CASR - New CASA regulations.

[Downburst]

CASA will introduce shortly new legislation as to training organisations and the qualifications of staff.

Can anyone tell me why CASA just coppies the FAA regulations?

The proposed CASR 61 and CASR 141 have exactly the same numbers with FAA (FAR 61 and FAR 141).

[tric1960]

I'm not sure why we are following the FAA, but if it means under Part 61 that my workmate, who is a grade 1, can give me instruction in my own aeroplane without an Flying School Licence, I all for it!!:ok:

[Gear in transit]

can give me instruction in my own aeroplane without an Flying School Licence

Just what this industry needs! Don't know how much longer standards will be around for!:rolleyes:

[PCFlyer]

Don't know how much longer standards will be around for!

gimme a break ... if the guy is a grade one instructor i think that takes care of his standards ... regardless of any "school licence" he may or may not be operating under

[Gear in transit]

I was more referring to the standard between flying instructors, not an instructors personal standards.
Anyone could teach anything with no way of correcting or monitoring it.

[Icarus2001]

Downburst have you read said CASRs? They certainly do not follow the FARs!

The Regs should be "made" in parliament mid 2005 which means they become law in mid 2006 with I believe a two year transition period. Can I suggest that there is plenty of time to actually read them and modify operations to comply.

tric1960 An interesting comment. A flying instructor could give you instruction now in your own aircraft what difference will it make not operating under a school AOC? Cheaper? Why? Lower standards? Possibly, as the instructor is not subject to the surveillance of a CFI. What is the benefit for you?

[tric1960]

By using my 172, which would cost about $40-50 an hour, and my mate who is grade one instructor, cost hopefully nil, as opposed to $150-180 an hour at a Fling School, I say the benifit is definately cost orientated.:E

[Icarus2001]

Well there is the rub tric1960 your friend would be a very special individual to provide to you for free all of the ground and air time that is required to gain a PPL. Perhaps he will do this and give you 100% effort on his part. Maybe who knows? You obviously view the training as an obstacle to get around rather than a learning process designed to give you the knowledge and skills to fly around safely.

What model C172 are you running that costs $40-50 an hour!!!! You are burning nearly $40 an hour in fuel! You sound like you are deluding yourself about costs. Insurance, maintenance etc...

[tric1960]

Hmm, my initial post was a bit previous in so much as I dont own a 172, yet! I will eventually when I find the right "bargain". At 36L an hour and a few dollars put aside for insurance and parts I am confident I would not exceed $50.00 an hour operating costs.

As a LAME my maintenance costs will be zip.

I already have the old restricted licence so only need the navigation side of it. As half of these hours are, I believe, solo, there isn't a huge amount of instructor time needed.

As I said, my initial post whas somewhat previous and lighthearted, I didn't think I would have to defend my post or deal with semantics.

As for a mate helping another mate, I have on many occasions helped others for no reward and given 100%, from your negative posts and your cynical views this is probably foreign to you.

[swh]

tric1960,

I am not aware of a mechanism that allows an instructor to provide independent instruction, my understanding of the CAO's is that its has to be done under the banner of a school so that you have a syllabus to train with.

The new rules have been up for discussion for a while, and my understanding is that they have delayed their introduction until 2007. The new rules will make our regulations comply with ICAO, but we could go further.

I hope CASA takes the time to harmonise the rules, and get it right first time. As a nation we could really set ourselves up to be a major training centre for Europe and Asia if we have a syllabus of training which meets or exceeds what is required in Europe and Asia. It would make our licence more valuable, and make our pilots more employable.

Not interested in harmonising with the FAR’s, the conversion process is a one week process, however a conversion to a JAR licence is like a 6 month process, Asia is set to adopt a JAR style syllabus and licence, whilst undergoing a change, we should try and change for best practice, which I don’t believe in this case is the FAR’s.


:ok:

[cogwheel]

The biggest problem with the flying training industry is the average product at the end of the sausage machine is way below the standard of years gone by. Today's average CPL pass would not have passed a PPL test 15 years ago. Not even many CFIs/Grade 1 instructors are as good as they should be. Training of instructors is a joke and many don't know what they don't know! (and it seems they don't care either?) Who is responsible for standardisation? CASA maybe - but they cant even standardise between regional offices, so what hope has this struggling industry got?

The only exception is where there is effective and comprehensive supervision and the maintenance of standards – that would limit you to around a couple of dozen or so schools nationwide. Maybe that would be a good thing? – certainly for commercial and instrument training. CASA either does not care or is incapable of enforcing their own standards. They seem to be more interested in the new rules and other non practical activities.

It a bit like NAS. You can import the rules etc., but unless you import the culture that goes with it there will be huge problems over time.

[Sunfish]

Cogs, could you please substantiate that last statement? What is missing/not taught?

[Feather #3]

Cogs,

Could be that CASA are about to make a major move in the area of professional instructor development!? Watch their space!

G'day ;)

[QNIM]

Gday Cogs
Your post would have to be the biggest load of BULLSH1T Ive read in ages.
Cheers Q :yuk:

[Time Bomb Ted]

A Coulpla things,

Cogwheel
The biggest problem with the flying training industry is the average product at the end of the sausage machine is way below the standard of years gone by.

