Who represents GA to government in Australia?

[Horatio Leafblower]

I have been in GA for nearly 21 years now and the end of the world has come and gone several times.

We have had AMATS, TAAAAAAAATS, Affordable safety, unaffordable safety, operators shut down, operators allowed to operate.

Airspace reform has come and gone and come again and the circus goes round and round and round.

More serious has been the recent progress (or at least, push forward) in re-writing the CASRs.

In 1992 AOPA had a massive memebrship and would have been all over this. They would have:

1/. Reviewed the proposed changes;
2/. Digested the changes and educated the masses;
3/. Facilitated consultation;
4/. taken up the cudgel for the industry's interests; and
5/. helped the introduction of the improved, better-consulted regulations.

Now every time you raise a problem with the new regs, CASA's first line of defence is "This has all gone to consultation!"

CASA themselves have scheduled 2 whole days to teach ATOs how Part 61 works. How the hell is a small business owner (which most of us are) supposed to take out sufficient time to read, interpret, and digest 511 pages of draft legislation?

...let alone then doing the same for Parts 141 & 142.

Can anyone else remember how long we had to comment? Yes thats right 21 days. :ugh:

This is an unreasonable expectation on the part of CASA.

Parts 91 and 135 are coming and WILL have a major impact on the way we do GA in this country. Who is acting on our behalf? Who is accepting this on our behalf?

Who is reading it, digesting it and discussing the implications with industry?

As I have suggested in other threads, the ATO insurance issue could be neatly handled by a decent professional association that can be trusted to act in the interests of GA, but who would that be?

AAFI? :rolleyes:

AOPA? :suspect:

RAAA? :confused:

[Shagpile]

Maybe the new motoring enthusiast party senator ?

[tail wheel]

Twenty odd years ago GA was represented by the General Aviation Association (GAAA), Regional Airlines Association (RAAA) and AOPA.

I suspect GAAA no longer exists? RAAA has a web site.

[Old Akro]

Strangely, the RAAA seem to be doing the best job of speaking for GA at the moment:

A Bridge Too Far | Pro Aviation (http://proaviation.com.au/news/?p=1650)

I'm not sure which makes me sadder; the fact that we don't have a strong assertive group representing us, or the fact that we need one to be heard by government.

A few months ago when ex PM Gillard had an emergency summit on the car industry, everyone was there. Government staffers, department heads, union leaders, industry bodies - everyone except anyone directly from the car industry.

By comparison, each year in Thailand the PM has a roundtable with the CEO's of all of the major car companies there. No staffers, no unions, no industry bodies. Just PM Yingluck in direct dialogue with leaders of industry. Which country has a vibrant, growing car industry and which has a dying one?

Why won't anyone from government get their hands dirty anymore and learn about what they are representing?

[Frank Arouet]

Who represents GA to government in Australia?

PPRune I guess.:ok:

And The Senate.

Look at the Senate Inquiry thread with, (to date on a new subsequent thread), 289,762 hits, some by the media and government, with 1,639 replies.

[Lawrie Cox]

Actually tail wheel you had it mostly right.
The General Aviation Association (GAA) was a widely recognised organisation and an effective voice for the industry but like all bodies it was torn apart and eventually closed down. Around that era the Metal Trades Industry Association (MTIA) represented the Aero Clubs. As an industry from the pilots side we could talk to the two bodies and get some sense about the best for the future. We often disagreed but we also agreed many things and representation to government actually occurred jointly on many fronts.
The Regional Airlines Association (RAA) was formed to look after the third level airlines and it moved away form GAA, it too had problems with the second level carriers taking them over and moving all into the domestic corporate structure.
Governments basically dealt with them directly and the organisation both lost influence and members.
On the Industrial front we had all the local chambers of 'horror' take over and run the ideology debate instead of considering the capital intensive industry that we are.
Now the Regional Aviation Association of Australia (RAAA) has expanded from the former airline to attempt to provide an industry voice of influence (not industrial).
All power to them for that and many operator should join up and provide strength to the unique one voice that is needed as against the plethora of one man bands that we have had in the past.
Sorry i forgot AOPA but since the great australian's involvement it has never really recovered from when Peter P was the President and it had some respect.
Lawrie Cox
Australain Federation of Air Pilots

[tecman]

Old Akro, there are no doubt many reasons but the number 1 problem I see with many people in the mainstream parties is that they have never actually *done* anything. On both sides of what is laughingly called the political fence, they've been union organizers, political staffers and so on almost from the word go. Never had to be creative to turn a dollar, never had to solve a complex problem. Leads to a warped view of how the world works. Showing a bit of personal prejudice, I could mention that there may be about 2 engineers in the federal parliament, a bad state of affairs compared with some other legislatures with which I'm slightly familiar.

On organizations, it's dispiriting in the private aviation sector. I was an AOPA member for many years but it degenerated into a sand-pit for egos and in-fighting, getting so bad that it was impossible to rectify with the candidates on offer at the elections. And it's interesting that RA Aus are actually now starting to look like AOPA of a decade or so ago! While we might conclude that pilots come with a bit of pig-headedness that prevents us working together harmoniously, life experience shows you the same issues emerge in many voluntary (or part voluntary) organizations. It might be, though, that private aviators are less willing to put aside the personal and get on with the job.

I know there's an element of hand-wringing in the above and an obvious mitigation would be to get in and help out. While we help in a variety of other spheres, private aviation is a bit of a retreat for many of us from the politics of our day jobs. I freely admit, though, that too much of that view will take us to hell - and may have already done so.

[Frank Arouet]

since the great australian's involvement

It subsequently went to the dogs and became an arm of CASA who are an arm of the AFAP who are perhaps, an arm of the ALP.

All nothing to do with him.

