A Gold Star Plug.
#41

The dream team:- Yeah, right......

As Hitch eloquently pats a very large nail with a feather duster, the BRB have demanded a tote board (MTF). But before that, we must examine the nails Hitch is attempting to whallop.

Hitch - “Firstly, politically the government doesn't see anything wrong with GA;”

Oh, they 'see' Ok – but it's what they are allowed to see which troubles. They are repeatedly told that GA is flight training, that light aircraft are mostly being used for recreational purposes, that GA is basically an amateur lash up, insignificant and dangerous to boot. Nowhere near the truth of course; but with politicians of all stripes being convinced of that; and, happily hiding behind the so called experts, they are quite content to sit back and leave it to Beaver, wash their grubby hands of it and watch it die a slow painful death. BUT - The VIP jets the minister loves to swan about in are classed as GA: the RFDS aircraft which will transport the same from brothel to the 'rehab' facility is classed as GA: the aircraft which worked around the clock to put out bush fires are classed as GA: a part of the multi million dollar tourist income is provided by GA; the crops which feed and support this nation are kept healthy by Agricultural aviation operations classed as GA: police air wings are in the GA bucket; essential patient transport is GA; in fact anything not classed as 'major' airline is GA. Maybe it is time that GA let the misguided, easily led 'members' know exactly how much 'GA' benefits this land. GA is not the plaything of a few wealthy dilettantes; is is an essential industry. One which may even grow, provided you leave us a few aerodromes from which aviation business can actually operate.

Hitch - “secondly, a powerful middle-management cadre within CASA has managed to block meaningful reforms in order reinforce their own reputations as experts.”

Good heavens Padre is that a cadre I see before me? Well son, it is and it ain't; I like to think of it as being more like a spiders web, gossamer light, strong as steel and lethal to those who fail to pay homage to the creature at the centre of the web. Play nice, beg, bow, cooperate, scrape and you will be allowed to 'tread the threads' protected and fed. Or else. Everyone knows who the part mad, megalomaniac creature at the centre is – but no one has the balls to pick up a boot and 'move it along' for fear of not hearing the approach of a whispering death.

Hitch - “The incoming DAS needs to have a sword of steel and be unfraid to wield it against the ultra-conservatives, both upstream and downstream. They need to have a horse called Hero, a dog called Devil and be a leader in the Dick Winters mould. Is such a person out there?

Aye, well said – however, until we follow the NZ path, with full government support, not even Hero, Devil and even Dick Winters can break wind. The Kiwi brethren simply drew a line in the sand; started again using real 'experts' and have never looked back. The USA has offered to gift their rule set and supply expert help to set it up – for free FDS. But no; after thirty years and half a billion dollars – all we can see is yet another RRAT 'inquiry' into the mess. A 'reform' DAS, backed by the government, with the courage to admit a catastrophic failure and start again, may just fix it. But don't forget to brush out the spiders web – a place where all reform meets a sticky end; cocooned in the byzantine, twisted coils of legal lunacy.

No matter: the crew want to pick a team:- first order of business is to pick a captain – a fearless leader. The nominations so far (in no particular order):-

John Sharp.
David Forsyth.
Phil Hurst.
Nick Xenophon.
Fiona Nash.
Kim Byles.
Mark Skidmore.
Mike Smith.
Clinton McKenzie.
Alfred E Newman.
Benny Hill.
Alan Jones.
River Dance
Elmer Fudd
Uncle Tom Cobbley.

No odds on the board yet. Once the list is 'properly' made, and the 'going' is known we shall see about doing this the right way. Until then, remember, the pen is mightier than the sword, even a feather one. Good work Hitch – Choc frog quality.

Toot – toot.
Reply
#42

Friday 24 July

[Image: fly-masthead_250enews1_0.png]


In News this fortnight: BRM flies it's new B8 and sends a letter to the Deputy Prime Minister, Moorabbin businesses get their marching orders, GippsAero's future is a bit cloudy and two unis delve into GA aircraft maintenance.

In The Last Minute Hitch, I get unhappy about the GippsAero situation, chip CASA over their handling of the Bristell issue, lament what's happening at Moorabbin and send out a Wings Awards reminder.


July-August 2020 Australian Flying is now the current issue, so if you haven't updated your collection, get to the nearest newsagent and grab one now!


Have you seen our new, simplified nomination form for the Wings Awards? Go on the website this weekend, check out the criteria and start planning to make your submission!


Want Australian Flying in digital form? Get it right here on Zinio!


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch


Steve Hitchen

Editor 

Quote:[Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]

The Last Minute Hitch: 24 July 2020
24 July 2020
Comments 1 Comment


– Steve Hitchen

Mahindra Aerospace virtually saved GippsAero in 2010 when they bought a controlling share. The company was in need of cash for development and the GFC had evaporated most streams of financial support. The new Indian parent immediately announced a cash injection of $20 million, which enabled GippsAero to get cracking on the GA10 and start dreaming of Nomads. But Mahindra & Mahindra is a giant corporation and almost immediately applied giant corporation thinking to an artisan industry where it simply didn't fit. When you're turning out only two aircraft per month, each unit being effectively hand-made, the management systems and profit expectations derived from high-volume production such as automobiles has no place. Now, 10 years later, industry rumoursbacked by flagging shipment figuresare indicating Mahindra wants out. How they do that will depend upon what their exit strategy is. They can sell the company for what they can get for it, or they can destroy it by selling off all the non-current assets, like tooling jigs and other production items. I have heard of at least three companies that are sniffing around GippsAero, but the word is they don't like the smell of Mahindra's asking price. If a deal can't be done, the parent is likely to adopt the second option, which will be both a travesty and a tragedy for Australian aircraft manufacture. One things has remained a constant: the Airvan 8 is damned fine aircraft that has a place in the general aviation right across the globe. If production ceases it won't be for a want of customers, but because of a lack of corporate courage.

Quote:CASA's handling of the issue has once again been poor and unprofessional

The stall/spin characteristics of BRM Aero's Bristell LSA is one of the most controversial topics in GA in Australia. CASA has been threatening to ban the aircraft from spinning because they say they don't have sufficient evidence that the aircraft complies with the ASTM rules for LSAs. Apparently the spin test results and the manufacturers statement of compliance–which is required under LSA rules–is not enough evidence. What other evidence can there be? Countering that, CASA is pointing at several crashes and a somewhat mysterious local test as proof the aircraft doesn't comply ... which is a statement not included in the local test results and not listed as a contributing factor by the ATSB in two of the accidents. At the time of writing, the issue has not been resolved and people representing the manufacturer BRM Aero are saying that CASA has become unresponsive. For those that have had to battle CASA, that might be sounding awfully familiar: demand more information then shut-up shop when the information arrives and continue to blame the other party. Regardless of what you think of the stall/spin characteristics of the Bristell, CASA's handling of the issue has once again been poor and unprofessional. It's an LSA. It either complies or it doesn't comply. How hard should that be to work out.


Moorabbin Airport Corporation (MAC) has started the process of clearing aviation businesses out of the western end of the Northern Apron for make way for commercial non-aviation development. This is not sudden; it was outlined in the 2015 Master Plan and allowed for in leases. Goodman-owned MAC is in the business of making money out of the airport and they clearly would prefer non-aviation money over aviation money. The aviation businesses marked for eviction have nowhere else to go because MAC has not given them options. It's a case of get off my airport. Full stop. Aviation companies are not like most businesses: they need to operate on airports and if airports won't let them do that then they have no option but to close. If aviation businesses close, then aviation activity wanes. Non-aviation businesses don't have to be on an airport to operate; they can do that from any industrial estate. To add to the woes, several of the evicted companies own the hangars, which means they are obliged to pay for dismantling the buildings and rehabilitating the sites at a time when their cash flow has dried up because they've been forced out of business. Commerical non-aviation development should be restricted to the parts of the airport that aviation doesn't need and MAC simply should not be allowed to bulldoze infrastructure in the form of a taxiway that they themselves are leasing from the public.


How are you going with your Wings Awards nomination? There's still plenty of time left, but we have already been looking over some very strong submissions. The field will be a large one this year, but every category is still wide open. If you're still working on yours, don't forget to make sure you address the criteria for your category and fill in all the fields. Our online nomination system seems to be making it all a lot easier. Check it all out on the Australian Flying website.


