Dick,
Could you please quote a credible, reliable and authorative source for your "outrageous" claim: To put it simply, the airspace system before 27 November 2003 added millions of dollars to the cost of general aviation.
It is your qualification If used correctly: If used correctly, the NAS system has the potential to be very safe and to save general aviation large amounts of money – this will assist the industry to be viable again and employ many more people.
If used correctly relates to the training and education which has failed this implementation; and in this regard you shoulder much responsibility.
Your graph is descriptive, but so too is the raw data:
Key Indicators
General Aviation, 2002
• General Aviation flying continued to show a decrease in activity in 2002, with a drop in flying hours of 0.9 per cent. Aerial agriculture flying fell by 33.6 per cent from the effects of drought conditions across much of Australia. Charter, business flying and test and ferry activity also decreased by 4.4, 1.8 and 9.9 per cent respectively. Aerial work recorded the largest increase in flying activity, with a rise of 11.2 per cent. Private and training activity also saw more moderate increases of 3.2 and 1.1 per cent respectively.
• The major activities in 2002 were charter operations (445,700 hours, down 4.4 per cent on 2001), training (410,800 hours, up 1.1 per cent) and aerial work (327,100 hours, up 11.2 per cent).
• 270,200 hours were flown for private purposes including recreation and personal travel. Sport aviation flew an additional 80,600 hours in ultralight aircraft, 122,200 hours in hang gliders and 32,300 hours in gyroplanes. Recent gliding activity statistics are not available, but totalled 63,900 hours in 1998/99.
Hours flown ('000') in General Aviation
Year Private Business Training Agriculture Aerial work Test & ferry Charter TOTAL
1992 255.4 204.2 421.6 80.9 256.7 28.2 403.9 1,651.0
1993 265.3 212.3 436.8 89.2 278.8 28.2 393.4 1,703.9
1994 256.9 198.5 419.5 78.9 301.7 25.9 424.4 1,705.7
1995 251.0 189.1 430.6 94.5 302.4 28.2 465.7 1,761.3
1996 261.6 182.8 444.9 117.4 285.7 26.2 480.4 1,799.0
1997 266.7 176.0 449.5 128.4 307.4 27.6 483.7 1,839.3
1998 263.0 163.8 478.5 139.2 312.4 26.6 494.6 1,877.9
1999 275.9 153.3 448.8 126.3 306.6 26.6 504.6 1,842.2
2000 248.5 136.3 413.6 115.0 296.9 27.9 476.7 1,714.8
2001 261.7 144.9 406.2 106.7 294.2 23.2 466.0 1,702.9
2002 270.2 142.2 410.8 70.8 327.1 20.9 445.7 1,687.7
Sorry if the table is corrupted check it out here.
http://www.btre.gov.au/avstats/genpage.htm
Quote from the 2002/2003 Airservices Annual report (page 89) and the Charter Letter, Ministerial Directions and Notifications:
“..It is the Government’s view that Airservices has a responsibility to operate in a way that promotes the general health of the aviation industry, but this does not require Airservices to ensure the viability of any individual operator, nor will it require that the aspirations of any particular aviation sector be met.”
Given this government charter - what place is there for you amongst the other industry players, other than a lobyist seeking best advantage for your commarades. Why not are the other legitimate concerns, reasonably argued also valid?