[Lawrie Cox]

Frank my point was AOPA was respected before the involvement of the said individual, it effectively started its decline due to the campaign run at the time.
As for other comment i will take it tongue in cheek as CASA seem to answer to no one let alone AFAP and AFAP is proudly independent & unaligned with either the ACTU or ALP. Unlike others.
Lawrie Cox
Australian Federation of Air Pilots

[Old Akro]

Frank my point was AOPA was respected before the involvement of the said individual

I first joined AOPA in 1973 or 1974. My recollection is that its been a hamster wheel of internal power tussles since then. It certainly predates the individual of which you speak by at least 2 decades.

[Frank Arouet]

Lawrie;

It is not wise to mention "that" acronym here, so I'll be brief in my support for "that great Australian" without mentioning him or it.

Despite what you assert, the rot set in when they began to accept gratuities in the form of expenses and free advertising in the early 2000 years. The folks were not amused and demonstrated their objection by refusing to renew membership. In fact it crashed from 4,000 odd shortly after the then President claimed that number at a Senate Estimates under oath.

The era you claim prior to have had some "respect" evolved historically positive until another figure at the helm, not "the great Australian", began to count affiliates memberships as heads to bolter numbers. Neither in your mentioned era or later did they ever have the claimed 8,000 members.

There was a decline when the subscriptions went up fairly dramatically, but had this not occurred the financial crash that came about in about mid 2000 would have occurred sooner. This crash came about because of mismanagement and waste during the ego trips mentioned.

There were people actively reading and answering NPRM's up until then and their input was politically ridiculed until the organization became neutered. This also may have contributed to some "disrespect" although I can think of more blunt terms.

As I said previously not in any way related to the person you want to blame.

I apologize for "baiting" you and it was tongue in cheek.

The said acronym is now 100% "compliant" and hardly represents a bold and energetic opposition to all the :mad: coming out of Canberra then or now.

Peter P would be out of his depth today and is history that would never have evolved today.

[sprocket check]

So in other words HL, Xenophon be about it. Did he get re-elected?

[Horatio Leafblower]

Yep he did, and with an increased primary vote too.

BUT he is not an aviation person and he has better things to do than read legislation and try to evaluate its impact on aviation business; it's simply not his job.

GA has no effective advocate in Canberra.

I would like to think RAAA is a chance but I can't afford a $4000/year membership just to feel good :(

Should we re-form the GAA? Or would it be doomed from the start to be effectively just another aero club :ugh:?

[Kharon]

Once upon a time – in a land far away.

The message.

[Andy_RR]

Call me politically naive, but I reckon GA has to make its usefulness case to people who care about the country folk and isolated communities etc. GA (and the infrastructure thereof) is one of the few resources that can make service delivery to the rural and remote areas of our country possible and - if not too strung up with regulation - economic.

There has to be a case made to the people that care, not specifically about GA, but about the continued rural and regional development more generally. Warren Mundine is one guy that springs to mind (and has the ear of the PM), but I'm sure there are many others.

GA should be promoted as a bellwether for the health of rural and regional Australia. Decline in GA must portend decline for the regions (unless the new NBN/teleportation technology takes off)

[GADRIVR]

Horatio,

I'd put forward the proposition it would be money well spent.
Call the RAAA and come along to the AGM in December.
You never know who you'll meet!!!

[tecman]

Andy, you make some good points which, in a rational world, would count for a lot. But the bush counts for little in most politicians' thinking or sphere of influence. No better example than John Anderson, a time server transport minister who did nothing much for the bush or aviation, while being Nationals leader, transport minister and deputy PM. No help to be had from the other side either, the merits of the most recent ALP incumbent (Albo) being rightly scored at about zero in these forums. The present ministry essentially parallels the Anderson situation and I wouldn't be holding my breath for innovative solutions or decisive action.

[Aussie Bob]

Let's have a quick look at GA

Perhaps someone doing well? Nope, those doing well are doing well and think they need no representation.

Perhaps someone struggling? Nope, those struggling are cutting corners and are worried about the regulator looking too hard.

Perhaps the private owners? Nope, these guys go flying, bitch about maintenance costs and are busy doing other things to have the bucks to be an aeroplane owner.

Perhaps the students and private pilots? Nope, they lack understanding and would have no credability in an experience defined industry.

And if you chuck all four groups in one single room no consensus is ever obtained. Poor fellow is GA, unrepresented, dysfunctional and a dissapearing thing. Those with any years amongst us can be heard murmuring "we have seen the best it will ever be pass".

[thorn bird]

Bob, so very, very, true. Us old farts saw the best, and what a "best" it was. So many wonderful experiences, so many fantastic people, the good, the bad and the ugly that meandered about GA putting their personal stamp in the memory book.
I got involved in a small way in the GA association not long after its inception sitting on various committees. It soon became apparent that finance was the major problem. The regulator made it almost impossible by scheduling meetings all over Australia, those were the old two airline days when an airline ticket from Sydney to Melbourne cost about six months salary. They knew full well that it would be unaffordable for most GA representatives to attend. I believe the "divide and rule" philosophy was the regulators mantra then as it is today, and as my old dad used to say "He who hold'th the money win'th the argument".
The decline in GA is not unique to Australia and we are not unique in that because of our widely dispersed populations, the tyranny of distance and lack of infrastructure we actually need a GA industry to fill in the gaps. Think of Canada.
Where we are unique is there is no recognition of this either politically nor from our regulator. Elsewhere in the world regulators have recognized there is a problem and are taking steps to attempt to remedy the situation not make it worse.
New Zealand led the way with straightforward regulatory reform which has become the envy of the world and is rapidly expanding in its adoption. Even China, an emerging GA hot spot is considering implementing NZ reg's .
Some European governments are enacting new GA rules, outside EASA, because they can see EASA is killing the industry.
The FAA is actively reviewing their regulations to see where costs can be reduced to make GA more affordable.
Here, our regulator doggedly continues to write rubbish regulations, unique in the world, which stifle any chance of a resurgence of GA.
More than a quarter of a BILLION $ and 25 years to write is in my mind corrupt, because in no sense can the new reg's be considered "Reform", in no sense can they be considered to improve "Safety" and in no sense can they be considered to "Benefit" the industry they purport to regulate.

