How can a new start-up succeed?

[Hempy]

My brother has come to me after having a discussion with a very wealthy (and business savvy) Chinese friend who is in love with Australia, aeroplanes and money..

IF an investor was prepared to look into commencing a regional sized operation in Australia and approach the start-up with an open checkbook, how and where could such an operation succeed (from an aviation perspective more than a business management sense)

I understand the basics, aircraft type to meet operational requirements, check and training etc, the question is more along the lines of service needs (i.e where IS a service needed) and establishment requirements other than regulatory ones.

p.s I'm not getting involved other than offering information 2nd hand, it's only preliminary reconnaissance.

[thorn bird]

Hempy,
A million bucks for an AOC, just to start, can you imagine anyone with any business sense considering that?
Then the $$$ really starts, a hundred grand just to get an aircraft on an AOC, that price climbs proportional to the size and complexity of the aircraft,
Could you imagine any transport business outside aviation who would pay a hundred grand before they could use a particular truck?
It currently costs my company over twenty grand just to give a pilot a job on a simple piston twin, that doubles or triples if your looking turbine or jet.
Aviation in Australia is finished mate, tell your friend to save their money or if they are really determined take their money to New Zealand.

[Hempy]

Thorn Bird,

I appreciate the struggles, but I guess it's all about scale. This guy gambles $3 mill over a weekend..

Surely, given the nature if our continent, regional aviation isn't dying, it's just being badly mismanaged. The need has to be there, it's just not being properly met? Or am I completely wrong and people in country areas are just going to need to catch a bus in 10 years? In that case, I'll tell him to invest in bus lines!!

[Skystar320]

It could work - if the operator is savy and smart enough! Right plane / Right place it could work.

Then again - I'm into Buses / Coaches and there is definite room to expand!

[sms777]

Is this another one of those Chinese dreams just to get permanent residency in Australia? I have been approached by several of so called rich chinamen over the years to sell my business so they can get permanent residency to move over here. It is not a bad thing because i have been offered some absolutely ridicoulus prices to sell but I am proud to be an Aussie so i am staying. As far as Tony Rabbit lets me.
I have tried to succeed in aviation but my millions ran out too quick.....:{

[Hempy]

No mate, he doesn't need nor want Australian residency...he's a bit too 'upscale' for that. It simply is what it is, an enquiry into validity.

[Ascend Charlie]

Well, I am in aviation and am working on my second million dollars.


I gave up hope of ever making the first, so am going straight for the second.

[dubbleyew eight]

ascend charlie is a bloody novice. :E I'm on my 7th million. having failed every previous time...

if the guy is serious why not by Rex or an established airline like them?

[Wally Mk2]

Look it takes x amount of $$$ to set up an airline of any dimension then that investment needs to have a reasonable rate of return proportionate to the risk. If you don't have that basic philosophy then any decision to enter aviation is not of a sound mind.
There's plenty of savvy people about in aviation that's never the issue take JB for Eg this guy seems switched on savvy in the ways of aviation here in Oz but his Co & every other Co involved in aviation is either getting very little return for their investors or are bleeding dollars quicker than a ruptured aorta & it's not thru lack of trying either!
Actually having the clout by way of bucket loads of cash behind you is usually not the problem it's the continuous hurdles that Co's of any description have to jump over here in Oz that sees them bleed out well before the life blood of the Co (enthusiasm) is exhausted.

I said it in another thread, fools & their money are soon parted when it comes to aviation in this backward thinking joint !

Advise yr friend that gambling is a far better way of getting a reasonable return financially or even enjoyment wise, at least you have a zillion to one chance but with aviation here you are doomed before you even get off the ground!

Wmk2

[ChaseIt]

Might not be to late to pick up the pieces of Vincent Aus

[Hempy]

Ok, so it seems that there is simply no way to build and operate a profitable regional airline in Australia regardless of the ability of it's management. Obviously costs are higher than customers are prepared to remit, even if 'a' demand is there. Fair enough.

