RNP $4,000 CASA Rip-Off?

[Dick Smith]

It appears that my Citation, MIF (in Australia since 2006), has to get some new RNP approval. I have had a pilot working on getting the information ready – having taken about three weeks – and I have now just paid CASA $2,040 for their estimate of what they have to do on their paperwork!

It appears the cost to me will be a little over $4,000 (including paying my pilot), however there is no change in the aircraft at all – ZERO - so no resultant change to the level of safety.

Can someone advise what happens with this $4,000 and why this has suddenly become necessary?

I have spoken to my American friends and they know nothing about what it might be.

[Creampuff]

It's how 'user pays' works in a monopoly, Dick.

The users get used.

[Jack Ranga]

Dick, if I were you I'd be registering my aircraft in the US. Things won't change in this country til CAsA have destroyed this industry.

[Blueskymine]

They know you're good for it.

They are probably chuckling down at the pub about it now lighting up some nice Cubans with dickheads and downing a grange. I heard the '08 is pretty fantastic. You probably already know.

Welcome to user pays :)

[Frank Arouet]

As a proud and decorated Australian identity, Dick shouldn't have to resort to pragmatic options in aircraft registration. I personally would have no problem with registering my new Citation in NZ nor employing a FAA certified pilot to fly it, but honestly, would anyone here leave it alone and not attack him if he did so?


But then again....maybe there is a point to bring it to the notice of bloody stupid apathetic public how bad things have become. But would you lot leave him alone?







Thought so....

[Dick Smith]

Yes I understand user pays. It was introduced after the Henry Bosch report about 1988.

It normally means you have to actually have to be a "user " of some service.

So what's this all about? Will I have to do the same with my IFR helicopter and IFR Caravan?

More importantly will every IFR aircraft owner in Australia have to pay a similar amount for every aircraft ?

Has a RIS be undertaken? Or is this irrellevent ?

Yes I can afford the cost but I am concerned about the industry I have always supported.

[Howard Hughes]

If I ever own an aircraft, it'll be M registration for me! ;)

[CaptainMidnight]

So what's this all about? Did you ask CASA, before you handed over $2,040 without knowing what for?

[thorn bird]

Dick,
mate, $4,000 is cheap!!

How about $6,000 and eighteen months for RVSM approval, aside from the fact the aircraft left the factory RVSM approved and flew all the way to OZ through RVSM airspace and Thats not counting the eighteen months of flying about at FL280 pumping vast amounts of carbon into our atmosphere.

Something seems to happen as soon as that VH is painted on an airframe.

Or how bout a hundred grand and twelve months to put an aircraft similar to your CJ on an AOC.
Imagine where our mining industry, which is about the only thing keeping this country afloat at the moment, would be if they had to pay that every time they wanted to introduce a new ore carrier into their fleet? (All in the name of safety of course)

CAsA put out a cost benefit analysis on what part 61 will cost the industry...
These people must be living in LA LA land if they think thats even close to the true cost.

There is a very informative narrative on CAsA's web sight where they use an imagined operator loosely based on the now defunct Brindabella to illustrate how a company should introduce a safety management system. It illustrates just how completely out of touch CAsA is with the industry they embugger.
This mythical company employs a myriad of people at management level to administer a few piston twins and a couple of turbines.

If Brindabella operated like that in reality its no wonder they went broke.

You can charter and aircraft in the USA for about a third of the price for the same aircraft here.

Why?

They don't have user pays.

Their airports are public utilities, utilised in the public interest for aviation, not as a cash cow for loan sharks and property developers to milk industry and the public alike of billions of dollars on which they pay no Tax.

They have a regulator who has "Foster and promote" in their charter.

Their regulations are not in the criminal code, are written in plain language and unlike here actually work to improve safety.

The FAA is by and large not corrupt unlike our regulator.

[50 50]

Hold on, wait wait wait....are you saying Dick, that you have had to shell out unnecessary money for your private jet, and may very well have to do so for your 2 other very expensive aircraft?

If only my problems were so horrific.

How about a hundred and twenty grand on myriad qualifications and endorsements, and you can't get a job unless its to work for free?

[Squawk7700]

5050, Dick has made it perfectly clear that he can afford to pay the fee however he is amazed at the cost considering that nothing on the actual actual aircraft changes.

Your $$,000's for your CPL is different because you actually got something for your money; a world recognized pilot qualification.