[outnabout]

Well said, Thorn Bird!! ^^^^

:D

[Defenestrator]

That sums it up Thornbird. :D

D

[outnabout]

Thorn Bird, further to your comment:

Who speaks for GA in NZ (as they appear to be world trendsetters in GA reform)? Who speaks for GA in China, if their GA is really starting to kick off?

Who does the lobbying in the background? Or do they just have pollies with some nous? :}

[YPJT]

Another area of non- representation not yet mentioned here is the impact of aviation security legislation on GA. Airports, airlines etc all have strong representation and input but never a peep from GA.:ugh:

[thorn bird]

Out and about,
I have no idea who represents the industry in those countries.
Perhaps their political masters recognize that industry in any form, no matter how fragile, is a good thing because it employs people, services community needs and promotes other unrelated commerce which does the same thing.
I hardly think killing off an industry through ignorance, corruptly regulating it out of existence is in the "National interest".
There has been a lot of discussion as to what the catalyst was that send NZ on their reform project, but I don't think there are many who could not say they did it very well, a few years, a few million $ as apposed to hundreds of Millions and a quarter of a century.
Their industry is now reaping the benefits, while Australia languishes in splendid isolation, that big rock at the end of the network that everyone shrugs their shoulders and rolls their eye's about.
Very soon we will be sticking out like a sore thumb, the odd man out in the Pacific and Asia because all the rest of the world is wrong we are right.

[Horatio Leafblower]

OK so some areas where a GA professional body/lobby group IS required (excuse those terms or acronyms which are obsolete but you will know what I mean):

- CASA regulatory reform- review & feedback

- CASA malpractice/injustice/complaints/dispute resolution

- DOTARS security & ASICs

- GAAP Aerodrome operator malpractice/injustice/complaints/dispute resolution

- Representation to government on policy direction;

- ATO professional standards liability limitation scheme

- Education to industry on those things CASA are doing that are not a bad thing, or a good thing, or not as bad as they seem (because CASA is consistently demonstrating that they can't do their own job)

All of the above would require significant and visible backing from the industry.

Does the RAAA or AOPA act for GA on any of the above? Has the RAAA or AOPA made any submissions on Part 61, or Part 141, or Part 142?

Who would help set up a new squeaky wheel for GA?

[bankrunner]

On the topic of politicians with possible aviation interests, I just noticed Clive Palmer's jet (M-ATAR) isn't on the VH register.

Regardless of what you might otherwise think of him, perhaps he has some sort of beef with CASA?

[Kharon]

This is one of those posts I know I'll regret; but there is a gentle zephyr of change wafting through the corridors of power; thus encouraged:-

Dear Horatio, I do admire that you want to 'do': to try and make things better; I really do. But the collective 'group' vehicle is beyond all repair. The vehicle has been repaired, only to be broken so often now that it's beyond practical redemption. (No, Minnie, it will not just buff out).

Australian GA is too small, diverse, selfish and fractured to ever gain serious traction, despite many repeated group 'best' efforts, going back as far the Wright boys. GA has only done well where there is a regulator with insight, knowledge, understanding with a minister supporting, at the moment, we have neither. Have a look at where the 'reformation' process was heading before Albo was conned into believing; the 2007 recommendations are almost identical to the recent Senate findings. Passing strange that it should be retrieved now, under FOI; someone is working hard behind the scenes, using the FOI act and preparing for 'awkward' questions. See here. (http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100096/f13-4067.pdf)... and where brother SARCS has nailed it down.. here. (http://www.pprune.org/8127166-post1604.html)

I believe the commission of inquiry is needed -(as promised), the appointment of a junior minister with the balls to use a large, sharp knife and the vitals of a few assorted sociopaths and psychopaths in a bucket, hung high, for all to see. Then if we get lucky, really lucky, we may get a DAS who knows how to do the job properly (e.g. M. Smith Esq. if available, or a look alike). Then watch, the culture of fear will vanish – overnight, the mantra of 'blood on your hands' will disappear like mist and the rule of the pedants, the inutile and the dubious will be over..

A decent DAS will root out for the law to punish, those who hide behind their perceived autocracy. A new DAS and a couple of lost houses will curb the cowardly pack. This would allow the 'good eggs', to get on with administering a small, diverse group of aviators with an even, practical hand. Targeting enhanced safety, job security and operational knowledge through working with industry, rather using it as personal piggy bank and/or whipping boy.

Perhaps there's more to gained by researching who would make a great DAS, nominating that person and reminding Mr. Truss of the promises made and his obligation to keep them....(lest he forget)..

Selah.

[Frank Arouet]

The words "Foster and Encourage" should be included in any mission statement by any real Regulator who has GA portfolio. This as opposed to "ruin and destroy" as is now the case. A few simple words put up by a willing MP as a Private members Bill" would achieve much I believe.

I can't hurt.

[thorn bird]

"On the topic of politicians with possible aviation interests, I just noticed Clive Palmer's jet (M-ATAR) isn't on the VH register."

Bankie, Clive's just being smart, if he's only using his aircraft privately why would he want to pay three times as much to maintain it if it was on the Australian register? Also much easier to sell overseas when he wants to upgrade, Australian reg's are not recognized elsewhere so selling an aircraft that's been maintained here becomes a nightmare and severely reduces its sale price. Get used to it the wealthy will more and more choose foreign registration as happened in Europe and the UK.

[Horatio Leafblower]

I thought Clive's aircraft was VP-CFP? (might be one of a few?)

Aparrently the F stands for "Frederick" but I admit it wasn't the first thing that came to mind :E

[bankrunner]

Bankie, Clive's just being smart, if he's only using his aircraft privately why would he want to pay three times as much to maintain it if it was on the Australian register? Also much easier to sell overseas when he wants to upgrade, Australian reg's are not recognized elsewhere so selling an aircraft that's been maintained here becomes a nightmare and severely reduces its sale price. Get used to it the wealthy will more and more choose foreign registration as happened in Europe and the UK.

