206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pursuing Happiness
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
I think that a perfect world would be great where operators don't push their pilots to fly at all costs and where pilots are strong enough to simpily say no.
But sadly this aint the case.
I think that CASA should bring the skydiving industry into line with the rest of them. It certainly wouldn't solve all the problems but it would at least get them pointing the right way so to speak.
The point needs to be made that it's not just the skydiving operators that push their pilots to break the rules, I've had it with charter too (just not as much).
Another point is that during my time with PJE i had more interest from CASA in how we were operating that I did for the same amount of time in charter. Must have been a couple of dodgy boys or girls before me.
At the end of the day it comes down to the pilots.
Just say no
But sadly this aint the case.
I think that CASA should bring the skydiving industry into line with the rest of them. It certainly wouldn't solve all the problems but it would at least get them pointing the right way so to speak.
The point needs to be made that it's not just the skydiving operators that push their pilots to break the rules, I've had it with charter too (just not as much).
Another point is that during my time with PJE i had more interest from CASA in how we were operating that I did for the same amount of time in charter. Must have been a couple of dodgy boys or girls before me.
At the end of the day it comes down to the pilots.
Just say no
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Isn't it funny how we often hear that CASA should leave us alone. Rack off and leave us to do what we know best. As soon as something goes wrong within a portion of the aviation Industry, we cry that CASA did nothing and they are to blame.
Seems like we can't live with them and we can't live without them.
TBT
Seems like we can't live with them and we can't live without them.
TBT
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Maitland
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
I am a helicopter pilot, commercial, and in the past I have conducted parachute operations in the SY area. Not many, in fact only about six drops. The thing is, for me to do this type of operation I had to be working under the umberella of an AOC, the company operations manual had to have parachute operations included, we had to have everything in place and we could have been subject to audit by CASA. With this in mind, we had to have all of the usual paperwork, passenger manifests, weight and balance etc. all available if required.
I obviously know nothing of how the fixed wing world does its parachute work, only what is read on this forum. A lot of very good points put across but it's not that easy to understand the actual ins and outs of this type of operation.
Maybe CASA should change it to a commercial/air work operation, maybe they should stay away from it. There would be some improvements and some restrictions. Make it safer? Who knows. Make it easier to do? Who knows. As someone has said earlier on this thread, it does come down to the PIC, he/she does have the ability to say "no".
Just a comment from a neutral observer.
I obviously know nothing of how the fixed wing world does its parachute work, only what is read on this forum. A lot of very good points put across but it's not that easy to understand the actual ins and outs of this type of operation.
Maybe CASA should change it to a commercial/air work operation, maybe they should stay away from it. There would be some improvements and some restrictions. Make it safer? Who knows. Make it easier to do? Who knows. As someone has said earlier on this thread, it does come down to the PIC, he/she does have the ability to say "no".
Just a comment from a neutral observer.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: between 800HP
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
They are all fare paying passengers so why shouldn't they be any less entitled to the same level of Saftey surviellence
If you had done the yards in GA you would no doubt see some sense in this line of thought. A lot of others do. If you don't agree I cant imagine you have been living in the real world of aviation,Cirtainly not a side I've seen in my last 16yrs.
Things need to be changed so future Blokes and Birds can work under a fair set of Standards
This could only be a win win for aviation.
although if you were a parachute operator maybe not the best change for you
You need to decide my friend which side of the campfire you are on.
RWS888
If you had done the yards in GA you would no doubt see some sense in this line of thought. A lot of others do. If you don't agree I cant imagine you have been living in the real world of aviation,Cirtainly not a side I've seen in my last 16yrs.
Things need to be changed so future Blokes and Birds can work under a fair set of Standards
This could only be a win win for aviation.
although if you were a parachute operator maybe not the best change for you
You need to decide my friend which side of the campfire you are on.
RWS888
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
RWS, from reading your reply it would appear you are missing many important pieces of information:
CAR206 defines fare paying passengers, assuming you are talking about RPT, fixed terminals, fixed routes, fixed times blah blah blah.
I dropped Parachutes todays, so you are again incorrect.