[Wally Mk2]

'Hempy' it's got nothing to do with 'demand', there's plenty of demand there for sure the demand for cheap fares with all the trimmings & lots of flights to chose from that's the demand, trouble is the Airlines are their worst own enemies, they are shooting themselves in the foot daily with ludicrous cheap fares that are unsustainable just to undercut their competitors trying to drive them out of business & the fools at the top of some Airlines are trying to make it work by thinning out the cost of doing business, IE less staff more work. It's like the structure of a bridge, you can design a bridge of lessor material to do the same job 'cause it's all about cost but you keep taking out a little bit of the structure here a little bit of the main support there & the next thing you know you have a collapsing bridge/defunct Airline or one that is struggling to hold its own weight never one the weight of it's customers.

Stick with the fundamentals of life, invest where there is a future where people have foresight even a slight one (not found here in Oz) & aviation isn't one such business as there's no vision, Govts & their greedy grubby corrupt ways have killed off any vision we are ever likely to have here.!


Wmk2

[tail wheel]

This guy gambles $3 mill over a weekend..

That would be a cheap shot compared to his aviation gamble. And I guess his gambles have some chance of winning, unlike his proposed gamble in aviation?

:=

[VH-XXX]

Think back to not so many years ago when Virgin Blue started. It started with quite a small amount of money. Sure it had backing should it have gone wrong, however the actual seed money was not significant in business terms.

[Adsie]

Isn,t it a sad state of affairs for aviation in Australia !!!

You can just feel everyones disappointment with the industry with comments that show here.

I would love to see positive replies and attitudes to a fairly simple question on how to start an aviation business in Australia, but I know myself I do not think I will see it again.

I am an out of work CPL pilot [ but have other employment ] and can see my awesome dream of flying full time disappearing every day.

[Wally Mk2]

"Taily" your plagiarizing my post there I see!:E

"Adsie"..........this thread subject certainly isn't a "fairly simple question" if it where then there wouldn't be the mostly neg replies.
Sorry to see yr not working as a plane driver but at least you have the basics (license etc) & it's usually circumstances that hold most people back in yr situation not so much the job itself. Hope you find that pot of gold someday at the ever decreasing rainbow:ok:

"xxx" that was a different era back then, the aviation landscape has slipped a lot further down the slope towards the bottom these days, one can't compare what little fruit there is these days on the aviation tree to days of past sadly:-( What's left is mostly rotten fruit & any eatable pieces are being picked clean by the majors before the aviation tree dies altogether:-(
Planting a new aviation tree will only see it wither & die as there's not enough water ( high yield pax) to go around as it is.......I really gotta stop watching that Peter Sellers movie "Being there", well recommended watching:-):-)


Wmk2

[PLovett]

The cost of regulatory compliance is unbelievable these days, and I fear, is only going to get worse. Aviation is a policy free zone so the regulator has a free hand to pursue its own agenda.

That said, Hempy, if your acquaintance is really interested the Vincent Australian operation is for sale. See Friday's Australian Financial Review for the advertisement. I presume it is the shell only but the ad seemed to suggest the AOC was still there. That would save an awful lot of money and time.

However, regional aviation is a knife-edge game with pax loads so price dependant and costs ever increasing. It is interesting watching the established players grimly hanging on to those routes where the majority of pax are business orientated and will pay full fare if required. An example, Rex operate 4 or 5 full or nearly full flights a day to Wynyard which services part of the NW coast of Tasmania but with a population of only 40k. However, it is also the service centre for the West coast and the mines there. Lots of miners flying home to the mainland and vice versa. It must pay for a lot of marginal routes.

[Guptar]

When Virgin started Australia was a very different place. We were in the middle of the biggest mining boom in history. They also had the good fortune of Ansett falling over which handed them a market shar un-dreamed of by any start up.

Today the industry is saturated. If the big players cant turn a profit, even with their massive economies of scale, then a stand alone start up has no chance. It's much harder to turn a buck with a turbo prop than a 737 and bigger. The big boys also I imagine pay pump price for their fuel.

As it stands our population is 23.5 million. There is no more room for any new players till we hit 35 million at least and IMHO the key is the very fast train between Brisbane and Melbourne. Only then will regional centres grow to the point where they can sustain an airline service.

