AOPA Australia -

Wombat points out that sub contractors are employed by the Defence Department. This is a necessary component of equipment procurement and maintenance, where outsourcing stops and Defence personnel takeover will be a matter for judgment.

With respect I see the point about calling those contractors ‘mini CASAs’ but there’s a vast difference here because they are private businesses competing for contracts.

Example; What if we could choose which Part 61 to use, that of the USA, NZ or Australia? No prizes for guessing how many schools would stay with the CASA P61 nightmare, let alone the ‘HOOey’ of Parts 141/142.
Reply

AOPA AUSTRALIA LIVE - TUES 18TH APRIL 2023

Quote:
AOPA AUSTRALIA LIVE - TONIGHT 7PM

Join us for tonight's AOPA Australia LIVE from 7pm as we update our members and industry supporters on a host of current events and news;

- CASA Individual Flight Instructor Part 141 Approval
- Update on Part 67 Pilot Medical Reform
- Important Update for Colour Vision Deficient Pilots
- ATSB and their refusal to investigate
- Mudgee Airport Situation Continues
- ADSB Rebates, Get in Before it's too late
- Update on the upcoming Derek Fox & Glen Buckley Interviews

GUEST PANELISTS INCLUDE:
- Benjamin Morgan; CEO, AOPA Australia
- Clinton McKenzie; Director, AOPA Australia

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Dear Ben - L&Ks mcoates??

Via the UP:

Quote:mcoates

As a member of the readership of this website, we have devoted significant time and emotional investment towards perusing the narrative of Glen.

Our commitment has not only involved the expenditure of time, but also the manifestation of compassion, offers of support, and discourse with others when the opportunity arose to deliberate upon these issues.

Upon viewing the video declaration made by Ben Morgan, I experienced a sensation of enthusiasm on behalf of Glen and other individuals who possess a direct interest in the matter, as I believed that progress was finally going to be achieved. Analogously, like many others, I monitored the website with regularity in anticipation of the promised update, which, regrettably, never transpired.

The lack of a comprehensive explanation as to the factors that impeded the realisation of the promised update leaves me to wonder why such an occurrence came to pass.

I presume that there may be others who share my inquisitiveness regarding the causes behind this unfulfilled commitment. Is there any chance that an individual could shed light on the reasons that hindered the delivery of the promised update?

Is it possible that there exist hidden forces operating in the background that prevented the disclosure of this information?

Waiting in anticipation for an update....

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

AOPA (Australia). Just saying.......

“Analogously, like many others, I monitored the website with regularity in anticipation of the promised update, which, regrettably, never transpired.” (mcoates)..

The idea of a Tuesday night 'gabfest' with AOPA and guests is, in theory and practice, a good idea. Even if a follow up, or progress report, or item of interest could not be presented, at least pay the membership the courtesy of an explanation. That there was nothing further for a while - due circumstances etc, - would be understandable, given the complexity of some matters and the difficulties associated dealing with the administration. But silence, without even a notice that 'tonight's session' has been cancelled is pretty rude.

“The lack of a comprehensive explanation as to the factors that impeded the realisation of the promised update leaves me to wonder why such an occurrence came to pass.” (mcoates).

I wonder if a change in approach to 'attracting' membership would help. The current 'philosophy' of constantly trying to 'sell' membership because AOPA 'needs' your support is IMO flawed. It is the 'non-aligned' who need support; those who need advice or counsel; the single aircraft owner, junior pilots who cannot afford 'Union' fees, small operators trying to meet 'compliance' etc. Lots of folk out there with nowhere to turn for 'professional' help, advice or even a shoulder to cry on.

AOPA has a lot of good will within the non membership; it would not take much to assemble a volunteer cohort, and even a Q&A session once a month – you know the sort of thing – Joe Bloggs has a spark plug question – Fred has a flying technique problem – Charlie has a medical issue. Lots of small problems, all needing support. Costs nothing to include 30 minutes of Q&A on topics of interest, easy enough to collate half a dozen questions for a qualified panel to answer.

There is a large cohort of non aligned aviators out there; some in dire need of serious professional advice. Stand alone they have little chance of resolution; but, as part of the AOPA union (for want of better descriptor) one which can and will support those  members in trouble  - well that would appeal – ne serait-ce pas? .

