   But it’s unlawful and risky to take off with your only landing light not working, in the dark or with an after-dark ETA for your destination.

“So:  Beware!    Even in cases in which someone has diligently followed CASA’s advice and recorded his or her opinion that each and every defect or item of damage entered on an MR is ‘non-major’, it does not follow that you may lawfully fly the aircraft.   It does not follow even if the damage or defect is effectively deemed ‘non-major’ as a consequence of the provision of advice referred to in CAR 47(1A), (1B) and (1C).   You must still assess the implications of each and every item entered as a defect or damage (or as required maintenance) on an MR, in the specific context of the flight you propose to undertake.  You must do that, even if each item is, in your or someone else’s opinion, ‘non-major’.

Clinton further suggests:
“Leave the ‘clearing endorsements’ column on an MR blank unless you are actually clearing a damage/defect or other entry.  Under the rules, a defect or damage will either be major or it won’t be.   Nothing you write on an MR in your capacity as pilot will change that.

“Review, very carefully, what’s been written by others in the ‘clearing endorsements’ column because, as a result of CASA’s advice, the writing may not be a clearing endorsement and, consequently, the aircraft will still have the corresponding defect or damage that you must take into consideration in deciding whether you are allowed to conduct your proposed flight.

“If you request advice about whether a defect or damage is ‘non-major’, as contemplated by CAR 47(1A), (1B) or (1C), clip a note of the advice you received to the MR.   That way it will be clear who is responsible for the decision about the ‘severity’ of the defect or damage and you won’t be causing confusion by writing stuff with no effect in the MR.

CASA’s advice also says:
“In the event that the defect or damage is major and the defective/damaged item is required for the intended flight, the aircraft must not be flown and the maintenance release ceases to be in force until the defect is rectified.    For the avoidance of doubt, an entry stating ‘this aircraft is not airworthy’ should be made adjacent to the defect endorsement.    The entry should be made by the assessing LAME or the holder of an appropriate authorisation/authority once it has been determined that the defect is a major defect.”

Clinton responds:
“It’s difficult to know where to start with the erroneous implications of that paragraph.   I’ll start with the riskiest bit for pilots.

“The applicable rules are the same as when I was taught to fly 30 plus years ago.  CARs 47 and 50 impose obligations on a range of people, including pilots, to do certain things about aircraft defects and damage.    A pilot’s obligation to record defects and damage – including major defects and major damage – and to endorse an MR with “aircraft unworthy” in some cases, does not depend on seeking advice from an expert – although of course, it is open to a pilot to do so and a prudent step if expert advice is available, and in some cases, the advice might result in damage or a defect being effectively deemed ‘non-major’ under the rules.

“In the case of major damage or major defects and “aircraft unairworthy” endorsements, CARs 47 and 50 do not say that entries “should be made” only by LAMEs or holders of maintenance authorisations or authorities.   If you become aware that an aircraft you are flying has suffered a defect or damage – whether or not major – and that defect or damage is never entered in the aircraft’s MR by anyone, you the pilot have committed an offence.

“Contrary to the implications of CASA’s advice, an MR does not automatically cease to be in force just because the aircraft suffers major damage or a major defect.    Little words like “and” and “or” in rules have big effects.   What actually happens is that a range of people, including the pilot, automatically come under an obligation to (1) enter the damage or defect in the MR, and (2) endorse the MR as “aircraft unairworthy” only if – repeat only if – there is a likelihood that the aircraft will be flown before the damage has been repaired or the defect rectified.   Unless and until that “aircraft unairworthy” endorsement is made or something else happens that brings the MR to an end, the MR continues in force.