Albury/Woodonga with 1000,000+ people is probably the closest to having airline services to capital cities other than Melbourne and Sydney. But its still needs to double in size to at least 200,000.

Ballarat, Bendigo, Shepparton are growing cities that one day may have an interstate airline service but they all need investments in a new airport. There is a large untapped market in those cities. Our government, on both sides of the political spectrum don't seem to be interested in investment that doesn't pay dividends inside the current electoral cycle. Then there is the lack of capacity at the capital city airports. No room for new operators, services from regional centres even if their populations needed it.

Lastly, with a large percentage of young people, who's sole ambibition in life is to join the Centrelink queue, I believe Australia is headed for a large contraction in the economy unless we have a large immigration program of bright and willing workers.

A pretty sad state of affairs overall.

[Wally Mk2]

'Plovey' I think you will find that such routes ML- WYY that show good returns are due one main factor, there's no option (other than an all day/night ship adventure) so the Airlines have a captive market. I recall sometime ago that the route Kendell's used to have AD-Port Linc (Rex now) was one of their most profitable 'cause to drive was something like an 8 hr drive around the gulf compared to somewhere around 35 mins flying.

'gupy' I just noticed yr above post. Trouble is with the smaller regional centers they are simply too close to have an effective link to capital cities via air. When you take into account the time it takes to drive to the regional drome & arrange to book in await the flight fly to yr destination & collect bags arrange transport to yr final destination would often take longer than a rd trip with these centers now being serviced by mostly freeways & that doesn't take into acc WX issues that would ground a plane but not a car or traffic holding etc. This is the main reason why smaller airlines have failed to succeed, simply not worth it sadly. Yr right about the centerlink generation, Christ what a sad society we are heading for:-(


Wmk2

[moonrat22]

Hempy

PM me I have an idea for you friend............

[Trojan1981]

Guppy/Wally,

What ever happened to the smaller regional services that flew short commuter routes, such as the Aeropelican Twotter runs to Sydney, as well as the plethora of Shorts 360 and even Chieftain routes that used to criss-cross the countryside? I understand Pelican was profitable when it was shut down. Has over-regulation killed these off?

Guppy, I don't agree that a large percentage of our youth aspire to join the dole queues. I think that the opportunities that were once available for the rest of us are rapidly disapearing, and further education through university or apprenticeship is for many not a viable option. This is due, again, to ridiculous over-regulation, extraordinarily low wages (unlivable without parental support, if you've even got that) at junior levels and little long-term return to justify training costs. Aviation might be at the cutting edge of employee exploitation, but it certainly doesn't have a monopoly.

A friend of mine is a very senior outsource consultant. She advises companies who want access to the Australian market, combined with western product quality and reasonable operating costs, to set up in NZ. Only one level of government to deal with, and predictable regulatory costs.Offshoring a business from Australia to NZ is apparently on par with outsourcing to India, but far more acceptable to customers. Politicians can blame unions and lazy youth all they like, but it is multi-layered, constantly shifting regulation that is deterring business investment in this country.

[training wheels]

I'm surprised why he doesn't want to invest in China itself where there is huge demand. There aren't too many regional turbo-prop operators in China so there's a niche there already where he can explore. Myanmar is another place where regional turbo-props will be in high demand as the country opens up with a developing middle class.

[Horatio Leafblower]

When Virgin started Australia was a very different place. We were in the middle of the biggest mining boom in history.

Not true, Virgin started in 2001 when mining companies were laying off people and most other economies in the world were having recessions. Even if Australia didn't have a recession at that time it was a month-to-month proposition with the numbers being very closely watched. We didn't have a recession, technically, but times were a bit tight.

The mining boom in Australia didn't really kick off till 2007/08.0

Thorn Bird:

A million bucks for an AOC, just to start, can you imagine anyone with any business sense considering that?
Then the $$$ really starts, a hundred grand just to get an aircraft on an AOC, that price climbs proportional to the size and complexity of the aircraft...

If that is what it costs you to get stuff through CASA I suggest you sack your Chief Pilot or whoever manages that side of your business and employ someone competent.

