Bankstown Airport – Desperately Sad

[Dick Smith]

I went for a walk around Bankstown Airport this morning. What a disaster! Hangars that once had thriving businesses in them ten years ago are now closed and when I peered through the gaps in the doors I could see they were being used for storage of what looked like rubbish. The whole airport reminded me of the Soviet Union when I visited there in 1966 – part of a system that had failed!

Bankstown is the major secondary airport for the largest city in Australia – but you wouldn’t know it.

Can anyone give me the current movements at Bankstown? I understood they were over 350,000 at the peak and I’d love to know what the figures are now.

And before you all start blaming me for “User Pays” – no, that was Henry Bosch in his report before I was involved. However, I was involved in getting costs down, e.g. by removing the rescue and fire-fighting from all the secondary airports. That has probably saved over $100 million in the twenty years since then at the major secondary airports and there has not been one fatality attributed to the removal.

If you ever want me to do some more cost savings, just ask.

[Cxmeron]

The figures certainly aren't great now compared to a few years back...

2014 January to July: YSBK - 137,952 - keep in mind that this is only a half year figure. The 2013 January to July figure was 127,870 so this year is a slight improvement so far.

2013 Calendar Year: YSBK - 215,802

2012 Calendar Year: YSBK - 236,030

2011 Calendar Year: YSBK - 243,126

Other info and sources can be found here:
Movements at Australian airports | Airservices (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/publications/reports-and-statistics/movements-at-australian-airports/)

[Creampuff]

And where did the $100 million “saved” go, Dick?

The problem is that the money “saved” doesn’t make anything less expensive for the aviation industry. It just gets p*ssed up against the wall by governments, and the costs imposed on the aviation industry still go up.

Not blaming you for that outcome.

Just sayin’ that “saving” more money doesn’t help the aviation industry.

Governments don’t budget and spend money like a business. Governments budget and spend money to protect their political interests. If the aviation industry doesn’t want an ARFF at Secondary Airports and that saves governments $100 million, governments are happy to spend that on pink batts and Seasprite Helicopters.

[Dick Smith]

The RFFS was about to become a separate charge for landing at the GA airports.


When I removed the service there was no separate charge- so at least I saved an increase in this particular case!

[thorn bird]

It is very sad Dick.

But when our airports were farmed out to property developers and loan shark banks to be expected.

With a rapacious regulator and what seems a government powerless to contain or control their excesses It looks like GA is finished in Australia.

People are just giving up, its all getting too hard.

Average age of engineers now in the fifties, very few young people prepared to invest their time and dollars into taking apprenticeship even if they could find someone to take them on, only people with your resources will be able to afford to fly.

I would love to be in a position to toss it in, get away from CAsA's incompetence and bully boys.

There's always Kiwiland every now and then for a flying fix. Beautiful scenery, great rule set and no CAsA, over there you can enjoy your flying and I would recommend anyone thinking of learning to fly to head there, you will enjoy the experience and save yourself a lot of money, and its safer to.

[Squawk7700]

I've heard that before thorn bird, however what do property developers have to do with the demise of Bankstown?
Horton park, yes. Wallan, yes. Geelong, yes.

It is sad when they are involve when airports are the target. Last week in Sunbury on the news a family of 10 siblings had bought a property 20 years ago for $300,000 sold it to developers for over $70 million for a new suburb to be built.

The worst part is family farms that have to be sold and you can't hold onto them. Once the council decides to re-zone from rural to residential, they charge the land owners full rates based on the potential value of the property. Owners can't help but sell. This is how owners are "forced" to sell.

[Marvin Martian]

Almost the same at YMMB.
Years ago it was a vibrant energetic place with so much activity.
RVAC is holding a dinner on 25th of this month to celebrate its 100th anniversary. Not sure how many years left though.
Membership numbers have plummeted from the heady days.
No touring aircraft online. Just about all the aircraft are 70s vintage.
Driving past recently saw the adjacent golf course has been removed.
Was in the tower years ago supervising night circuits when someone called up to say they had suffered EFATO and landed on a fairway.
No injuries/damage. Won't be able to do that when the new factories are there. Sad really..

[SOPS]

Unfortunately many years ago GA ceased to be regarded as an important part of infrastructure in this country. And the regulator decided it was better to work against the industry than with it.

What we see today, is the result. And I don't think anyone is going to wake up, until is too late and everything is gone.

Very sad, but that is Australia in 2014, if it can't be dug out of the ground, it's not worth worrying about.

[DUXNUTZ]

Dick,

The cost of aviation (in ths country particularly) is absolutely insane. I'd love to hire an airplane out at BK and go for a fly - take the Mrs down Victor 1, but its simply too cost prohibitive. I'm sure that the training operators on the field are struggling.

I wonder what the end-game is? Will the State govt allow YSBK to shut up shop?

[Ultralights]

I've heard that before thorn bird, however what do property developers have to do with the demise of Bankstown?
Horton park, yes. Wallan, yes. Geelong, yes.


have a look in a few more hangars at bankstown..... some contain carpet recyclers, one is a nursery, one sells office chairs, another is the base of a cleaning company... and thats just on one road....

[thorn bird]

Ultra,
the scary thing is all of those mentioned have airside access.
With no security free to wander where they may.
Don't know how many aircraft parked up that hold enough jet A or avgas to make a fairly large bonfire down George street at lunchtime, about six minutes flight time away.
No such thing as public infrastructure anymore, how long before we start renting parliament house from MC Bank or the Chinese government.

[Fris B. Fairing]

This is symptomatic of modern governments which have lost sight of the concept of essential services. Things like electricity, water - and airports, are now luxury items.

[thunderbird five]

Dick:

2013-2014 219,770
2012-2013 220,294
2011-2012 240,142
2010-2011 257,434

more available from the publications port of DCA/CAA/ASA/whatever the hell it's called this week.....:(

when do I get that jar of Ozzie nuts:eek:

[KRviator]

Not exclusive to Bankstown, Dick...And here's why:

I worked the cost to do an hour of circuits at Warnervale in my RV-9 with their new costings, earlier this year. Over $600 an hour!, based on 10 circuits/hour - for an aeroplane that I own...!

Despite a submission to Council about this, the most they're willing to compromise is a daily "training" rate, for ab-initio ("training") circuits, but for you or me, we pay for every landing.

It's cheaper to fly from Warnervale to Archerfield, refuel and fly an hour of circuits there and return home than it is to do an hour at my local airstrip.

WTF? :rolleyes:

[Dick Smith]

And was it once 350,000?

[SOPS]

600 dollars an hour..for circuits.WTF??? What are these blood suckers going to do when there is no one left that can pay these extortionate rates?

[Draggertail]

Warnervale airport fees.

"For Australia Skydive landing fees and other charges for parking and refuelling went from $1795 a year to $535,000 a year."



No Cookies | dailytelegraph.com.au (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/central-coast/australia-skydive-says-warnervale-airport-now-more-expensive-than-sydney-international/story-fngr8h0p-1226958738736)

[Andy_RR]

This problem is not just confined to GA. The whole country is being de-industrialized on a major scale with capabilities being exported wholesale or left to wither.

We are watching high-end precision machinery being exported at 10c in the dollar. Never mind the "advanced manufacturing" that is going to save us. Most of the skills and machinery required for that will be gone before the nation wakes up.

We will be competing for foreign aid in the future to make up for the lack of FDI because it's only our positive capital account that has allowed us our currently high, but declining standard of living.

Take a look at what the "mining boom" has done to our balance of trade and current account. It's barely a blip in a long and sorry trend into the abyss.

Is it any wonder the nation can't sustain expensive aviation infrastructure?

[Kharon]

Nice one Dick ..:ok: – the Daily Mail and US Financial press articles only add value to the cause and (as a bonus) disgrace – once again, 'The Australian' – as a CASA propaganda rag.

Never, ever quit – using your own time and money to help those to whom, the word 'experience' means little, or are capable of believing in a lesson learnt. There are not many to whom I would "dip my lid". However, good Sir; consider it 'dipped'.

Toot' a toot, toot – Dick special salute from the 'Houseboat' crew. (Ignore the farting elephant – it's a long, long story).

[KRviator]

600 dollars an hour..for circuits.WTF??? What are these blood suckers going to do when there is no one left that can pay these extortionate rates?Yep, no bull (http://consultation.wyong.nsw.gov.au/d-and-r/notice-of-variation-to-revenue-policy-warnervale-a/supporting_documents/WARNERVAL_AIRPORT_PROPOSED_201314_FEES_AND_CHARGES.pdf).

$110 just for the privelige of refuelling on council land. Not counting the fuel purchased. That's extra. And this is per refuel - even if you BYO Mogas!
$15/tonne (or part thereof) per landing for regular users. $27.50 for itinerant users.
$1,650 parking fees per year.
$605 "usage fee" per year.

The user pay model was selected by council as the most equitable fee structure with costs borne by the users rather than Wyong Shire ratepayers, with the fee structure benchmarked against other regional airfields prior to adoption.But when I suggested Wyong Council would not dare to introduce a "User Pays" fee structure at their 25 boat ramps, there was deafening silence. Yet as a (now former) Wyong Councli ratepayer, I don't own a boat yet have to pay for the maintenance of the boat ramps.

[jumpnut]

Guess they'll get what they want in the end with the total demise of the airport. Then develop in to more housing.....yay!

[KittyKatKaper]

It doesn't help movement figures when YSBK charge nearly $8000 pa for a Piper PA28 to park there.
Never mind that the marginal cost to provide parking is close to zero so one would think that encouraging more parking/aircraft would be great for the airports' bottom line., but no, they go the way of trying to extract their total costs + profit from a dwindling user base, which then results in less users and higher fees.
= positive feedback and less actual aviation usage.

Before the effing privatisation occurred I remember that it often required a lot of head swiveling and occasional laps of the grassed areas to find a parking spot after landing.

I don't know what the hanger-owners/renters pay and I am afraid to ask.

[yr right]

Can't put housing at bankstown as it is a flood plan.

[dhavillandpilot]

Dick is right,

Bankstown is like some third rate third world airport in the back of Africa.

They are so pro active!!!!!!!!!

I keep my aircraft in a hangar at around $1000 a month. Which when you consider a charge of $62 per day outside parking courtesy of BAL is double the charge for under cover.

Then just push the aircraft outside for even 5 minutes and the Gestapo arrive.

But the best part is their collection department. The chap in charge rings after 5 days for payment, I guess with so little movements they need to chase every dollar.

When Flew thru Biggin Hill and then Cannes, the difference is like chalk and cheese. Both the English and the French are now so pro General Aviation it is funny.

BAL need to take a good hard look at themselves and start running a business it's call aviation.

BUT HELL THEY ARE PURPOSELY RUNNING IT DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE THEY CAN JUSTIFY SELLING IT OFF TO A DEVELOPER AS A BEAUT HOUSING ESTAE WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ON THE SIDE.

[thorn bird]

Jumpnut,

a bit if deja vu, all them that complained about aircraft noise at Hoxton Park and celebrated its closure and sale now have a 24 seven truck depot. YAH!
Good onya truckers hammer them airbrakes!! few air horns as well.
Bk is pretty well run by Toll, eventually it'll go the same way.

Kitty,

no you really don't want to know...pity Marion street aint a taxi way, industrial off airport is way cheaper.

Dick,
one question I would like asked is, how come I can buy Jet A1 at Mascot for $1:05 a Litre, yet at BK its $185 a litre, about the same as at Bourke?? Wouldn't be retail price maintenance would it? and there I was believing that was illegal.

But for Mascots insane costs it would be cheaper to fly to Sydney to refuel for BK jet operators.