That's the thing :ok:

Either Clive himself has dealt with CASA and found out what a crock of **** CASA's regs are, or whoever works for him who manages his aircraft has, and probably told the big man about it.

Either way, it might be worth dropping him a line and pointing out that this symptomatic of the general state of affairs for aviation in Australia? Given he's got a direct interest in it it mightn't hurt, and he might even be up for some ****stirring over it in Cantberra :E

[LeadSled]

Frank my point was AOPA was respected before the involvement of the said individual, it effectively started its decline due to the campaign run at the time.

Lawrie,
Why so coy about names?
AOPA was "respected" before Dick and Boyd breathed some new life into a moribund operation???
AOPA was "respected" then, as it is now, by the bureaucracy, because it then and now, represents no threat to the quiet life for our army of bureaucrats.
Tootle pip!!

[LeadSled]

Regardless of what you might otherwise think of him, perhaps he has some sort of beef with CASA?

Nobody in their right mind registers their aircraft in Australia if they can register it elsewhere. And most can!!
I remember, some years ago, a member of the CAA/CASA board was the Chief Engineer for Kerry Packer's fleet of aircraft, up to and including a DC-8-50 --- none of them on the Australian register.
Tootle pip!!

[Jack Ranga]

Hi #*+£

Thanks for the advice. However, your mentor has not advised you wisely.

His mentor told him to tell this prick to jamb it, but read on to get the picture

While you may have your Commercial pilot licence, we (as your first employer) now have to spend countless hours getting you up to commercial standard before we can clear you to line on any of our ops. Your training organization does not achieve this. Even CASA is aware of this problem but doesn’t know how to overcome it. So, we bear the brunt. The $2000 bond is simply to give us piece of mind that you will be committed while we work through this process. It is fully refundable after completion. You have just spent $20,000 on a MEIR which is not going to help you whatsoever with your first job but you are quibbling over small financial issues? Your flying school are probably telling you what you want to hear because you are paying them! Reality is that if you want to get paid for flying, you have to be able to fly commercially and safely. You will not be at that standard. I takes us 12 months to get a pilot up to standard and cleared to line on all of our operations. Flying around the country having a bit of a wally is very different to flying commercial ops.

This is not about the money. It is about you getting your first position into aviation, gaining valuable experience and hours, then moving on to the next step. We have employed more than 50 pilots over the years and many have remained close friends. Most are now Captains with Cathay / Virgin / Qantas / Jetstar etc.

We receive countless applications from young pilots seeking their first job in the industry and the reason that I am blunt in the initial interview stages is to ensure that we only consider those applicants who are truly committed and focused. By the way, some of our pilots are being paid over the award and they deserve it. If you do truly want to get some real experience and a start in the industry then you will need a different attitude. We know of quite a few young pilots who applied with us several years ago (with a similar attitude) who are still not working in the aviation industry.

We wish you good luck with your aviation career.

Regards

#*+*^ (this turd was offering the above applicant $100 a day as a CPL in Commercial ops)


Thanks for your time *^%#+
But after consulting some mentors, I'm not prepared to accept the role under the conditions. This being paying a bond and working for under the award rate.

Bravo young man, and to whomever his mentors are! Problem is there'll 50 others crawling all over this.

And you lot wonder what is wrong with this turd of an industry?

As one of my better mates comments, part of the problem are the smug bastards sitting in the cockpits of 737's & 320's who accepted this garbage in the first place. Kids get killed in piece of **** chieftains but, I'm alright jack in my Multi-crew cockpit.

[Horatio Leafblower]

There is no room for bad manners mate and I think a lot of what is branded "racist" and "sexist" these days is just bad manners in the wrong setting. The tone of the Email you appear to be quoting is pretty poor we would all agree - however you have not supplied us with the letter or email that prompted it.

There are arseholes in every industry. But that is not the point of this thread. :ugh:

[Jack Ranga]

That email was in reply to a job applicant. The applicant was querying why he had to pay a bond to work for said 'prick'. There were no endorsements involved to prompt a bond. The prick had not done a check flight with the job applicant so one would wonder how the prick could come to the conclusion that the job applicant's skills were deficient. And if they were deficient, don't hire the applicant.

The prick is well known in the industry yet he continues to get away with these practices. The reason I posted this in your thread, who represents GA, is that a great part of GA is a sewer. The people that have the power to change GA couldn't give a toss because they are out of it now.

Who represents GA? Start at the top of this garbage industry, treat the people who work it and make you your money with a bit of respect & then get your representation sorted.

The email I reproduced is without alteration.

Rascist, sexist........you lost me I'm afraid?

They are not my manners, I'll give you the name & address of who wrote it if you like? You can ring him and ask him why he pays his pilots $100 a day & charges a $2000 bond for the privilege of working for him.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Just saying the author was exhibiting bad manners, and a lot of people seem to feel free to do that without a second thought. Hence, some of the statements we see around the place that might have been meant as a joke but were just bad manners and in poor taste, and labelled as racist or sexist. But they were just in poor taste.

I get what you're saying about the industry. Its depressing.
:ugh:

[Jack Ranga]

Sorry, got your point!

If GA can't manage something as simple as an award wage is it worth saving/representing?

[Horatio Leafblower]

I know a Chieftain type operator who pays well (all full time salary and about $60k for 4 days/wk) and he is rewarded by an awesome and loyal team.

...the problem comes from the competition using casual pilots who have an "off farm" income so they don't need to earn flying income 5 days/week.

I have heard of Bongo pilots being paid $135/day on Horn, as contractors (ie: deduct your tax and super from that!)

I have heard stories of Chieftain drivers in Brisbane earning $35k.

How do the good operators survive in hard times? How do they maintain high operating standards and high levels of training when the competition continue the race to bottom on every front? :ugh:

...Mate it IS worth saving, and some of the new rules will clean out the bottom feeders. But we have to ensure the proverbial baby isn't thrown out with the regulatory bathwater.