[Cactusjack]

Dick, think outside the box mate. Charges such as the one you mentioned will help to fund CASA's regulatory reform program for another 25 years! Think of all the jobs that are being created.......stop being so negative ok.

[Capn Bloggs]

CASA is charging for swapping from GPSRNAV to RNP2?

[xr6]

I agree with Dick. We have experienced the same with our private jet. Not only do we have to pay CAsA the $2000+ estimate to have our aircraft 'approved' when nothing has changed on the aircraft, we also have to spend our time and effort educating CAsA as to why our aircraft should be approved. Some of the questions we have been asked that should already be known by the regulator or questions they ask which they already have the access to documents that contain the answer for them, is something I find frustrating. There seems to be little value in the $140 per hour that we pay CAsA not to read our documents.

[Torres]

Do I sense a highly successful monopolistic business plan?

$300 million and 26 years of regulatory reform, still far from finished, intended to generate perpetual income for services that are of no benefit to it's captive "clients"?

$140 per hour for a CASA FOI, theoretical gross annual income $241,920? I'm yet to find a CASA FOI that could earn one third of that as a commercial pilot.

I agree with Dick. His aircraft came from the manufacturer RNP certified - it doesn't get better than that. He wasted $4,000 for what gain or safety benefit?

Whether or not he can personally afford to waste that amount of money is entirely and totally irrelevant.

[Sunfish]

5050:

Hold on, wait wait wait....are you saying Dick, that you have had to shell out unnecessary money for your private jet, and may very well have to do so for your 2 other very expensive aircraft?

If only my problems were so horrific.

How about a hundred and twenty grand on myriad qualifications and endorsements, and you can't get a job unless its to work for free?

Fifty, the reason you can't get a job is that there aren't enough aircraft in Australia - for the very reasons Dick is complaining about.

The reason it cost you a hundred and Twenty grand is exactly the same....CASA is a leach on the entire Aviation industry it claims to regulate.

You should be supporting Dick.

[thorn bird]

Sunny I wholeheartedly agree.

We are rapidly approaching the end game.

Part 61 was just the beginning of the perfect storm about to engulf the industry.

Need examples? the very regulations CAsA used as their model has killed GA in Europe. Why do we imagine the same result would not occur here?

[Snail Dave]

Dick,

Are you going to the AAHOF event this year? If so, I'll seek you out and give you another ripping example of how their 'creative charging' regime hurts us (not an aircraft operator). It just defies logic and all sensible business practice. The reasons they give for the costs we pay each year is just as priceless.

Snail.

[tail wheel]

Wonder why a new imported car is far more expensive in Australia than most other countries?

Because, I'm told, the Australian authorities again crash test examples, despite being crash tested and approved/certified in their country of manufacture. And the Australian authorities purportedly test to the same international safety standards.

Bit like the horrific expense around the old DCA "First of Type" aircraft certification of years gone by. It was a junket of incredible proportions, first class air travel, weeks overseas at the aircraft factory, lavish wining and dining, all to reach a similar Australian certification conclusion (plus a few expensive modifications required to justify the junket) as the original aircraft manufacturer and the regulator in the country of manufacture.

Australian Governments repetitiously continues to reinvented the wheel.

[thorn bird]

Taily how very true,

The mantra pervades all regulatory bureaucratic institutions in Australia.

All the rest of the world is wrong, we are right!

[Wunwing]

The Industry problems with DOT/CASA will only be solved when we get a Minister for Transport (or even better a Minister for Civil Aviation ) that is appointed because of his/her ability and understanding of aviation.

This will never happen as long as the Libs/Nats continue appoint a Nat who is a farmer, whose interest and expertise is in exporting rural produce. As well Labor always appoints a Minister who is from a noise impacted electorate and whose interest and expertise is in getting re elected and/or holding airport seats for Labor.

History shows that these 2 criteria have been used by both parties, vitually since we lost a dedicated Minister for Civil Aviation.The downhill slide of aviation in this country also mirrors the time since we had a dedicated Minister.

Wunwing

[Torres]

.................................
............................

.............................. :D :D :D :D

[Jack Ranga]

As a proud and decorated Australian identity, Dick shouldn't have to resort to pragmatic options in aircraft registration. I personally would have no problem with registering my new Citation in NZ nor employing a FAA certified pilot to fly it, but honestly, would anyone here leave it alone and not attack him if he did so?

Can only speak for myself Frank, no Dick shouldn't have to resort to this. It's a disgrace that any Australian would have to think of these options. If Dick did this I would applaud him.