Always wondered why the big end of town with their heavy metal, given the costs of parking, restrictions on operations with slots etc, why they don't fly out of BK.....wouldn't be the fuel cost would it??

A few years back, I flew my boss to Sydney in his BBJ. Flight started in Paris, ended with stops enroute in Sydney. Costs from Paris to O/head Port Headland about half of Port Headland to Sydney. Parking at YSSY double that of Heathrow.

Needless to say he was pissed off, felt like he'd been cheated and vowed never to come to Australia again, to my knowledge he never has.

This guy would spend 30 million on half a dozen horses in the USA.

I really was embarrassed as an Australian.

Have you seen how VIP's are treated here?? They arrive in their 50 million VIP jet, and do our Customs come to the aircraft???

Not on your Nellie.

Park at the international terminal (Big Bill) walk your Passengers in the pouring rain, or stinking heat across the tarmac, dodging baggage trains etc. Clamber through the bowels of the terminal basement, to be confronted by some surely Customs bitch apparently suffering from severe PMS, because politeness aint in her vocabulary, just to get an anointing stamp in the passport.
Retrace your steps and finally restart and wend your way to the VIP terminal to blessed relief.

Dick, you've seen how the rest of the world does it, its a national disgrace!

[SOPS]

It is interesting that some mentioned boats. It has always been a complaint of mine ever since this whole user pays thing for aviation started. They don't do it for the recreational boat user...but the do it to GA. Well, they can do it for a little while longer to GA, then there will be nothing left.

[thorn bird]

Sop's, no offence but you should keep your trap shut, you'll give them ideas...after they've killed GA they will be casting about for something else to regulate out of existence.
What else can they do with all the incompetent clowns that infect CAsA??
About all I have left to enjoy is my boat, so please keep it quiet mate.

[SOPS]

Sorry....no more marine talk..I promise.

[thorn bird]

"Can't put housing at bankstown as it is a flood plan."

Yr right,
your right, but it didn't stop them dumping, I don't know how many cubic meters of uncertified fill ( Naughty, naughty no EPA blessing?) on a flood plain and contaminated ground to boot, ie unexploded buried ordinance, to build an industrial estate.


Careful next time your in Bunnings, the floor just might erupt beneath you.."Its called the big bang theory"

[gerry111]

And you can't even buy a pre flight coffee from the shop on a Saturday morning anymore. (As I found out a week ago when a mate picked me up from the terminal.)

From the air, I noticed that the housing around YSBK is being redeveloped at a rapid rate. All those big blocks with run down homes. No doubt, BAL have firm plans to develop YSBK for housing or more warehouses.


Out of interest... Do Toll ever fly those Metros parked outside their warehouses?

[thorn bird]

Sops,

your a saint mate, by boat, I meant "tinny" but its my "Ship"..bout all one can afford after a lifetime in aviation. Just dreading having to face the boatman on the Stynx one day soon. Not to worry I love elephants!!

[Bill Smith]

C*@ts Against Sustainable Aviation !

[RatsoreA]

It would take a high profile public figure to bring it to the publics' (and subsequently the Government's) attention

Sadly, neither the government or the public care.

The public just see GA as a rich mans toy and if you asked 100 members of the general public what they know I bet over 90 of them would answer along a very similar vein of "Little Cessna's? They crash all the time, aren't they dangerous?"

The government don't care because there is no money and no votes in it. How many active pilot licences are there right now in Australia? 60-70 thousand? Spread across the whole country? There are much larger, much crazier lobby groups that wield more influence to get noticed and 'buy' votes than anyone in aviation. And even if we did have numbers to matter, we couldn't form a cohesive bunch. The last time any two given pilots agreed on any given subject was when Orville and Wilbur chose the field in Kittyhawk, and it's been nothing but in-fighting and backstabbing ever since. FFS, no two people in aviation can even agree about when to clean a set of injectors, and we are expected to form a cohesive lobby group to get our lot improved?! HA! :ugh:

I guess though, soon, it won't matter, cos Dick was actually right. I remember BK in the 90's, there being 6 or 7 big schools, a few small ones, and NOWHERE to park, there were so many aircraft there. You could hold a football match on the area where Navair used to park now, and not hit anything. I guess that's what happens on a race to the bottom in an industry where the next guy is prepared to work for free just to get the experience and there are people willing to take them on for it. :uhoh:

Anyway, I am tired and going to bed! :\

[sprocket check]

WVA that much? Gee, they must be "crowd funding" the new airport!!!

I can't believe there are people on this forum actually calling on MORE fees on aviation????:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

We should all be saying and writing to casa, airservices, your local members,, the papers, blah, blah to ef off.

.. but we don't and we let them ream us for more... there is something fundamentally wrong not just with the guvmint but us as well. Not speaking up is agreeing with the system, just like not responding to a claim in court is acquiescing to it.

And while Dick seems to be the only one speaking up he has a chorus of naysayers behind him. What a screwed up community this is.

The truth is that WE allow the so called powers to do this. Government is for the people not the other way around. There is a fundamental misalignment in our thinking.

Like the fear mongering going on with security. 9/11 happened in the US. Seen their security around airfields?

[FERetd]

dhavillandpilot Quote:-" Both the English and the French are now so pro General Aviation it is funny"

From what I have read on this forum, Oz and the U.K. are suffering the same malaise.

Over here EASA is pulling the strings but AOPA is trying to soften the jerk. GA airfields are under threat from developers, two closed at the end of September and others are under threat. The Government is not interested and Councils see an airfield as a new suburb.
Manston Airport in Kent was sold by the council for £1, yes £1, to the owner of a public transport Company. There was a proviso that it must be kept for use as an airport. Some ten months later the airport has closed and the owner has rejected a £5 million offer from someone that wanted to continue to use Manston as an airport. The council refused permission for night freight operations.

There is nothing pro GA here in England - I do own a vintage Piper.

I'm afraid we are all in the same boat, albeit in different oceans.

[yr right]

When I started at bankstown in the late 70s you could not get a a lot to get into the cicurit.
You could not get a parking space. Rex and piper had new aircraft every where. Then in the mid 80s the rot set in.

Now it's dead. Hangar rates have now risen past normal commercial rates for floor space.
One person I heard of had there rates risen 600% this year. Now if you have a support shop you just can't pack up and leave. Your casa approval has to be redone for the new premises the time and cost involved is just a killer.

Some off the people running these airports must be ex Russians straight from the iron curtain. Held in a frozen condition and rolled out as airport managers.

Not been to bankstown for a long time but it saddens me to see what happened to the busiest airport in the southern airport but then again the greens would be happy.

[FERetd]

Jack Ranga Quote:- "You lot need to get out more"

I would really like to do so, it's just getting more and more expensive to do it. I'm sure that your Australian colleagues feel the same way.

Avgas in the U.K. £2.00 a litre.

[4Greens]

How about the UNSW training school ? Is that going to be ok?

[BNEA320]

we've just heard that a foreign airline will be flying RPT services out of BWU next year, probably 3rd quarter.

[AACCI]

Here are a group of dedicated people doing something about this appalling situation.
Please consider making a contribution as this is the culmination of over eight (8) years of work and tireless effort to bring those responsible kicking and screaming to be held to account.
Minister Warren Truss is using your tax-payer dollars to fund a high-powered legal team - Ashurst Lawyers from Canberra to defend a position he rejected when he was last in Government.
If successful this action will be a watershed moment and turn the airport privatisation model on its head.










http://www.vision6.com.au/download/files/46993/1747923/logo_aacci.jpg


Website - AACCI (http://www.vision6.com.au/ch/46993/1728g/1772506/ce39d14p8b.html)

We Need YOU!

Dear fellow Aviator,

http://www.vision6.com.au/download/files/46993/1817383/WeNeedYou.jpg

AAT Proceedings

As you should be aware by now your Chamber (AACCI) has had proceedings in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) since August 2012. Our action is challenging ex-Minister Anthony Albanese's disastrous decision in May 2012 to approve the 2011-2031 Archerfield Airport Master Plan.

If permitted to stand unchallenged by your Chamber, the Minister’s approval would clear the way for Archerfield Airport Corporation (AAC) to proceed with an irreversible and permanent downgrading of the critical aviation infrastructure that exists at Archerfield Airport. This includes the unacceptable loss of the 04/22 runway complex, the Archerfield Control Tower, the fuel farms and above all would obliterate many aviation businesses without compensation.

This is solely an industrial land grab by AAC without appropriate regard to the consequences to and requirements of the aviation users (that's YOU!) and also the overall public interest both now and into the future.

The Chamber's action is now set down for trial commencing from the 18th November to 26th November 2014 with an airport site visit by the AAT Deputy President Hack on the 17th November 2014.

Up to twenty-seven (27) witnesses, (most of whom have made extensive written statements) will be appearing for the Chamber - including our expert witnesses. If you are a witness you will soon be receiving a summons to appear before the AAT. Although this will be for the entire period from and including the 18th November, the exact day or days you will be required will be confirmed closer to the time. Persons pre-approved by the AAT will be able to provide evidence by phone or video link.

All members and their supporters are welcome to attend the hearing but everyone who receives a summons cannot be present in the hearing room until after they have given their evidence as a witness. If you attend the AAT before you are called, objections could be raised against your evidence including the possibly of totally invalidating your evidence – so please exercise extreme care about this.

What will be achieved?

The AAT has stated they are not running a royal commission. That said, the main issues, properly prosecuted by expert legal counsel will result in the 2011-2031 Master Plan being rejected by the AAT and possibly replaced by the Chamber’s alternative master plan (which was ratified by the Chamber in General Meeting) being approved by the AAT to then become the 2011-2031 Master Plan.

This decision will not only help rescue Archerfield Airport from unscrupulous land development, but will help every other secondary airport and the ALOP airports throughout Australia.

It is extremely important to understand that this is not just an action for the benefit of Archerfield Airport alone.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the Department of Infrastructure and Transport clearly do not know their own rules. Both Government Departments have been acting merely as a post office and have not done their job.

There will be significant ramifications for the Minister and section heads of these departments from our proceedings as the spotlight is now turned on to what they have done.

Running these proceedings in the AAT has been and continues to be a massive and resource demanding undertaking.

This is a "one off" exercise to save your airport and your business – an opportunity that will not present itself again.

It is now the time for your focus, for your action, for you to play your part, and to help with the heavy lifting others have shouldered to “get us all over the line”.

To prosecute the trial for the Chamber, we are represented by our Solicitor and Barrister, both of whom have aviation qualifications and are familiar with Archerfield Airport. In addition to this we also have litigation support personnel (who are also pilots) and iconic expert witnesses donating their professional time.

Our solicitor costs $2000 per trial day and Barrister $4,000 per trial and preparation day.

We request each and every member to sponsor either the solicitor or the Barrister or both for one or more days. For most aviation businesses this is fully tax deductible.

You do not need to be a member of the Chamber to sponsor. The Chamber is an approved organisation to receive public donations for this purpose under the Collections Act 1966 (Qld). Donations can be made with anonymity.

You may chose the day (or days) that you want to sponsor. A list of the days and slots requiring sponsorship will soon be up on the Chambers Website and kept updated . (Note no names will appear thereon – unless you specifically request same) .

The AAT is open to the public and (unless you are a witness) you can attend to see what you are getting for your sponsorship day.

Where do I send my sponsorship funds?

The Chamber’s Bank Account Details for the “AAT Case Fighting Fund” are as follows:
Account Name: Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc.
Bank of Queensland – Springwood
BSB No: 124057
Account No:20220853
Don’t have the cash? – we can accept your credit card – donate on-line by clicking here (http://www.vision6.com.au/ch/46993/1728g/1834064/ce39d5cbp.html) and then selecting the 'Donate' button.

Know others that want to Help?