What in the way of evidence do you have of this?

Are you a current working Instructor?

Did you attend any of the CASA Instructor Seminars at all this or last year?

I did and I was quite surprised that CASA is in the process of setting up a Flight Instructor Development Program. Feather #3 is absolutely correct. They actually asked us what do the Flying Training Industry think they need in it. It will be very interesting to see if they take the material the seminar participants came up with and use it.

Instead of saying how bad things are in the Flying Training Industry ( which I don't personally believe) why don't we band together and make ourselves the best in the world at what we do??? We surely can't rely on the Government (read CASA) to magically make things right. They are not full time instructors. We are so lets take control of our Industry while we still have one.

TBT

[cogwheel]

Sunfish: We could start with basic airmanship and follow that with basic stick and rudder (you know those pedals on the floor!) skills. (try sitting on the airport fence and watching ops when there is a x/w) That is only the tip of the iceberg! What about basic nav training (without a GPS)? What about use of radios and airspace management? I know of some pilots that don't know how to operate the avoinics in the a/c they are endorsed on - and that includes how to use a transpnder (how hard is that?)...!!

F#3 Yes, such a course or program is well overdue, so long as it is practical and improves the standards. If it is commercially driven it will fail, just like the instructor review in the mid '90's.

Q: your opinion only.. just like mine!

TBT: The evidence is there. You just have to appreciate how to collect it. Talk to instructors and fly with ppl's who have trained in the past 10 years. What's more, talk to employers who have to in many cases retrain pilots to do things they should have done in their CPL training. My experience as an instructor is over the past 30+ yrs and I have something to compare the standards now with. Only those with something to loose in a commercial sense have disagreed with me to date.

The problem with the flying training industry is that it lacks standardisation across the board from CASA FOIs down thru the CFI's around the place and to the line instructors who need the standardisation most of all. The industry seems incapable of conducting any self audits and talk of quality assurance brings about a blank look of horror, especially from those that believe it may cost $'s. Fact is that even if it cost a bit the returns would (are) well worth the effort in flow on business from professionally trained and tested pilots who by word of mouth ensure the advertising is free!

As for banding together. Yes, great idea, but first lets look at where the Flying Instructors Association is these days? Would that be a good vehicle to progress things and improve standards? Trouble is that not many instructors are in it for the long haul and believe they have better things to do with their time. This is why the regulator has a responsibility to draw some lines in the sand and kick @rse if they are not achieved. Failure to band together and standardise standards will continue to see 2nd rate pilots in the stream.

It can be done better. Look at why it is not and we may be close to some answers.

[Time Bomb Ted]

Cogwheel

Excellent post. The trouble with anecdotal evidence is that it is too easily manipulated by those who stand to lose something. By that I mean, "Standards are not what they used to be! Come and fly with me and I'll train you to the standard you should be." Now I'm not in anyway saying that you do that, however just by saying things are bad won't make them better.

I think that as an industry, we have lost motivation and interest. As I said I was at the Adelaide Instructor Seminar recently, and out of a possible 150 local instructors, only 18 showed up for the Seminar. Nearly a quarter of the participants were from out of state, with one lady coming all the way from Karratha.

If we don't actively do something, then we can watch our industry fall apart. Should be very interesting when the new regs finally come out and allow some sections of flying training to be done by private pilots. We really need an industry body with teeth. AAFI don't even have a website. Why? No one wants to join...

Please stick with it Cogwheel. We need Instructors like you to show us the way.

TBT

[Downburst]

Obviously I can's say much because I am working for an overseas airline but I have the impression the aviation industry in Australia is not united in trying to achieve a common goal.

Whenever I taked to a CFI recently I learned that every CFI is an idiot doing everything wrong except the one I was talking to at that moment.... Even a CASA employee has told me how instructors and CFIs rubbish each other "off the record" in front of them.

It was always usual, when talking to a prospective customer, not to knock a competitor but to either ignore his/her existance or to stress what my company can do and how good we are. Recently I have heard the worst opposition bashing I have ever heard, where? In the aviation industry.

I have heard people saying to prospective students: "Come to us, here you won't fail".

May be there are too many flying schools in Australia for the limited market? The resulting competition could become a fight for survival which whould destroy any cooperation on some levels.

[69s]

Well COGS and all.
Yer all on the ball, 2007 is the first guess.
Standards - sausage like
Why FAR? stab a guess---They won't admit they st*ffed up:mad:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

I did and I was quite surprised that CASA is in the process of setting up a Flight Instructor Development Program. Feather #3 is absolutely correct. They actually asked us what do the Flying Training Industry think they need in it.


WHATTHA...the regulator asked the regulated what the regulator should want in the syllabus......Isn't that ringing any alarm bells?

[Icarus2001]

Who said anything about "the syllabus" ozbusdriver?

CASA or more specifically the Safety Promotion Unit of CASA wish to assist the training industry by providing guidance, training material and resources for instructors. As part of setting up this initatiative they have asked the industry what we would like to see the limited resources spent on. What areas would benefit most by having some training material printed etc.