The messaging is wrong: “AOPA needs your support” and constant advertorial rants enforcing the notion that AOPA is in trouble and needs your money. Bollocks. The turn of a word – “Need support – join AOPA” - (sub message) “don't need support, join AOPA and help us, help those who need our support.”

Take a look at the Buckley case – lots of 'support' for that, fiscal, legal and emotional; Bruce Rhodes – same deal -  lots and lots of similar exhibitions of the aviation community offering unstinting support for one of their own, in trouble.  It is an extensive list......

Time to make full use of the 'on-line' facility – less rant – more support for the non aligned, lonesome who could do with a helping hand, a little sound advice and know that they are not alone.

My two Bob. - Back to my knitting -  Toot – toot.
Reply

AOPA Oz - The marketing of Commonwealth Airports contrary to the Airports Act??

Via FB: 

Quote:Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Australia
21 h
  ·

WHY AREN'T PRIVATISED AIRPORTS MARKETING TO BE EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE... AIRPORTS?

Take some time to watch this interesting sales-pitch video presentation for the Aerospace Precinct in Melbourne, possibly shot during the early 2000's.  Now ask yourself, have you seen anything like this from a privatised airport in Australia?

What we have seen is almost two decades of non-aviation real-estate advertising and commercial property advertorials, seeking out multi-nationals to lease industrial warehouses and logistic centres on Australian airports.

Australia's privatised capital city airport leaseholders need to step up and deliver workable and achievable aviation development plans for the airports they are operating.  Anything less isn't good enough.

Quote:GAF - Government Aircraft Factories  ·
Mal Crozier  ·

MELBOURNES AEROSPACE PRECINCT FISHERMENS BEND VIC.

A very well produced promo movie selling the merits of the
Aerospace precinct. I see a couple of familiar faces. Adnan Raghdo from Boeing Aerostructures Australia and Roger Lough from ARL. Must have first appeared post 1998.

(Go to above FB link to view the video)

Hmm...little bit confused with the disconnection between the former Fisherman's bend and the disgusting 23+ year privitisation history of Commonwealth owned airports? However the success story of Fisherman's Bend and the association with the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation is fascinating and highlights how in times of need (IE War) Aussies in the private sector can become very motivated in the National interest.. Rolleyes

Ref: https://www.theracetorque.com/2022/08/th...mans-bend/

Quote:[Image: FL15658029-1024x816.jpg]

Fisherman’s Bend Aerodrome

Aviation activities kicked off in Fishermans Bend as far back as 1919, with joy flights offered from near the end of Graham Street, while flying in the area was subject to what is thought to be Australia’s first air crash investigation, after the heel of Miss Jessie Dorman’s shoe jammed, causing a tragic accident in 1922.

By the 1930s, a barebones strip poked out of the swamp to cater for gliding and light aircraft enthusiasts, however, when the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) was set up in the area in 1935, a proper runway system was constructed to support the industry.

The CAC was a private company, with its ownership group featuring firms such as BHP and Holden, with the express purpose of constructing planes to support the war effort.

Subsequently, the Government Aircraft Factories (GAF) was also established in the lead-up to WWII further bolstering the nation’s Defence Force, with the GAF and CAC situated on the western end of Lorimer Street, while the Aeronautical Research Laboratory was located alongside GMH, further to the east off the same road.

Numerous models are reported to have rolled out the various hangar doors, including the Wirraway and Wackett training aircraft, plus the Mustang, Boomerang, the Beauford, the Avro Lincoln, the Tiger Moth, the Canberra bomber, the Winjeel and the Jindavik, with post-war production featuring the Sabre.

There were also significant research and development activities ongoing at the facility, with large-scale production in the area ongoing through to 1960. In the end, the larger runways at Avalon, closer to Geelong, gave manufacturers the required space to operate more modern jet planes.

And:

Hmm...maybe we need a war for the Albo Govt to realise the value to the country the GA industry brings??  -  Rolleyes

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

CASA sack BM from driver licence TWG?? Rolleyes

Via Oz Flying: 

Quote:AOPA CEO leaves Medicals Working Group

23 June 2023

[Image: morgan_ausfly19_web.jpg]

CASA has today announced that AOPA Australia CEO Ben Morgan would no longer form part of the self-declared medical working group, citing a lack of respectful participation.

The Technical Working Group (TWG) is developing a recommended framework for self-certification (Class 5) standards among others to be presented to the Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP).

"The Technical Working Group consists of representatives from across the aviation community bringing diverse and different perspectives," CASA said today.