Help in sponsorship and extra litigation support and special project staff are needed.

Email this to your friend.



Lindsay Snell
President
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc


http://www.vision6.com.au/download/files/46993/1747924/AirportPlan.gif
Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce Inc
GPO Box 2511
Brisbane Qld 4001
Australia
Website (http://www.vision6.com.au/ch/46993/1728g/1772506/ce39d14p8b-1.html):- www.aacci.org.au (http://www.aacci.org.au)

[BNEA320]

Thornbird speaking of the land of the all bleck, can't any RPT New Zealand airline fly within Australia without having to deal with CASA ever ?

[Horatio Leafblower]

Sorry guys but flying just isn't sexy any more.

The re-development of aerodromes and the public apathy isn't a conspiracy... it is just reality.

To my Father's generation (now 65-80 years old) aeroplanes were an incredibly sexy machine that saved the world as they knew it. Pilots were hailed as heroes. Air travel was glamorous and private flying was gritty and technical and adventurous, for a generation of men that were (like Dick Smith) gritty, technical and adventurous.

Those of us aged maybe 40-65 have inherited some of our father's interest in the gritty, technical and adventurous but the last 20 years of GA have seen massive changes.

1/. No such thing as acceptable risk (for matters of public liability);
2/. No interest in dirty hands and little exposure to, or interest in, machines generally;
3/. The rise and rise of the safety/quality auditor and the uber-emotional response to the "Safety" red card.

For people with some money and a technical bent, things like motorbikes and jet skis provide a fun outlet for a fraction of the entry cost and a fraction of the regulatory embuggerance.

...and despite the hand-wringing faux outrage over the term "affordable safety", Blind Freddy can see that "Safety at any cost" (usually only incremental safety at exponential cost) is now regulating small aviation out of existence.

There is such a thing as "unaffordable safety" and this country is living it - and drowning in it.

Regulation, "unaffordable safety", audits and indifference have replaced the values that made Australia the great nation of the 1950s-1980s.

Where once we had integrity, public service, thrift, and common sense practical skills we now have corruption, self interest, profligagte spending and a nation of unskilled impractical housemaids incapable of making a decision for themselves or thinking their way out of a wet paper bag without googling the answer first. :ugh:

I keep saying here that Dick could help revive public interest in aviation through a media campaign and sposorship or spearheading an EAA-style Young Eagles program in this country, but Dick never answers. :suspect:

[Eddie Dean]

Alas poor Aviation, I knew him well Horatio

[Andy_RR]

I keep saying here that Dick could help revive public interest in aviation through a media campaign and sposorship or spearheading an EAA-style Young Eagles program in this country, but Dick never answers. :suspect:

I'll bet Dick could be interested in figureheading such a campaign, but to expect him to kick it off and direct it is a tall order. If enough aviation types could get together and agree on a strategy, he might be convinced to lend a hand.

However, I still see the malaise as much wider than just aviation in general and GA in particular. While our populous enjoys the benefits of the investments of the past and of other nations, we don't feel the need to bother our minds with technical stuff. You only need to refer to a) the current account deficit and b) the drop off in STEM participation to figure that out.

It will change, but it won't be change we currently believe in...

[no_one]

There are two things that will lead to the eventual demise of Aviation in Australia; Loss of access to airports and bureaucratic interference. I have the benefit of having lived in the USA for a while and learning to fly there. I have seen a different approach to aviation.

Part of the key differences between Australia and Here is how united the pilots organisations are in their fight to maintain their status quo or indeed even improve their conditions for aviation. Here is Australia thereare constant squabbles between the different branches of aviation. You only have to look at the threads on this site to find people complaining about gliders and RAAus, or suggesting that homebuilts need more restriction. The converse is true on other sites, with complaints about RPT doing straight in approaches at uncontrolled fields. Until the participants unite to a common purpose the continuation of Aviation in this country in under threat.

I am also amazed at how many Australians have never been in a small aircraft. While a high proportion of Australians have jetted off overseas far fewer have been in a single engine aircraft. This leads to a perception in people’s minds that private aviation is only something that a select few rich people can enjoy. It’s why the boat ramps are safe from “user pays”, even those who don’t have a boat know someone who does and at some pointjust about every Australian has been out in one. When they hear of an airport closure or increases in landing fees it triggers no more reaction than the rugby results might trigger in an AFL fan. For this reason it won’t be Dick Smith who is able to galvanise the populous to action but will take the effort of “regular”individuals, people who work “normal” jobs who like flying and not feeding bait prawns to flathead or being towed behind an outboard on water-skis.

Imagine if there was a program similar to the EAA’s Young Eagles (https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-education-and-resources/eaa-youth-education/eaa-young-eagles-program) program operating in Australia. The young eagles program provides free flightsto kids between the age of 8 and 17 in homebuilt aircraft by private pilots.Now some, here on this website, would recoil in horror at the thought; No commercial license, no AOC, experimental aircraft!!!! But if 50% of the kids in the Wyong area had been for a free flight the article linked above about the increase in landing fees at Warnervale could have been straight out of the newspapers “think of the kiddies” back catalogue. What politician would like to be the one facing the press in these circumstances?

The fixing of aviation can be done. It will take a change ofheart of a number of individuals and organisations. It will take a lot of work. I only hope that we are up for the challenge.

[fencehopper]

I think you will find that the exodus started around 1992 or so. That was when the FAC came along and jacked up the rents and costs and started to take in non aviation industries to pay for their custom number plates and fancy corporate logos. We had a small but profitable little maint. biz there but when the costs went up our customers started moving away and we could not afford the FAC rents and with the CAA/ CASA attitude it was just not worth it. Closed up and went sailing in the Whitsundays for ten years. I think that this was part of the CAA's plan to get rid of as many small operators as they could so they had only a smaller industry base to stand over. The big got bigger and the small just faded away.
BTW Dick who screwed up the original ANO95:10 for ultralights and made it compulsory to belong to those pecker heads at RAAus?
Fencehopper

[John Eacott]

I'm not sure what happened elsewhere when the Howard government sold off the airports

I wouldn't try to make this a political issue, since the planning and initial implementation was done by the Hawke and Keating administrations, starting in April 1994. The actual (Phase 1) sale was completed in July 1997 after tenders were called by the Keating government. Both sides are equally incompetent when dealing with Australian Aviation.

I flew two Keating ministers back to Tullamarine who were happily chatting away about what a marvelous residential development they had planned for Essendon Airport, unaware that the intercom included the driver. Since one was the Transport Minister Laurie Brereton and the other was the Deputy PM, Brian Howe, I wasn't too impressed with their commitment to general aviation.

[kaz3g]

. yr right

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 699
Can't put housing at bankstown as it is a flood plan.


Didn't stop them from developing Wallan for housing even though when it was an airfield there would sometimes be 12" of water in the hangars.

Kaz

[gerry111]

It's amazing what a bit of backfilling and drainage can do to increase the value of land for housing. :{

[wakefield]

Land - the modern gold rush!

[PLovett]

Part of the key differences between Australia and Here is how united the pilots organisations are in their fight to maintain their status quo or indeed even improve their conditions for aviation. Here is Australia thereare constant squabbles between the different branches of aviation. You only have to look at the threads on this site to find people complaining about gliders and RAAus, or suggesting that homebuilts need more restriction. The converse is true on other sites, with complaints about RPT doing straight in approaches at uncontrolled fields. Until the participants unite to a common purpose the continuation of Aviation in this country in under threat.

One person, and he's a no one (sorry couldn't resist), has got it right. While Australians are only prepared to whinge to their peers rather than get off their backsides, join an organisation that is prepared to fight for aviation, then GA will continue to go down the drain.

For all those who talk about CASA and the government being so stupid, look in a mirror. They know that they can do what they like because the Australian public are too stupid to put aside their petty grievances with each other to organise into a united front. It reminds me of the scene from Monty Python's "The Life Of Brian" where they keep complaining of the splitters. Just look at the threads we have had on splits in the warbird community, AOPA and others. Trivial in comparison with what is being done to aviation as a whole.

The Archerfield group reminds me of what was one of the very few successful groups to stop a major airfield being carved up for development, Jandakot. It was an example of a group putting aside their differences to achieve a common aim. Forget about government inquiries, that is just a re-arrangement of the deck-chairs as the results show that governments of all persuasions are to blame for the regulatory mess and the toxic relationship that now exists between the regulator and the aviation sector.

The great unwashed, better known as the Australian public, couldn't give a rats anus about aviation so long as they can get a discount fare to Bali or where ever. Besides, every government knows that if things get tough for them they can always press the button marked "xenophobia" and rely on our fear of the yellow peril to stop any mumblings of discontent.

The biggest danger to general aviation in Australia is US because we won't do anything but whinge to stop those who would destroy that sector of the industry.

[Oakape]

The biggest problem with aviation is ego. Everyone has an opinion & their opinion is the only one that's right! Everyone thinks that their area of aviation is the only one that really counts. Until you get rid of that & have people who support aviation rather than trying to run aviation & totally have their way, there will always be division. And when you have division its all over. Just a matter of time.

GA is also somewhat unwelcoming & I believe that ego is part of that as well. Every time I go out to a GA field & wander around I am watched suspiciously & never spoken to. All the pilot types are standing around in their groups talking & laughing & having a good time, but portraying exclusivity & superiority. I always feel like an outsider & even inferior at times. I therefore tend to never go near the aircraft & just watch quietly from a distance.

If I, as a current airline pilot, feel like that, what hope to those who are interested, but never actually flown or become involved in some way, feel like? Its all very well to say that people like us should just rock up, introduce ourselves & start chatting, but human nature doesn't work that way. If you don't actively invite people in, they will stand at the fence & watch & then eventually move on with their lives.

[gfunc]

I moved to Aus about five years ago after living in the US for 7 years and growing up (and getting my PPL) in the UK. I converted my PPL when I arrived and I've gone on to get my CPL recently.

I have made a couple of my own observations about the demise of GA here:

There appears to be a missing generation of PPLs in Australia - there are plenty of old fellas and plenty of debt-laden young boys and girls who want to press buttons in a shiny jet, but where are the younger and middle aged folk who want to fly for fun? The older guys and girls are gradually retiring and the young dreamers want out of GA ASAP.

I don't think flying is any more expensive relative to earning compared to 20,30 or 40 years ago, so there must be something else responsible. I'm sure having more and more pursuits to spend your money on is a factor, but my theory is that there has been less and less general interest in aviation in Australia and that this is fundamentally linked to the lack of public exposure to aviation. The only time the public see aviation is (i) RPT (in foul mood after being stung for parking etc) or (ii) prangs - i.e. never in a positive or exciting/inspirational light. GA firms are universally terrible at any sort of marketing (sticking a sign on the roadway outside your school is not sufficient in this day and age!), so I suspect the best way of swaying people toward aviation has to be through events like airshows. In the UK during the summer you have several big events every weekend and I believe these have been and continue to be instrumental in getting the general public interested and engaged with aviation. The US has airshows, fly-pasts at sporting events and of course the young eagle program. Maybe we have to plumb the depths of something like those awful reality TV shows :yuk: but we need something that makes people sit up, see flying and think "that looks like fun and I can do it".

Getting people through the door is only the first step; consistent with Oakape's experience my initial impression with several schools around MB was terrible - At best I was treated as an inconvenience and the school cat was most frequently the friendliest and most helpful member of staff. Most surprisingly this bizarre attitude to strangers (i.e. potential students) hasn't really changed much since the disappearance of the lucrative overseas zero-to-hero cadets after the GFC. This is a complete contrast to places I've been to in the UK and US, where the staff of the flying schools I trained at would be tearing your arm off to show you their aeroplanes, fill you with coffee and talk about flying. Why do schools and clubs insist on shooting themselves in the foot after doing the hard part of getting people through the door? I trained at four flying schools at MB until I settled on one that I actually enjoy being at.