CHeers

[Kharon]

HLB #39 –"..Mate it IS worth saving, and some of the new rules will clean out the bottom feeders. But we have to ensure the proverbial baby isn't thrown out with the regulatory bathwater."

Perhaps, good sir, you should examine the regulatory bathwater. Start here.. (http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100228/ar1213.pdf)

[Up-into-the-air]

Guilders:

I wouldn't "crow" to much about these submissions as I noticed there is a lot of joint membership of both organisations and employees of casa as well are in gapan.

Besides which, casa take no notice of submissions anyway.

They just use the submissions to confirm that there has been "consultation" with the industry.

[Aussie Bob]

Guilders, AOPA may well have made a submission but clearly AOPA are also good mates with CASA. One look at the AOPA web site will confim this. Sadly you can't both represent GA and also be mates with the regulator unless the regulator deciedes to foster and support aviation. At present CASA has no intention of fostering aviation.

Unfortunately GA need something with a little more balls than AOPA and it is for this reason I am giving up my 25 year membership. For a glossy magazine it is not worth the cost.

[Cactusjack]

CAsA don't give a toss about GA, there is nothing new about that. AOPA has been clinging to the buttocks of CAsA for some time now. Aussie Bob has posted a brief yet succinct analysis of AOPA on this thread. In reality AOPA have been a toothless tiger for a number of years now, fornicating with CAsA yet producing no tangible results. I have read the submissions, particularly in recent years, and all they were good for is a hearty laugh over an early morning strong black.
AOPA will need to sever their conjugal activities with CAsA as a starting point, allow their balls to descend and stand on their own two feet, and only then may some change take place.

[T28D]

Cactus Jack, Hear Hear, you are right on the money, it is improbable any reasonable change comes from conjugal pairing.

[Frank Arouet]

far better outcomes with CASA by working with them

Apologies for taking this out of the text to highlight something lost on many.

This mindset is why CASA are in the position of non accountability today. They work on the theory of "you're with us or agin us" and until the various "representative bodies come to terms with that they will remain outside any sphere of influence. You simply can't work "with" them and pretend to represent the members interests at the same time.

that is an absurd assessment and totally inaccurate

There are no apologies for this highlight. That statement itself is an absurd mis-statement of fact.

If there are two people in a lift and one farts, it's hard to blame it on the other bloke. The mentioned alphabet soup organization was instrumental in supporting the introduction of ASIC, indeed they wanted to issue the cards. They accepted cash to host "CASA roadshows", accepted free or token rates advertising in CASA blurbs, made submissions or didn't make submissions depending on the mood or benefit of individuals and became a "compliant" organization.

I could go on, but mere mention of "that" organization on these pages usually ends with exchanges of abuse and closing of threads. Posters should be cognizant of this "fact" as there is a lot of unsatisfied ex members with long memories still around. Oblique mentions are mildly tolerated from my experience.

[Old Akro]

AOPA decided some time ago that they could encourage far better outcomes with CASA by working with them on important issues and that has been an effective way of doing business for GA for some time now.

I've intermittently been a member of AOPA since 1973. Its trotted out this line as long as I can remember and in that time things for GA have gotten worse and its hard to point to indelible changes achieved by AOPA.

Over that time we have seen other special interest groups come and go who did not take such a kumbaya attitude but did make some inroads.

Dick Smith (pre CASA in the "2 years in the aviation hall of doom" Two Years in the Aviation Hall of Doom (http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/hall_of_doom.php)) era and Boyd Munro www.airsafety.com.au - Aviation reform without needless change (http://www.airsafety.com.au/) come to mind.

We even needed an Ameican (John Deakin) to blow the whistle on the appalling job that was done on the Whyalla Chieftan accident. Pelican's Perch #57:<br>The Whyalla Report — Junk Science? - AVweb Features Article (http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182152-1.html?redirected=1)

AOPA did not make a submission to the Senate Pel-air inquiry (although a past president did)

Lately, have we seen signs of AOPA supporting GA against CASA in issues like the John Quadrio affair?

At the moment the strongest voice for GA seem to be the Regional airline association via Jeff Boyd A Bridge Too Far | Pro Aviation (http://proaviation.com.au/news/?p=1650). They don't seem to share the softly softly approach.

Where have we seen this sort of advocacy from AOPA?

[thorn bird]

Ah Guilders,
member of the CAsA cyber warfare team are we?

[Up-into-the-air]

Yes Thorny another one

[Sarcs]

TB is it a coincidence or could it be that Guilders was having a beer with this diligent, break the mould, FF twaddler...:confused:

Posted not long ago in a galaxy far..far..away: Got questions or need info re aviation in Australia? New web resource centre set up for you (https://twitter.com/CASABriefing/status/399449416450338816)

Wonderful thing those flexi-hours!!:E

[Cactusjack]

Oh dear, only post number 3 and the gelding Guilders has lost the plot. Mmmmm I smell a Casasexual := Temper temper, he must be the offspring of the Skull? I can only imagine what his blood pressure will reach at the mention of Kharon or Gobbledock, or dare I say if a shanty, riddle or secret code be mentioned.

Let's face facts, CAsA's enthusiasm and support for ASIC was certainly, in part, driven by AOPA influences, and I think Guilders (and all his other identities on PpRune) are well aware of that. Now had AOPA and CAsA's relationship been chaperoned adequately then maybe it would have stopped at heavy petting, some French kissing or even some 'gazing into the eyes' and the occasional reach around. But unfortunately the two connected in a scene reminiscent of the love scene in Titanic (except maybe the love making took place in the back of a Yak or an RV-6?), and the rest is history. Just like an uninvited algal bloom, the unsightly mess has spread extensively through industry with CAsA as the main host.
Anyway, time is short and I have reluctantly decided to start reading Part 61 again, from start to finish, so I must twaddle off for a while.

[T28D]

Maybe his gilding of the lily is his predominant passion, certainly a CASA apologist with a bit of alphabet soup thrown in !!!!!!!!

[Frank Arouet]

IS NOT AN AGENCY FOR ADVOCACY! That is not their role nor should it be.....