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch



Comment: 

Mike Borgelt  14 hours ago

Having strenuously tried, on specious grounds at best, to put Jabiru out of business a few years ago, CASA is now targeting importers.
Reply
#43

Into a corner – painted am I.

[Image: painted-into-a-corner]

Hitch - “Regardless of what you think of the stall/spin characteristics of the Bristell, CASA's handling of the issue has once again been poor and unprofessional.”

Not to mention it is slightly embarrassing to watch a Bantam weight amateur squaring off to an internationally recognised heavyweight pro, with a solid track record.

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials. Take a moment to read a few paragraphs of the Wiki blurb; enlightening ain't it. The ASTM have a long history and some serious 'clout'. They don't just dream up 'standards' – take a wee peek at -THIS – or for the more legal mind – there's 'the Rools'.

Now you have to wonder why CASA is taking on this crowd. The ASTM 'testing regime' for the Bristell aircraft has been internationally accepted. The manufacturer has 'tested' the aircraft, gained approvals and in good faith marketed and sold the airframe, acknowledging the limitations and providing 'cautions' within the Aircraft Flight Manual. 

Hitch - CASA has been threatening to ban the aircraft from spinning because they say they don't have sufficient evidence that the aircraft complies with the ASTM rules for LSAs.


Aye, CASA can do whatever it likes in Oz – until the court battle. That will 'interesting' particularly when the comparison between 'like and like' is made and the ASTM step up to bat in defence of their 'standards' and testing regime. The burden of proof, expert international opinion, the FAA and EASA acceptance on the one hand; CASA's fluffy duck, unsupported opinion on the other:-

HITCH - CASA is pointing at several crashes and a somewhat mysterious local test as proof the aircraft doesn't comply ... which is a statement not included in the local test results and not listed as a contributing factor by the ATSB in two of the accidents.

Mysterious 'local' test flights – proof positive – court standard? Fine, publish the results. Let's see 'em. If this aircraft is a substantive danger to the public and those who operate them; the CASA test flight results must support the statements made. ASTM will no doubt be delighted to have their errors pointed out.

Hitch - At the time of writing, the issue has not been resolved and people representing the manufacturer BRM Aero are saying that CASA has become unresponsive.

Perhaps someone with a functioning brain has had a quiet word and advised CASA to back up a little bit and tone down the 'opinion' level to at least credible deniability; lest they are , once again, the subject of much international head shaking. 

The accident reports we have seen so far, involving this aircraft, are sketchy at best. Accident rate to world wide hours flown on type would be handy, as would an analysis of who, why and what were they doing prior to accident. The aircraft may well be 'sensitive' in the CoG range – as advertised; limited in the latitudes allowed for pilot error; it may even be not suitable for 'training' – but that's no crime. Many aircraft fit into that slot; horses for courses and all that.

There are sensible, realistic steps CASA could take – provided they could back up their claims with real evidence. But so far all we have is some fairly 'wishy-washy' rhetoric from an authority which can't analyse flight test data; nor make up their collective minds. Perhaps its time to collect the marbles.

Toot – toot.
Reply
#44

Friday 07 August

[Image: fly-masthead_250enews1_0.png]


In News this fortnight: CASA gets worried about the Bristell CoG, Aspen gets a new owner, NSW dumps the WAR act, Textron launches its new King Air, we shed more light on the GippsAero story, CASA examines Adelaide airspace, WA Police get an H145 and CASA cements the Bristell stall ban.

In The Last Minute Hitch, I lament the fate of GippsAero, add my voice to the Bristell debate and sound a caution about Warnervale's good news.


July-August 2020 Australian Flying is now the current issue, so if you haven't updated your collection, get to the nearest newsagent and grab one now!


Have you seen our new, simplified nomination form for the Wings Awards? Go on the website this weekend, check out the criteria and start planning to make your submission!


Want Australian Flying in digital form? Get it right here on Zinio!


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch


Steve Hitchen

Editor 
stevehitchen@yaffa.com.au


Quote: [Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]



The Last Minute Hitch: 7 August 2020
7 August 2020
Comments 0 Comments



– Steve Hitchen


My last column briefed the industry on the impending sale or closure of GippsAero by parent company Mahindra Aerospace. Triggered by extremely poor shipment figures, I went searching and uncovered the shaky ground upon which GippsAero now stood. It took a bit longer to confirm the reasons why. It seems Mahindra ignored the hackneyed but legitimate old saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." GippsAero was short of cash, but far from broken when the Indian conglomerate bought in at the height of the GFC. Then they proceeded to fix a company that didn't need fixing, and after reassembling it couldn't make it work they way they wanted it to. There's no shortage of ex-GippsAero people out there willing to tell their stories; loyalty to a great aeroplane is still very strong. That loyalty extends to the customers; the Airvan 8 is one of the few aeroplanes that is not over-hyped but continues to deliver above expectations. It is galling to think that all that may be gone for no reason other than it couldn't meet the demands of big business attitudes. There is still time for the Airvan to be saved, but it is in the hands of Mahindra, which doesn't seem fussed if they sell it complete or smash it up for parts. A good outcome is still possible, but it would take Mahindra to cut their losses and set the Airvan 8 free.


Quote: Do I hear the thunderous clatter of pennies dropping?

It seems problems are coming at the Bristell from all directions ... or are they? In late July, CASA firmed-up its stall ban on the LSA in spite of local representatives petitioning the government to take the regulator to task over the way the whole things has been handled. Now, today, CASA has gone again, this time with a warning that the aircraft handbook figures could, if followed, result in an aft centre of gravity (CoG). Do I hear the thunderous clatter of pennies dropping? One of the known impacts of an aft CoG has been found in many aircraft to be a change in the spin characteristics. Generally speaking, an aft CoG will dictate a nose-up pitch and a flatter spin; notoriously hard to break because control effectiveness decreases. This is likely to show up only when two people are on board, i.e., not during spin testing, which is traditionally done solo. Of course, all this is speculation that will or won't be confirmed by CASA investigations and whether or not the same condition is found in Bristells in Australia. This is not the end of the story ... this is a new beginning! If true, everything in the ongoing saga with this aeroplane just changed. However, I must take time to muse on how we could have had two serious accidents with the type in Australia and not twig to this problem.


Central Coast Airport at Warnervale is breathing again! A NSW government review has delivered recommendations that are encouraging to the future of the airport ... and the government has accepted them. The review into the legislation that imposed restrictions has been scrapped and the local council has been directed to develop a plan for the future of the airport. It's all looking good. So far. The local council has not exactly shown themselves to be pro-airport, and you could mount a decent argument that they are the opposite. Central Coast Aero Club has been pitted against the council at almost every turn, trying only to exercise their rights to use the airport as an airport. We may be dreaming that some government regulations will be enough to quell their animosity; councils are known for their ability to take petty regulations and morph them into show-stoppers for airports (G'day Tyabb!). This is a great win for CCAC, and the government support has been fantastic, but more will be needed if Warnervale is to have a sure future ahead of itself.


Thanks to FlightStorewe are offering you the chance to win a brilliant iPad cooling case and mount kit worth $420. Is there anything more annoying than having your iPad shut down mid-flight because it over-heated? Goodbye EFB, goodbye E6B and all those other apps that are supposed to make life easier. This kit from X-naut and RAM is just what you need to stop that happening. To win, all you need to do is sign up for the Australian Flying e-Newsletter and answer a simple question about which company is offering you this chance. Get on board this competition right away!


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#45

RIP Phearless Phelan -  Angel

[Image: phelan-4.jpg]
A Champion Rides Away
21 August 2020
Comments 1 Comment


– Steve Hitchen

If there was ever a writer that put his heart and soul into general aviation, it was Paul David Phelan. A true champion of the cause and a skilled pilot with an adventurous career under his belt, Paul died last Thursday 13 August, leaving the world of aviation journalism in deep mourning.


Paul was the Executive Editor of 
Australian Flying for many years and in total his work appeared in the magazine for over 20 years. He built a reputation as a writer of great analytical skill who could turn his hand to entertaining prose when the subject required it. Behind the scenes he was also a raconteur of note, and often it showed through in his work.


