Gaunty, I fully concur.
The major downfall of GA is its lack of unity. Every operator is pitted against each other in an attempt to . .1. Undercut the opposition; or as Gaunty suggests. .2. Pit against the airlines on a passenger seat cost per mile basis.
G.A. will never compete against the airlines between major city pairs. They will simply be picked off by the airlines converting those ports from waypoints to landings. But regional centres with limited runway capacity are there for the taking. Unless GA adopts some of the tactics of the airlines by capitalising on ‘economies of scale’ it will forever perform as a hobby player. The industry sadly lacks unity. It should form a consortium aimed at buying power, negotiating strength and the advantage of relocating assets to benefit demand.
I have no doubt that sooner or later the regulator will insist upon the sidelining of old equipment. Just like most cabs and busses are sidelined, as early as five years in some instances. Such a direction would be the catalyst for a rebirth of our industry.
The old technology out there deprives travellers of the safety and operators of economics developed in recent times. These include engine reliability and fuel efficiency, avionics/instrument packages that enhance safety, improved performance and reliability that reduce operating costs.
Major companies and governments are rethinking the safety of the GA industry and moving towards other forms of transport to avoid serious risk management repercussions.
The new trend with manufacturers is to produce aircraft with five years warranty on both vendor and non-vendor components. Turbine engine manufacturers are gearing towards three year/3,000 hour warranties and 5,000 hour TBO’s. Some avionics suites carry a five-year warranty and have done for several years. But still we persevere with thirty-year old corrosion buckets.
Power by the hour has been around for some time on engines and at least one manufacturer offers an hourly pay-as-you-go parts program for airframe components. The latter is extremely beneficial to operators as aircraft are maintained in top condition ensuring excellent resale. Worn tyres or a gyro problem are fixed long before the canvas starts to show or an IMC incident occurs. Manufacturers will also operate a tracking system in conjunction with the parts scheme. When a service falls due a box of ‘O’ rings, seals, filters, lockwire and any spares needed will arrive at your service centre – beats the hell out of paying the 25% parts mark-up charged by many service providers.
A consortium of operators should be in a position to achieve lower financing and insurance costs, better prices by fleet purchasing, cheaper maintenance and steer prices back towards where they should be at for charter and LCRPT. Such a consortium would be in a better position to negotiate mining contracts or on-carriage with the airlines. A united front would generate greater power in dealing with the regulators.
The present industry is pulling in a dozen different directions and an easy target for the airlines who stamp out any possibility of a success. Look at the number of regionals taken over by Ansett and Qantas – their names disappearing into oblivion.
[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: dragchute ]</p>