I don't think all is quite lost yet, but the status quo will not only lead to a slow agonizing death!

G

[thorn bird]

gfunc,

Wholeheartedly agree, young people today, which most of your instructors are have no idea.

Its a service industry, people expect service, not some sprog kid who is convinced his/her sh..t dosnt stink because they have a few gold bars on their shoulder, treating them with contempt.

Someone should have told them they were on the bottom rung of the ladder to a real aviation career, with a long way to go.

Those people coming in the door are the ones paying your salary and expect service, and an experience for their hard earned dollar.

[CAR42ZE]

I like the discussions regarding the olden days at the larger 'secondary' airports such as Moorabbin, Archerfield, Bankstown, Jandakot, etc, etc, and how it would be hard to get a parking sport because of the amount of aircraft there. I also believe they serve a valuable purpose for not just the GA community, but also to the smaller RPT and charter organisations.

But I do have questions about this subject: According to CAssA, there are many, many more aircraft on the register now than back then... So where are they now? They all can't be R22s in the dust or Pipers parked up in places like Broken Hill.

Where in the industry have the golden days transferred to? If they aren't at the second tier airports (and they're certainly not at the first tier ones), then where are they? Everyone is saying GA is dead - but there are more smaller GA aircraft than ever before? Are you all sure GA is actually dead, or are you wearing rose tinted glasses?

I'm not having a go, it's just sometimes the stories don't match the numbers.
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/casadata/register/images/graph.jpghttp://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/casadata/register/images/anntotal.gif

[VH-MLE]

"I don't think flying is any more expensive relative to earning compared to 20,30 or 40 years ago"

With respect, I disagree. I recently renewed my expired instructor rating at YPJT (due to the many uncertainties involved with the Part 61 implementation). That exercise - which involved 2.6 hours flying in a C152 (1.3 practice + 1.3 for the test) cost $1030.

These days you pay airport fees to the greedy airport owners, ATS fees & GST - none of these were around when I learnt to fly & conservatively add around 50% more to the cost each flying hour...

Regards.

VH-MLE

[gfunc]

VH-MLE,

I admit that that quote lacks evidence! It was just my unscientific impression that an hours dual in a C152 cost of the order 1-2 days worth of 'average' wage both today and in years gone by. Sadly, the flight would probably be in exactly the same C152 today as it was 40 years ago!

I stand corrected.

Gfunc

[Horatio Leafblower]

CAR42ZE - with respect - your numbers finish at the start of the "Indian" training boom.

I would be curious to see the numbers to the end of 2013... that graph will have turned downwards sharply I reckon.

[gerry111]

It's rather telling that CAR42ZE's supplied graph is the current one on CAsA' s website.


2006! Goodness, isn't it now 2014? :sad:

[no_one]

The graph is also deceptive as the spacing of data points goes every 5 years up to 2004 and then every year. A fail in high school science.....

[Alchemy101]

Couldn't agree more.

Flew into YSBK last weekend, and noted just how run down it is. It is surely too busy to sell it off, but perhaps there is a major redevelopment on the cards (think public:private partnership with a reduction in footprint in return for improvement in facilities?)

I must say many Australian airports seem a bit run down in my recent experience - closed restaurants, shops, flying schools and terminals, and a feeling that things were busier in the past. I guess it's expected that the industry will remodel as interests and demographics change, but as a young person who has only recently learned to fly - I can't help but wonder what exactly the future will hold.

Looking around my local flying club, I'm 25, and I think the next oldest 'serious' private pilot would be late 40s. Lots of teenagers seem to come in for trial flights though. Most active club members seem to be in their late 60s/70s. Going through my training, it wasn't all very fun - but the reasons for this were never about cost. The instructors seemed burned out, and very pessimistic about the world / especially GA. I've noted this seems to be the case, especially on this site. Every question is answered in part by a stab at CASA, at prices, at regulations, at people who had 'wronged' the club. GA seems a negative place, in my short time in it! And it's actually a turn off, because I fly for fun, and don't like to spend my weekend being negative about stuff.

I enjoy going for a fly, and seeing new places, and persisted long enough to qualify for my PPL, but the excitement, the allure, the adventure, was not sold through the training. And I don't think that the glory days of GA are behind us ;)

So perhaps my experience is in part representative of others, and might help explain why YSBK's paint is peeling.

[VH-MLE]

Gfunc,

In principle you were correct (& I wasn't meaning to sound like a smart arse with my comment), it's just that there's been a significant increase in "other" flying training costs since the early 90's - largely due to airport privatisation & "user pays" (thanks Dick!) which has had a major impact on our industry...

VH-MLE

[triadic]

I am told that an hour's flying in 1935 cost about the average weeks wage.... If that is the case it is somewhat cheaper now...!!

Nevertheless it is not cheap any more. I recall hiring a PA32-260 in the late 60's for $22/hr wet....!!

[Centaurus]

With respect, I disagree. I recently renewed my expired instructor rating at YPJT (due to the many uncertainties involved with the Part 61 implementation). That exercise - which involved 2.6 hours flying in a C152 (1.3 practice + 1.3 for the test) cost $1030.


In fact you did well. I did the same thing in Melbourne (instructor renewal) which was 1.2 VDO (0.8 actual flight) in a C172 and forked out just under $800 which included ATO fee and $55 for one landing fee. ATC held us at the holding point for 10 minutes awaiting other traffic.

I remember the days when at Moorabbin, a pilot and his Warrior would tout for business at the fence near the tower and the pilot would dress in normal clothes (he wore a cravat I think) without all this white shirt, big wings and three gold bars nonsense. Pay on the spot, no receipt, hop over the fence or go through the gate and get airborne for one circuit. Next please. The kids loved it and some got the flying bug after that.

[gerry111]

1983, at Schofields Flying Club in a then fairly new Piper Warrior:

$86-00 per hour dual and $56-00 solo.


And my instructor was a lot older and wiser than me and didn't wear the silly gear that the young guys do today!

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

OK, I can play this game!

Back in the early-mid 70's when I learned to fly, a C172 at Archerfield was $22/hr wet.

My salary was $164/wk - let's call that about 7 x 1hr in a C172!

Dr :8

[just a dumb pilot]

For years now I have heard pilots and Aircraft owners explaining about the demise of General Aviation following the leasing of former Commonwealth owned secondary Airports. There is little doubt that ever since that happened we have had a long line of ministers from both parties who left the power at cruise and the autopilot engaged. The current recycled minister is proving once again that nothing has changed. His minder MM has kept many former ministers and the current one secure at the trough.


These people at Archerfield have taken on city hall and are applying pressure not seen before. They are to be commended and deserve our support if only every person who has expressed concern about the selling off of publicly owned airports supported The Archerfield AAT case with just $100 they can and will make a difference. The level of their commitment cannot be doubted !
This $100 will give those contributors more bang for their buck than a 10000 letters to Warren Truss all carefully answered by MM & co
Do It NOW!:ok:

[Oakape]

In December 1977 the NZ hourly hire rates where I learnt to fly were - C152 $24; C172 $28.50; C206 $46; PA39 $62.

If I remember correctly, my weekly take home pay was $125.

When I left NZ just 5 years later, in 1982, the rates had soared to - C152 $49.55; C172 $59.10; C206 $101.40; PA39 $136.80.

When I was looking around in 1977, one club was advertising a PPL for $1,287.50, based on average required hours. Another had a Victa 100 for $18/hr, a PA18/150 for $22/hr & a Maule for $30/hr.

These days, you would struggle to find any of these types to hire, except of course, for the 172.

[PLovett]

In real terms I think it is cheaper to learn to fly now than it was when I started. My first job (a very long time ago at the callow age of 16) I was earning the princely sum of $21 per week.The hire cost for the PA28-140 was $14 per hour dual and $11 per hour solo.

After board was removed I could only afford to do an hour a fortnight. I doubt that the hire cost today would be nearly 66% of ones salary but I do recognise that people probably have less disposable income today than I did then.

However, the aircraft I flew was purchased new and it was replaced with new. The then Dept. of Civil Aviation provided all of my documents (except the WAC) for free and there were no landing fees or air navigation charges. I could actually go and talk to a met and briefing officer and there were helpful people called Flight Service Officers at a whole heap of airports, none of which exists today.

You try and tell that to the young people of today and they won't believe you (in best Yorkshire accent).

[Creampuff]

Looksherry! Our Aeroclub used to be a shoebox in the middle o’ the rowed!

[dhavillandpilot]

It seems most of you lament the old days where there were no landing charges or ANCs etc.

BUT we still paid.

I can remember in the mid/late 1980s when I had to pay out something in the order of 30,000 for the registration of my C550 each year. Once paid then you cold fly to your hearts content.

The figures for aircraft hire quoted in this forum for way back then reflected this annual registration cost broken down to hourly.

Still most here are right, coming from a aviation marketing back ground most smaller aviation businesses don't have a clue how to promote their enterprise.

A good example is Bankstown, I am currently trying to persuade my Rotary Club to hold a flying open day with the proceeds going to a deserving charity here. But when you talk to business on the airport they all appear dis interested.

[Creampuff]

User pays is a necessity.

Otherwise they’d have to levy income tax, fuel excise, GST, Medicare levy, Medicare surcharge, flood levy, budget emergency levy etc. Oh wait….

[BNEA320]

someone has to pay for all those extremely overpaid & extremely underworked public servants, we don't need & never did need.

[RENURPP]

Alchemy101 are you learning at a club north of Sydney by about 43nm by chance?

[thorn bird]

probably not just an aviation issue.

Once upon a time we paid taxes and in return our government provided us with services.

Today we pay taxes, GST, plus almost every government service requires a fee be paid.

Governments don't build anything anymore, they charge a fee to someone for the privilege of building something and them charging us to use it. They also flog off every public asset they can find, which we then have to pay a fee to use.

I'm really wondering when parliament house will be flogged off to the chinese and rented back to us. If truth be told probably has already.

[CAR42ZE]

CAR42ZE - with respect - your numbers finish at the start of the "Indian" training boom.

I would be curious to see the numbers to the end of 2013... that graph will have turned downwards sharply I reckon.
It's rather telling that CAR42ZE's supplied graph is the current one on CAsA' s website.


2006! Goodness, isn't it now 2014? :sad:Sorry gents! Should have mentioned it came from: Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Aircraft on the register, 1928 to 2006 (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90135) I stumbled across it the other week when I was looking at available marks on the register.

I didn't know about the Indian training boom, I've only got a half-foot in GA. And yes, it does not surprise me it hasn't been updated lately. I'm sure our friends in CAsA are busy sticking their beaks into someones operations (please don't hurt me CAsA, I was only audited last December!)

[yr right]

The average deposable income has shrunk with the cost of housing power water etc. so for the average person now the cost has flown out the window. To commit to go for a fly when all other cost are so high it hard to justify. The cost of maintenance is relatively cheap per hourly rate. It cost more per service of your car than an aircraft. Most traders are dearer as we'll. the cost of paper work in regards to parts and traceability insurance liability hasn't help as we'll. Maint org now having to pay comercail rates for space is also making the cost of owning and renting an aircraft high as we'll. answers we'll I don't think there is any. There will always be a GA industry here in aust but as a for pleasure of just going for a fly I think your time is limited.