“So note:   If and when an obligation to endorse an MR with “aircraft unairworthy” arises, it is not done “for the avoidance of doubt” as stated in CASA’s advice.   It is done for the avoidance of criminal liability and loss of licence for failure to comply with the rules.   Further, that obligation falls upon, among other persons, the pilot.   Again, if that endorsement was required to be made in relation to a defect or damage of which you the pilot were aware and the endorsement is never made by anyone in the MR, you the pilot have committed an offence.   Don’t assume ‘somebody else’ is going to make required endorsements.   Watch them do it, or do it yourself.

“A chronic source of confusion arises from the intuitive belief of some that an MR ‘should’ automatically cease to be in force as soon as an aircraft suffers a major defect or major damage.   It does not make intuitive sense to them that the MR only has to be endorsed “aircraft unairworthy” if it is likely to be flown again, and that the MR only ceases to be in force if and when that endorsement is made.    But a moment’s reflection on operational reality reveals why the MR remains in force unless and until the “aircraft unairworthy” endorsement is made (or e.g. the MR expires as normal).

“First, if the MR automatically ceased to be in force as soon as an aircraft suffered major damage or a major defect – e.g. a bird strike that puts a big ‘ding’ in the leading edge and bends the ribs inside a wing, or the engine suffers a cracked cylinder and consequential damage – the pilot would from then on be flying an aircraft without an MR that is in force.   There’ll probably be at least one offence, somewhere in the rules, for doing that.  But the pilot has little choice but to continue to fly the aircraft until the (hopefully safe) completion of the flight.

“Secondly, an aircraft that suffers a major defect or major damage might be unlikely to be flown again, simply as a consequence of the laws of physics.   For example, an aircraft that loses a wing and suffers bent and buckled propellor blades during a forced landing has suffered major damage.  Good luck flying it again before that damage has been repaired.   I’ve yet to see a successful attempt at breaking the laws of physics.

“You can state the obvious in the MR – that the aircraft is unairworthy – but it achieves nothing in this example.   The aircraft’s flying nowhere in a hurry.  All you are required to do so far as the MR is concerned in this example is to enter the damage on the MR.  (Best to call the ATSB, too.)  The MR will likely expire long before the damage is repaired anyway.  The LAME tasked with fixing the example aircraft is going to have to do a lot more than merely fit a new wing and new propellor blades.

“As another example, nobody else flies my aircraft.   If it suffers major damage and I keep it locked in my hangar until the damage is properly repaired, I am not obliged to put an “aircraft unairworthy” endorsement against the “Windscreen smashed due bird strike” entry in the MR.

“In any event, and unsurprisingly, you’re not allowed fly an aircraft with a ‘current’ MR that has the entries like “Left wing broken off during forced landing” or “Both propeller blades bent and buckled due to ground strikes during forced landing” or “Windscreen smashed due bird strike”, unless actual clearing endorsements appear against those entries.    Exactly the same concept applies to entries of major damage and major defects that are not as physically obvious as these stark examples.   That’s precisely why it’s a good idea and you’re required to review MRs and conduct pre-flight inspections before committing aviation.  

Clinton concludes by expressing the kind of frustration felt by many in GA these days:
“It is extraordinarily frustrating to reflect on the fact that the chronic confusion around the proper use and interpretation of maintenance releases is being contributed to by erroneous CASA advice, based on 1988 regulations that we were promised would be gone and superseded over two decades ago.   It is particularly concerning that the confusion may result in increased risks to safety, through pilots believing that some writing in the ‘clearing endorsements’ column of an MR means it is safe to fly the aircraft with the corresponding defect or damage.

“Regards and safe flying.

---

CM follow up comment via Facebook:

Clinton McKenzie


The MR rules are actually pretty clear. And they make sense, provided you consider them from both an operational safety and airworthiness administration perspective. Much of the confusion arises from persistent folklore based on what some people think the rules ‘should’ be from one perspective, rather than what the rules actually say. And occasionally that folklore is, unfortunately, conjured up and propagated by CASA.

“Confusification” - what happens when an attempted clarification has the opposite effect.

[Peetwo]

AOPA, COVID and a contradiction in hemispheres??