The right to fly responsibly without undue................ Oh bugga.... what exactly is their role these days?

[Old Akro]

From the " our mission " page of the AOPA website:
By far AOPA Australia’s most important job is advocacy.

[Cactusjack]

Old Akro, has Guilders forgotten his AOPA creed or forgotten what is on his web page? Oh my. He desperately wishes to 'distance' himself from CAsA (sorry, although in denial there is to much evidence out there to the contrary that proves his robust connection), yet he is quite obviously still joined to the CAsA teat! (Once a Casasexual always a Casasexual)

Guilders;"I'll bite", I have heard a few 'different users' on pprune use that one :=

[LeadSled]

Folks,
What dose a Guilder do?? Looks like we have one who guilds the Lilly ??

Guilders, old maaaaaate!!!, you are so far from reality I am wondering if you should be let out without an escort.

Seriously, the only sadly brief time when AOPA was an effective advocate for GA was a brief period, when Dick Smith and Boyd Munro gave the place a good spring clean, and part of the prime policy was:

"Pay your own way, have your own say" in recognition of the axiom:"He who pays the piper calls the tune".

In the period from about 1995 through to the end of Bill Pike's term as President, quite a lot was achieved, and CASA knew that AOPA had the lobbying power, in that period, to get up dis-allowance motions in the Senate, as was demonstrated on a number of occasions. In this period, AOPA lobbying resulted in changes to the Act and Regulations that materially benefited all of aviation.

One was the removal of regulation that mandated fixed ELT, saving GA around $20M in '95 dollars for devices with a worse than 95% failure rate in real world accidents.

Another was a change to the Act, eliminating the provision that a pilot could be prosecuted for being negligent to him or herself -- a nonsense legal proposition --- which, incidentally, CASA is trying to revive.

Parts 21 to 35 would not have ever made it into law without the combined efforts of several thousand AOPA members all collectively lobbying.

In other words, without AOPA there would be no Experimental Amateur Built --- just one of the many things brought in with Part 21 (and SAAA did nothing to help push the legislation through against concerted opposition from elements of CASA)

There would have been no vast expansion of RAOz.

I could go on, but where has there been any significant AOPA "wins" --- real wins for GA -- since it ceased to be an activist organisation, and got into bed with CASA???


Tootle pip!!

[Up-into-the-air]

Well said leadie

A. I. P. A RIP. and the guilders of the world

[Up-into-the-air]

Well said leadie

and for interest: Regulatory reform? CASA costs $250 million so far | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/?p=2360)

A. O. P. A - RIP. and the guilders of the world

[Kharon]

Well that little fire fight drilled one of the buggers; now where's his mate, Rosencrantz I wonder ?. Searching -Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosencrantz_and_Guildenstern_Are_Dead)-for clues.

The main source of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is Shakespeare's Hamlet. Comparisons have also been drawn to Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot,[3] for the presence of two central characters who almost appear to be two halves of a single character. Many plot features are similar as well: the characters pass time by playing Questions, impersonating other characters, and interrupting each other or remaining silent for long periods of time. .. :D...:D Sounds about right to me. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

[Bell_Flyer]

Unfortunately GA need something with a little more balls than AOPA and it is for this reason I am giving up my 25 year membership. For a glossy magazine it is not worth the cost.

Amen to that. I've just dropped out too after 22 years.

[Up-into-the-air]

It took you guys that long to work it out.

It is a real pity that it had to go down that track. I have been a member of US-a.o.p.a and it is a great organisation.

Not due to the pilot population size, but due to the attitude and support of it's constituency.

[Kharon]

Well, a review is announced, due next year. It's time to answer the question posed by HLB #1.

If GA don't get some credible representation, the big end of town will gazump the show, the vested interests will bring on the razzle dazzle, ATSB will do the smoke and mirrors show, CASA will provide the dancing girls, the DOiT the trained seals and elephant show.

GA will contribute what exactly, last years flying cap, a scrap book of past operations or even a montage of closed workshops. I wonder if GA has the horsepower to take it to the inquiry or if the dear old donkey is so knackered and beaten that all it wants is to find a nice quiet paddock with a bit of shade, a bucket of water and some fresh grass to chew while it contemplates what used to be.

So then, who will represent GA at the next gummint sponsored circus?

[gupta]

Here's the review announcement
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/asrr/files/Ministerial_Statement_ASRR.pdf

Start near the bottom of P7 to see who is looking after the interests of both GA and the regional airlines

[Sarcs]

"Yes Minister there is a mole hole in the middle of the office...hmm yes I can also smell a strong whiff of cuban cigars eminating from the hole..":E

FFS this thread has dwelled on the subject of A.N.O.H.O.P.A := and how they spend a lot of time underneath the desk of the DAS's office and the general consensus was...W.O.F.T.A.M!!:ugh: Then we get this..


"I recognise that it is particularly difficult for the diverse general aviation sector to have its voice heard in a review like this and so I have asked Mr Phillip Reiss, President of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia, to take a particular responsibility as a specialist adviser to ensure that the concerns of general aviation and regional operators are well aired. His experience will provide valuable insight and technical expertise to the panel."


So Fort Fumble have deployed their Mole...well Minister here is a formal protest petition from the IOS and my name is number one on the list..FFS:mad:!

[Kharon]

I second the Sarcs motion: how can the review possibly have any credibility with a No Hopa on the panel.

Conflict of interest – probable.
Representative of GA – not likely.
Significant membership – they wish.

The complaints are made against CASA; how can a complete Casaphile be remotely considered 'independent'. Game over before the first ball is delivered. Remember, the rest of the panel probably have NFI about No Hopa Australia and are probably used to dealing with the US version, which is a different animal, worthy of some respect. Hunt with the hounds and run with hares - not possible.

I've sent my protest in, perhaps some of our co-mates and brothers facing exile could do the same. Truss is unlikely to change his mind, but it may put the other members on their guard. What can it hurt? No I'm not cranky, furious? well perhaps, a tiny bit - ....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gif

"BOLLOCKS !!!" (there now, that's better. It's been coming for a while).