[v1aviator]

No offence, but why would I give me hard-earned to the Archerfield Chamber of Commerce who says the Archerfield Master Plan "is solely an industrial land grab by AAC", and yet AAC claims they just spent over $4 million on developing the airports first onsite aviation student accommodation facility??

http://www.archerfieldairport.com.au/Downloads/Media%20Release_StudentAccommodation_2.pdf


It doesn't sound like much of an industrial land grab to me, and certainly not something someone would do if they were trying to close down an airport! (unless that's just what they want us to believe before they bring in the bulldozers!!) :eek:

[thorn bird]

Well v1aviator,
guess your happy to see Archerfield become an industrial estate, the loan sharks and property developers win and everyone who wants to commit aviation move to Toowoomba.
Well old mate, wait till you see the corruption that has occurred at Bankstown.
Property developer = organised crime = corruption. Same formular all over the world, ever heard the name obeid?

[sprocket check]

I know this is about YSBK, but given the general area...

just heard Aeropelican landing fees... $200 ?????

[50 50]

As a regular YSBK user I notice that the plan originally derived by BAL just hasn't come about. I believe the concept was to price GA out of the market, thus making way for RPT and jet ops.

Phase one was successful, GA has been effectively priced out. But the hoped for RPT never came. Why? There is no infrastructure near YSBK to support it. No trains, busses or even a cab rank. When old mate airline disgorges a bunch of passengers, where are they supposed to go?

There is a terminal building that I have never seen open. But it has a car park filled with UNSW students, and not even a turning circle or drop off point. Welcome to Bankstown, I hope you have arranged a lift, on a bicycle, or rickshaw, or have the ability to teleport. It's the only way you're getting out of here.

[601]

supported The Archerfield AAT case with just $100 they can and will make a difference

I am sure that if 50% of the blokes who learned to fly at AF who now earn big$ "following their dream" followed the above advice, the AACC may be able to save AF.

onsite aviation student accommodation facility??
It is not much use to have onsite accommodation if there is no flying schools left. But there is always Griffith Uni just up the road who would probably welcome more student accommodation for overseas students.

[Alchemy101]

Are there any GA airfields in Australia that are flourishing?

[yr right]

Parts have zero to do with an hourly rate. The standard hourly rate for a car is around $150 plus an hour. Most work shops are o. Around $100 plus or minis an hour.
Lames don't set the rate the time taken or the cost of parts. It's no different to anything else. If you can't afford to maintain your aircraft to the level required sell it.
This blame the lame is just bull s$&&. The engineer has been supporting GA for ever. Time come now where it's not going to happen in the future.

[KRviator]

Are there any GA airfields in Australia that are flourishing? Temora, perhaps, due to their airpark and the aviation museum?


Gatton? A private airpark. Wedderburn? Privately owned by its' users.

[Perspective]

Quote: hi cleared,
"My far more technologically advanced", yep,
Bingo! (Read, much higher investment, development and technology)

" much harder working car"
Incorrect.

[yr right]

What about the $150 charge just to plug into the work shop computer to give you a code. That's it then the spare part cost that your held to ransom over.

Our what about when you need a solicitor. How much are you charged for a phone call. Photo copying. Etc etc.

When you all relize how we'll you all been getting it for maintenance maybe then you may wake up how we'll you been looked after. How much do you think it cost the average shop just to comply wit casa regs. Tooling. Workshop manuals. Tool calibration. Etc etc. then you take your aircraft away and expect that you can pay later and use the maintenance org as your personal bank acct.

Then put up with the casa clowns.

No wonder why work shops are closing down and no ones coming through.

[yr right]

So tell me what dose the basic cost for a maintenance library cost and then how much a year to keep it current ?

Edited by Charlie Foxtrot India

[no_one]

I think the posts above prove my earlier point about the lack of civility between participants in the industry.....

[Perspective]

So we go from the topic being bankstown airport-desperately sad, to this?
I think some professionalism on all sides would be good.
All of this is counter productive and does nothing more than to build
Contempt and disdain.
Cleared, then go somewhere where they can give you better service,
Don't put up with it if this is truly your experience.

The general consensus is that part of the problem with increasing costs in GA is tied in to the sell off of all the secondary airports.
I know that a lot of maintenance bases struggle to come up with the monthly lease Fee that has been imposed onto them, as the new owners of the airports sell off what land they can, and open up the rest to commercial operators whom are able to cover their lease costs far easier.
The hourly rate has lagged and has not increased at the same rate as most other industries over the last 20 years.
Rarely do I see the actual hours recorded and billed to most jobs either, hours are always cut off the bill, although this is probably happening less as the remaining maintenance bases tighten up due to their overheads increasing at sometimes 10% a year.
The recognition that general aviation is a unique and valuable industry probably resonates little with government departments.
Maybe the answer from here on in is the creation of more private-aero club style aerodromes for the smaller end of GA.

The fact is that as the hourly rate for engineers has increased to become well over 50% of the charge out rate, then the overheads to soak up the remaining, there is little to attract people to enter the world of owning-running an aircraft maintenance business.
After all, by the time you have spent the average 10 years or so to gain your licenses and grow your experience base, are privileged enough to gain a CofA,
find a facility, tool up, manuals, insurance etc etc, you would fairly expect to be able to expect modest return commensurate with the qualifications, and risk.
But that does not happen.
For an industry that apparently is full of thieves and open cheque books, I fail to see engineers living the high life! Far far from it.
Your best bet to lower the cost of maintenance, is, for example, just a thought,
Find someone who has the land, the Will to open an air park not too far from the action. Create an aero club or syndicate, everyone chip in to build a hanger-maybe issue shares. Them employ an engineer or two.
That way all you pay is wage rate plus a few percent to cover other associated costs.
Air parks are nothing new. Just a thought. That might work for private owners,
Would that work for a training institute?

[gerry111]

Perspective wrote:


"The recognition that general aviation is a unique and valuable industry probably resonates little with government departments."


I agree. And the Federal and State pollies, likewise. That's our problem!

[Perspective]

Forget the car comparison. If you must compare it
To anything, look at how fighters have developed over
Time. We don't fly P-51's any more, billions of dollars
Of investment results in a modern, reliable F18.
Bar the avionics, GA design and construction is pretty much still
At the mustang Era.
The topic is lowering costs, overheads.
Automotive sector is a massive market with billions in
Investment, Toyota sell, what a million cars a year?
They've sold over 40 million corolla's alone since the brand
Started.
As I said, GA is a unique industry, for ALL of our overheads
To be kept under control, a solution for all, must be
Found.
Symbiosis!

[yr right]

The comparison is that your car is deposable your aircraft in is. The manufacture of these old aircraft did not ever think they still be flying now. As these aircraft age there cost to maintain them is going to increase. It's not my job or any maintenance org to subsidise this. As it stands the amount of hours we cut is mind blowing.
And as know one has stated as yet a library to set up is going to be around 25 k to set up and around 10k a year to keep up to date. That's before you even undone a panel

[Runaway Gun]

I wish people would stop drinking before they post. It's so difficult to comprehend some of these.

[RatsoreA]

Here is the big difference between my car mechanic and my LAME -

I can ask both of them the same question for a quote, how long to replace the exhaust manifold on my - LAME, airplane - mechanic, car.

I get roughly the same answer, 3 hours.

The mechanic got this answer by looking in a book that listed my model of car, and the part that needed replacing and it gave an approximate time for it. He showed me this book, but I can't remember exactly what it was called.

I have no idea how my LAME arrived at this conclusion.

The mechanic had a spare guy standing around, so he helped on the job, and got it done in 2 hours, and I was charged 2 hours for the job and was able to pick the car up on time.

The LAME also had 2 guys work on my plane, at the same time, and charged me 2 X 3 hours for a total of 6 hours to complete the 3 hour job...

[Andy_RR]

Cars have been intentionally engineered to be low maintenance. Aircraft stopped being engineered in the '70s

If you were trying to keep a 1965-model car on the road you might have spent a small fortune by now too*, especially if the guvmint tells you you can't touch it yourself.

(* as well as having bad fuel consumption, poor crash safety and no airconditioning)

[RatsoreA]

yr right, way to miss the point entirely. It wasn't about the the specifics of the job, it was about HOW LAMEs charge. I have absolutely no idea what you are banging on about for the rest of your post. Try again, but in english this time?

Andy, my car was in the last 100 serial numbers of it's type to be built in 1989, which was designed in the 70's and put into service in the early 80s. No computers etc etc. Also, I have excellent fuel consumption, all things considered, AND A/C! I think I should be fine in a car vs car crash, but I wouldn't like to test it on a tree...!

[Perspective]

Guys,
Dick smith started this thread with an aim I believe to have a
Discussion about the state of secondary airports, costs associated
With them and any one with ideas as to how to inject some positive
Changes.
I posted an idea, I don't mind if it is Poo Poo'd, as long as you have a
Better one.
Inevitably it turns into a LAME bashing thread.
Jack, I respect what you are saying and your views, keep your "thieves" comments to your self, bloody Offensive, and does nothing more than invite others with similar thoughts Rightly or wrongly, to comment, completely hijacking the intent Dick had When opening the Thread.
I'm glad you are the obviously the proud owner of an RV10, great simple
Little plane. Not everyone has the choice of being in experimental Cat. Though.
What for them.
Back on topic.

[yr right]

Cars engineered to be low maintenance. I think not. Car engineered to be assembled on a production line. Large components bing bam thank you next. That is till they require repair.
Like a switch in a mates European car. $154 for the switch. 4000$ to change it. Requires the whole dash and most of the engine to be dismantled to gain access to the dash bolts.

The philosophy of aircraft has not changed and never will. Something that not a large requirement in a motor car.

Weight !!

[GarySnail]

I drove around Bankstown today and visited a few flying schools, trying to hire a Cessna 172 (with absolutely no success by the way - anyone who's interested please let me know if you have a 172 you would like to hire out occasionally). It was a Sunday with perfect weather, and the place was almost completely dead. I spotted just three aircraft landings in one hour, and a couple of rich guys taking helicopter hovering lessons.

Delving into the costs of operating at Bankstown, the answer becomes clear: it is far too expensive to run a business there, or even park your own plane. I would have to say, the reason is almost certainly that the owners indeed want to sell off the airport to property developers. It's a large, flat piece of land that would be worth billions. Once the airport is dead enough, the owners can plead that they have no alternative but to shut it down and sell it off. From the owners' point-of-view, several years of (I'm guessing) multi-million-dollar losses are easily worth a payoff of a few billion.

[Sub Orbital]

For info, I have heard that the Georges River golf club (adjacent to Bankstown airport) has been, or is about to be sold to B.A.L. Interesting.

[Runaway Gun]

Great - maybe it'll be cheaper to land on the green.

[BNEA320]

this would allow extension of runway(s).


Skyforce have 1 or 2 146's, but don't think they can take off with a full load on present runway.

[Stasi Hunter]

The general consensus is that part of the problem with increasing costs in GA is tied in to the sell off of all the secondary airports.

Perspective is on the right track - few of you appear to be aware of or even interested in the non compliance by Airport LEASE holders of their obligations under their long term LEASES. Neither is our bureaucracy which is where the corruption issue is so blatantly obvious. Annual AUDITS, adherence to contractual terms, obligation under Retail Leases Acts etc etc. all covered in the LEASES but no one bureaucrat interested.

Archerfield chamber of commerce have done a great job in identifying these and many other shortcomings and now the Moorabbin CC has also come on board, but industry support is almost non existent ! Maybe it's time instead of complaining amongst yourselves about excessive charges you took the time to read the official Acts and leases and see who is ripping you off and who is standing by and letting them. Get involved.

As to the selling off of land this is not possible with leasehold. BAL and other Airport operators are permitted to sub lease to others by building commercial structures eg. Bunnings. Good luck to them provided it doesn't interfere with Aviation. (loss of runways etc)

As to establishing private airfields, good idea but who will convince the local councils, planning/ zoning etc when even at the Cwth level there is no support. Operators join your local Chamber or Action group as AOPA appears a total waste of time when it comes to anything aviation. A USA AOPA would never have even let it get started. Apathy is alive and well in Apastralia, long live corrupt bureaucrats.

