Abandon – or adopt?
"The Sport Aircraft Association of Australia (SAAA) has called for CASA to abandon the self-administration system and transfer all aircraft to the Australian civil register in a controversial submission made public today."
Only a stray (first coffee) thought – but I wonder what the devil's advocate may say about abandoning the ASAO system. One could argue that rather than abandonment – CASA should adopt the system and make those rules the standard for 'private operations'. Rather than farm 'the system' out to for profit organisations. Make that system 'the rules'. Then all could enjoy the clearly defined benefits.
If CASA believe that the ASAO system is an 'acceptable' risk, and an equivalent method of compliance; then why not make it so for all 'private' operations?
The benefits are as self evident as the negatives; flight training being a stand out. The CASA standard system has served this industry very well (part 61 notwithstanding) the notion of two separate standards for basic training is a nonsense. I, for one would like to know that the aircraft I share airspace with has at very least a pilot who meets the 'CASA' standard. RAOz may well train to an equivalent standard, if they do and CASA find that acceptable – then why is that not the 'national' benchmark?
No matter – it just confounds me that there exists two systems and standards. Why? It achieves little except create friction and confusion. If the ASAO 'light' system is a good enough sauce for the goose, then surely it is as good for the gander.
Toot toot.
"The Sport Aircraft Association of Australia (SAAA) has called for CASA to abandon the self-administration system and transfer all aircraft to the Australian civil register in a controversial submission made public today."
Only a stray (first coffee) thought – but I wonder what the devil's advocate may say about abandoning the ASAO system. One could argue that rather than abandonment – CASA should adopt the system and make those rules the standard for 'private operations'. Rather than farm 'the system' out to for profit organisations. Make that system 'the rules'. Then all could enjoy the clearly defined benefits.
If CASA believe that the ASAO system is an 'acceptable' risk, and an equivalent method of compliance; then why not make it so for all 'private' operations?
The benefits are as self evident as the negatives; flight training being a stand out. The CASA standard system has served this industry very well (part 61 notwithstanding) the notion of two separate standards for basic training is a nonsense. I, for one would like to know that the aircraft I share airspace with has at very least a pilot who meets the 'CASA' standard. RAOz may well train to an equivalent standard, if they do and CASA find that acceptable – then why is that not the 'national' benchmark?
No matter – it just confounds me that there exists two systems and standards. Why? It achieves little except create friction and confusion. If the ASAO 'light' system is a good enough sauce for the goose, then surely it is as good for the gander.
Toot toot.