He became known for his talent in putting regulators to the sword with cutting efficiency. It was once said of another writer, Leon Trotsky, that after he cut off his enemy's head he held it up to show that there were no brains inside, and I have always thought Paul Phelan was cut from the same bolt of cloth. It was a very brave bureaucrat that tried to find an escape clause by dissecting Paul's work to find a flaw in logic and reasoning. Mostly, there just weren't any.


His trademark was the last page of 
Australian Flying where he presented his "Backlash" column, a place where Paul could air his principles and ideals, targeting the guilty and espousing a logic in regulation that we are still chasing today. Many readers would pick up their new copy and turn straight to the back to see who Phelan was skewering in this issue.


His style set a benchmark for many aviation writers in the next generation, including me. Even today when I have to unravel story of some regulatory misadventure I always ask myself if I have done as good a job as Paul Phelan would do. Other writers have credited him with being their inspiration to start writing in the first place. He was a pilots' writer with a world of experience that helped him relate to the people he was writing about.


He started out in aviation the way many pilots did, flying ad-hoc charter work. One of his early roles was to fly the media chase plane over Lake Eyre in 1964 as Donald Campbell set his world land speed record. He later flew DC3s for Bush Pilot Airways in QLD, crewing up on at least one occasion with the late Warren Seymour, founder of National Jet Systems.


In the end it was as an aviation writer that he found his niche, not only in Australia, but also in international publications. He could turn his hand to anything, a trait that is lacking in many writers today. In-depth analysis of regulation, testing a corporate jet, flying a trike or waxing lyrical about a fly-away destination, Paul Phelan tackled them all, switching easily between the styles most appropriate for the subject.


And he was a great character that added colour to the lives of those who knew him, just as he did to the publications that used his work.


My first encounter with Paul was at one of the early Avalon air shows. As someone who'd been reading 
Australian Flying since the mid-1980s, I was already familiar with the name. As the Yaffa Publishing team were all Sydney-based, they fled early on the Sunday to get flights home, deputising Paul and me to look after the stand. "Sell all the magazines," they said, "nothing goes back to Sydney." Paul and I were not up for the task ... we just stood in the middle of the aisles and gave them all away. Mission accomplished; nothing went back to Sydney!


Paul and June (traditionally he would introduce her as "my first wife") lived in many places across Australia's east coast, from Cairns to Cooma and Mount Beauty. Anyone who visited them at home was most likely to be introduced to Paul's legendary home-made scotch. A few survived to tell the tale. I met him at a pub one day for a Saturday afternoon session. I had a cold beer; he had a scotch and coke. As we discussed the possible heritage of a wooden prop above the stage, Paul reached into his jacket and produced a hip flask, spiking his own drink with the contents – his home brew. "They never put enough in here," he grumbled.


Paul was a straight-shooter whose only agenda in this world was to use his typewriter to keep the bastards honest. After he left Australian Flying he entered the world of online journalism, working briefly for Aviation Advertiser before pairing up with Stan van der Wiel to create ProAviation. He changed his platform, but the writing remained quintessentially Phelan and the regulators were given no respite.


As with Ben Sandilands and John Spiers before him, the loss of Paul Phelan has weakened the art of aviation journalism in Australia, particularly in the general aviation sector. He was a true champion of the aviation cause and often the first journo to get a phone call when CASA threatened. He added power to the voice of David when Goliath began loading his sling.


The thoughts of all of us here at Australian Flying and Yaffa Media are with June and the Phelan family.


&..via FB:

Quote:Sandy Reith
12h ·

Sad to say that my friend Paul Phelan died last Thursday week, the thirteenth of August.

I’m sure that many will mourn his passing being a well known personality especially in General Aviation (GA) circles. Paul first came to my notice when he was writing his perceptive articles for the Australian Flying magazine. His back page ‘Short Final’ editorials were often insightful critiques of CASA’s inappropriate regulatory schemes. He foresaw the disastrous consequences for GA that have followed and are now so obvious.

A hard time for June and the family made worse because normal commemorations are not allowed.

We have lost a quintessential Australian.


& this week's LMH: 

The Last Minute Hitch: 21 August 2020
21 August 2020
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

News is reaching us only now that the doyen of general aviation journalism, Paul Phelan, died on 13 August. This was shattering news to me. Paul was the heart and soul of Australian Flying across two decades and helped build the reputation of the title as a magazine dedicated to the GA cause. Beyond that, Paul was my benchmark when it comes to writing about regulatory issues; a benchmark that I will never stop trying to reach. Anyone who ever had a problem with CASA had a champion in Paul Phelan. The entire aviation industry will feel his loss and the plethora of bloggers, vloggers and podcasters rising in general aviation today would do well to study his work and learn how the best did the job.


Quote:the straws I am grasping at are thin ones

Some time in the next month, another iconic Australian invention will be shut down: the GA8 Airvan. GippsAero's owner, Mahindra Aerospacehas confirmed production will cease and the Latrobe Regional plant reduced to a service and spares organisation only. The official line is that COVID has killed it, but the truth is not as simple as that. Conversations with former GippsAero employees have had one consistent thread: the order books were deliberately closed and orders for up to 15 airframes were refused, a sure sign that Mahindra is looking for the exit unburdened by the pesky obligation to deliver new aeroplanes. The service and spares operation will keep the type certificate active, but I can't believe that Mahindra will want to be involved for very long in a company with such limited earnings potential. However, there is a slight hesitation in the cry "the end is nigh!" There is a very strong indication that Mahindra is still mulling over one offer to buy the company outright, no doubt at a figure well below what Mahindra wanted for it. Even Mahindra has told me that Airvan production will cease "for the time being", leaving the door open for a potential great escape for what is a great aeroplane that has earned its second chance. Yes, the straws I am grasping at are thin ones, but they're the only straws within reach.

Risk-based regulation in GA, as exhorted by the RAAA in their submission to the senate inquiry, may just be a pursuit without end. The basis of the concept is that the intensity of the regulation will be appropriate for the level of risk in a particular operation. That leaves the word "risk" open for evaluation, usually by a regulator that believes any operation involving an aeroplane is risky. Right nowdespite several documents that contradictregulation is applied to GA that is well above any sensible risk assessment, loading a lot of unnecessary cost on operators. The best example is the most well-known one: the rules for operating an A380 and a Cessna 402 are the same, despite the risks being substantially different. That's because CASA believes that the paying public should be guaranteed the same level of protection regardless of which aircraft they travel on. The flaw in that theory is obvious: what is risk for one is not risk for another, and applying the same rules to the C402 introduces a level of safety that proportionally exceeds that of the A380. It's unlikely this will change simply because it's easier for CASA to make it so and there is no existing mechanism that can bring about any change.

Fathers' Day is coming around again, as is the annual problem of what to buy him as a gift. This year it's easy: an annual subscription to Australian Flying is perfect, made even better by the great deal on offer. Six print issues of the magazine has been set at only $32. That's $5.33 per issue, a saving of 40% on the usual price. And whilst you're in there, check out the other magazines in the stable that might also appeal to Dad. Yachting, fishing, woodworking, bicycling, walking ... there's heap of great magazines ready to be read. Go to the Great Magazine website (where else?) and grab a bargain for Dad this Father's Day.

May your gauges always be in the green,

Hitch
Reply
#46

Via Oz Flying:

 [Image: andrew_glen.jpg]

Ombudsman finds Franchising Legal in APTA Case
26 August 2020
Comments 1 Comment
104

A Commonwealth Ombusdman investigation into the conduct of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has found no legislation that prevents a flying school from franchising out their Air Operator's Certificate (AOC) to other operators.

The revelation comes in a report supplied to former Australian Pilot Training Alliance (APTA) owner Glen Buckley, who is taking legal action against CASA over several enforcement issues that he says destroyed his business and forced him out of the aviation industry.


One of the contentious points in the enforcement action applied to APTA in October 2018 was that the organisation was illegally allowing other flying training schools to use APTA's Part 142 approval (franchising), which was the very business model APTA was built on.


It was only one of several issues that Buckley reported to the Commonwealth Ombudsman. In Phase One of the investigation, Assistant Director of Investigations Michael Buss said he could find no legislation that made franchising illegal.


"As of October 2016, no Australian legislation prohibited 'franchising' of an AOC, subject only to the exclusivity of the AOC holder’s operational control, and that remained the case as of 25 March 2020," Buss says in his report.