A properly managed application for a low cap RPT AOC should set you back around $25k. Recently added a new type to ours for $5k up front (and still got some change at the end).

[Bladeangle]

Wally Mk2:
'Hempy' it's got nothing to do with 'demand', there's plenty of demand there for sure the demand for cheap fares with all the trimmings & lots of flights to chose from that's the demand, trouble is the Airlines are their worst own enemies, they are shooting themselves in the foot daily with ludicrous cheap fares that are unsustainable just to undercut their competitors trying to drive them out of business & the fools at the top of some Airlines are trying to make it work by thinning out the cost of doing business, IE less staff more work. It's like the structure of a bridge, you can design a bridge of lessor material to do the same job 'cause it's all about cost but you keep taking out a little bit of the structure here a little bit of the main support there & the next thing you know you have a collapsing bridge/defunct Airline or one that is struggling to hold its own weight never one the weight of it's customers.

This is definitely part of the problem. Iv seen the Building industry go the same way. Builders/trades dropping prices to get the work, trimming the edges on quality to maintain a margin, at the end of the day, the ones they are harming are themselves long term. But its what the customer wants, "good quality/cheap product". If it ever existed...

[Mick Stuped]

Bring on part 135 get rid of reg 206- in a lot of ways the only way a small aviation business in the bush will survive is to be a able to have the ability to turn back the clock and go back to the start where small aviation bussiness with less than 9 seats can operate routes from small towns stations and communities as feeders back to regional service centres or capital city's on small hops less than 2 hours.

There are so many tourist destinations and small regional communities that could be linked as a milk run that would appreciate even one regular scheduled flight a day or even a week in something like a caravan. Nearly all these airports/ strips are not RPT compliant or viable to a large regional operator but there is a need for the small operation like a mum dad operation that can keep its costs down be regionally based and hire local pilots.

Remember most small communities/ regional service centres in Australia have less than 3000 people and most of them live on wages near basic minim. For these people to charter an aircraft to travel to a regional service town or capital city it is cost prohibitive. Thanks to reg 206 and not having the ability to sell a seat on a milk run.

It is just accepted now by those living in the bush that it is cheaper to drive.

The most common thing I hear is you guys are ripping us off why are you so expensive, I can fly on Jetstar from Sydney to Darwin, cheaper than I can fly with you. The travelling public don't understand the difference between charter and RPT. When I tell them they must charter the whole aircraft as it is a CASA ruling of our licence, they immediately think it must be because we are less safe than a RPT.

In aircraft less than 9 seats I cannot understand why CASA are so hellbent in endorsing CAR 206 in the interest of safety.

In the latest CASA flight safety magazine their own published figures from ATSB from 2003 to 2011 show that fixed wing air charter aircraft have the lowest amount of accident and fatalitys per million flight hours of all sections of both fixed and rotary light aircraft operations both in private and charter ops.

We have considered moving to LRPT a few times only to be advised to wait for interception of part 135. The main reason is that to change all our aircraft from schedule 5 to class A, wouldn't be viable and to find a part 145 maintiance org in the bush is impossible and to change our small maintiance org to part 145 isn't worth it with all the extra compliance.

I just hope that when part 135 is finally released that we don't have to go to class A, or that will mean nearly every mum and dad operation that operate very good safe little charter operations to service the basic small demand that is there now will also disappear overnight.

However if Part 135 were allowed to commence with an upgrade to operation requirements and stricter F/D times more check training,route training and tighter fuel reserves in other words lift the operation skills, I can see this would allow a mini boom again in small aviation, and could once again open up the bush for regional travel for bussiness and tourism, with all the knock on effects that it would provide putting money back into regional Australia and stimulate growth Australia wide.

History can teach us a lot.

Think of what was originally responsible for early growth of regional and remote Australia and to some part Australia's wealth and growth boom early last century. It was the surpluses of small aircraft and pilots after the wars that went out and developed routes in the bush.

This can happen again we just need to remove some of the cotton wool that CASA has wrapped us up in.

It is in my main task of keeping my bushiness, my house and my livelihood, not to allow any of my aircraft go missing and kill my passengers and pilots. what is the difference in safety if we fly a 206 with 5 pax on board with one person paying as a charter or a 206 with 5 pax on boards with everyone paying for their own seat?