"We’re disappointed that one working group member from AOPA has been unable to accept that there are views beyond his own and participate respectfully.

"He won’t be participating further but we can assure members of that industry association that we value their input and that their interests will continue to be represented by others."

CASA did not elaborate on the details, but members of the TWG have said the problem stems from the way Morgan interacted with Principal Medical Officer Kate Manderson.

In a video posted on the AOPA Facebook page on Wednesday, Morgan said he did not support the TWG's attempt to recommend an arbitrary weight limit on self-certification and accused Manderson of "doing what's easy, not what's right."

"CASA is supposed to be an evidence risk-based regulator, but there is not a single document, not a single formula, not a single report; there's nothing on the table ... other than a bunch of emotional, anecdotal comments," he said, calling an arbitrary weight limit "absurd".

"I've had enough, this is bullshit," Morgan went on to say. "This is supposed to be a national safety regulator, and there's a group of people sitting in a room having an emotional anecdotal pow-wow about how they are going to screw you and your rights across this medical reform."

Morgan also said that CASA had consistently refused to provide AOPA Australia with data on medical certification. He also admitted that he had told Manderson to "shove her technical working group".

In ending the video, Morgan also hinted that he was considering ending his time as AOPA CEO.

"It's been a lot of fun doing this AOPA gig for the last seven-and-a-half years, but I actually think that after today, I have absolutely seen my fill of the crap that's going on down in Canberra," he said, "and I don't know if I'm going to be able to do this any longer."

The self-declared medical TWG was a sub-group of the Part 67 medical reform TWG, which is due to produce documents for public comment soon.

"In practical terms, the group has been debating what level of operational freedoms is important for sport and recreational activity across the wide range of aviation in Australia – so that the level of medical assurance can be appropriately matched," CASA says.

"Parameters like the size or weight of an aircraft, or the altitude that you want to operate at will affect how much medical assurance is needed to keep the risks to passengers or third parties appropriate. These are the types of operational parameters the group has been providing guidance on.

"We expect to be putting a proposed model to the aviation community for comment soon." 

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Just get it sorted...

It seems the time has come (as the walrus said) for the AOPA board to get a handle on and manage 'affairs' at the AOPA – financial, corporate governance and issuing clear directives to the CEO of how the organisation intends to not only 'advocate' on behalf of the members – those remaining – but as to how the current situation can be reversed to allow AOPA to be represented in all things pertaining to 'matters aeronautical' those which directly and indirectly affect not only the financial membership, but the GA industry at large.

There is a very simple question the AOPA board need to answer – just one, It is a question I ask myself; do I want to join AOPA? The short answer is NO. Then why not - ?  The answer is twofold – one is APOA are skating on very thin corporate legal and financial ice; ice which has not been acknowledged. Two, do the Morgan antics, bombast and arrogance reflect my views or those of 'qualified' pilots (he's not by the way) , operators domestic or overseas; or even vaguely reflect the stellar examples of how the OS AOPA operate to achieve meaningful change. I think not.

Can the AOPA Australia board point toward one significant change the Morgan bluff, bluster and bull-shit has produced? Can the AOPA board publish their directions on the 'ways and means' by which Morgan was 'requested and required' to execute, in pursuit of serious easement of the regulatory straight jacket. Yes; then – let's see it. No -then what the hell is the AOPA board playing at?

Should the AOPA board ever wonder why the membership is dwindling; consider the corporate and financial risks they are taking – then a quick study, minus the 'blinkers' would show that they are being talked into an oblivion from which any form of recovery of previously respected, invited to discussion, able to influence change status is not going to happen. Sack Morgan; sort out the corporate stuff and start to perform design function. You know I'm right as you are fully aware that the organisation is well on the way to becoming an insignificant pariah; kept outside of the doorways to being part of any sensible reform and curtailment of the lost in rhetoric, rudderless CASA.

[Image: Untitled%2B2.jpg]
Reply

With the very greatest of respect Super Moderator, while your prediction of Mr. Morgan’s options and the future of AOPA are probably correct, that is as far as it goes. The only ones laughing are CASA, Ben has given CASA an excuse to freeze AOPA out. However it is a moot point whether AOPA or any other organisation should be participating in what appears to me to be sham consultation, as explained by BM, which gives legitimacy to an intellectually corrupt process. This is especially so when one considers the bloody punishment CASA metes out to industry participants like Glen Buckley; I mean how can anyone sit around the table with these apparent butchers? But I’m off topic.