"There would be no legal or regulatory impediment to Mr Buckley or APTA selling or licencing intellectual property in the form of its AOC exposition to other FTO [Flight Training Organisation].


"And there would be no legal or regulatory impediment to CASA issuing part 142 Permissions on submission of those expositions by other FTO."


Buss also pointed out that CASA had agreed with the finding.


CASA's reasoning for declaring the APTA model–which it had previously approved–illegal was that franchising for FTOs was not permitted by the 
Franchise AOC Arrangements ruling made in 2006. That ruling refers to commercial operations under CAR 206, but in September 2014, flight training was removed from CAR 206.


"The Ruling was not amended to reflect that legislative change from 1 September 2014 meaning that the CAR and the Ruling were no longer aligned in material ways," Buss concluded.



"Conceptually, I accept CASA's view that the Ruling may reflect broader policy considerations.


"Nevertheless in my concluded view there was an administrative deficiency due to an absence of a direct relationship between the activity being regulated and the policy said to regulate it.


"This gave rise to ambiguity and uncertainty with the potential to cause detriment to those relying on the accuracy of the regime or, conversely, prevent detriment from occurring."


The Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman is now proceeding with Phase Two of the investigation, which will investigate the CASA action of serving a seven-day cease notice on APTA in October 2018 and CASA informing Buckley's new employer in August 2019 that his new role was "untenable" due to comments Buckley was making publicly.


Buckley is currently suing CASA and the then CASA Regional Manager for defamation over the comments, saying that he had suffered reputational damage that "has extended to my reputation with peers in the industry, my past employees, work colleagues, my suppliers, neighbours, school community, and indeed my own family."


Quote:Sandy Reith  a day ago

This is excellent news and thank you Steve Hitchen for such a clear article. Anyone who has followed Glen Buckley through the horror story of bureaucratic power play will be super happy to see, at last, some of the smoke clearing. Of the many inexcusable actions of CASA towards numerous individuals by acting as policeman, prosecutor, judge and jury, this one stands out. Glen’s business procedures were developed in conjunction with CASA, then, for some completely obscure reason, ‘policy’ was reversed, and a legitimate business squashed.


Just maybe here is an example that will catch media and political attention.


Reforms are desperately required if General Aviation is to overcome it’s bureaucratically induced decline and only the Parliament can make the necessary root and branch changes to the law and administration of Australian aviation. If this were to occur aviation jobs and businesses will once again flourish, especially in General Aviation, serving the needs of our People across our great continent.



MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#47

 [Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]

The Last Minute Hitch: 4 September 2020
4 September 2020
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

The Commonwealth Ombudsman has stated that, legally, there is no existing legislation to stop a flying school from franchising out its AOC. Amazingly, CASA has come out in agreement with that finding. I say "amazingly" because it was CASA's position that franchising was not legal that started the whole APTA fiasco in the first place. Yes, CASA reversed that position some time ago, but then committed the sin of not rectifying the damage done by their original ruling. The regulator has in the past demonstrated a modus operandi of defending to the death an entrenched position that has been proven wrong and the way they have dealt with Glen Buckley can be held up as perhaps the primary exemplar of this. Although it is true that CASA has other issues the way Buckley ran APTA, without the ruling that APTA was illegal none of the actions the regulator has taken can be justified. Without the central premise, the enforcement was overkill. Buckley has proven that he's not about to conveniently fade into anonimity and permit CASA to roll on with impunity, so there's a lot to play out in the saga, including defamation proceedings.


Quote:It costs a lot of money to be an Angel Flight pilot.

Australia is a volunteer nation; we step up with time, money and perspiration when needed. It could be a charity fundraiser, a bushfire rebuild program or even fighting a war. Volunteers hold a special place in Australian society and we respect what they do, knowing that governments would have to cover the shortfall should volunteers walk. Angel Flight pilots are exactly the same, except the amount of personal money they put into the charity is out of proportion to the time they spend working on it. It costs a lot of money to be an Angel Flight pilot, but I've never heard one word of complaint from them. Given how much they already give, it must rankle deep within them that CASA has effectively called them unsafe and is demanding they divulge information about their flights. Some pilots have acquiesed, others have drawn a line. Angel Flight is referring the matter to the Federal Court because it believes CASA has over-stepped its powers in demanding the information. What CASA has done is take for granted the good will of the volunteers, which is something these stalwarts certainly don't deserve.


The last air show domino fell today with Wings over Illawarra canceled. Although probably inevitable given the resurgence in the pandemic, it is no less heart-breaking for Kerry and Mark Bright. Every year they put everything they've got into organising the show and this year they rolled the dice in an attempt to get the show up once again. It seems like WOI has been plagued with metronomic regularity: fire, floods, wind, pestilence; all have dogged their best efforts. But of course these two have been driven back to their feet by optimism and are already planning for next year. Soldier on, Bright people, general aviation is better off for the like of you.


If you want to talk about this or any other aviation topic with the creative talent behind Australian Flying, we're giving you the chance to interact directly with them in our first Meet the Writers webinar on 16 September. Run through the Facebook page, you'll be able to discuss aviation matters whether they be current affairs, the culture of flying, aeroplanes or the content and make up of Australian Flying itself. We're there from 7.00 pm on the night and will be very pleased to meet our readership and hear what they have to say. And Garmin Australia has come to the party, providing three Garmin Integrated Flight Deck (GIFD) simulators for us to give away on the night. How do you win? Getting involved on the night is a very good start!


And speaking of opportunities, if you've been really tardy with a Fathers' Day gift for this Sunday, you've still got time to take out an Australian Flying subscription, made a lot easier and cheaper with our Dad's Day special. At no less a discount than 40% off the normal price, its a no-brainer gift for the father who has flying in his blood.


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch




MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#48

 [Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]

The Last Minute Hitch: 2 October 2020
2 October 2020
Comments 1 Comment


– Steve Hitchen

The aviation industry's collective MAYDAY call to the Federal Government last week has been a long time coming; perhaps too long. With COVID restrictions damaging the health of cash flows and viability, the industry has pleaded for help to stay alive and continue their support of the larger aviation infrastructure. So far, all government responses point to the $1.3 billion package of largesse the minister doled out early in the year as if that should be enough to save the industry. That, of course, ignores the limitations of the package, which has advantaged few and certainly is not worth even close to $1.3 billion in real terms. The package has become a shield for the minister to hide behind. But there is something more in the industry letter that is not represented by words on pages: unity. With airlines, flying schools, MROs and assocations all putting their names to the call, it reveals, finally, some recognition that general aviation is a keystone of the wider aviation industry in Australia. Without GA, Australian airlines would have to source their pilots from overseas, fuel companies would suffer from a major loss of revenue, as would airports, avionics houses, engineers and even the regulators. This is a concept that has either somehow managed to escape the Federal Government or been left to gather dust on a shelf marked "inconvenient truths". It would be a shame if the unity displayed in this letter extended no further. My first reaction on reading the list of signatory organisations that this could form the genesis of a decent industry association, one that could deliver a greater punch that other representative groups that have, by the narrowness of their focus, catalysed a splintering of general aviation in Australia.
And speaking of which ...


Quote: the SAAA could find themselves somewhat isolated

You have to applaud the chutzpah of the SAAA in their submission to the senate RRAT inquiry into general aviation. Their officially stated position can be summarised as saying that ASAOs, particularly RAAus, shouldn't be allowed to exist as self-administering organisations. I say particularly RAAus because the submission does focus a lot on CAO 95.55, which pertains solely to them. Despite their underpinning reason as a need to reduce complexity, a ring around today has found some sympathy, but little agreement. There isn't a lot of support for one association telling others that they should have to surrender their freedoms and raison d'etre. Consequently, the SAAA could find themselves somewhat isolated at the barricade. Sympathy may be absent, but empathy not necessarily. The submission also contains a statement that the SAAA doesn't believe RAAus should get their new 750-kg MTOW limit. This move could be forcing the SAAA to fight for their existence, given that pilots of home-built, two-seat aircraft up to that limit will soon have the option to forego SAAA membership and sign-up with RAAus under the 19-reg category. With that comes lesser medical standards, lesser training standard, lesser maintenance standards. The potential for a membership drain from SAAA to RAAus is too serious to be ignored. This is not the first time SAAA has vocally fought for equal rights for their members, but it is an escalation in the battle.


