Originally Posted by
Lead Balloon
No worries.
Every country will ‘have their own version of regulatory interference’.
That’s because all rules are, ultimately, about politics.
Folks,
At a meeting at Bankstown, Kim Beazley, then leader of the opposition, and as a former Minister for Transport who had no time for the CAA/CASA, made the following observation:
"In the US, aviation is so large the bureaucrats can't micromanage it, in Australia it is so small they can, and because they can, they do".
This, and the fact that the military have has an entirely disproportionate influence of CASA (Australian civil aviation started out as a branch of the military, one Colonel Horace Brinsmead was the first "Controller of Civil Aviation") are two more vital battles to be fought and won, but it must start with a workable set of rules.
Which, as Lead Balloon correctly points out, would eliminate a make-work program costing $20M plus per year to produce unworkable nonsense, which has driven heavy maintenance off-shore, and is driving GA into a "graveyard" spiral.
In 1998, when the remit of the PAP/CASA Review finished, we left a Part 91, and Parts 66/43/145 ready to go, they were based on the US equivalent, but further simplified. I probably even have copies on an old hard drive or disk somewhere.
Somebody needs to get the message to McCormack that this was all done as Lib/Nats. Government policy under Nationals Ministers, all he need to do is talk to John Sharp and Mark Vaile, and take up where they left off --- they and their PAP were not snowed by the bureaucracy.
Tootle pip!!