CAR 206 has given CASA the reason to close down more small aviation bussiness in Australia than a lot of other regs. It is also the biggest hinderence to growth and fear of all small charter and air tour operations in Australia.

However if some wealthy Chinese person wishes to give me heaps of money and a fleet of caravans and not expect a return for a few years and is happy not to have control and wait maybe 5 years without return whilst growth expands, I will be very happy to take their money. Maybe I could even draw a wage larger than my pilots:8

Ms

[Wally Mk2]

"MS' that's a well constructed post:ok:
Trouble is the world back then when this country was being opened up by small operators was very diff to what we have nowadays. The 'extras' alone to operate a small Chtr Co amount to heaps as you would know. Our airways system was in it's infancy so fees where low, security was pretty much non existent & that good old chestnut 'user pays' wasn't even dreamed up back then but now has all but destroyed the small operators I imagine.
Just the fuel costs, the maint & the wages for all the hanger-oners these days is horrendous, am surprised anyone wants to be in the flying game at all!

The cost of doing business now from back then is to me anyway chalk & cheese! Economies of scale plays a huge part in managing the bills, 1 A/C or 10 A/C still need similar support facilities to operate.

This subject is something am sure from CEO's right down to 'mum & dad' operators is constantly being examined & it's not obvious that there's a long term future in it for any of us at this stage.
We have a huge land mass to traverse here in Oz similar to mainland USA yet nobody lives here, its almost deserted meaning we have piddly little infrastructure, few people paying taxes yet we almost expect the same services as if we had 270Mill Population!

We are stuck with a huge block of land that needs mowing & all we have is a pair of nail clippers in which to keep it neat!:-)
Wmk2

[Hempy]

Thank you everyone for your comments so far.

As I said, gentleman is savvy. He also comes from a very different culture with different values, so a lot of the emotive issues are really irrelevant. He's not interested in 'running' anything, just to say he 'owns' it. Having said that, face demands the books look good eventually.

It's a speculation. My guess would be that if it was to eventuate, buying the shell of an established operation would probably be the result. Only for that paperwork though.

The conversation started around the great open spaces (he'd just returned from a tour of Uluru) and progressed from there.

p.s he has a nice little personal fleet, including a very nice GV. Hires an Aussie pilot, apparently we are 'lucky'!

[Wally Mk2]

'Hempy' it's good you kicked off this subject even if it is diverging a little.
You mention yr friend had just come back from 'The Rock' & referred to 'great open spaces', that's what I was alluding to in my past post, that 'great open spaces' is the issue. Large tracts of land to traverse for people whom live at times on a shoe string budget way away from the mainstream population, something not conducive to air travel especially when it's infrequent & costly.
Many have seen the same vast distances of our sunburnt country & thought this place/area could do with more services (thinking I could make money here )not only air services these remote communities are devoid of a lot of other services to but the funds are simply not there. The 'need' (for air services)is there it always will be but given our current climate (in financial terms) it's not sustainable.
I think it's back to the gambling table & await the next adventure down under:ok:

Wmk2

[Mick Stuped]

Wally I agree circumstances are different to the 20's and 30's as aviation was trying to find its feet along with the regulators. However it seems every golden age of aviation came with the support of government. Look at the incentives to aviation in the 70's offered to aviation. They recognised the importance of stimulating regional growth.

Government now be they federal or state seem to be very city centric.

Stimulate regional growth and money flows to the city. Mining and FIFO don't stimulate regional growth as money bypasses the regions. All except WA where a certain amount of royalties are quarantined and fed back via royalties for regions.

The ability for everyone to share costs are even more important when times are tough. If mines were forced as part of their licence to use more local services, employees, we as regional operators would get more work. Instead they keep it all in house and fly contractors in from the cities or that is what we hear from a multitude of local services.

Reg 206 restricts the local electrician sharing the cost of a flight with the local computer geek and plumber with a tourist to visit an aboriginal community once a week, or three different government departments being billed for visiting a small town to setup shop for a day once a fortnight is so important to community services in the outback community.