The time has come, the Walrus said, to think of ASIC things ... And for many aviators that time comes around every two years. I received my "renew or surrender" note from my ASIC provider just yesterday and as always it has me considering my position. Do renew, or simply fall back on the AVID? The AVID is mandatory if you don't have an ASIC, and gets you access to absolutely nothing. However, it's a lot cheaper than an ASIC ($126 compared to $250+) and the hoops are less onerous. What many of us battle with is the philosophy: the ASIC has very little value in real terms because it fails to perform its core task of increasing security at airports. Therefore, why should we pay for something that actually does nothing? Yes, that argument can also be applied to the ASIC, but if you're going to pay for nothing, it's always best to pay as little as you can. In my position, I often need tarmac access to regional airports for testing aeroplanes and taking photos. I still need permission to be there (ASIC is not a guarantee of access), so for me the answer to the conundrum is clearer. That's no comfort to the many PPLs slugged by this white elephant. Even worse is that the Department of Home Affairs has not offered any COVID extensions even though large numbers of pilots have been unable to fly or use regional airports due to restrictions.

You have one more month to get your 2020 CASA Wings Awards nomination finalised and submitted. COVID-19 has dictated the program run a few months behind previous years, so there won't be any extensions to the 4 November deadline. Some people have asked about the lack of activity this year and how it might effect nominations. Remember, we opened the nominations in May, which means your submission needs to be around the May 2019 – May 2020 period. There was still plenty of action in the GA community up until the unwelcome arrived of the coronavirus in March 2020, so keep your focus on what your group/company/individual did in that period and don't worry about the enforced inaction. You weren't Robinson Crusoe.


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch


Comment:

Quote:SteveHitchen Mod • 17 hours ago
Avid home-builder, SAAA member and RAAus owner/pilot Martin Hone has sent in this comment.

As both an SAAA and RAA member, I'm very disappointed to read of more
in-fighting between these two organisations. If CASA was to take over
the registration, maintenance and training responsibilities from RAA,
where is it going to get the staff from ? The slightly relaxed medical
and maintenance requirements allow many more people to afford flying for
fun. As an SAAA member and aircraft builder, I have the privilege of
being able to maintain my own aircraft. What makes SAAA think that CASA
forces us to go back to LAME maintenance organisations ? Be very
careful what you wish for guys! - Martin Hone



MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#49

Via Oz Flying:



 [Image: moorabbin_park.jpg]

Aviation Regulation in Government Sights
9 October 2020
Comments 0 Comments



Indications coming from Canberra are that the Federal Government may be investigating ways to reduce the burden of aviation regulation.

In a speech delivered to the Business Council of Australia on 2 October, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ben Morton outlined the Morrison government's agenda of deregulation designed to support economic recovery.


"To be clear, deregulation isn’t about getting rid of all regulation," Morton said. "It’s about getting rid of unnecessary, disproportionate, and inefficiently implemented regulation. It’s about the ease of doing business.


"Well designed, efficiently implemented regulation has always had a place in Australia. It is essential to good government, a safe community and a growing economy."


Morton also said that the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet would establish a taskforce to ensure a consistent approach across all regulators.


"Regulators across the Government face varying issues and their stakeholders can be quite different," Morton said. "Nevertheless, there are a number of common issues regardless of the complexity of the regulatory framework or the stakeholder group.


"These include ensuring that their interactions with the community they regulate are clear and that they assist with compliance where appropriate."


In answering questions posed by 
Australian Flying, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) declined to specifically state that aviation would be included in the new deregulation agenda, but did say that all regulators in all industries would be involved.


"PM&C will work with all Government policy departments, providing a consistent and coordinated approach to how they share and embed improved regulator performance," a spokesperson said. "It will cover all Commonwealth regulators, across all sectors.


"The new function will focus on identifying and sharing best practice, ensuring transparency of expectations, and building capability."


However, the power to regulate aviation safety lies not with any governmental department, but in the hands the CASA Director of Aviation Safety (DAS), a safeguard against political interference. Consequently, any deregulation agenda put forward will need the co-operation of CASA for it to succeed.


The impact of the regulatory burden on general aviation was also recognised on 1 October, when the Federal Government published the issues paper 
The Future of Australia's Aviation Sector: Flying to Recovery. The paper focuses largely on airlines, but singles out GA as one area that stands to benefit from reduced regulation.


Citing the 2017 General Aviation Study conducted by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE), the paper acknowleges the challenges faced by GA in Australia.


"Recent data from the General Aviation Survey shows stagnation in certain sectors such as private flying and sport and recreational aviation," the paper states. "However, other sectors, including aerial work, are experiencing periods of growth.


"The Study outlined key challenges facing the industry such as fluctuations in the cost and availability of [avgas] and maintenance of an ageing fixed-wing VH-registered fleet.


"Stakeholders ... suggest that improvements to safety regulation would increase prospects for the sector's growth,and that assistance to build a broader skill set in areas of business management could support increased viability."


The paper notes that the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport's General Aviation Advisory Network (GAAN) is already charged with identifying improvement opportunities in regulation and that the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (RRAT) is conducting an inquiry in the GA industry.


"This Issues Paper is not proposing to duplicate these processes," the paper says. "However, stakeholders are welcome to put forward options to further enhance GA's contribution to the economy and the community."


The full issues paper is on the 
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications website.




MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#50

 [Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]

The Last Minute Hitch: 16 October 2020
16 October 2020
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen

A proposal from the Federal Government to hand more control over regional airports to the state and local councils has the aviation community divided. Right now, many of the airports presented to the municipal councils under the ALOP scheme are balancing on a financial knife edge. Inspite of what incomes there may be, and what grants are available, most council airports are facing funding shortfalls for this year, most years in the past and several years in the future as well. Although government scheme are injecting cash for investment, it's nowhere near enough and in some cases, such as increased security, maintenance costs are laid at the council doorsteps. So how does the Federal Government arrive at the conclusion that handing more control to the state and local governments is a positive reform? It can only be related to the freedom to raise their own revenue or close the airport if they can't do that. The language in the proposal talks about "local requirements", which leaves open the ability to consider whether or not the airport is required at all. What the policy (or is it a policy?) ignores is that all airports are part of a greater infrastructure network where each airport relies the other airports. Every Point A needs a Point B. Other than for training, how often does a flight start and terminate at the same airport (OK, other than the QF flights to nowhere)? An infrastructure network this large has to be a federal thing that's immune from the sort of localised corrosion that mass airport closures would propagate.


Quote:Should we be picking out new party clothes? Not just yet.

The Federal Government has made a big hullabaloo about their plan to revitalse the Australian economy with a cost-saving deregulation program. For a broad range of regulated industries, it's manna from heaven and probably overdue. But will aviation be invited to that dance? In the recent issues paper The Future of Australia's Aviation Sector: Flying to Recovery, the government recognised that general aviation in particular would benefit from a lesser regulatory burden. Furthermore, follow-ups to the department garnered the proud statement that all regulated industries would be involved. Should we be picking out new party clothes? Not just yet. Aviation safety regulation is different in that the power to make regulations is the privilege of the CASA Director of Aviation Safety, screened by legislation from political influence. When the Department of Prime MInister and Cabinet was pressed on whether they were prepared to  take on the DAS over aviation safety in order to pursue their deregulation agenda, things got sort of quiet. And they are still quiet. If successive Directors had supported some level of deregulation, they could have done it by now without the need for parliamentary intervention. Interference by politicians is always a gimmee in the house for the opposition, so an invitation to the great deregulation ball is unlikely to be extended to us.



If you're facing the renovation of a decaying two-storey mansion, it would be lunacy to spend millions on the upper storey and leave the underpinning first storey to rot. You would soon find out all your millions bought you was a shinier pile of rubble. Yet, the Federal Government has adopted this very tactic for helping the aviation industry survive: all the money is going to the airlines and the foundations of the industry, the flying schools, are getting next to nothing. In free Australia, that's not so much of an issue; flying is still happening, training is still happening, money is still flowing. But in lockdown Victoria there are more tumbleweeds taxiing than there are aeroplanes. Flying schools in the Melbourne basin, which account for about 24% of all CPLs trained in Australia, are reaching the end of their cash reserves. Drip-feed programs like Jobkeeper support the employees, but they provide cash for neither rent nor debt. A great implosion is coming, avoidable only by a large injection of funds from governments or a releasing of the shackles to allow revenue activity again. Representations to this end have been made to the right people, it's just that the industry is being given the wrong answers.