Parachuting in an extreme sport, chartering an aeroplane to go sight seeing or flying Virgin to Brisbane is not.( http://www.skydivecairns.com.au/aircraft.htm )
I am paid very fairly by this operator, well above the award, why because i have a backbone, i negotiated a fair deal at the beginning ( do not undercut others and will not work for crap wages, which you obviously do and have done ).
Things do need to be changed, the only way this is bound to happen is by people not doing what you appear to have done, fly over weight with defects etc etc for crap money by under cutting other pilots for the work.
You have no right to be spouting wisdom, you are being judged by your actions.
CAR206 defines fare paying passengers, assuming you are talking about RPT, fixed terminals, fixed routes, fixed times blah blah blah.
I dropped Parachutes todays, so you are again incorrect.
Parachuting in an extreme sport, chartering an aeroplane to go sight seeing or flying Virgin to Brisbane is not.( http://www.skydivecairns.com.au/aircraft.htm )
I am paid very fairly by this operator, well above the award, why because i have a backbone, i negotiated a fair deal at the beginning ( do not undercut others and will not work for crap wages, which you obviously do and have done ).
Things do need to be changed, the only way this is bound to happen is by people not doing what you appear to have done, fly over weight with defects etc etc for crap money by under cutting other pilots for the work.
You have no right to be spouting wisdom, you are being judged by your actions.
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Originally Posted by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower
Parachuting in an extreme sport, chartering an aeroplane to go sight seeing or flying Virgin to Brisbane is not.
Even as a pilot who hates the idea of sky diving, most of the sky diving aircraft i've seen I reakon jumping out of it is the smarter thing to do than stay in it.
I know of 3 mates that did dropping, and 2 of them grounded a/c due to serious defects, both were told never to return. The other after working for months asked if it was possible he was finally paid for his work, he was also told not to return.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Directly under the sun....... now.
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
I think you are coming out a bit harshly LHRT.
You say you are getting paid above award, what award? It is illegal for you to be paid for skydiving ops.
If skydiving was not a private operation at least the law would not be on the side of unscrupulous operators, and that can only improve pilots chances of being paid well in this industry. By the way I do get paid always have but it is pretty miserable all the same.
Tandem passengers(notice not tandem students) are members of the public who deserve the same safety standards as charter passengers end of story.
Have your tandem passengers ever had it explained to them that their aircraft can be operated in private catergory and as such the only maintenence required by law is an annual inspection, and that 100hourly etc are only reccomended?
Why should dz operators get an easy run by CASA. And can you tell me how the APF can self regulate with so much vested interest, look at the area reps, all dz owners in qld at least. Very clear conflict of interest. Tandem wind limits went from 20 to 25 kts, gear did not improve, skills did not improve but it was a chance for operators to make some money.
Can anyone tell me the last time jump pilots were penalised by CASA or the APF? Pretty common knowledge that we go through clouds, what about woolongong when tandems dropped through cloud and kms out to sea?
I worked at one of the busier dzs in country and never saw a CASA inspector or nor did any of my colleagues? And as for APF audit does a skydiver really know how to read MR and do weight and balances?(skydiving pilots excepted)
LHRT if you are getting paid well hats off to you but if more operators were like your boss perhaps pilots would hang around in industry a bit longer and overall skill levels would improve especially at the smaller non-turbine dzs.
end of rant not really directed at anyone but anyone that is defending system as it stands is more than welcome to answers some or all of my questions.
You say you are getting paid above award, what award? It is illegal for you to be paid for skydiving ops.
If skydiving was not a private operation at least the law would not be on the side of unscrupulous operators, and that can only improve pilots chances of being paid well in this industry. By the way I do get paid always have but it is pretty miserable all the same.
Tandem passengers(notice not tandem students) are members of the public who deserve the same safety standards as charter passengers end of story.
Have your tandem passengers ever had it explained to them that their aircraft can be operated in private catergory and as such the only maintenence required by law is an annual inspection, and that 100hourly etc are only reccomended?
Why should dz operators get an easy run by CASA. And can you tell me how the APF can self regulate with so much vested interest, look at the area reps, all dz owners in qld at least. Very clear conflict of interest. Tandem wind limits went from 20 to 25 kts, gear did not improve, skills did not improve but it was a chance for operators to make some money.