But then again....maybe there is a point to bring it to the notice of bloody stupid apathetic public how bad things have become. But would you lot leave him alone?

I firmly believe that GA has gone past it's PNR. The only thing that will save it from here is if it's destroyed & re-built. There is no possible way I could own an equivalent certified aircraft in this country. I would love to have certified, I could do Angel, I could earn a quid on the side etc.

[Jack Ranga]

How about a hundred and twenty grand on myriad qualifications and endorsements, and you can't get a job unless its to work for free?

I have very little sympathy for you if you didn't do any research prior to spending that amount of money. The facts are out there & have been from day one.

[Aussie Bob]

There is no possible way I could own an equivalent certified aircraft in this country

That is Jack, until some clown in CAsA decides its too damn dangerous for you to do your own maintenance and thinks up an oversight procedure. Perhaps similar to the one you seemed to think Angel Flight may have needed? :eek:

[Jack Ranga]

Bob......Bob.........Bob............. So typical of most, read what I wrote on the Angel Flight thread ;) I didn't say that anything needed to be done. I said: if people get killed in that activity why wouldn't CAsA take a look at it, it's their job.

I have the same sentiments, they won't change :ok:

The day CAsA put a stop to experimental in Australia is the day my aircraft gets flown out of this country ;)

[50 50]

Thanks Jack your very little sympathy means a lot.

Research or not, if one wants to be employable you still have to spend that amount of money, prior knowledge makes it no less expensive.

[dubbleyew eight]

but jack if the clowns ever put a stop to experimental....
you won't be able to fly it out of the country.
you won't be able to fly it anywhere.

I'm sure you will get to know how to pack a container :E

[Aussie Bob]

if people get killed in that activity why wouldn't CAsA take a look at it, it's their job.

Does the same apply for Experimental then Jack?

but jack if the clowns ever put a stop to experimental....

I am a huge fan of experimental by the way and have been privileged to make the maiden flights on several home built aircraft. I just don't trust the clowns.

[neville_nobody]

It is utterly ridiculous that CASA wants to certify things that come as factory standard. Either the type is approved or it isn't. We cannot have the situation where CASA lets you register a particular aircraft then bans you from using any of it's factory standard equipment. Maybe it's time to lean on the manufacturers to lean on the government.

It would be like buying a brand new Mercedes and Vic Roads telling you can't turn on the cruise control and the air con!

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Neville,

AWB 00-16 and CASR 21.114 clarify automatic acceptance of foreign STC's as issued by CASA. There is another thread discussing this issue of STC and EO's.

Worth knowing the detail on this case. Is it acceptance of approval or approval for crew to operate?

[Wally Mk2]

Is anyone really surprised here? I mean worlds best practice does not exist down under, just down under & done like a dinner!:ugh:




Wmk2

[chimbu warrior]

How about $6,000 and eighteen months for RVSM approval, aside from the fact the aircraft left the factory RVSM approved and flew all the way to OZ through RVSM airspace and Thats not counting the eighteen months of flying about at FL280 pumping vast amounts of carbon into our atmosphere.

Something seems to happen as soon as that VH is painted on an airframe.

What about the RVSM monitoring by the Australian Airspace Monitoring Authority (a division of Airservices)? They insist on costly monitoring of all aircraft wishing to operate in RVSM airspace in Australia, including foreign-registered aircraft. Even if the regulator in the state of registry accepts the RVSM certification, AAMA still insist on periodic monitoring, and in a sweet little deal that they have with Pearl, the user really pays for this one.

[Nose_Wheel]

The question still remains as to what CASA have actually done to make Dick's aircraft safer or is this just a compliance issue. If it is just compliance filling in a form and sending it off with FAA approved documentation should have been enough. Sure you might have had to pay $200 for the form to be processed but 4k is ridiculous!

If it was me I would be asking for a complete breakdown of the hours spent by CASA and would like to know how they have justified it. If they cannot give you this they are ripping you off and a call to the.....oh wait. Where do we go to complain about CASA again?!?!

Agree with a previous comment also that nothing will change unless we get a new minister of aviation or transport that actually knows what they are doing.

[le Pingouin]

Sooooo, Dick whinges about Australia doing things it's own way, yet when we adopt an International standard and he has to pay he also whinges....... Console yourself with all the money you've saved with the other changes introduced over the years. Oh wait.....