"Empty Skies are Safe Skies"

[43Inches]

For info, I have heard that the Georges River golf club (adjacent to Bankstown airport) has been, or is about to be sold to B.A.L. Interesting.

Moorabbin airport has had the additional land returned from lease to the council golf course now for 4 years or so. The master plan map shows an extension of 13L/31R and associated terminal for RPT, but it's only listed as potential development with no time frame. I would guess the land around the actual approach paths will soon be all factories and non-aviation related businesses. The only thing stopping the approach paths from being used is the land use requirements, but how long will that be in place if the runway extensions don't go ahead soon.

[Perspective]

The white paper produced by the government appeared very supportive of general aviation as a whole if I remember correctly, Will that turn into something tangible.
I am aware of a couple of times in the last few years of councils being supportive of the creation of a maintenance base by way of interest free loan etc.

Councils are pretty savvy these days, so although entirely possible,
I think you would have to attach to any proposal, a pretty robust, honest
Return of investment estimate, services gained and how attractive it might be
To an existing community.
In remote locations it would be easy to justify, but obviously that's not where most keep their aircraft.
As most of us live coastal, maybe the selling point for government and council would be the ability to, more easily service fire bombing aircraft for example.

The state government are only too happy to spend millions on leasing fire fighting and support aircraft and infrastructure, how about spending a few percent of that on government land to build some runways and a few hangars, some private body's, flying groups etc, can be the "body corporate" in effect, and viola', now you have a facility that the government wants, community want, and not held to ransom by private corporations. Just a thought.

[Andy_RR]

Cars engineered to be low maintenance. I think not. Car engineered to be assembled on a production line. Large components bing bam thank you next. That is till they require repair.
Like a switch in a mates European car. $154 for the switch. 4000$ to change it. Requires the whole dash and most of the engine to be dismantled to gain access to the dash bolts.


I don't think you understand the difference between repair and maintenance. Old cars were relatively easy to repair, but they required lots of maintenance. Newer cars are vastly more complex, with way more widgets and gadgets, but spend many more km on the road before they require even the very rudimentary scheduled maintenance that they do now. Of course, complex things are expensive to repair, but that's not maintenance and in fleet terms, recalls and design/production stuff-ups excepted, is relatively rare.

Look at the distance cars travel these days before they're considered scrap! 200k+ is common, and taxis seeing half a million clicks before things start to be replaced in earnest! Unthinkable twenty or thirty years ago.


The philosophy of aircraft has not changed and never will. Something that not a large requirement in a motor car.

Weight !!

Yeah, well perhaps you should leave the design philosophy to the designers. Weight is only one of the many design criteria. The real problem is that (GA) aircraft designs haven't actually moved on much from the 50's production technology, except perhaps in the less regulated sectors like LSA... If we were still driving around in 1980's Magnas and VB Commodores, driving would be as **** as flying in the certified aircraft fleet is today!

[Perspective]

FFS..........
I have not seen anyone yet, that come close to addressing Dick's original question.
His offer to do costings.
Here is a question then.
All of the fire fighting aircraft to a large degree are kept, maintained, assembled and initially at least, Operated from airports owned in a lot if cases at sold off secondary airports I assume. As such, the cost built in to contracts to cover these expenses must be significant, particularly when operating Very large fire fighting turbo props or jets.
What is the cost of operating at these airports.

-Parking, landing fees, transport to effected areas eg.(most bush fires are not at inner city burbs)
- what would be the savings to infrastructure with reduced time to effected areas and ability to operate larger aircraft closer to where they are needed.
-what could the projected savings be over the next century as people and infrastructure continue to move into more densely tree'd (bush land) areas.

I don't blame the guys who now own the secondary airports, for the most part, I highly doubt most of the people associated with them are too enthusiastic about aviation in general, in other words, GA aviation exists to a large degree because of peoples enthusiasm
For flying, love of it even, sense of adventure, it gets romanticised a lot if you will.
They have every right to engineer for profit, we will never be able to compete with amatil coca-cola or schenker logistics, or even Jeep. Essendon airport, most likely still exists only due to the major corporate Bizjet activity, and the people that own them.
So as it becomes clear that they can make significantly more money from large logistics companies and wharehouses, why other than their contractural obligations would they not lean that way.
Would a landing field reduced to just helicopter movements still qualify as an airport?

As the urban sprawl continues, incidents become more of a Media melodramatic plaything, and liability becoming more of a focus, land becomes more valuable, there will be pressure to move airports with a "large amount" of activity away from built up areas.
All of this is going in one direction.

I believe investment is sort of happening (airport upgades)with the government grants that have been on offer, so
In that respect it has been encouraging and supportive, although this does not change
The crux of the issue at larger, corporate owned inner area, airports.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Well, I'm not sure if this is useful or not, but here it goes.

I was getting to the point a month ago where I almost bought an aircraft for the first time, a Piper Pacer. I could afford to buy it, I could afford to insure it, I could afford to run it... I couldn't afford to store it. I'm a normal person and purchasing an aircraft was something I wanted to do out of love, completley lacking in any fiscal common sense, but my passion for flying is such that I was very keen. But it was just too much. Maybe in a few years... after everything has increased in price again

Now this wasn't at Bankstown, I can only imagine that BK would be worse in terms of aircraft storage. Paying thousands of $$ a year just to park an aircraft inside a shed, or even on a patch of grass is a bit of a killer. I'm not sure what the other fee's are like at BK, but they all add up.

I'm aware this isn't any great insight, I guess all I'm tryingt to point out is that GA might be busier in a private capacity if people weren't getting screwed out of every $ they have before they even get to say "clear prop." The passion is there for me, but its just too much.

[Andy_RR]

FFS..........
I have not seen anyone yet, that come close to addressing Dick's original question.
His offer to do costings.


I think his question was addressed in the second post.

...and his offer was to do cost savings, not costings...

[RatsoreA]

Junior,

YSBK charge you over $30 a day just to park outside on the grass.

Over $900 a month, just to cast a shadow over their land. It's not like they don't have the space either! $900 a month, that doesn't value add to the aviation experience. It doesn't keep your plane out of the elements. It is a ripoff, plain and simple. I really don't know how they justify such a charge?! I'm sure it doesn't cost them ANYWHERE near that amount for you to park.

[junior.VH-LFA]

That really is just outrageous.

I love flying more than I love anything, and it saddens me that in order to pursure my passion I need to either completley ignore every other financial aspect of my life, or win the lottery! :{

[Ultralights]

hangarage at YSBK is far less than the parking on the grass charge....

[thorn bird]

The $30 a day parking on the grass, hangarage fees etc are all I imagine calculated down to the square foot based on the present day valuation of the land, I cannot imagine what that would be but I wouldn't be surprised if it ran into a billion.

Deals can be done for hangarage I know, but 120K a year for a small hangar that might fit six cherokee's, if you can find one thats not full of carpets, furniture, tractors or cranes still runs to more than parking outside.

The commonwealth didn't pay a cent for the land but eventually charged through the FAC to park on it. Admittedly at a reduced rate.

They then leased but really sold it to the current owners for a couple of hundred Mil for the three airports, BK, CN, and Hoxton, which the new owners flogged off straight away for pretty much what they paid for the lot.

Probably most of that went in McBank management fees because BAL has some serious debt now even after flogging Hoxton.

Privatisation of our airports I believe can never be called as a success except for the interests of them that bought them.

It did nothing for the government because they haven't received a cent in tax since.

It hasn't been a success for the public, our airports rating very poorly around the world.

Its been a major disaster for the industry that uses them, captive to monopolies able to milk them of every cent they can.

I also believe that the corruption that has occurred with all the secondary airports make Eddie Obeid look like a saint.

[Creampuff]

Wedderburn looks very busy and healthy, as does Mittagong, as does The Oaks, as do many small strips near Sydney that are owned or leased by people other than spiv property developers. I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of owner-maintenance carried out on them as well.

[Frank Arouet]

QUOTE I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of owner-maintenance carried out on them as well QUOTE.


Human behaviour is a perpetually fascinating subject. CasA think like that too.

[Creampuff]

You're another interesting case, Frank.

I'll rephrase what I said, to include words that I thought were implied. I anticipate that many of the aircraft based at those places have a lot of perfectly legal owner-maintenance carried out on them as well.

[mickjoebill]

The commonwealth didn't pay a cent for the land but eventually charged through the FAC to park on it. Admittedly at a reduced rate.

My father was in the equivalent of the army engineers and help build underground culverts at Bankstown during WWII.

He doesn't qualify for government assistance because he wasn't in a war zone, he spent his 21st birthday away from home.




Mickjoebill

[Clare Prop]

They had to pay an annual payment to the council to compensate for the fact there would be no ratepayers there.

We still pay those "rates" though the only service the local shire provides is emptying the bins...and we have to pay separately for that. :ugh:

[le Pingouin]

Who maintains the road to the aerodrome?

[Kharon]

A glimpse of the future – Here (http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2014/10/14/nearly-empty-skies/) – where the risk of a mid air meeting has been reduced exponentially by clever regulation and diabolical costing.

L'P - There will be no need to repair the airport road and the bus company will only pay the increased cost to maintain 'their' bit: unless a concession to use the empty taxiways is issued. I believe that part of 61 could be used to grant a license to operate as where required. How else will they move the dog food factory staff or the pink bat production about the place, if not by bus ??.

What a mess....;)

[thorn bird]

Very interesting article K.

My Dad had a house in Spain back in the 60's. When he and my Mum toured by road, they'd stop at interesting places, visit the local aeroclub and hire an aircraft for a sightsee. From some of his Pic's it was really humming in GA back then.
Some of the comments perhaps tell it all. EASA rules and privatization have pretty much killed GA in Europe.

Some samples

Holy Joe (http://disqus.com/embed/comments/?base=default&disqus_version=a5e988c2&f=opinionleaders&t_i=1791%20http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F%3F p%3D1791&t_u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F2014%2F10% 2F14%2Fnearly-empty-skies%2F&t_e=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&t_d=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies%20%C2%AB%20Opinion%20Leaders&t_t=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&s_o=default&l=#) • 8 hours ago (http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2014/10/14/nearly-empty-skies/#comment-1640501731) I had my first flight in 1944.. The problem with General Aviation and private ownership in the U.K. & Europe (where it is much worse than the U.K.) is the cost and very high fuel taxation coupled with rigid and restricting Government Controls and other requirements & impositions. Which is why young Europeans flock to places like Florida, to learn to fly (My bold)

They'll flock to NZ as well once the true costs of Part 142 and 61 begin to bite.

passerby • an hour ago (http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2014/10/14/nearly-empty-skies/#comment-1641261111)
Could the infrequency of flights be related to the insane fees and governmental control that pilots must be subjected to over there...?
Government really will take away our freedoms, not only to fly but in other areas if we let them.
Wake up before the next election...(My bold)

Isn't that what Creamie has banged on about?

C. John Graham (http://disqus.com/embed/comments/?base=default&disqus_version=a5e988c2&f=opinionleaders&t_i=1791%20http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F%3F p%3D1791&t_u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F2014%2F10% 2F14%2Fnearly-empty-skies%2F&t_e=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&t_d=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies%20%C2%AB%20Opinion%20Leaders&t_t=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&s_o=default&l=#) • 5 hours ago (http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2014/10/14/nearly-empty-skies/#comment-1640790907) The same is true in Italy and Greece, and elsewhere we traveled on a recent 6-month round-the-world vacation. Except in New Zealand, sightings of GA aircraft were rare and consisted mostly of commercial sightseeing operations. We're very fortunate in the US. (My Bold)

Ah but NZ has PROPER REGULATION.