Can anyone tell me the last time jump pilots were penalised by CASA or the APF? Pretty common knowledge that we go through clouds, what about woolongong when tandems dropped through cloud and kms out to sea?
I worked at one of the busier dzs in country and never saw a CASA inspector or nor did any of my colleagues? And as for APF audit does a skydiver really know how to read MR and do weight and balances?(skydiving pilots excepted)
LHRT if you are getting paid well hats off to you but if more operators were like your boss perhaps pilots would hang around in industry a bit longer and overall skill levels would improve especially at the smaller non-turbine dzs.
end of rant not really directed at anyone but anyone that is defending system as it stands is more than welcome to answers some or all of my questions.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
G'Day PPruners,
This is only my first time on, but would it usual for all this discussion regarding regulation to continue on this type of thread? Until more is know about the cause of the accident, is there a more pertinent thread for such discussion?
Regarding the possible causes, would anyone have any knowledge of a NZ accident a few weeks prior to this one which may have been caused my over heated and seized turbo due possible lack of ventilation in conversion?
Sorry to be asking so many questions first time on!!
Condolences to all bereaved and thoughts and prayers with those survivors - get well soon.
Diatryma
This is only my first time on, but would it usual for all this discussion regarding regulation to continue on this type of thread? Until more is know about the cause of the accident, is there a more pertinent thread for such discussion?
Regarding the possible causes, would anyone have any knowledge of a NZ accident a few weeks prior to this one which may have been caused my over heated and seized turbo due possible lack of ventilation in conversion?
Sorry to be asking so many questions first time on!!
Condolences to all bereaved and thoughts and prayers with those survivors - get well soon.
Diatryma
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
HOD,
Industrial Relations and CASA's definition of an operation are in no way related, so you are incorrect, it is illegal not to be paid. As far as award, in QLD there is not Aviation Award, although i and those other pilots i work with are being paid more than the AFAP award for Single Engine Turbine / Multi Engine Piston ( http://www.wagenet.gov.au/wagenet/Se...=0&quickview=Y ).
How can the industry be self regulating you ask ?, well CASA realised in its Charter many years ago that it is interested mainly in the protection of "Fare Paying Passengers", there are many facets of Sports Aviation ( infact all facets that i can think of ) that are self regulated, incidently who is better to regulate an industry than those who know the most about it ?.
Conflict of interest, ohh my yes, there certainly is, but how is this different to any industry or regulatory body ?, it's not.
Puff,
These aircraft are maintained under the same Maintenance Schedules as Class B Charter Aircraft, the pilots are trained under the Regs and orders as any other pilot. Yes some operators operate aircraft that look like crap, but do you think a LAME is going to sign out an unairworthy aircraft ( risking his/her Licence ) ?. So ultimately you are talking about a neglected paint job and worn interior.
As to the pilots not getting paid their last weeks pay, they have a Seven year statue, ring Industrial Relations, they will get them their final pays.
Some of these dodgy operators push people around because the people let them, end of story.
I fly for the afore mentioned company in my holidays, i do it because i enjoy the flying, if the aeroplane is broken, well it's broken, i don't fly until it is fixed, neither should any other Pilot.
Industrial Relations and CASA's definition of an operation are in no way related, so you are incorrect, it is illegal not to be paid. As far as award, in QLD there is not Aviation Award, although i and those other pilots i work with are being paid more than the AFAP award for Single Engine Turbine / Multi Engine Piston ( http://www.wagenet.gov.au/wagenet/Se...=0&quickview=Y ).
How can the industry be self regulating you ask ?, well CASA realised in its Charter many years ago that it is interested mainly in the protection of "Fare Paying Passengers", there are many facets of Sports Aviation ( infact all facets that i can think of ) that are self regulated, incidently who is better to regulate an industry than those who know the most about it ?.
Conflict of interest, ohh my yes, there certainly is, but how is this different to any industry or regulatory body ?, it's not.
Puff,
These aircraft are maintained under the same Maintenance Schedules as Class B Charter Aircraft, the pilots are trained under the Regs and orders as any other pilot. Yes some operators operate aircraft that look like crap, but do you think a LAME is going to sign out an unairworthy aircraft ( risking his/her Licence ) ?. So ultimately you are talking about a neglected paint job and worn interior.
