Also ran;
Working my way through P2's ratings I eventually arrived at No.5. AFTIA. Warning Will Robinson - AFTIA ya money seems the best interpretation of this neatly worked confection.
I can, well and truly understand the need for apprentice engineers to be subsidised; only makes sense. If the government are going to rubber stamp the existing system (talk to Ken Cannane) then its reasonable for them to subsidise it. But then AFTIA Money trot out a ridiculous notion - subsidised junior pilots. WTD.
The Sterle ears picked up on this - but its a non starter and a short 'think' would serve to discard that card. I doubt there's an operator in the country who would take up the offer; simple arithmetic will explain why. Take a 'joy' or 'scenic' flight operator out in bush - using say the venerable C210 - five paying passengers, one pilot. Can you see the operator giving up the passenger revenue from multiple flights to carry an 'apprentice' on a subsidised wage? I cannot.
Or; take the tried and tested method of building hours; once again, in the bush, same C210 only this time cargo/ post operation. Operator contracted to carry maximum payload - only now 90 Kg of revenue must be left behind to accommodate a government sponsored apprentice - like that's ever going to happen.
If there is a need for an improved 'training' system the the Buckley notion is a good option. But is there a need? Are there enough GA operations left out there to warrant more pilots? Sure the airlines are stuck for 'experienced' crew and the feed from GA is reduced, but this has not always been so. When Charter and Cargo operators were plentiful, there was always a ready supply of pilots for the majors. But, as it stands now, the restrictions imposed and actions taken by CASA have closed down more operators than any recession we had to have.
Throwing money at apprentice pilots is no solution. Reviving a once flourishing, enthusiastic section of the commercial sector would be a better investment. But, before spending dollar one of tax payer funds the regulations and the regulator must be realigned with reality.
Toot - toot.
Working my way through P2's ratings I eventually arrived at No.5. AFTIA. Warning Will Robinson - AFTIA ya money seems the best interpretation of this neatly worked confection.
I can, well and truly understand the need for apprentice engineers to be subsidised; only makes sense. If the government are going to rubber stamp the existing system (talk to Ken Cannane) then its reasonable for them to subsidise it. But then AFTIA Money trot out a ridiculous notion - subsidised junior pilots. WTD.
The Sterle ears picked up on this - but its a non starter and a short 'think' would serve to discard that card. I doubt there's an operator in the country who would take up the offer; simple arithmetic will explain why. Take a 'joy' or 'scenic' flight operator out in bush - using say the venerable C210 - five paying passengers, one pilot. Can you see the operator giving up the passenger revenue from multiple flights to carry an 'apprentice' on a subsidised wage? I cannot.
Or; take the tried and tested method of building hours; once again, in the bush, same C210 only this time cargo/ post operation. Operator contracted to carry maximum payload - only now 90 Kg of revenue must be left behind to accommodate a government sponsored apprentice - like that's ever going to happen.
If there is a need for an improved 'training' system the the Buckley notion is a good option. But is there a need? Are there enough GA operations left out there to warrant more pilots? Sure the airlines are stuck for 'experienced' crew and the feed from GA is reduced, but this has not always been so. When Charter and Cargo operators were plentiful, there was always a ready supply of pilots for the majors. But, as it stands now, the restrictions imposed and actions taken by CASA have closed down more operators than any recession we had to have.
Throwing money at apprentice pilots is no solution. Reviving a once flourishing, enthusiastic section of the commercial sector would be a better investment. But, before spending dollar one of tax payer funds the regulations and the regulator must be realigned with reality.
Toot - toot.