An excellent title and a good read highlighting the current state affairs of the GA industry in the USofA, via the original AOPA...

WHEN SKYHAWKS RULED THE EARTH

(ALSO KNOWN AS 'YESTERDAY')

May 20, 2020 By Jim Moore

---

Flight tracking data reveal an interesting flip of the aviation script related to the coronavirus pandemic: While Boeing 737s remain the most common transport aircraft flying at any given moment, Cessna Skyhawks often have them outnumbered.



You can play this game at home: Go to FlightAware’s website and click “Browse by Aircraft Type” for a live look at what’s in the air around the world.

What you will see, according to Myles Din, FlightAware's manager of custom data and rapid reports, is a constantly updated list of worldwide flight activity drawn from many sources, including ADS-B data collected from more than 27,000 receivers in 201 countries. 

“Even if an aircraft...hasn’t filed a flight plan (VFR flights, Ad Hoc Flights), we can still track the aircraft using Multilateration as long as the aircraft is Mode S equipped," Din explained in an email. "The data on the page you are referring to includes all traffic that we’ve observed on our network for ADS-B and Mode S aircraft regardless of whether they have filed a flight plan or not.”

If it’s morning on the East Coast, you may see Boeing 737s (the most common transport aircraft) outnumbering Cessna 172s, but repeat the exercise. As we looked at the data May 18 through 20, a pattern emerged: After 10 a.m. Eastern time, the Skyhawks get the upper hand, and generally keep it.

For example, on May 19, there were 593 Boeing 737s in the air (all variants) at 10:36 a.m. Eastern time, and 440 Cessna 172s. By 4 p.m., the number of Skyhawks tracked by FlightAware had climbed to 507 aircraft, with just 271 Boeing 737s (all variants) active. May 20 live data followed a similar pattern: By 11:40 a.m. Eastern time, there were 579 Skyhawks being tracked, and 557 Boeing 737s, though the airliner had enjoyed the upper hand during the morning rush.

It’s all because of the pandemic, which has absolutely crushed demand for air travel, depressing enplanements to a truly unprecedented degree.

This too, shall pass, experts believe, and there are signs that the Skyhawk’s king-of-the-air status may change. FlightAware reported May 19 that commercial aviation is beginning to bounce back from the 82-percent worldwide decline noted on May 2, comparing 2019 and 2020 data from the same day, year over year. By May 17, the year-over-year decline was 77 percent (22,354 flights on this day in 2020, compared to 96,050 flights on May 17, 2019).

"Since the beginning of May, we have seen worldwide commercial flight traffic improve by almost 5 [percent],” FlightAware CEO Daniel Baker said in a news release. “While we still have a long way to go, each tenth of a percent represents tens of millions of dollars in economic activity."

While many flight schools shut down to help “flatten the curve” and faced their own challenges from lost revenue, the relaxation of social distancing guidelines and advisories in most states across the country is likely to put more Skyhawks in the air in the coming days and weeks. There are other signs that general aviation has resisted the downward trend. AOPA Aviation Finance Co. staff noted a 20-percent increase in loan applications in April, and the AOPA Pilot Information Center is fielding a significant number of queries related to aircraft purchases, a typical pattern in the spring.

And while the Cessna Skyhawk remains the most-produced aircraft model in history, with more than 44,000 made, Piper gets an honorable mention in this story: The Piper Cherokee ranked in the top five on every check of active flights by aircraft type from May 18 through 20, with around 200 of them flying at any given time.

[Peetwo]

News & Discussion session 2/03/21: BIRDSVILLE RACES, AIRPORTS & AVIATION ADVOCACY

Join the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia for an open and candid conversation about the recent ban on aircraft camping at the Birdsville Races and how challenges facing local councils in airport funding are threatening the future of recreational, sport and general aviation nationwide.