Now each department have to drive sometimes for 8 hours and overnight at the community to provide theses services because some been counter in a gov dept in a city office cannot justify the cost of a sole charter and an 3 hour return charter flight. The local sparky or plumber cannot afford a sole charter and the residents of some of these communities have to wait up to a month to get these services and are all combined with a regular driving visit once a month.


Small aviation business less than 5 aircraft that make up the majority of charter operators in Australia according to the latest statistics are the most cost effective. This is because most of the times the CP is also main pilot, freight loader, HAAMC and CEO second pilot is son daughter or mate and partner is also in charge of manning the phones,quoting and book work and keeping everyone on the game.

My experience shows cost go up rapidly when you move from this to 5 to 10 aircraft and you have to employe office person, line pilots with it also comes more responsibly to check that everyone is being compliant as you relinquish a bit of control and take up more of management role. You also have to go harder on quotes to keep it all in the air and make payments.

I like those of us stay in the business's because we love our job, and dream of the day that common sense will prevail and CASA allow us to do what we do best and that's provide a service to those in the bush that rely on us and are also our friends.

We live for the day 206 will be relaxed and we can setup services for less than 9 pax on a schedule on a per seat price into dirt strips 700-1000 metres long in 206's,210's and caravans the same as they do in South Africa and Alaska.
We also hope to be able to keep maintenance on our aircraft on a schedule that is more suited to a small operation and aircraft we operate. Eg VFR day.

I know fairies are alive and living at the bottom of the garden, but were would you be if you couldn't dream.

Hope Senator Fawcett can keep the pressure on he certainly understands our issues.

MS

[Wally Mk2]

'MS' dreams are fine we all have them, fairies, garden gnomes & goblins we know live at the bottom of our gardens but you can't include aviation amongst those words as it's the devil yr now talking about & we hope the two shall never meet:E


Wmk2

[Hempy]

Wally,

To take your premise further then, if you are suggesting that GA has terminal cancer, does it not follow that in future all civil pilots will either be employed by the Domestics, employed by schools training Domestic pilots, flying for recreation or unemployed?

If this is the case the whole fabric of the industry is changing :eek:

[Chocks Away]

Government now be they federal or state seem to be very city centric.
On the contrary Mick, with Federal and State funding being actively rolled out (http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/federal-government-to-fund-remote-airports) already and coming up (http://www.aviationbusiness.com.au/news/australian-government-allocates-funds-for-regional-airports), it is long overdue yes and just scratches the surface but a good step in the right direction, with more to come I'm sure.

That still doesn't help the litigation/red-tape you mention, which is heart breaking especially for small business. Weren't the Fed Govt intending to go through all this with a huge broom (after the hundreds of other "must-do's to tidy up the current shermozzle left behind:rolleyes:) to make it more business friendly?

[Mick Stuped]

Chocks, this isn't new, the industry has had cancer for a number of the 30 years I have been in a small aviation business. Regions have been dying for years as there are no votes in the country we are on the bottom of the list.

We are sick of hearing about the next saviour be that a new mining company that rolls into town promising wealth and jobs for all to governments promising to improve roads and airstrips and services. All started back in the late 80's when government started centralising services back to capital or regional service centres and lost touch with the communities they service.

Ask any charter operator how much government work now comes out of regions and how much comes out of capital cities. A lot of departmental government flights now charter like mining from a capital city to remote and regional areas direct instead of using RPT to regional areas then onto local charter operators to remote communities or basing staff in regions to service remote communities.

It does feel like we are drowning, we struggle to the surface occasionally grab a big gulp of air and start to sink again. At the moment with the senate enquiry and potential for part 135 we have just taken another big gulp and hopefully the government is going to throw a life ring. However I do fear that a heap of us are just about to end up on the sea floor.

Hempy I fear you are right as I can see that all aviation is going to be RPT city based and all those aviation jobs that gave newbies a start will disappear as will the number of smaller aircraft. Training will have to move to RAAS as private GA will disappear and RPT will have cadet program's to replace pilots. Government will have to bring back more route subsidies to keep the shrinking viable regional routes serviceable due to lower economic regional wealth and populations.
I hope this is just a doomsday scenario from my imagination, however to be honest, I like many others in this game fear it could happen.