Australian Flying November-December has reached the hands of the readership! We've stacked this one with some really good material including examinations of new twins, competition aerobatics, Transavia's brilliant baby elephant and Qantas when it was still wearing short pants. Thanks to the usual retinue of writers that keep me honest and the magazine bright and fresh. Look out for it at your local newsagent now!


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch
Reply
#51

Over a beer.

Hitch - “When the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet was pressed on whether they were prepared to take on the DAS over aviation safety in order to pursue their deregulation agenda, things got sort of quiet. And they are still quiet. If successive Directors had supported some level of deregulation, they could have done it by now without the need for parliamentary intervention. Interference by politicians is always a gimmee in the house for the opposition, so an invitation to the great deregulation ball is unlikely to be extended to us.

Agreed. Unlikely indeed; closer to impossible; but, I reckon keep your party frock handy. Only an inkling – a faint smell on the breeze; but,  if the 'heavy' mob take a hand and 'convince' the new DAS that reform is essential – and 'they' can exert that much influence, then perhaps there may be a dim light at the end of a long dark tunnel. Simple enough for them to do. PM&C - “want the job?” Candidate “Oh, yes please”. PM&C - “then you will, with adult assistance, bring in the reforms won't you; or,  will we take the management back to the department and the minister? Two options no choices.

IMO if the 'real' management see a need for an overhaul – then it will happen. If they don't, then I reckon we're all buggered. And when it becomes clear that the bloody dreadful regulations lay at the roots of a decimated industry; someone will get the message and simply bring in the NZ or USA rules, provide government loans and hope that there is still enough interest in revitalising an essential industry. That will still leave a lot of new airports to build – or demolition crews needed to undo the property developers rapine of a national asset.

Time will tell and there ain't a lot of it left to count down to zero hour. Tick, tick, tock goes the industry clock. 

Sandy - “Until there’s real action by Parliament there’s little hope of worthwhile reform. With more than a modicum of luck we may just find a new CEO with a brain and a conscience who could make a difference in the short term, but without a different model with Ministerial and Parliamentary control then the long term prospects for GA are very poor.”

Nice one – but it's your shout Hitch.
Reply
#52

Hitch summary in response to some of this - :

 



 [Image: susan_mcdonald_rrat_20oct20.jpg]

McDonald grills CASA in Senate Estimates
21 October 2020
Comments 0 Comments

Queensland Senator Susan McDonald took CASA to task in a senate estimates hearing in Canberra yesterday over the regulator's cost burden and relationship with the general aviation community.

The Nationals senator, who is also the chair of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee (RRAT), has positioned herself as a champion of general aviation since entering the senate in 2019.


McDonald grilled outgoing CASA CEO and Director of Aviation Safety Shane Carmody over the cost impost of new regulations, particularly in relation to the impending 
CASR Part 138 Aerial Work Operations.


"As I travel across Queensland, why is it that in my very short 50 years, we've gone from a thriving, busy aviation industry in this country to virtually no aircraft," McDonald asked. "They can't afford the maintenance, the pilots and operators continually say they cannot keep up with the regulatory changes demanded of them.


"You can't get engineers and this just sums up to me this concept: what is CASA trying to achieve by making changes that industry is saying is not necessary? There's not a reported number of accidents. I mean, we don't want to go back through the whole Angel Flight discussion ... of trying to fix a problem that hasn't been demonstrated."


Carmody replied that CASA's Manual of Standards for Part 138 had been prepared with input from the Aerial Application Association of Australia (AAAA).


"I believe that if we reduced aerial work classifications and authorisations that you are required to obtain from 42 to three, we've made this a lot simpler not more complex," Carmody pointed out. "That's been the aim of this; that's where this manual of standards is actually going.


"As I said, a lot of work has been done since that association, which is also part of the technical working group, put forward its submission, which I think is probably at least four or five months ago I suspect.


"I am strongly of the view that we are making Manuals of Standards, consulting with the industry very, very openly and transparently and making the type of amendments that they think are important."


Senator McDonald then asked Carmody to comment on the parlous state of general aviation and CASA's impact of the health of the industry.


"Do you want to reflect on my view that there is virtually very few aircraft left in general aviation, particularly in places–I'm not talking about RAAus and the recreational guys–I'm talking about serious pilots and businesses that operate in regional and remote Australia?"


"General aviation, depending upon how you describe it, is declining around the world," Carmody responded. "Most general aviation aircraft in Australia are more than 40 years old ... young people don't necessarily want to join and maintain those aircraft and people don't want to fly them.


"On the other side of it, on the recreational aviation space, that space is booming. Ten thousand pilots and 3000 aircraft. There are only 15,700 aircraft on our register, so another 3000 are now in the recreation space."


McDonald reiterated that she had collected feedback from the GA industry in remote and regional areas that contradicted the position CASA was taking, particularly when it came to operators having direct dealings with the regulator.


"I would put to you that a very, very long way away from the comfortable walls of Canberra, where we do really serious remote and regional work, people can't afford to operate aircraft," McDonald said.


"Every pilot I speak to complains about the regulations and process of CASA and I have tried over the last 18 months to raise this gently, but I can't seem to get any understanding of why the culture of CASA is so against people who do real flying, in real places, not recreational pilots along the coast."


"I don't believe that CASA is against real pilots doing real flying," Carmody said. "They may say so, Senator, [but] every regulatory matter that has been put to us in recent times has been dealt with. I've heard those allegations constantly over four years and every time I've actually asked for something to fix, if I've been given it, we've had a look at it and fixed it.


"Maintenance costs on old aircraft are high; there's nothing I can do with the cost of maintaining 40-year-old aircraft. People register an aircraft once for life ... it costs them $138. I don't see what CASA's cost are that are driving the industry. I believe that security and airport charges are charges that drive the industry, but I'm not sure that my charges do."


McDonald then suggested that Carmody contact the CASA offices in Cairns and more remote parts of the country to get the full story.

"They'll be able to tell your they're trying to mediate between Canberra and the real pilots–as I'm going to describe them–and now the complete lack of engineering and maintenance services, and again, I can line them up.


"But if you don't know about it, and you don't believe it then that's a longer conversation."


Carmody indicated to the hearing that CASA had held a full board meeting in Cairns last year, which he said gave anyone in the aviation industry the opportunity to air grievances.


"Very, very few people would have come because they're terrified," McDonald stressed. "They say to me 'can you not mention my name? I don't want to go through the two years of investigation, the massive expense and cost if CASA turns its attention on me.'


"So I would put to you that that's the reason why you didn't see anybody."


Carmody said that CASA couldn't fix matters that people didn't come forward with and pointed out the role of the Industry Complaints Commissioner in resolving disputes.


"That process is used often and the complaints are resolved, I think, very quickly and monitored very closely by the CASA board," Carmody said. "I do hear, and I accept what you're saying, but it's not what I'm hearing when I travel. It's not always what I hear from staff in offices, but I do hear lots of allegations ... every time a real allegation has been made with a fact that an inspector has done X or Y, we deal with it."


"We will continue to disagree on this matter," McDonald finished with, "because I have literally hundreds of pilots [and] aircraft across Australia that are either in sheds, giving up their planes. People travel huge distances and I don't know that we have a focus on supporting them."


Senator McDonald is also the chair of the RRAT Senate Inquiry into Australia's general aviation industry with particular reference to rural, regional and remote Australia, which has so far gathered 30 submissions from the aviation community canvassing a very broad range of matters.




MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#53

The Forsyth review commissioned by the Commonwealth only six years ago garnered two hundred and sixty nine submissions from the public. This makes the thirty to the present Senate inquiry look rather miserable. One might ask why so few submissions today. To those of us that have submitted twice and made numerous representations to the Commonwealth through our MPs and officialdom the answer is simple. People tire of wasting their time and money.