GUEST PANELISTS

Joining AOPA Australia CEO, Benjamin Morgan, are the following guests;

- NQ Aviation Services, Mrs Mary Brown
- AOPA Australia President, Mr Shawn Kelly
- AOPA Australia Medical Director, Dr Sean Runacres

BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION

AOPA Australia invites our members and industry supporters to be part of the disucssion.  Please post your comments and questions during the broadcast and our team will do their best to respond during the program.

[Peetwo]

AOPA Australia LIVE - Tuesday 9th March 2021

BATTLE FOR KATOOMBA CONTINUES, NEW ZEALAND CAA DELIVERS PPL DRIVERS LICENCE MEDICAL REFORM & DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER MICHAEL MCCORMACK LEADERSHIP IN QUESTION

Welcome to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia LIVE presentation for Tuesday 9th March 2021.  This evening we will be catching up with Katoomba Airfield leaseholder, Mr Derek Larsen of FlyBlue Pty Ltd, to learn more about the ongoing battle with the Blue Mountains City Council.  We also discuss new information from the Central Coast, which may threaten the Warnervale/Central Coast Airport.  AOPA Australia Medical Director, Sean Runacres, will be joining us to discuss breaking news of New Zealand's new PPL Drivers Licence medical.  Rounding out the programme with a discusssion pondering the future of Deputy Prime Minister, Michael McCormack.

[Peetwo]

AOPA Australia

AOPA AUSTRALIA FACEBOOK LIVE - TONIGHT 7PM

Join Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia CEO Benjamin Morgan for our Facebook LIVE for Tuesday 4th May 2021.  This evening we will be discussing issues at Sunshine Coast Airport and how poorly managed airport development is now constraining aviation.  We take a look at the Morrabbin Airport Masterplan and give an update to the ongoing situation at the Birdsville Races, where under-wing aircraft camping remains prohibited.

GUEST PANELISTS
- Simon McDermott
- Capt. Mike Becker
- Paul McKeown
- Timothy Holland
- Dr Sean Runacres

P7 - chip in -

[Peetwo]

Via AOPA Oz: 11/05/21

(Also via the AP blog: https://auntypru.com/sbg-9-05-20-of-ridd...nanswered/ )

---

AOPA Australia
AOPA AUSTRALIA FACEBOOK LIVE - MOORABBIN AIRPORT
6PM, TUESDAY 11TH MAY 2021

AOPA Australia warmly extends an open invitation to all aircraft owners, pilots, aviation businesses and industry supporters to attend our LIVE Broadcast Event at the Flight Deck Bar, starting 6:00pm to 7:30pm Tuesday 11th May 2021.

The AOPA Australia LIVE Panel Discussion will provide local aviators and stakeholders with a unique opportunity to provide their views and perspectives regarding the recently published Preliminary Morrabbin Airport Masterplan, which will see further reductions in aviation infrastructure at the airport.

Viewed by thousands of aviation industry participants, leading government and departmental representatives, state and federal politicians along with mainstream television and print-media, this is a great opportunity for those directly impacted to be heard.

AOPA AUSTRALIA PANELISTS:
Mr Benjamin Morgan, CEO AOPA Australia
Mr Sean Runacres, Medical Director AOPA Australia
Mr David Hooke, Treasurer AOPA Australia

---

Plus a FB comment from Sandy...

Politicians will need to be influenced if the plan is to be stopped. They should be persuaded that the airport use must be protected from both State government and Commonwealth perspectives.

Airports, like roads are the essential nodes for access to the aerial super highway to anywhere in Australia. The airport and aviation use is vital for much more than simply direct employment on the airport. For example the services provided, such as training which could  be some thousands of people per annum, and include new instructors who may find employment in other parts of the country.

Similarly maintenance personnel and as a centre and hub for the various specialised skills based aviation businesses that should be thriving in an airport with the size, numbers and activity that will only be found in proximity to a major city.