Time to click my heals three times and take a gulp of air and search for fairies and curse the devil again.

I really wanted to leave this little aviation business to my son and daughter however I fear if I do I maybe taken to court for child abuse:O

[Howard Hughes]

On the East Coast Qantas Link and Virgin have any decent 50-70 routes sewn up. Rex has a virtual monopoly on the 30 seat market, they have made a lot of money since 2002, but not sure what they are going to do about fleet replacement as their fleet is gets long in the tooth.

in the West it would appear there is a lot of competition.

I may be being a little negative but it doesn't look like there is a lot of opportunity there to me, or maybe that's why I am not an entrepreneur! ;)

[Wally Mk2]

'Hempy' that may very well be the way of the future, or one way at least.
I think the general consensuses is that GA as we know it is dieing off slowly & the big boys will survive to some degree albeit in a different form as to what we know of it now as that level of aviation to is dieing off.

The future is way up in the air so to speak, no one has all the answers & no one can say it's gunna be all roses either but one day no doubt a long way off from now pilots will be something to be poked fingers at by curious little kids in some science museum where the theme is 200 years in Aviation showing the 'Wrong Bros' were it all began to us pilots as we see us today as half way & the fully autonomous pilot-less flying machine:)

Oh & CASA will still be there wearing red suits with a pitch fork in hand:E

'MS' even the baddest father on the planet couldn't do that to their offspring, that's inhumane!:-)

Wmk2

[LeadSled]

If that is what it costs you to get stuff through CASA I suggest you sack your Chief Pilot or whoever manages that side of your business and employ someone competent.

A properly managed application for a low cap RPT AOC should set you back around $25k. Recently added a new type to ours for $5k up front (and still got some change at the end). Horatio,
With the very greatest of respect, you have no idea what you are talking about.

With what CASA are now demanding, the "route proving" alone will cost more than that.

Last Low Cap RPT application I was involved with, the manual upgrades alone (to an already well established operator of good repute), including the interminable manual changes required by various CASA minions, cost more than $25,000.

As for $5,000 to put a new type on an AOC, in the region I am, the CASA quote for their charges, alone, will be more than that, and in my more recent experiences, it always goes well over the quote. Of course, none of this includes any costs incurred by the company.

I believe I know the situation, to which Thorn Bird referrers, and he is not exaggerating, the costs incurred as a result of CASA demands are frightening for a small outfit. What is worse, the imposed operating requirement result in very real operational safety questions being raised --- the CASA impositions severely impact the safe operation of the aircraft. CAR 138 is simply ignored by CASA.

Mick Stupid,
RE. Part 135, you obviously haven't read and understood what is in Party 135. The aerodrome standards, alone, will eliminate most of the light charter, without regard to the many other costs Part 135 is going to impose.

Quite why you conflate CAR 206 and Part 135 mystified me, Part 135 doesn't do much to eliminate the definitional problems of CAR 206.

Hempy,
Tell your prospective investor to use the NZ CAA AOC, and operate in Australia (assuming you can finds a niche) using the benefits of the Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Treaty. If it is good enough for Qantas and Virgin, it is good enough for anybody to use this treaty as intended.

Tootle pip!!

[PLovett]

Mick, its not 135 that will replace 206, its 145 and that is up and running. The rumours out of Canberra is that 135 will be similar to 145. The small charter operators that ran around regional Australia will not stand a chance if it happens. :uhoh:

[LeadSled]

PLovett,

Part 145 doesn't have much to do with CAR 206, either.

What we get for light aircraft maintenance remains to be seen, even Mr. McCormick has expressed his preference for the US Part 43 approach, but the CASA "Iron Ring" ( particularly the fellow who will tell you, to your face, that there should only be two kinds of aviation, airlines and military -- and he is a very senior executive manager) want to impose Parts 42/145, so that all maintenance would be conducted as if your were running a fleet of A380s, and even Qantas can't afford to do that in Australia.

The scary thing is that the only thing stopping the "Iron Ring" right now, is a Legislative Instrument, restricting Parts 42/145 to high capacity RPT.