Meanwhile in the heavily insulated fortress of Aviation Hearse (House) in Can’tberra the CASASTROPHE has continued unperturbed and the bureaucratic injury by ever more unworkable regulations and fee gouging to General Aviation (GA) continues to put people and businesses out of work. At the same time valuable flying services have all but stopped or are but a shadow of their former selves and the ever increasing heavy criminal sanctioned environment of CASA’s mountain of regulations are working steadily to even further kill what’s left of GA.

Adding insult to injury, and this largely but not completely out of CASA’s remit, the continued loss of Commonwealth owned airport property to inappropriate development such as factories and shopping centres is also on the march, nary a whisper of concern is evident from Parliament and the Minister stands back, Mac Do Nothing.
Reply
#54

Limbo – and trapped therein.

Hitch is, as usual, worth a read this week in Oz Flying; it would have been interesting to have him sitting in on the discussion the IOS had on exactly the same 'comment' Hitch makes:-

Hitch - “It was a very smooth response that evaded the real issue, helped by McDonald, who didn't ask the right questions.”

It is possible to agree with Hitch, also to disagree. There are two distinct possibilities to consider.

1 As Hitch points out, McDonald is clearly 'over it'. Had enough and very pleased to see the back of St Commode, his slippery answers and colossal arrogance. So why bother wasting wind and time asking questions. The Senator did clearly define when Commode would be gone; then announced an interim report with which Commode will  not be involved. There will be a new DAS by then.

2 So is the Senator keeping her powder dry or being poorly advised? There's some serious support for the 'powder dry' case; it makes sense. Clear the decks, and begin afresh on a new page. Each way bet at the moment.

Even so; many believe there are some serious moves being made behind the scenes, equally as many others are not convinced that any good will come from yet another inquiry. What is agreed is that the results of ARSR following the Pel-Air debacle broke many hearts and soured a lot of good minds. This notion supported by the paltry number of submissions made to the current inquiry. Perhaps, those who could provide submissions are also sitting still until a clear direction is seen. Who knows; only one thing is certain, industry across the spectrum cannot continue to limp along as it is. Change, deep and meaningful change is desperately needed. Today would be great, but we can wait until tomorrow – if it ever comes.

Toot toot.
Reply
#55

Oz Flying on Senate Inquiry hearing -  Wink



 [Image: Parliament_House_Canberra_60DD7810-CD67-...C172F4.jpg]

Senate Committee to hear GA Submissions on Friday
16 November 2020
Comments 0 Comments

The Senate Committee on Regional and Rural Affairs and Transport (RRAT) will hold public hearings for the inquiry into the general aviation industry at Parliament House in Canberra on Friday.

Starting at 0900, the committee–chaired by Senator Susan McDonald–is planning to hear from nine groups  who are expected to give their views on the state of general aviation and the regulatory impact.

The nine groups scheduled to appear are:

  • McDermott Aviation

  • AOPA Australia

  • North Queensland Aviation Services

  • Aerial Application Association of Australia

  • Regional Aviation Association of Australia

  • Robert Cassidy ATPL

  • RAAus

  • Glen Buckley

  • CASA
The inquiry, which is still scheduled to table an interim report in parliament on 10 December, has attracted 43 submissions from individuals, operators, industry groups, associations and community groups, canvassing ideas on everything from safety regulation to airport closures, aircraft noise, medicals and most issues current in the aviation community today.

People planning to travel to Canberra for the hearing will need to check what COVID restrictions apply to the ACT and how to apply for exemptions and permits.




Plus:


[Image: chieftain_enginestart.jpg]
Many professional pilots in Australia work in the general aviation industry. (Steve Hitchen)

Pilot Union bids for Seat on Advisory Panel
17 November 2020
Comments 0 Comments

One of Australia's largest pilot unions, the Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP), has put itself forward for a seat on CASA's main advisory panel.

In its submission to the senate inquiry into the state of the GA industry posted this week, AFAP states that the Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) would benefit from the input of a union.


"The ASAP has never had a representative on it from a member based association," the AFAP submission states. "Professional pilots are a unique group of aviation stakeholders in that the result of nearly all safety decisions flow through the aviation system to us.


"We, as an association of professional pilot representatives, are uniquely able to observe and collate where consistencies and deficiencies collect in the aviation system."


As the union representing commercial pilots operating largely within Australia, many within the GA industry, AFAP believes it is a logical addition to the panel.


"Other front line professionals may also be able to do the same; however, professional pilots, more so than others, receive the outcomes of these other groups, and are at the final point of control in the aviation decision making process.


"The AFAP is the key representative organisation for GA pilots and would be best placed to contribute to the ASAP.


"A consultative panel in the medical sector for example, similar in purpose to that of the ASAP, would not exclude doctors. Yet in aviation, the voice of professional pilots is not welcomed by CASA in the ASAP."


ASAP is currently made up of eight industry members plus two appointed from CASA. The industry members at the time of writing are:

  • Mr Stuart Aggs – COO Virgin Australia

  • Mr Mark Awad – CEO Australian Warbirds Association Ltd

  • Dr Reece Clothier – President, Australian Association for Unmanned Systems

  • Capt Ray Cronin – President, Australian Helicopter Industry Association

  • Ms Adrianne Fleming – Head of Operations, Tristar Aviation

  • Mr John Gissing – Group Executive, Qantas Group

  • Mr Malcolm Sharp – Managing Director, Sharp Airlines

  • Mr Mark Thompson – Technical Training Manager, Aviation Australia

ASAP members change regularly, with The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF), Recreational Aviation Australian (RAAus), the Australian Airports Association (AAA), and the Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA) all serving on the panel at one stage or another.





MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
#56

And; about bloody time too.

AFAP - "We, as an association of professional pilot representatives, are uniquely able to observe and collate where consistencies and deficiencies collect in the aviation system."

I remember when the AFAP made a real difference – not to wages and conditions – but, would turn up – at their own expense – to 'assist' a member who had run afoul of  a 'company' witch hunt. I can clearly remember one brilliant closing statement when a pilot had been seriously 'fired' and the AFAP were called in to assist. One sentence saved his burning tail end - “I wish I had a dozen like him on the pay role” said one worthy. Game, set and match to AFAP. Back in the day – they really did matter. However, the incredible mess in 1989 really set the hanger cat among the pigeons. Then of course there was the CASA 'take over' through (financial) membership which gave a lot of folk 'the jitters'. That said:-


"The AFAP is the key representative organisation for GA pilots and would be best placed to contribute to the ASAP.

AFAP always were 'good' at exactly what they claim above. Not only that, but they have managed to keep the 'award' not only viable, but, when used, acceptable. AFAP has been in the shadows far too long – even after 1989 – they really had little case to answer. I, for one would like to see 'em back – as a force to be reckoned with; and, they do actually 'know' - at grass roots level, the facts Ma'am – just the facts – sans horse-pooh. Bring 'em on board, there is a wealth of 'aviation' know how and muted support behind them – barring the CASA cash cow, which MUST be slaughtered, if matters aeronautical are to move forward and the AFAP is to 'matter' again. I wish 'em 'Bon Chance' and fingers crossed.
Reply
#57

I’m sorry to say that I have a rather different view and find it a bit much the claim that its the key representative for GA. How many members or official AFAP reps were found at the seminal AOPA meetings at Tamworth? Or Wagga? How many have actually run GA businesses?

I certainly remember when CASA started to really get a stranglehold on GA with it’s great paperwork avalanche and the fee gouging commenced in earnest. I wondered why AFAP did not enter the fray on behalf of GA and was given to understand, in no uncertain terms, that that they were a cut above and happily sitting high on their wallets and I’m ok Jack.

I’d love to be corrected but cannot remember the AFAP being involved in any meaningful way or strongly influencing Government to reform or slow the disastrous trajectory of the CASA juggernaut as it squashed GA. Some mitigation and apologies to a number of ATPL individuals who have given great service to GA.

Nevertheless I look forward to any support, and everyone deserves a second chance.
Reply
#58

Choc Frog – each.

The problem with standing in the 'middle of the road' is you can get clobbered from both directions; however, both my esteemed colleagues have made valid points. But both GA and the AFAP are trapped by cleft stick.