As for comparison with AOPA USA, that is unfair and inaccurate. AOPA USA reminds me very much of Don Corleone - the fictional godfather. There is a certain ponderous nobility and strength about it backed up by the capacity, totally lacking in Australia, of metaphorically leaving a bloody horses head on the the bedclothes of any legislator that wishes to cross swords.

This is because AOPA USA has its own Federal political action committee and it is very, very effective at lobbying Federal Politicians. They can make and break political careers. Believe me, when AOPA asks for a favor, it gets done. Their political action committee(PAC) is in the top five percent nationally in terms of contributions and in the top three percent of lobbying expenditure. AOPA Australia and the whole GA sector has zero political clout compared to AOPA USA as we are about to find out again when the green and white papers are released.

The AOPA PAC by the way is independent of AOPA and it’s Board, so the PAC can be as mean and rude and crass as will get a politician’s attention, while the AOPA Board can be noble, generous and charitable like Don Corleone. Their PAC does the dirty work that gives AOPA its strength and don’t forget the 2,500 AOPA volunteers as well.

Criticizing Ben for pointing out the bleeding obvious doesn’t help. Being part of a sham consultation gives legitimacy to the CASA product which it doesn’t deserve. You may leave AOPA because of Bens uncouth Whitlamesque “crash through or crash” approach. He is the reason I joined because I happen to believe that all the old school consultation stuff as practiced for the last forty years(?) is a waste of time when one side is obviously not acting in good faith.

It’s time for more people to spit the dummy like Ben, mate, before this Canberra mob - CASA, ATSB, AsA, cause a series of smoking holes in the ground.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/aircraf...D000000233
Reply

Wombat wrote:-

With the very greatest of respect Super Moderator, while your prediction of Mr. Morgan’s  options and the future of AOPA are probably correct, that is as far as it goes. The only ones laughing are CASA, Ben has given CASA an excuse to freeze AOPA out. However it is a moot point whether AOPA or any other organisation should be participating in what appears to me to be sham consultation, as explained by BM, which gives legitimacy to an intellectually corrupt process. This is especially so when one considers the bloody punishment CASA metes out to industry participants like Glen Buckley; I mean how can anyone sit around the table with these apparent butchers? But I’m off topic.

As for comparison with AOPA USA, that is unfair and inaccurate. AOPA USA reminds me very much of Don Corleone - the fictional godfather. There is a certain ponderous nobility and strength about it backed up by the capacity, totally lacking in Australia, of metaphorically leaving a bloody horses head on the the bedclothes of any legislator that wishes to cross swords.

This is because AOPA USA has its own Federal political action committee and it is very, very effective at lobbying Federal Politicians.  They can make and break political careers. Believe me, when AOPA asks for a favor, it gets done. Their political action committee(PAC) is in the top five percent nationally in terms of contributions and in the top three percent of lobbying expenditure. AOPA Australia and the whole GA sector has zero political clout compared to AOPA USA as we are about to find out again when the green and white papers are released.

The AOPA PAC by the way is independent of AOPA and it’s Board, so the PAC can be as mean and rude and crass as will get a politician’s attention, while the AOPA Board can be noble, generous and charitable like Don Corleone. Their PAC does the dirty work that gives AOPA its strength and don’t forget the 2,500 AOPA volunteers as well.

Criticizing Ben for pointing out the bleeding obvious doesn’t help. Being part of a sham consultation gives legitimacy to the CASA product which it doesn’t deserve. You may leave AOPA because of Bens uncouth Whitlamesque “crash through or crash” approach. He is the reason I joined because I happen to believe that all the old school consultation stuff as practiced for the last forty years(?) is a waste of time when one side is obviously not acting in good faith.

It’s time for more people to spit the dummy like Ben, mate, before this Canberra mob - CASA, ATSB, AsA, cause a series of smoking holes in the ground.

A courteous reply.

P7 – TOM is 'busy' so the task of courteous reply and sensible discussion landed on my desk. Good post Wombat - and worthy of serious consideration. MTF a racing certainty. 

But, well said Sirrah - Good logic from Wombat (and 100% agreed - in principal) – however; although things are arranged differently overseas; the demographics, governance of the regulator and 'history' are different (USA Civilian based – Australia Military). But that should not preclude the Australia AOPA from applying /adopting the common or garden sense approach, based on past and present knowledge of how the CASA functions; the likely outcome; and, the ways and means of making friends and influencing people to your way of thinking. Big ask with CASA – almost mission impossible - almost.