Richard (http://disqus.com/embed/comments/?base=default&disqus_version=a5e988c2&f=opinionleaders&t_i=1791%20http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F%3F p%3D1791&t_u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.aopa.org%2Fopinionleaders%2F2014%2F10% 2F14%2Fnearly-empty-skies%2F&t_e=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&t_d=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies%20%C2%AB%20Opinion%20Leaders&t_t=Nearly%20Empty%20Skies&s_o=default&l=#) • a day ago (http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2014/10/14/nearly-empty-skies/#comment-1639650451) I agree, it's a great shame. I feel this needs to be viewed as a warning to all pilots in the US and my home country, Canada. It's a stark demonstration for all of us who love GA, of what happens when you let people slowly erode your freedoms and the things you love. (My Bold)

[Clare Prop]

le Pingouin

Inside the airport boundary, roads to the tilt up monstrosities are maintained by Jandakot Airport Holdings. Once you get beyond them to the aerodrome bit the roads are not maintained at all.

Unless you count this as "maintenance". (by Gate 9 at Jandakot)

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h315/minnie_the_minx/pothole_zpsda883189.jpg (http://s67.photobucket.com/user/minnie_the_minx/media/pothole_zpsda883189.jpg.html)

[Howabout]

TB, and in regard to your post #122, I suppose the issue of HOX has been raised somewhere else on this thread. Nonetheless, and despite the passage of time, what I regard as sheer chicanery still sticks in my craw. That beautiful little airfield sacrificed to Mammon; aided and abetted by a bunch of pencil pushers that know squat about aviation. Same goes for the E/W at BK - nobody in authority in CBR had the foggiest about the importance of an E/W for GA in the basin. Either that or they didn't give a sh*t.

In respect of HOX, my wife hates a trip down the M7 because I go into auto-jabber every time we get abeam. I see those bloody warehouses where there used to be aircraft, grass and movement areas and just want to spew - all gone, never to be seen again.

I need a drink!

[Howabout]

Hi CP, isn't privatization just peachy when it comes to aviation infrastructure that was already owned by the Australian 'body corporate'?

Your pic is a sad but accurate vignette regarding the demise of GA, and the clueless that formulate policy in CBR.

I need another drink.

[Clare Prop]

Indeed.

My leasehold is currently flooded because water comes from the next lease and the road, over the crossover and onto my property.

I have been trying for two years to get them to answer emails about installing a drain in the crossover. Meanwhile my brick paving is all destroyed and the place looks derelict...no point fixing it as it will just keep flooding every time it rains.

[Pinky the pilot]

Clare Prop; Your situation as you describe it sounds actionable to me.

Thought of consulting a Lawyer?

[Clare Prop]

Last legal battle I fought with them cost me a fortune, even though I won. (lease assignment that they tried to block)

Last time I went to discuss leasing issues with them face to face left me very shaken, I am a toughie but some threats are enough to keep you awake at night.

So we are at an impasse; and to me, being ignored is preferable to those threats being carried out. The only slight win is that I have been able to use this as a lever to stop them putting my rent up for a while. They can't say my lease is comparable to the lease next door when they are bone dry and I am under water.

There is no organisation that represents people like me, one man bands that are just trying to make an honest dollar and succeeding, albeit under water for most of the winter. The local Chamber of Commerce just want to talk about the Master Plan and issues that affect everyone rather than individuals.

I'm too sick of all this to bother with a David and Goliath issue. So I'll just have to put up with all the water pouring in from the car park and the lease next door.

All the fighting to preserve the bush around the airport only to have it converted into a prairie of tilt up hideousness and massive traffic jams with a stroke of Peter Garrett's pen was enough for me.

[Pinky the pilot]

I am a toughie but some threats are enough to keep you awake at night.


Did you take along someone (a witness) with you to this face to face meeting?

Maybe time to involve local MP. Or even one of the 'excrement stirring' TV shows masquerading as a Current Affairs show?:E

Like my late Father (Upon retirement a senior Law Clerk) said on occasion;
"Don't get mad, get even. With interest!":ooh:

Just sayin'

[Clare Prop]

I'll keep my head below the parapet for now.

If they try to put my rent up that will change. I didn't take a witness the first time, learned my lesson; and have involved my local Fed MP since then but none of this will provide a drain on my crossover!

The problem is that to involve lawyers is beyond my means and they know that. Just involving an independant valuer at the last rent review was a major financial burden, I'm just a one man band. Also there is little that lawyers can do to enforce things until we get a Minister who actually gives a :mad:

Just demonstrating the reality of allowing foreign property developers to lease aviation infrastructure. Thank you Mr Keating for your :mad::mad: Airports Act.

[BNEA320]

just heard that someone else is looking at RPT into Bankstown.


Vincent were looking at it, prior to falling over in May.

[thorn bird]

Another one??

Oh good grief, until regulatory reform is accomplished, aviation in Australia is far to safe to risk wasting money in.

[BNEA320]

just heard, Bankstown to Melbourne (not MEL) RPT flights to commence next year.


Don't know which Melbourne airport, Essendon or Moorabbin.


Apparently backed by one of the big travel agency groups, who handles big corporate business who has offices at both end, not near SYD but western Sydney.

[le Pingouin]

Why wouldn't you want use Essendon for such a venture with the right sized aircraft? Terminal access is a doddle for the pax, no queues, cheaper taxi fare than Tulla to/from the city, rarely any large ATC delays. Sounds ideal! Spend a few bucks providing terminal facilities and the business traveller would feel right at home. If you're not connecting to a flight departing Tulla why go there?

[Xray Tango]

Had a wander around Essendon terminal lately ? The airport canopies are rusted to the point that their falling down, looks like a ghost town of yesteryear, needs plenty spent to bring her up to scratch. Good for RPT, think not.

[BNEA320]

you missed the point completely. Business men & women want to get in & out of an airport fast (who wants to spend any time at an airport ?)


Rental cars will be a lot cheaper at MEB as no outrageous airport charges on rental car companies that MEL & SYD get away with.

[Centaurus]

Terminal access is a doddle for the pax, no queues

The small food court served by Holly's café inside Essendon Airport Terminal building is perfect for a pleasant hour of conversation. No loud mouth okker bogans and screaming kids, no loud-speaker "music", friendly and attentive staff at Holly's, air conditioning, and a perfect view of aeroplanes going hither and thither. In fact one of the best meeting places you could ask for. Greg of Gee-Bees pilot shop always ready to greet you with politeness and a smile even if you are just browsing. Love the atmosphere.:ok:

[Jabawocky]

Possibly a JetGo kind of operation, small number but high volume on a baby-braer ?

If there is enough business travel demand, it sure beats the BS at the majors.

I have to go to Melbourne twice in about a months time, oddly enough the destination is out near Moorabbin, so door to door is 5 hours by RPT. Fly myself even at piston single speeds, is around 5.5-6 door to door. I will most likely do one trip RPT and one GA. Besides the obvious, the main attraction is avoiding BNE&MEL. The cost has nothing to do with it, and two up its equal or less.

A well researched and marketed plan could just work.

[le Pingouin]

I don't know the BK end at all but I'd say at the EN end you could easily save 30 minutes between minimal delay in the air, less buggering around in the terminal and a shorter trip to the city. Assuming something similar was achieved going the other way you're looking an extra hour or more at the destination. Sure, the terminal needs some work but if you're providing the right service that's not so important - you're not in the terminal long enough to notice :ok:

[BNEA320]

30 mins ? & the rest. More like a hour & 1/2 or more.

Jetgo aircraft are 1kg too heavy (20K & above require security at vast expense)

[sprocket check]

The graph is also deceptive as the spacing of data points goes every 5 years up to 2004 and then every year. A fail in high school science.....

or perhaps intentional misrepresentation of the CURRENT state of affairs by the Authority?

[peterc005]

The problem with YSBK RPT is the lack of good rail access.

Bankstown railway station is a 10 minute taxi ride and the drive into town is slow and painful.

If the RPT passengers did catch the train from Bankstown they'd probably get mugged by an Islander youth gang or caught up on a Middle-Eastern drug gang drive-by-shooting.

The streets of East LA, or Detroit are nothing compared to Bankstown, especially at night.

[rutan around]

or perhaps intentional misrepresentation of the CURRENT state of affairs by the Authority? I'm horrified you could think such a thing.:{Queenslanders should just take a hard look at Campbell Newmans multi million dollar advertisements with a graph depicting how much debt will be paid down when they sell all our assetts. Such honesty ! Such clarity !

I've heard of time distortion/ stretching but this graph stretching is new to me.

[BNEA320]

who uses trains ?


Don't even know how to get to the train station at Sydney airport & apparently more expensive than taxis if more than 1 person.


Bankstown airport has a Thrifty car rental depot & if commercial flights were to begin there, others would follow.

[peterc005]

@BNEA320 - I use the trains at Sydney airport all of the time. It's a great service and their are train station underneath both domestic and international terminals.

From memory, the return train fair from Domestic to Central station in the city costs $16. A taxi for the same would cost maybe $80 and take a lot longer.

Just walk out of the Domestic exit gate, down the escalator to the right and then take another escalator downstairs to the railway station. It's a really well integrated into the airport, quick, efficient and clean.

[TBM-Legend]

they sell all our assetts

We know "Queenslanders" can't spell but the Govt is not selling the bigger assets at all. What they are doing is selling the right to lease. Like anyone, debt should be brought under control...

Most bigger airports around the world are owned by non-Govts...

[BNEA320]

taxis will come if demand. Presume that taxis at SYD, like BNE & MEL can wait around for hours at times to get a fare. Better to sit at BWU for a few minutes than at SYD for hours.

[Hugh Jarse]

taxis will come if demand. Presume that taxis at SYD, like BNE & MEL can wait around for hours at times to get a fare. Better to sit at BWU for a few minutes than at SYD for hours.

Incorrect.

I had reason to divert a Dash 8 into BK a few years ago post-curfew at SY due Wx. My company managed to get 1 taxi to the airport for 50 PAX. When asked, the taxi driver explained that drivers have security concerns with BK at night and are not prepared to take a risk.

The only way to resolve the issue was to get QF Transport to send a bus 3 hours later.

[Ultralights]

funny, we have no probs getting a taxi at YSBK for private pilots that fly in from other areas. even late at night....

[Hugh Jarse]

I'm only speaking from first-hand experience with the taxi situation I encountered after a diversion. Things may have improved since then.

[LeadSled]

I keep saying here that Dick could help revive public interest in aviation through a media campaign and sposorship (sic) or spearheading an EAA-style Young Eagles program in this country,

In the mid-1990s Dick (and Boyd Munro) did exactly that with AOPA, and for their troubles (and hefty personal expenditure) were roundly and loudly condemned by large slabs of the GA community. --- who believed that grovelling to the powers that be would produce better results than political action.

We have seen how effective the current AOPA policy of mass grovel has worked.

And has happens here whenever Dick suggests we should have the so very successful US airspace management system --- where the phrase "clearance not available, remain clear of controlled airspace" is unknown, we get yet another concerted bout of all the reasons why "it won't work here".

Tootle pip!!

[ramble on]

Bankistan, Archerdishu, Essidong.

There's not much hope for them as viable airports.

[Sarcs]

M&M has sure kept this quiet...:rolleyes:
Truss Approves Bankstown Master Plan (http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/truss-approves-bankstown-master-plan)
07 Jan 2015

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss today approved the Bankstown Airport 2014 Master Plan.

Bankstown Airport submitted its Plan in October 2014, to replace the 2005 Master Plan.