Guys, this is a good thing. We should encourage CASA here not bag them for being tied up in knots for the last ten years.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Icarus2001 I do see your point. But, it worries me to see CASA has to even ask. Have they realy lost that much of their expertise?

[bushy]

We have a huge flying training industry, which is training hundreds, probably thousands of commercial pilots that nobody wants.or needs. The flying schools know this, but it appears that they have no consience, and money is the only consideration. So they tell them to "go bush"to find their first job. The trainees must be fairly dumb, as they surely can see that there are very few flying jobs, and far too many people looking for them. They seem to believe the fairy stories. So G.A. in the outback (you know, that big area on the other side of the ranges, where the crows fly backwards to keep the dust out of their eyes) is being attacked by a flood of pimply faced youths who think we are required to give them a job, even though most of them are a liability. They undermine the genuine bush pilot so they go, and we end up with a group of pilots who do not want to be there. are angry negative, and inexperienced. Many of the city flying instructors are the same. So the accident rate is higher than it should be.
I believe there are some operators that exploit this situation for financial gain (but it backfires) driving prices down to an unsustainable level.
How to fix it???
Change the recruiting system the major airlines use. Have them do pre employment testing before the training and offer jobs to candidates subject to getting the required licences. Or expand the cadet system. And have them announce how many pilots they intend to employ each year.
Casa cannot regulate any of this away, but they cam publish figures showing the number of commercial pilots that are graduating each year, and the number of licence holders etc.. I can remember when our aviation authority used to publish lots of statistics, so we could figure out what was happenning. Now we get propaganda. It does make me wonder about their motivation.
There are about 12000 civilian aircraft in Australia, but the whole system is made to suit the few hundred big ones that shuttle up and down the east coast. They even seem to control CASA. When we start to look at the whole picture, instead of only the
big bucks, then we may start getting somewhere

[Sunfish]

As a mature age ppl student, I am interested in this subject because naturally I want to fly as well as possible to ensure that I and anyone who flies with me has a safe and rewarding experience.

I am very happy with my school and instructors, but that does not mean that there is not room for improvement in the whole industry. There is always room for improvement in any industry.

As a general comment, I find that the regulatory aspect of flying has a much higher profile than in other industries. Textbooks constantly quote references to the Act or the regulations which is disconcerting although CASA has summarised the rules for VFR in one book as far as I can tell.

As for the structure and expereince requirements of the course, its fine and naturally it satisifes the regulations.

I guess my concerns are "what don't I know?" but I'm not sure a younger student would ask that question.

I will not bore you with a multitude of things I know I dont know with suggestions on how to fix them. I am treating a ppl as a licence to learn more, which I plan to do over time, with the same school.

CASA is doing the right thing by asking around. If they are going to lead any change, then they have to know what the issues are.

If you want to do something about flying training, I suggest you start with developing a vision - what do you want flight training to be like in say ten years time? What will its products be like? What will the people who work in it be like? And so on. Do it your self or accept CASA's vision.

If you can get CASA etc. to agree with your vision then you are off and running. Work out what has to change to achieve the vision and then develop strategies to do it over time.

I can think of a few things I'd like to see that might be of help.

I'd like to see syllabus and course content organised into the old military must know/should know/could know structures. I'd like to see some course content organised into an "on the ground" and "in the air" structure - especially air law. It would be less confusing for us beginners.

I think I'd like to see some form of chief instructors national committee where the old and not bold can perhaps codify some of the experience they have had to be passed on to future generations and perhaps resolve, or provide answers to, some of the common questions about aviation. For example, I am so very sad that someone who could have been so much of an asset to all students, including me, Rob Partington, is no longer with us, and his priceless experience is gone with him.

I'd also like to see a syllabus laid out for private pilots after they obtain their licence. By this I mean not just a series of ratings constand speed/ retractable/ twin/ IFR. etc. But more like exercises, flights, expereince, etc.

I'm sure there are many more and better ideas out there. Why dont you go for it? Its your industry! Handing Over!

[swh]

bushy,

Casa cannot regulate any of this away, but they cam publish figures showing the number of commercial pilots that are graduating each year, and the number of licence holders etc.. I can remember when our aviation authority used to publish lots of statistics, so we could figure out what was happenning. Now we get propaganda. It does make me wonder about their motivation.

The figures I think you are after are on the CASA web site (http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/fcl_lic/fcl_req.htm), i.e. 804 CPLs issued in 2003-04. It would be safe to say that a lot of these CPLs are "exported" overseas as pilots trained in Australia for overseas airlines.

A lot of Australian pilots end up as "expat" pilots overseas, they still show as having Australian pilots.

A number of "exapt" overseas pilots have had Australian licences issued as an immigration requirement and have no intention to fly here, they maybe based in say DBX and plan to bring up their families here and commute to work.

Airlines come and go, not all pilots want to go to airlines, not all pilots want to work here in Australia.

You will always have unscrupulous operators in every aspect of our community.

:rolleyes: