I have never had such a barrage of communication as that I have received about CASA’s introduction of Part 61.
The main issue being brought up by professional pilots is that there was no safety issue to address and the result will be tens of millions of dollars of extra costs that the industry can ill afford.
One flight instructor has written to me stating,
I have to spend something like $18,500 to keep up but for what reason? Am I going to be safer? I think not. Is CASA going to do anything about this terrible situation? Remember, a flight review in the USA done in a C172 covers everything – every airplane you fly and vice versa. Safety statistics in the USA are marginally better than ours given the weather and terrain within which they operate
Another pilot has written to me stating,
CASA was correct in that the majority of pilots will hardly be affected by the introduction of Part 61. These are the airline pilots.
The areas affected badly are general aviation, a catch-all for all that is not airlines.
The training industry and the private operator are now confused – worried, angry and fed-up with the ignorance of CASA to their role. The collateral damage will be the death knell of large parts of this industry – and for what?
Another professional pilot has come up with a “fix”…
(a) Amend part 61 so that one proficiency check/flight review per year
covers all types that a pilot flies. Without this there will be serious
problems, especially in the helicopter world.
(b) Form a committee with industry and CASA to rewrite Part 61, CASA must
not have a majority representation on this committee.
(c) While this is being done allow all rules, applicable at the time of
introducing Part 61, to stand.
(d) Stop believing CASAs self-audits and grand statements about how safe
they have made our aviation, it is the people in the industry who make it
safe and CASA is more of an impediment than a help.
(e) Audit CASA with a competent overseas authority, I personally believe
it is beyond repair and should be cleaned out, re-badged and started again.
(f) Our aviation regulator should be called the CAA and also be given
the role of fostering and supporting the aviation industry, not just being
the police.
Any further comments would be greatly appreciated.
If anyone is adversely affected in a cost way by Part 61, please put those details on this thread.