In addition, transport both scheduled, like King Island, and on demand charter, business and private flights, in other words a great variety of roles which are not easily quantified. These activities are important for more thousands of citizens, and the general well being, part and parcel of a developed and technically advanced Nation.

As a sign of the lack of logic in the planned alienation of even more airport land, we have adjacent golf courses protected by the State government for the use of a very small minority but the Commonwealth is giving up precious and irreplaceable airport land which is taken up by non aviation uses because of pricing, making money for one private company. 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Via AOPA Oz thread:

---

AOPA AUSTRALIA SEEKS CLARIFICATION ON COVID-19 EXEMPTION FOR PART 142 FLIGHT TRAINING PROVIDERS
August 18, 2021 By Benjamin Morgan



AOPA Australia has received several complaints from our NSW flight school members regarding the inconsistent application of exemption standards by airports’ regarding the current public health orders, particularly those in regional areas.   Part 142 schools have phoned airports in regional NSW explaining their circumstance and are often met with perplexity and, in some cases, restrictions to ‘Touch and Go’ only or even a straight-up ‘no.’


All of our flight school members follow strict covid-safe practices and have covid-safety plans in place. Many schools want to land, refuel, and take-off as quickly as possible, wearing masks and following the best hygiene practices in the process. However, the case is not always negative, with other airports being very supportive subject to our members sending them appropriate documentation of their flight details, plans, and covid-measures.

AOPA Australia has received telephone advice from NSW Health that as a Part 142 organisation (formal educational program), you can fly with Part 142 students under the reasonable excuse of facilitating attendance at a school or other educational institution where you cannot learn from home. The specific reasonable excuse is found under Schedule 1 paragraph 4 of the current Public Health Orders.
AOPA Australia is currently seeking this advice to be confirmed in writing.

AOPA Australia further understands that the NSW Government are relying on NSW Police to enforce restrictions during this time, and we are aware of a range of examples where the Police are applying varying interpretations of the relevant exemption currently available to our members.

With respect to the above, AOPA Australia has written to the NSW Police Commissioner seeking clarification and an urgent communication to be distributed to all Police statewide, ensuring the valid exemption is thoroughly understood and the rights of Part 142 Flight Training Providers and students are protected.

In the myriad of exemptions and reasonable excuses, we are talking about two people in a plane, who are COVID screened, wearing masks and following the best hygiene practices. These pilots complete navigational training to these airports, get out to refuel, get back in and depart again, spending as little time as possible at these airports. Such educational training is well within the NSW government’s risk appetite, it’s simply a matter of getting the message out there.

AOPA Australia is encouraging the Government to make more explicit rules for pilots undertaking formal educational programs under Part 142 to clear this mess up and consider extending these provisions to those already enrolled under Part 141 programs.

Aviation education is essential in ensuring we maintain the highest levels of safety in Australia. Therefore, we must encourage their operations as far as reasonably practicable during this time for currency, financial stability and future of our aviation training system in Australia.

There is a significant domino effect for flight schools not operating now. Part 142 students already enrolled are suffering skill decay, which will result in additional expenses to cover remedial lessons; Part 141 students aren’t too different. The average Diploma of Aviation – Commercial Pilot Licence (Aeroplane) student will spend $80,000 undertaking flight training; more if you are undertaking the same course for rotary wing. If this training is extended due to skill decay brought about by what we are talking about here then remedial lessons and the like can cost upward of +$400/hr for fixed wing and +$600/hr for rotary wing.

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

BM 4 Senate??

Ben Morgan with an OP piece, via Facebook:

---

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Australia

SIX MINISTERS IN SIX YEARS, CAN WE AFFORD MORE OF THE SAME?

AOPA Australia CEO, Benjamin Morgan, ponders on a lack of political leadership for Australian aviation.

During my six years with AOPA Australia we have seen a parade of Ministers responsible for aviation come and go, each arriving with great promise and expectation, only to leave without serving a full government term, to an industry more frustrated and damaged than what it was when they arrived.

