Duck Squadrons – Rouges gallery #149.
![[Image: D_Qn9wRU0AA_6r4.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_Qn9wRU0AA_6r4.jpg)
Not that it’s a thing I’d ever do; however, I wonder just how I’d get along strolling into an RAAUS operation wanting to rent an aircraft for an hour or so with a perfectly valid Australian pilot licence – of any stripe, under the proposed Duck-up 149?
Say I needed to do a few night circuits: as it stands I can ring the local school, rent a VH PA 28 or similar, provided my medical is valid – off I go; no fee except the usual. Routine – another day at the office. I fail to understand why I’d need a membership and licence to operate any other aircraft belong another tribe; learn a new set of rules and have to remember a new system.
Morgan – “From my perspective, I honestly do not understand why any sector of our industry would desire Part 149, which simply duplicates the costs of aviation regulation, creating dual-standards that will only serve to add complexity, confusion and ultimately higher costs to the end user.
Renting a balloon would be a different thing (and interesting); borrowing a glider a different kettle of fish altogether and the very notion of going crop dusting would be out of the question – I simply do not have the ratings. BUT – should I choose to acquire those ratings then those options would be available on my Oz ticket; so why Oh why do I need a special rigmarole to rent Tupperware of even a ‘sports aircraft’ whatever they may be?
Morgan – “During the past 20 years of CASA’s management of our aviation industry we have all watched on as they have slowly divided us into competing interest groups, and today we now have multiple pilot training and licensing standards, multiple aircraft registration standards, multiple medical standards and a host of other dual-standards that have nothing to do with safety, but instead on how much money you are paying to whom.
Another intriguing angle is that of ‘medical certification’. CASA has a graded system of medical standard – one is either ‘fit to fly’ or one is not. An annual or even bi-annual trip to the vet cannot be too bad a thing; it gives one a platform to work from when self certifying being fit for duty – within the scope of limitations applied on sound medical advice; leaving aside the ‘applied standards’. Those may be wrong, indeed many argue they are a little OTT. Even so - they should apply across the board and if a little OTT then lobby to have ‘em changed – and good luck with that.
Morgan – “Yet, in the same breath, CASA have outright refused to provide the same privileges to recreational and private pilots under their direct management and regulatory responsibility, citing safety concerns. A decision that CASA is thoroughly unable to justify or adequately explain to either government or industry.
So – CASA reduce their operating and administrative costs, not to mention their liability - Bravo. Will we see a significant reduction in their annual budget now? Silly bloody question ain’t it. Will the insurance industry benefit from selling more personal liability and etc. to those running their piss ant empires – course they will.
Mark my words – if Duck 149 gets up and running the notion of private operation will once again become the plaything of the very rich – until they get bored with it and discover drones, or some other mindless diversion.
When a large portion of the cost is down to ‘administration’ and ‘compliance’ why are the private/ sport/ recreational crew screaming blue murder? What happened to the Wagga solidarity? Where is the loud long NO !?
Arrggh – Duck it all, my Ale is here – and the idea of flying for ‘fun’ is an alien concept anyway; so having said my say – I’ll shut up and watch the implosion of grass roots GA from the bar.
Not that it’s a thing I’d ever do; however, I wonder just how I’d get along strolling into an RAAUS operation wanting to rent an aircraft for an hour or so with a perfectly valid Australian pilot licence – of any stripe, under the proposed Duck-up 149?
Say I needed to do a few night circuits: as it stands I can ring the local school, rent a VH PA 28 or similar, provided my medical is valid – off I go; no fee except the usual. Routine – another day at the office. I fail to understand why I’d need a membership and licence to operate any other aircraft belong another tribe; learn a new set of rules and have to remember a new system.
Morgan – “From my perspective, I honestly do not understand why any sector of our industry would desire Part 149, which simply duplicates the costs of aviation regulation, creating dual-standards that will only serve to add complexity, confusion and ultimately higher costs to the end user.
Renting a balloon would be a different thing (and interesting); borrowing a glider a different kettle of fish altogether and the very notion of going crop dusting would be out of the question – I simply do not have the ratings. BUT – should I choose to acquire those ratings then those options would be available on my Oz ticket; so why Oh why do I need a special rigmarole to rent Tupperware of even a ‘sports aircraft’ whatever they may be?
Morgan – “During the past 20 years of CASA’s management of our aviation industry we have all watched on as they have slowly divided us into competing interest groups, and today we now have multiple pilot training and licensing standards, multiple aircraft registration standards, multiple medical standards and a host of other dual-standards that have nothing to do with safety, but instead on how much money you are paying to whom.
Another intriguing angle is that of ‘medical certification’. CASA has a graded system of medical standard – one is either ‘fit to fly’ or one is not. An annual or even bi-annual trip to the vet cannot be too bad a thing; it gives one a platform to work from when self certifying being fit for duty – within the scope of limitations applied on sound medical advice; leaving aside the ‘applied standards’. Those may be wrong, indeed many argue they are a little OTT. Even so - they should apply across the board and if a little OTT then lobby to have ‘em changed – and good luck with that.
Morgan – “Yet, in the same breath, CASA have outright refused to provide the same privileges to recreational and private pilots under their direct management and regulatory responsibility, citing safety concerns. A decision that CASA is thoroughly unable to justify or adequately explain to either government or industry.
So – CASA reduce their operating and administrative costs, not to mention their liability - Bravo. Will we see a significant reduction in their annual budget now? Silly bloody question ain’t it. Will the insurance industry benefit from selling more personal liability and etc. to those running their piss ant empires – course they will.
Mark my words – if Duck 149 gets up and running the notion of private operation will once again become the plaything of the very rich – until they get bored with it and discover drones, or some other mindless diversion.
When a large portion of the cost is down to ‘administration’ and ‘compliance’ why are the private/ sport/ recreational crew screaming blue murder? What happened to the Wagga solidarity? Where is the loud long NO !?
Arrggh – Duck it all, my Ale is here – and the idea of flying for ‘fun’ is an alien concept anyway; so having said my say – I’ll shut up and watch the implosion of grass roots GA from the bar.