[Soteria]

Nose-wheel, if you've ever had the mispleasure of seeing how government agencies work from the inside you would be mortified! For example in Dick's case they charged him $4k which was still probably a financial loss to CASA. Why? Well you have all those different hands that need to be used in the process - the admin girls, a Clerk, an Inspector, discussions with other Inspectors, a supervisor or department manager, time spent on Google, reading paperwork, shuffling paperwork, losing paperwork, not understanding the regulations, reading regulations, re-reading regulations, making up regulations, twisting regulations......get my drift? It is nauseating observing the levels of incompetence, laziness and disarray that calls itself, in part, a 'service centre'. And all this for what? To make Dick's plane safer?
Yep, taxpayer money pissed into the wind. I could have charged Dick half that price and still had enough change left over to spend on party balloons and a pinate for McCormick's farewell.

P.S Just because Dick can afford to pay the $4k thousands of times over doesn't mean he should have to. The cost is a crock and so is the supposed benefit. Nobody should have to put up with the impost, rich or poor.

[Aussie Bob]

Sooooo, Dick whinges about Australia doing things it's own way, yet when we adopt an International standard and he has to pay he also whinges....... Console yourself with all the money you've saved with the other changes introduced over the years. Oh wait.....

Hey le Pingouin, why don't you take your dick bashing elsewhere, what you have written above does nothing for this thread and contributes nil. Looks like you haven't even bothered to read the thread through.

[Kharon]

Some weekend browsing below; it seems CASA have obligations toward RNP much the same as for RVSM. It seems fair to criticise the time and cost aspects of Dicks approval; AUD$ 2000 odd dollars / 160 = 12.5 man hours is an unreasonable add on to the red-tape requirement.

As you can gather from the AC and other information, there is a need to 'satisfy' the legal requirements, but with 'company' documents in order and a factory certified aircraft any more than a days work for one man seems excessive, perhaps a time/motion study would clarify the time wasted, on the telephone, sending e-mails, making coffee, yarning with whoever is sitting about the office. etc. etc..

I can defend the need for some form of 'evidence of compliance', but to charge for a day and a half when six hours of honest work would do the trick smacks of a mini rip off. It's callous manipulation the bloody system again; not the 'rules'.

No matter Dick – Uncle Wazza will fix it – sometime in the far distant future; lash out the rebates and have it all running like a Swiss watch in no time - won't he??

AC - 2005 (http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/091/091uc02.pdf)

AC 2012. (http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/091/091uc02-c02.pdf)

USAC_RNAC (http://www.uasc.com/documents/whitepaper/UASC_RNAV_WhitePaper.pdf) (Good read).

Toot - toot....

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Ask for a breakdown of costs from the service centre. In the past they have made errors charging for full new approval of companies when the applicant was only changing legal entity details.

The other catch is travel of minimum 1 hour each way even when on the same airfield as casa office.

[fencehopper]

As for ADR car rules. that goes out the window soon we move to international standards. Our imported vehicles and if any are still built here will comply to world standards. You will even be able to go online and order from any dealer in the world and then ship any type model to here.
After just on 40 years of playing with real ultralights, i've given it all away. I've just had enough of the over regulation and unnecessary costs for things i didn't need. The RAAus failed audits kept me grounded for over three months for want of a sticker, then the following due rego they had another go by insisting on re weighing rewriting the manual and more hand in pocket. I now go to the USA once a year and fly the same machine with no license no rego and no hand in pocket. More fun with more people doing same. So all you rich types you got two choices, follow me, plenty of room in the States or sit on the pot and ****.
Fencehopper

[Air Ace]

Oh, but it is World's best practice Wal, ask CASA. And such perfection costs! :yuk:

[Dick Smith]

I understand this CASA RNP approval will also be required for all aircraft that fly under the IFR. Yes even a 182!

Can anyone find out if this approval is also required by the FAA.? I have not been able to get the facts on this.

What with mandatory ADSB out for all IFR aircraft coming soon and now this- I would imagine serious economic damage to our Australian GA industry.

I was responsible for the Yates report that removed the expensive requirement for first of type approval by the authorities in Australia. So far , despite predictions , no measurable safety reduction has taken place.

I like saving our industry money.

[Capn Bloggs]

I would have thought if you're not using GPS for IFR Nav then no, you wouldn't need RNP approval. Given that GPSRNAV grandfathers over to NAV/RNP2 automatically, I'd very much doubt there'd be $4k involved.

What with mandatory ADSB out for all IFR aircraft coming soon and now this
Given ADS-B needs some sort of "proper" GPS, I would have thought RNP2 approval would be automatic (unless you don't have any display for it).