Six Ministers have presided over our aviation industry in just six short years, each new to the job and largely unaware as to how aviation works, thrust into the responsibility of managing what is clearly one of the most complex industry sectors in the Australian economy.

Lead astray by the very bureaucracy that has been strangling our industry, and mislead into believing that all is well, each successive Minister has provided little to no leadership, no plan and critically no vision for advancing Australia’s aviation future. 

The status quo has reigned and whenever an industry group or individual has raised their concerns, the Minister of the time simply ignores them. 

Australia genuinely deserves much better.

The future of Australia’s aviation industry desperately needs a Minister with a clear focus on our long-term betterment, capable of driving a concise and inspirational agenda, if we are all to succeed. 

We need a Minister who is willing to stand-up for the hard-working men and women that comprise our aviation industry. 

Likewise, we need strong and determined members of Parliament, who will hold our Ministers to account, seeking to ensure that the rights of everyday Australian’s are protected, and that regulators and bureaucracy remain in check.

Without this, aviation cannot advance and is doomed to further decline.

Now more than ever, we need people in parliament who understand the issues we face, who understand how the system works.

Representatives who can clearly articulate the voice of our industry and who can use their time in parliament to advocate and champion for vital change.

The issues that we face in aviation are not exclusive, with millions of Australians all sharing similar experiences and challenges in a wide range of industry sectors.  We are living in a time where government bureaucracy, at all levels, is fast becoming out of control and where public servants are now wielding more power than our elected officials.

If we are to genuinely protect our freedom to fly, our access to airports, our aviation businesses and our future, we can no longer afford to vote for more of the same from the major political parties, who are letting us all down.

It's time for a paradigm shift - I fly and I vote.

Maybe at the next federal election, I should put myself forward as a Candidate Senator for New South Wales, with a clear agenda for aviation.

What are your thoughts?  Share your comments below, but please refrain from using abusive language and any personal attacks.

---

Some comments:

Ralph Holland

https://www.aph.gov.au/.../pubs/rp/rp1415/LobbyingRules

---

Tony Griggs

Might as well. Transport has become one of those ministries handed to seat warmers, the most recent McCormack who did bugger all. Wrote to him on a couple of occasions. Received wishy washy pathetic responses from one of his bureaucrats or minions. CASA is now a political animal. I’m not sure regional/rural aviation can be resurrected back to the old days quite frankly. Good luck if you do stand. It’s getting more politically correct & dangerous in this country to stand for Parliament. ABC will try to nail you if they suspect you aren’t a woke leftie…..just sayin…

---

Graeme De Morton

As far as running for a senate seat… put your energies into other strategies… amongst the public I believe empathy for aircraft owners is even less than that for Porsche drivers who have been pulled over by the police for speeding…

---

Graham Wilson

It is the Authority that is in charge not the Minister and Government

---

Hedley Harding

I was a candidate for a political party last federal election and take my advice forget running against another major party.. better to rally harder against these morons calling themselves ministers because all they ever do is tow the party line.

A TV campaign promoting AOPA and demoralising the minister works better

Mary Brown

Hedley Harding makes a very good point Benjamin Morgan. Bowing to party politics is what we witness all too often from our elected leaders, with very few strong enough to stand up to them!! I would be supportive of a whole of industry marketing campaign leading into the next election would raise awareness across all levels of politics....of course if you are passionate about joining politics....I say go for that also!!

---

Tam Camilleri

I’ve always said you have to BE the change you want to see in this world. If you want to make a difference and you are passionate enough and thick skinned enough I say go for it Ben. You would have my support.

---

Gary Gould

I would support your nomination for the senate to represent the best interests of the aviation community. However, I believe it will end in tears. The political system in Australia is so entrenched and inbred that change is almost impossible. Probably a bad example, but look at Pauline Hanson. Like or dislike, she became a threat to The Establishment and that group of people did everything they could to silence her. Nick Zenophon is another example of a man who tried for change. Then gave up in frustration. The Liberal and Labor parties are like the drug cartels of Mexico. Almost impossible to change. Absolutely impossible to get rid of. Good Luck Mr Morgan, you will need it.