[Frank Arouet]

What's the pay scale, or travel, accommodation meals and lurks allowance for a specialist adviser?

Q. Are you still on the payroll of mentioned alphabet soup organization gupta?

[gupta]

Frank

You know I'm not...

[Frank Arouet]

Sorry mate, I didn't know for sure. Last I heard you were crook but no details other than that regarding whether you went back or not. It's good to see you are out and about anyway.

Last time we crossed paths there was unrest because of the CASA "roadshows" and I haven't forgotten that. A lot has gone under the bridge since, but my feelings of being disenfranchised remain.

I concur with the previous posts.

[thorn bird]

So can anyone tell us what qualifies this bloke as an "expert" on all things GA? AOPA stands for "Aircraft owners and pilots" which to me means "Private". Guess it just illustrates the ignorance of our pollies of just exactly what GA is.

[Paragraph377]

Thorny, it doesn't show our pollies ignorance, it shows up our pollies continuation of the previous governments approach to hiding, distorting and avoiding the truth. They hire a Casasexual to review CASA! Jeez, I wonder how that will turn out! Oh how AOPA fans would have enormous chubby's about now? All that experience in slapping together their little rv6's and making CASA breakfast in the morning has paid off!
This decision from the Ministers department basically lets industry and the IOS know early on in the peace what the Liberal government intent is in relation to Australian aviation safety, so I guess in some ways it is good that we know now. I hope all the mum and dad frequent flyers are watching this space. The government you voted for are hell bent on ensuring that the massive decline in aviation safety which has been spiralling for a number of years now continues on its merry spiral into the ground.

Dear Senators, are you watching this? It would seem all your good work has been pissed against the fire, naughty naughty Ministers office. Anyway, your services will be called upon once again in the near future as it is inevitable, based upon what has taken place with Transair, Pel Air, Canley Vale etc etc that the clock keeps on ticking, the incidents keep occurring with frequency, and a giant smoking hole becomes more inevitable.

[Frank Arouet]

I think you are giving the Minister credit for thinking that he isn't capable of. He is simply not that devious to plan to thwart the IOS and Industry, (although by and large they are one in the same), so one can only imagine this happened by accident.

One hopes we are not hinting CASA suggested this turn of events to the Minister.

Shirley not?

[sprocket check]

Has anyone given Mr Truss another option? Is there any other body that DOES represent GA?

Refer HBLs original question…

What's the option GA?

Do you now band together, put aside your differences, bitching and bickering or do you take it, well let's just say as it's dished out. Your cries of TREACHERY! and SHAFTED AGAIN! and HE'S A NO HOPER! are most likely falling on deaf ears. Government doesn't actually have a vision for GA, nor should it.

If there was a remote possibility of an organisation forming to truly represent GA I would even probably put aside my anti-aero club attitude and join.

I'd even pay.

Hate to say it but GA needs a lobby group that is united and focussed on a group of directives. It must be:

1. Capable of communicating with EVERY aviation professional in this country
2. Capable of producing a clear set of objectives for GA in Australia
3. Capable of representing GA to the Government
4. Capable of presenting GA to the media
5. An AUTHORITY on all issues that affect GA
6. Able to command respect from its members
7. Capable of representing GA to the public
8. Capable of directly affecting the Ministers Review
9. Capable of representing GA to the point of NO CONFIDENCE motion to the government

It needs someone to be able to say to the Attorney General: "Your new rules and regs have failed their original intent and need to be scrapped"

Its members must give their representatives a clear mandate and charter and then allow them to fulfil these.

It needs to a PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION.

It also needs to be THE organisation to PROMOTE, FOSTER, and DEVELOP aviation in Australia.

It needs to have administrative, legal, financial, public relations and lobbying muscle.

It needs to be led by a visionary that has the capacity to embrace all of the above effectively. This can be an individual or a group.

GA needs a leader.

Just some thoughts on a reflective morning reflecting on the fact we are not here for a long time…

It is interesting to note that most of the issues the Review is dealing with relate to GA and small RPT ops. The three that are to do the report are all ex-executive airline material….

The Terms of Reference are not bad. Who will make sure the outcomes GA needs are presented?


sc

[Horatio Leafblower]

Thanks Sprocket,

I am heartened somewhat that the conversation has occasionally referenced the original question.

More concerning is the way in which several of the usual suspects immediately descended into squabbling over historical deeds, misdeeds and wrongdoings.

Sprocket has provided the exact requirements for a GA professional body.

Every time there is a defence scandal or policy announcement the media go to Neil James of the Defence Force Assoc. He provides a clear and concise reply. Why is there no voice for us?

The General Aviation Assoc needs to be re-born and afilliated with RAAA. It needs a clear vision, a strong voice, and freedom from the issues of the past which have diverted the original point of this thread.

[Up-into-the-air]

Hi HHB,

Well said, but how do we get away from the fact that casa keep on manipulating the facts to get their preferred result.

When there has been a good representative body, casa has "nobbled the horse".

[Horatio Leafblower]

Perhaps we need someone who is better at manipulating the facts?

[185skywagon]

HLB,
GAA.... A great idea.
Would it be modeled along lines of the AAAA's? Where do we sign?
185

[sprocket check]

It is occasionally (often) disheartening to see such fractures within the GA community that you could swallow up the Grand Canyon in them.

Most, if not all professional occupations have a body that represents the interests of their, well professionals.

Aviation has none. Aviation seems to be, in my limited understanding of the system, in the clutches of an organised syndicate that plays the role of lawmaker, policeman, judge, jury and executioner.

If the same requirements as for flying an aircraft were applied to driving a car just in terms of being required to know and comprehend the raw legislation, which is still written in legalese and not plain English, itself a complete failure of the original intent behind the re-write - there would be no cars on the road.

HLB is spot on. The GA representative has to make more noise and have a smarter PR and a better face on TV than CASA and shout the woes of GA not just across the reverberant halls of the dominion but from every mountain top, at every accident, from every trig station and every news cross.