“The Master Plan sets out Bankstown Airport's strategic direction for the next 20 years and provides information for the community about site operations and future development,” Mr Truss said.

“The Plan proposes a range of aviation developments including runway lighting upgrades and runway, taxiway and apron pavement strengthening.”

According to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, the plan seeks to support the long-term sustainability of the aviation industry in the Sydney region "consistent with the Australian government's strategic planning for Sydney region aviation—including the recent announcement of Badgerys Creek as the location for a Western Sydney airport."

While Bankstown Airport has been experiencing declining aircraft movements for some time, over the next 20 years aircraft movements are predicted to increase from around 220,000 movements in 2013 to around 298,000 in 2034.

No increase to the current provision for Regular Passenger Transport links has been proposed, and although the plan has been approved, individual developments contained within the plan still need to be signed-off by the Department.

Bankstown Airport is now required to publish the master plan within 50 working days. This comment from Beryl is spot on...:D:Beryl Lester. • a day ago (http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/truss-approves-bankstown-master-plan#comment-1775863092)
They kept their cards (plans) close to their chest. Looks like with stealth they will win. Those famous last words Bankstown will never become a busy Airport. Passing strange is that the presser for this announcement was only released yesterday but apparently the Miniscule signed the Master Plan on Monday...:confused:: Approval granted for Bankstown Airport Master Plan (http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/wt/releases/2015/January/wt001_2015.aspx)

For those interested here is what Truss has signed off on - 2014 Preliminary Draft Master Plan (http://www.bankstownairport.com.au/Corporate/Master_Plan/2014_PDMP/2014_Preliminary_Draft_Master_Plan.aspx)

I guess the issues with the McBank & Floodplains have all been addressed..or have they??

You Tube

[Clare Prop]

Looks like BAL have come up with a new revenue stream.

Send a bill for a "daily charge" for aircraft that are based at Jandakot and haven't been to Bankstown for about 15 years.

:mad::mad::mad:

[Stanwell]

Clare,
Que?
Could you expand on that for me, please.

[Nulli Secundus]

Anyone care to estimate what sort of offer would be in the ball park to buy the airport lease from BAC/ BAL?

[thorn bird]

Nulli, too much!!, what do you think a thousand acres of empty land smack dab in the centre of Sydney is worth??
Unfortunately it was ordained by a murky Machievellion way back when The leases were first let, that Bk would eventually be developed for the benefit of the shareholders.

They just had to get rid of a few pesky airplane operators first.

The minuscule is so senile now he will just sign whatever is put in front of him.

We are witnessing the end game of a conspiracy to finish General Aviation in Australia.

[Clare Prop]

Stanwell, today I received an invoice from Bankstown Airport Limited for a "daily charge" whatever that is, for an aircraft that lives at Jandakot and left Bankstown 15 years ago.

Looks like they are picking callsigns at random and sending out invoices for things that are physically impossible unless this little Cherokee has superpowers and can be in two places over 3000 km apart at once.

[Stanwell]

Ah, thank you Clare.
Similar to the 'landing fees' scam, eh?
I'll pass that on to a mate who was a bit concerned.

[Up-into-the-air]

In the last two senate estimates, there have been some serious questions about Bankstown, Archerfield and the other secondary airports.

The news as most who use these airports from time to time is not good.

The next senate estimates hearing is on Tuesday [Estimates daily programs ? Parliament of Australia (http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Senate_Estimates/Estimates_daily_programs)]

Clip on the LIVE button after 7PM to view. http://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/Watch_Parliament

There is commentary on previous estimates and the effect on Bankstown (http://vocasupport.com/bankstown-airport-what-is-the-legal-position/)in various places. These cover the situation and effect of the operator on the user. (http://vocasupport.com/history-of-bankstown-and-objections-to-lease-sale/)

[Romeopapa]

A question for Dick Smith who started this thread.

Where did you go wrong?

You were the man who was in charge all those years ago:ok:

[BPA]

And a pilot is in charge;

Archerfield Airport abandons plans for regular passenger services (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/aviation/archerfield-airport-abandons-plans-for-regular-passenger-services-20150224-13nmbq.html)

[Stanwell]

Romeopapa,
Did you follow the running battles he had with the 'vested interests'?
I was around at that time. No wonder he ended up with grey hair.
Mind you, I didn't necessarily agree with everything he proposed, but...


"Hell hath no fury like a vested interest posing as a moral principle".

[Romeopapa]

Hey I go back to the era of Bob Hawke claiming how easy it is to fly an aircraft and Brian McCarthy's tantrums changing the face of Australian aviation for ever:ok::ok:

[tipsy2]

Romeopapa I'm afraid you haven't been around this game long enough. There just isn't enough time to bring you up to speed.

Tipsy:rolleyes:

[LeadSled]

A question for Dick Smith who started this thread.
Where did you go wrong?
You were the man who was in charge all those years ago:ok:Romeopapa,
Where did Dick go wrong? In grossly underestimating the resistance of "the industry" to any change, and now so many of you are whinging, whining and bitching about the state of the industry, because you did not have the whit to understand the need for change -- and get behind Dick.

After all, what he wanted to do was apply a normal and rational business approach to Australian aviation, not an approach that said that, somehow, aviation in Australia was special and unique, and the experience of the rest of the world, especially USA, didn't count.

Indeed, the resistance to anything the Yanks did (do) was (is) illogical in the extreme, they had and have the lowest cost system combined with the world's best airsafety outcomes, but that wasn't good enough for us, we had to have, and have, a vastly more expensive system, with demonstrably worse airsafety outcomes.

Fortunately, the total of Australian GA is little more than a rounding error on the statistics for the North American continent's aviation, so we have little effect on the world wide stats.

The ridiculous misrepresentation of the meaning of "affordable safety" , just for starters, most of you preferred "unaffordable safety", now you are paying the unaffordable cost of unaffordable safety -- with lousy airsafety outcomes to boot.

Airspace wise, you are paying the cost of not having a proper risk managed and cost/benefit justified ( ie; ICAO) airspace management system. Instead, you have demanded and got an inverted system, as the risk decreases, so the CNS/ATM resources applied increase, and you are paying $$$$ for it.

How many of you actively opposed the direction of CASA, in recent years -- effectively opposed, you didn't, and as a result (amongst other things) you are now paying for the monstrous Part 61.

We have a current NPRM Part 132, another piece of gross overkill, applies to Limited Category aircraft --- and the Australian Warbirds Association Ltd. are supporting it --- which is about as smart as turkeys voting for Christmas ( or Thanksgiving if you are a Yank, like the CEO of AWAL ) ---- To roughly quote a former CASA CEO, about 60 odd pages of new crimes, all to solve a non-existent problem ---- this is just another example of the regulatory insanity gripping Australian aviation.

Don't blame Dick Smith, look in a mirror!!

Tootle pip!!

[Tinstaafl]

You don't realise just how bad the Oz system is - until you fly in the US, and...

...you don't realise just how bad the UK/JAR/EASA system is - until you fly in Oz.

Now Oz seems to be trying to move to an EASA based system!

In some ways I'm glad I fly in the US now (not pay & benefits) but the system here is a breath of fresh air compared to Oz.

Safety has always been based on 'affordability'. What changes from one era to the next is the perception of what is safe (enough), and what a country is prepared to pay for it. Dick just brought that idea to the forefront.

And, on the topic of affordable safety, just a couple of days ago I had a discussion with a wet-ink pilot on affordable safety. This time the topic was drug & alcohol screening. His position was that even if just one life was saved it's worth it. My counter argument was that - following the same logic - if even one life was saved then all pilots should be provided with instrument ratings and single engine aircraft outlawed. Further, the dollars put to D&A would be more effective if transferred to providing instrument ratings, multi licences & recurrency due to the utterly miniscule number of lives lost that were caused by D&A issues but the much greater loss of life due IMC, system failure & mishandling.

He couldn't see it and opined that both should be done. Never mind he's from Egypt and one reason for learning in the US is price! Talk about mutually exclusive options...

[LeadSled]

Tinstaafl,
I couldn't agree more, and FAA and the general US system must be doing something right, the air safety outcomes are head and shoulders better than Australia.

It is interesting to compare the approach to a BFR in US ( or NZ) compared to what is now seemingly required for the new Part 61.

In both the US and NZ case, the BFR concentrates on the areas where pilots kill themselves and their passengers, low speed handling, in short, concentrate on the stick and rudder skills --- and in my experience, the average standard of handling skills of a GA pilot in US leaves us for dead --- literally dead, have a looks at the stats.

What do we find here? Instead of 60-90 minutes of attention to the obvious, in AU, have a little practice cross country, where you can do at least one 180, as you turn around to come home. Do a couple of careful "approaches to the stall", but no stalls please, not required, and the instructor may have never done a full and exhaustive stalling exercise --- so he/she is not to happy about the idea. Some "steep turns" --- 35 degrees only please --- that's a steep turn??

In contrast, the US instructor has to be spin and recovery current. And like as not, a good proportion of the BFR will be with the stall warning light/horn on at large angles of bank with lots of power on --- to see if you can fly.

I always love the "some controlled airspace work" --- WTF- I have got many tens of thousands of hours in any class of airspace you can name --- so I need more straight and level practice in controlled airspace.And it is now being treated as a "license renewal", with a pass/ fail, and I rather suspect the likelihood of failure is directly related to the school's budget v. achieved revenue for the month.

No wonder two good mates of mine have recently sold their aircraft and bought yachts.

Tootle pip!!

[PRunella_2]

i retired from aviation in 1990 & have not kept up with the industry until not long ago when i caught up with an old mate who introduced me to this forum.
must say that i am totally gobsmacked by many of the comments on this forum, & of the downward spiral of GA.
to be fair young student enthusiasts are usually so besotted with flying, that the health of an industry & where it's going doesn't even enter their minds.

how many people do actually write to a newspaper 'letters' section on any topic to complain, not many. IMO, individual letters from all over australia about GA flying nowadays & how it's not doing as well as years ago, would carry some weight, though perhaps not as much as a concentrated lobby effort.

personally i believe it's the bureaucracy that's to blame for many ills, i DOT NOT believe that they ought to have a job for life, i think their tenure ought to be linked with their contribution to help any industry go forward, and be able to be removed from their jobs when they are not up to speed.

currently if the government or councils don't want to do anything they can because NO-ONE questions their lack of lateral thinking, stubbornness, not wiliing to listen to industry concerns, general incompetency and sometimes digging their heels in if they don't like someone.
with new ways of dealing with government bureaucrats then any industry ought to be able to flourish.

well anyway that's just my opinion. :)

[extralite]

..and wonderfully quaint it is.

[PRunella_2]

when writing to bureaucrats email is a waste of time, as they can easily be ignored & pretend it got lost in cyberspace.

1. always write a proper LETTER,
2. phone & find out WHO the right person to address it to
3. send through post & pay a little extra for TRACKING service. (don't think the old 'certified mail' where you had to sign to receive your letter exists anymore)

very hard for the receiver to pretend it didn't arrive with tracking. then you can legitimately claim they couldn't be bothered to address your problem or query.

[Lookleft]

phone & find out WHO the right person to address it to

Here's the thing. All phone numbers to government departments are often of the 131 prefix with automated voices at the other end. You will be hard pressed to find a human to talk to who even has access to an internal directory let alone giving you the name and number of any bureaucrat that you can send a letter to. Even within an organisation most contact is through email.

[PRunella_2]

sometimes with automated phone voices & a menu to select from, instead of using their menu, i have just pressed 0 (zero) & it frequently by-passes & takes to a live person.
though I admit it doesn't work 100% of the time.
give it a try.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

I admit it doesn't work 100% of the time.
Just like the live person you may get hold of - it is the government after all.