---

Bruce McLachlan

You would kill it Ben. Not just aviation, we need more practical common sense at the top. Go for it.

---

Rod Tyson

Have a look at all these Ministers. What actual qualifications do they have. All of them dont have any qualifications in the fields they represent. How do you get a job in Aviation with no qualifications?

---

Michael Wood

Never going to change till we get one with a spine to tell the public servants in CASA that the Minister runs the show not them....

---

Ric Wilson

GA airport safety and security has been compromised in these COVID 19 times. These property people are risking life and limb by refusing to take phone calls, answer emails and letters appertaining to important operational matters. Surely there is a higher authority that can address these issues and take action to remove such stakeholders for various breaches. If we could apply the Nuremberg Code or similar these leaders would face the death penalty for what they have been doing since privatisation of airports began. At some airports if you look at security alone there are at least 15 breaches of the original code brought in after 9/11. In this day and age of a higher threat levels those loop holes need to be closed and aircraft and operators given full protection from any threat. Over charging and bulldozing hangars and associated eviction orders are being done in lock down times with no way of defending and no compensation given or offered. What sort of a country have we got when we allow foreign invader corporations to have more power over life and death than our governments? I rest my case until a class action perhaps???

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Horse power v Pony Pooh.

Or, political grunt if you prefer; either way if you want to move or change anything you need to satisfy Newton's basic laws.

Only my opinion, but it seems to me that there are too many small 'groups' trying, individually to change the motion and direction of a much larger group; i.e. the CASA.
Hitch is banging on about a 'new' group being cobbled together to try and save 'flight training' - HERE -. Then Morgan wants to self promote to a Senator's gig - to change the status quo; then all the other insignificant tribes are pulling and pushing their own agenda. Its akin to herding cats.

Size does matter when it comes to applied Newton. Rather than getting into politics or starting yet another ineffective, independent 'group' IMO its time to 'gang up'. Can you imagine the impact of one voice speaking for all, from engineering, through training, agriculture, charter, regional RPT, uncle Tom Cobley and all; speaking as one.

That would have some weight; can you imagine the chagrin at CASA when the entire GA industry said 'enough - this stops now' and back it up, with serious numbers.

Divided and splintered, each pushing it's own small wheel barrow, the GA (light and heavy) haven't got a prayer of achieving real reform; history, the facts and science back this up - undeniably.

Form one large, united, serious body, stop pissing about, get an agenda and list of demands sorted out; take 'divide and conquer' out of the game. You could also dump a load of ego and personal promotion at the same time.

Just my opinion and notions; could it be done? Yes; it can, only industry is preventing it from happening, no one else...

[Sandy Reith]

Good thought to have all of GA singing from the one hymn book and considering that the industry is predominantly a variety of private enterprises, many impoverished, with a natural element of competition between them, then I think we did exceptionally well at the AOPA sponsored Wagga Wagga Summit.

There’s always a variety of claims which should be sorted and balanced by Government and through Government where the public interest comes into play. This is where our problem lies, they’ve left it entirely up to the independent, out of control regulator, CASA. Parliament has rubber stamped CASA‘S perverted rules and inappropriately migrated them, at CASA‘S behest, to the criminal code. An uninterrupted ‘tour de farce’ since it was shoved out of the Minister’s Department thirty three years ago.

The hard yards are making a constant effort to engage with our Representatives including State Senators. Arranging meetings, writing letters, engaging through political parties, and generally supporting other GA people and groups.

All the same agreed it would be ideal to have a single voice, but is it realistic to expect? I can think of many other business groups that have their own associations, but few if any that encompass such a variety the likes of GA.