'Professional' GA pilots have little to no protection from 'operators' – and on occasion, they need someone to go into bat for them. Take the fatal Ross Air event; the Chief Pilot had nowhere to turn for 'real' help. Despite tea and sympathy from his FOI, there was no way the CASA FOI could or would, despite the clear and present danger, modify the system which killed three. Perhaps, had the AFAP been asked to intervene, common sense may have prevailed. I don't know, but, the point is that standing alone, the GA professional body has little in the way of 'protection'. Like P7, I too have been party to events where AFAP took up the cause and sorted out a conflict between 'management' and or CASA and crew; very good at it they were. So that's a Choc frog for AFAP.

But, AFAP do have a PR problem these days; the mooted CASA membership and influence (true or false) leaves a bad taste and, I believe the 1989 hangover is a persistent skeleton at the feast.

Then, there are two subtle elements to consider. Would a 'working' pilot join AFAP and have the protection of the award and a 'union' or the AOPA which offers nothing a working man can use. So, while Union backing is an essential,  AOPA membership maybe nice to have – finances permitting. This of course becomes nugatory if the industry continues to diminish in size and scope; both need membership to survive – less flying, less need for either.

I can remember when both AOPA and AFAP were a force to be reckoned with and did some very good things; not so much these days. IMO neither, as they stand right at this moment, are worth my hard earned. We have IMO reached a crisis point – it is make or break for working class GA – operators, engineers and crew – time for both outfits to stand up and be counted; make a real difference and earn back the respect lost in the shadows of disinterest.

That, Gents is my two bob – spent as pleased me best.

Toot – toot.
Reply
#59

Well spoken K, you may now retrace your steps to the footpath, from the middle of the road where you are most uncomfortable, traffic permitting. I do have a first hand experience about a pilot I employed for a weekend’s stint who needed the help of his union, the AFAP. They did a good job of restraining CASA and the prize clown of a pilot got of very lightly. Full marks to the AFAP in this case, helping a member who was in trouble for his negligence and laziness which cost me, the operator, time, money and embarrassment.

What does this mean? Nothing much but if everyone does their job conscientiously and sticks to their area of competence then we have a better world.

I wish the AFAP well, but to read this:-

AFAP - "We, as an association of professional pilot representatives, are uniquely able to observe and collate where consistencies and deficiencies collect in the aviation system."

“uniquely”? Hardly.
Reply
#60

Oz Flying this week -  Rolleyes


Friday 27 November

[Image: fly-masthead_250enews1_0.png]

In News this fortnight: BRM is vexxed over weights, CASA faces the music, the ATSB issues a stall warning, a new Diamond tours the country, RAAus gets a new CEO, serious accusations aimed at CASA, pistons are kings of the shipments and AFAP want on ASAP.
In The Last Minute Hitch, I review the senate inquiry, get concerned over misfeasance, weigh in on a weight issue, cut AOPA some slack and issue a we-a culpa.
November-December 2020 Australian Flying is now the current issue, so if you haven't updated your collection, get to the nearest newsagent and grab one now!
Looking for an ideal Christmas present for an avid aviator? A subscription to Australian Flying is now on the table for 40% less. Check it all out at Great Magazines.


Want Australian Flying in digital form? Get it right here on Zinio!
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch


Steve Hitchen
Editor 
stevehitchen@yaffa.com.au





 [Image: hitch_2020_kh.jpg]

The Last Minute Hitch: 27 November 2020
27 November 2020
Comments 0 Comments


– Steve Hitchen


Last Friday's first public hearing of the senate inquiry into GA was like an open mic night where everyone got to sing their own song. Open mic nights can be great fun, but they descend into chaos when the singers all accuse each other of being out of tune. The main melody was of an industry besieged by a regulator that has so little understanding of the industry that they seemed to be surprised by some of the evidence. Like they were hearing it for the first time. There was very little new information presented; all of it was dredged up from as far back as the Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR), of which CASA was the target. A lot of it had even been presented at senate committees before today. But it seems that facts can be twisted more ways than a Rubik's Cube. On several occasions, evidence was delivered in good faith that was wrong or out of date. Sometime it was understandable; other times flabbergasting. Most of the evidence was factual, but delivered in a colour that matched an agenda or clear philosophy. That was, I suppose, to be expected. I feel mostly for the senators, to whom has landed the job of centrifuging out all the agendas to leave only the true facts in the bowl. That's going to be a challenge for a group of people for which aviation is not their first language.


The most damning evidence of the day was delivered in straight-face style by 
Glen Buckley. Regulated into bankruptcy, Buckley is a man with little left for CASA to take, so he directed accusations of misfeasance at three senior managers, by name. Buckley came across like a cornered bulldog that had done all the barking he was prepared to do and had now turned to biting. CASA CEO Shane Carmody rejected the allegations and had clearly come prepared to defend his organisation with his own set of teeth. Charges of misfeasance are a serious matter and shouldn't ever be leveled in anger, only after legal advice and considered thought. As the case is currently in the hands of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, it is prudent to let that office do their work. Although the conclusions of the investigation are unlikely to include accusations of misfeasance, it will become apparent very quickly if Buckley's accusations are on the mark.


I'm not a CASA-approved aircraft weight guru, but it seems to me that if an aircraft is 4.1 kg over the stated basic empty weight it could be considered a mistake. But 100 kg over? That's not an error in the scales or a case of failing to carry the 1. Some FlySynthesis Texan 550s have been discovered to be much more portly than first thought, and CASA has hinted that the problem could lie in the certification standard. The papers, apparently, declare the Texan to be designed to CS-VLA and JAR-VLA, which are not the same standards as the ASTM standards to which LSAs are self-certified. Someone, somewhere is going to have a very bad day very soon. What has propelled this into the news is
 the apparent difference in the way CASA has dealt with this and the way they have approached a 4.1-kg discrepancy in the Bristell, a type already under siege. CASA says they have been consistent because the issues are different, but I am surprised they aren't more alarmed about the Texan discrepancy, because it shows a greater systemic break-down than the Bristell issue, and systems are definitely what CASA is all about.


There has been some traffic of late lamenting the unavailability of the AOPA financial report for 2019. There's no evidence of skullduggery here, it would seem. The Annual General Meeting slated for May was postponed because of COVID-19, so the board didn't sign off on the accounts. With the borders lifting like a Spring fog, the AGM is now down for 22 December at AOPA's new 
Bankstown HQ. However, we are likely to see the financial report as early as Monday afternoon. What condition the books are in remains to be seen, but they will probably reflect a series of challenges the assocation faces as it tries to remain the premier advocate for GA in Australia. Under the COVID circumstance, the industry needs to cut them a little slack.


Technology is magnificent until it fails. We in aviation know that, and in the next issue of 
Australian Flying we have examined that very issue as it applies to a cockpit. Last night we had our own technology failure, which forced us to cancel our Facebook Live session after it was scheduled to begin. It was one of those moments when things "should" happen, but they damned-well just don't happen. In our case, the simple click of a mouse to port the session from Zoom onto FB just refused to occur. We're onto it, and will do some more experimenting next week and will advise the rescheduled date and time.


May your gauges always be in the green,


Hitch




Sandy comment... Wink


Quote:Where does one start? Is CASA responsible for practically chopping Australia’s General Aviation (GA) down to a shadow of it’s former self? Yes and no, certainly it must bear a great responsibility. But no one should forget that it was government, thirty two years ago, that instituted an experimental form of governance, hiving off a Departmental responsibility to an unelected, independent corporate body which has virtually zero political input. 


This has proven to be disastrous move for GA as touched upon by most of the witnesses to Senator Susan McDonald’s inquiry. 

Most of the industry witnesses were brave and forthright, with a couple of exceptions where their own bailiwick was evidently tied to a friendly CASA relationship, notably RAAUS. Also I would take issue with Malcolm Sharpe who claimed that there were still private airstrips here and there and so it wasn’t too bad. I could take anyone on a Google Earth tour and show numerous places where strips used to be, and if we account for population growth then the picture for the massive decline of GA looks even more precipitous. 

The most outstanding moment of the whole proceeding was the decision made by Senator McDonald. supported by her fellow Senators, to instruct CASA to allow Chief Pilots of helicopter operations the same right to undertake periodic proficiency checks as do their fixed wing counterparts. 

How will this instruction play out with CASA, let alone Minister McCormack? Hopefully this will be one of the worst kept secrets of 2020. 

Senator McDonald showed what governments should be about, governing, doing something, making a decision. That’s why we elect them and pay them to do. Bravo, we’ve been waiting a very long time.


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)