It also needs to be pre-emptive rather than just responsive, it needs to dictate the agenda rather than follow. Pro-active rather than re-active. It needs to be telling the community at large how fantastic a job its members are doing, from saving lives to pretty pictures to traffic reports, to training the finest of their young, etc. Bring some joy back into the business!!

[Horatio Leafblower]

Sprocket,

I wonder if a successful TV campaign could be mounted? There must be TV/Sound production people involved in Aviation... somewhere?

General Aviaiton Industry Association.. GAIA... hmmmm

[LeadSled]

Sprocket Check,
Dream on --- multiple GA outfits on the one airfield can't unite in their mutual interests --- unite across the country??
Tootle pip!!

[Creampuff]

Leaddie is correct.

AOPA Australia and the type-specific clubs in Australia would achieve a lot more if they were merely affiliates of, and under the direction of, the US equivalents. Organisations like AOPA USA have professional lobbying expertise. Glorified social clubs don’t.

The important question is not: “Who represents GA to government in Australia?”

The important questions are: “To whom and how should representations be made to achieve beneficial change for GA in Australia?”

I can tell you at least two wrong answers to those questions: Making a “submission” to a government “review”.

Last time I’ll say it: The only glimmer of hope is professional lobbying of the people who will be non-major party aligned Senators with effect 1 July 2014.

[Old Akro]

So then, who will represent GA at the next gummint sponsored circus?

The real sadness is that it needs anyone. That government AND the public service are so removed from their constituents that they need someone to interpret for them. If they were doing their collective jobs, they'd know.

Why is GA treated as a special thing? The equivalent discussion of this does not seem to occur with road vehicles, or boats, or motorbikes, or most other endeavours that have a business / private mix.

Aviation is so over-regulated that we don't even know what it should look like anymore.

Road transport can mix road trains to light trucks, to tractors, motorbikes, private cars and historic vehicles all within the same regulator at a fraction of the administrative cost. Why can't aviation?

I can drive a 20t truck on a photo ID licence that I pay a couple of hundred bucks for every 10 years with no medical requirement. But to fly a 1 tonne aeroplane I need an annual medical, annual flight check and biannual security check. The combined annual cost of this probably approaches $1000. Really?

My guess is that the ministerial review is really about trying to decide what to do with the Senate hearing and about getting CASA / AsA & ATSB to play well together.

It is said that achieving long term cultural change requires 1/3 of the management to change. I can't see this will happen in the shelter of public service land in Canberra. So, we will continue to tinker at the edges and wonder why the end result doesn't vary much.

[sprocket check]

Creammie and Leaddie:

I am not suggesting a social club.

And I agree that there needs to be a strategy as to how and to whom as you say representations, lobbying, etc are made.

But to do that effectively you need a backbone and you need smarts and most of all the support of the industry at large.

Individual lobbying might get a couple of questions thrown in at Senate Estimates. Organised action that is constant and consistent will stir the pot.

The questions Old Akro asks need to be made public, need to be made a point of so strongly that it embarrasses the PTB and exposes the mockery of the system.

HLB:

Yes, a successful and effective campaign can be done. There is a plethora of social media, TV, radio, etc that can be utilised and there are people we all know that are excellent at it. That is one of the great things about aviation-it attracts all those kinds of people, capable, intelligent and even willing.

The issue is there is no one willing to stand up and lead.

[Horatio Leafblower]

What a pity.

Oh well. we're buggered then.

If only Dick would actually listen to the industry, instead of fighting us all the time and telling us what we want.

I might give him a call tomorrow, I still have his number from last time he threatened to sue me for something I said on PPRuNe :ooh:

[sprocket check]

Don't waste your time.

Dick is not a likely leader, he is an entrepreneur and as such has nothing to gain from a professional association unless he gets financial reward in some sense out of it. Being a private pilot it's of no interest to him. Just my view based on very little other than a few comments on Pprune and observing him since I was about 13.

Further, it seems there are too many chips on shoulders between the industry and the man.

You either want someone like General Tito who unified the Balkans into Yugoslavia, kept the Russians out and the Croats, Serbs and the rest at peace with each other. And kept the country in pretty good prosperity, certainly relative to other former Eastern Bloc countries. Except that Tito is dead a long time now.

Or someone less military but more intellect.

Yes, aviation is pretty buggered, in the true sense of the word.

The regulations are unworkable.

Hands up the pilot that hasn't committed an offence against the regulations that carries an offence of strict liability?

Criminals, every one.

Why would anyone risk their lives, in every sense, in pursuit of giving other people, SLF usually, the benefit of easy and fast and safe transport?

Maybe these kinds of questions need to be asked those that want to be flown?

From Wiki (a succinct version)
In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability (including fault in criminal law terms, typically the presence of mens rea). Strict liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability), corporations law, and criminal law.

[Guilders]

Just for the record, the introduction of Part 61 is set to be delayed until September 2014! You saw it here first!:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Yeah Sprock you're right about Dick. Obviously inhaled too much MEK while in the hangar yesterday :uhoh:

[Kharon]

It's to be hoped that the 'big end' of industry have been looking hard at either adopting new the rule set and jacking up prices to cover the impost; or, more sensibly bugging out and moving shop to a sensible regulatory regime. In a honest attempt to answer HLB question, been poking about to see 'who' is doing the heavy lifting on behalf of the 'lighter' end of the industry.

The two standouts both have their roots in engineering, Jeff Boyd (-RAAA (http://www.raaa.com.au/about.html)-) and Ken Cannane (-Amroba (http://amroba.org.au/newsletter)-). Seems to me a lot of trees could be spared by simply providing an individual statement supporting their efforts. The amount of 'front of house' work done is impressive, but the work done 'back stage' is truly remarkable. Well done both and thank you.

The rest just seem to be like those 'nodders' you always see stood behind some windy polly; nodding away furiously at their masters words, which is (IMO) no way to represent industry.