Part 145 certification, versus Part 30, imposes costs that limit Part 145 workshop approvals to quite large organization, to carry the imposed overheads. It is in no way similar to a CAR 30 workshop approval for a small business.

If the "Iron Ring" has its way, by my estimate, all but about 30-40 of the present CAR 30 workshops (300+ ?)will remain, if my estimate is wrong, it will be because I have been too optimistic.

Tootle pip!!

PS: Don't forget, even Qantas only finally got their Part 145 approval very close to the deadline for the transition period, at the cost of $$$$Millions, and several years of time.

[LeadSled]

PLovett,

Part 145 doesn't have much to do with CAR 206, either.

What we get for light aircraft maintenance remains to be seen, even Mr. McCormick has expressed his preference for the US Part 43 approach, but the CASA "Iron Ring" ( particularly the fellow who will tell you, to your face, that there should only be two kinds of aviation, airlines and military -- and he is a very senior executive manager) want to impose Parts 42/145, so that all maintenance would be conducted as if your were running a fleet of A380s, and even Qantas can't afford to do that in Australia.

The scary thing is that the only thing stopping the "Iron Ring" right now, is a Legislative Instrument, restricting Parts 42/145 to high capacity RPT.

Part 145 certification, versus Part 30, imposes costs that limit Part 145 workshop approvals to quite large organization, to carry the imposed overheads. It is in no way similar to a CAR 30 workshop approval for a small business.

If the "Iron Ring" has its way, by my estimate, all but about 30-40 of the present CAR 30 workshops (340+ ?)will remain, if my estimate is wrong, it will be because I have been too optimistic.

Tootle pip!!

[Mick Stuped]

PLovett, Part 135 is operations and Part 145 is how they will be maintained.

CAR 206 1 part B will disappear as part 135 the new Transport Category will be the same as LRPT is now and Charter category will cease to exist.

This will allow scheduled departures generally available to the public in and out of airstrips that have lower min requirements that standard RPT has now. A potential boom for new services and routes in the outback and will bring a lot of fresh vigour into a stale industry.

It will only leave Aerial work and training from what I understand.

The question is under part 145 what maintenance schedule will we be allowed to operate under if not S5?

Talk is S5 will disappear and it will all be a min of Manufactures Maintenance to operate part 135 aircraft.

How long and costly do you think it will be to get a small fleet of older aircraft that have operated well under S5 for years into MM or class A?

Not going to be viable. Can we viably run to part 145 and MM out in the bush when we have no part 145 maintenance orgs within 2 hours of flying. Nope another nail in the coffin. Can current maintenance orgs afford the extra compliance and cost of going to 145. All the little shops have said they wont be. Will just close the door when this all comes.

We have no problems with what has been raised in part 135 and meeting the extra requirements as being a responsible operator, we already have company standards above what we need to operate under charter.
Our problems will come if as you say CASA insist on us changing our maintenance schedule to do the same job we basically are now as charter under S5 for many years very successfully.

MS

[Mick Stuped]

Beat me to it Leadsled.
Agree completely with what you say, that is exactly how it is.


MS

[PLovett]

My mistake.

[VH-XXX]

You only need to look at the Britz camper-van company to know that a Chinese owned airline or aviation company will attract Chineae customers. The idea in general has potential, especially if Uluru and tourists were involved.

[Mach E Avelli]

Operating under NZ rules would be the way to go to avoid a lot of the grief that CASA cause. However, you can't simply set up in NZ then move the whole program to Australia. The company's head office and at least some of the operation needs to be in NZ.
But having recently worked under NZ CAA oversight, they are certainly much better to deal with. Very practical people who at least recognise operators are really their customers. They don't quite subscribe to "the customer is always right" and they do their fair share of 'milking' operators with fees etc, but at least they give good advice and service. Unlike CASA who see operators as an embuggerance.
Hempy, check PM.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Horatio,
With the very greatest of respect, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Leadsled

With a modicum of respect, get knotted. Last time you ignored my opinion you bogged your aeroplane up to its axles.

Tootle friggin' Pip. :}