Morgan's appearance at the 'indaba' was, IMO unnecessary; the whole bun-fight and consequences could have been avoided had a 'submission' or statement of AOPA's position on the SDM's etc been made, backed up with a polite note, declining the invitation to attend, the AOPA position being made crystal clear. With that position established and made very clear beyond any doubt; there was no requirement to become embroiled in a group session with folks of different 'interest' and agenda groups. A logical assessment – based on objective, factual sector risk management would have at least – perhaps - provided CASA with food for thought – particularly on the arbitrary weight limitations affecting the more popular 'light twin' and single engine private operations; would another two or three hundred Kg have any real impact on 'safety'?  That to me seemed to be a justifiable, sensible way to break the first barrier to a clear win.  

As for Morgan – the CEO of any company or organisation may well be furious; maybe even righteously so; fully justified but; to behave in a manner which will effectively lead to being excluded from any future discussion on matters between a government agency and the industry served, destroys credibility, ruins any chance of future success and leaves others wondering what sort of operation is he representing, this cannot be allowed, no matter the provocation. Yes, Rant, rave, kick chairs over, all jolly good fun – in private. But when in a known hostile environment, where even the slightest 'off' word, let alone action will provide an excuse to take the CEO 'off the dance card' has never been a good move. An apology may be 'graciously' accepted – but don't think, not for a moment, that all is forgiven and forgotten – it ain't – certainly not by CASA. QED.....

Maybe a short educational course on winning the day taken from the pages of the  Cannane or Hurst method and approach would help – then again, perhaps not. 

Toot – toot......
Reply

It’s hard to imagine that a CEO of any reputable organisation that’s trying to influence government policy could be so stupidly incompetent to publicly, through a video posted on Facebook, threaten a senior officer with an obscenity thus:-
“….stick it up your arse.”

There is no comparison to Whitlam or anyone else in any contemporary situation that comes close to this inexcusable and very damaging lapse of manners and reason that’s out there for anyone to view.

AOPA Australia is plummeting downwards.
How to arrest its demise?
The answers will be hard to come by but firstly there must be an apology from the perpetrator and from the Board of AOPA.
Reply

Quite right I’m sure and Mr. Morgan has helped neither himself nor AOPA.

However, considering that the industry has spent forty plus years engaged in respectful dialogue, with very little to show for it, one has to ask……

Especially when one watches the alleged treatment of Glen Buckley and apparently others. Shirley there must be a limit?
Reply

Entree, credibility, respect and survival.

Wombat - “However, considering that the industry has spent forty plus years engaged in respectful dialogue, with very little to show for it, one has to ask……”

Fair comment – but has it been a 'united' industry push? All sectors from 'heavy' to ultra light speaking with one voice? It takes very real, very expensive time consuming effort to gain entree to, acceptance in and 'credibility' to 'ring in the changes' – that or a Mt Erebus event to shake out the political drive and will into gear. And even then it is a tough job to bring any semblance or 'real' change. Look no further back than the Pel-Air /ASSR Senate inquiry.

When folks like Sen. Fawcett and the Rev, Forsyth (and many others) at great public expense, produce (collectively) some 60 odd recommendations; which have had absolutely zero effect – in real terms – it makes one wonder what it will take to 'reform' the system. Particularly when the NZ.UK/Europe/ and the USA seem, at least, to be doing a lot better than us Dunnunder. A land that could really use 'air services' -

I don't know what the solution is – but the evidence of an industry in dire need of regulatory reform and sanity is clear; it would also be quite handy to have a few aerodromes available – you know, those paddocks aircraft and infrastructure must have.. But then, I have never believed challenging a sniper protected artillery battery armed with a blunt pocket knife is a sound idea; no matter how fierce or loud the war cry is. Just saying …....

Toot – toot.
Reply

AOPA Oz MIA??

We all know that BM has been laid up after an unfortunate traffic accident. Consequently for the last couple of months we seem to have had crickets on the AOPA Oz front?


However I did catch the following email traffic from the AOPA Oz Prez... Rolleyes   

[Image: aopa-1.jpg]

[Image: aopa-2.jpg]

[Image: aopa-3.jpg]

[Image: aopa-4.jpg]

[Image: aopa-5.jpg]

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)