As to the pilots not getting paid their last weeks pay, they have a Seven year statue, ring Industrial Relations, they will get them their final pays.
Some of these dodgy operators push people around because the people let them, end of story.
I fly for the afore mentioned company in my holidays, i do it because i enjoy the flying, if the aeroplane is broken, well it's broken, i don't fly until it is fixed, neither should any other Pilot.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Directly under the sun....... now.
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
LHRT i am not talking about dodgy paint, i am talking about a system that has fare paying customers on aircraft that legally only require an annual. Not saying all operators operate private category but a lot do.
How is it different to any regulatory body? Government agencies dont have financial incentive to maintain the status quo. Tandems are big money and these oprerators a given free rein.
I dont buy the fact that tandems are students, they are passengers plain and simple. Student doing a TAFF the only exception. Do passengers you fly get taught anything other than their part in the exit?
I was not trying to link IR and def of private operation, was simply stating it is illegal to get paid for flying priv ops? Not talking about awards or anything else simply that the APF will never agree to commercial ops because board members and area reps have to much to lose.
As you are in the industry I am sure you can tell me the last time you heard of pilot getting penalised. Two tandems were dropped kms out to sea last year and nothing ever happened to operators or pilot. Last week tandem master and passenger drowned in hawaii a few hundred metres off shore. Self regulation when financial interests are involved simply does not work.
You are entitled to your opinion but you are in danger of losing your cred as you defend the indefensible
How is it different to any regulatory body? Government agencies dont have financial incentive to maintain the status quo. Tandems are big money and these oprerators a given free rein.
I dont buy the fact that tandems are students, they are passengers plain and simple. Student doing a TAFF the only exception. Do passengers you fly get taught anything other than their part in the exit?
I was not trying to link IR and def of private operation, was simply stating it is illegal to get paid for flying priv ops? Not talking about awards or anything else simply that the APF will never agree to commercial ops because board members and area reps have to much to lose.
As you are in the industry I am sure you can tell me the last time you heard of pilot getting penalised. Two tandems were dropped kms out to sea last year and nothing ever happened to operators or pilot. Last week tandem master and passenger drowned in hawaii a few hundred metres off shore. Self regulation when financial interests are involved simply does not work.
You are entitled to your opinion but you are in danger of losing your cred as you defend the indefensible
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
HOD,
They are not fare paying passenger, departure point to out the door is not and approved route right ?.
Annual, that is not different to a Class B aircraft in Charter Catergory, 100 hours flight or 12 months, as per section one of the MR, some aircraft, such as C310 ( charter aircraft ) operate on 220 hour maintenance releases.
It is not illegal to earn money from private operations, read CAR 206. many companies use their own aircraft to move people around, private category, does not require an AOC as they are mobilising and demobilising, does not fit into CAR 206, therefore private.
Your unterstanding of what defines a commercial operator requiring an AOC is completely incorrect.
Tell me the last time a pilot operating on an AOC was penalised for a similar mistake ?, all facets of VH registered aviation is controlled by the basic legislation, VMC, basic operational requirments etc etc, maintenance, schedule 5 or similar.
If a parachuting organisation was required to hold an AOC, it would be actually cheaper than being a member of the APF, do the maths on the Temorary Memberships fee's etc etc that are paid by one off tandems and fun jumpers alike. CASA's has handed over the regulation of this industry to those that know the most about it, a group of senior operators.
What will happen sooner or later is one of the parachute organisations that does not recieve preferential treatment will take the APF to court, that will be an interesting turning point.
Quote "Two tandems were dropped kms out to sea last year and nothing ever happened to operators or pilot. Last week tandem master and passenger drowned in hawaii a few hundred metres off shore" end qoute, is that better or worse than say a , metroliner crashing into a hill and killing 16 RPT passengers ?.
Hawaii - why weren't they wearing floatation equipment, we are required too, for dropping at the beach. Your information is somewhat flawed right, does the APF regulate Hawaii ( rule are obviously different right ) ?, your statement seems rather nonsensical in that light doesn't it ?.
Lets wait and see what the ATSB has to say about this horrible event.
They are not fare paying passenger, departure point to out the door is not and approved route right ?.
Annual, that is not different to a Class B aircraft in Charter Catergory, 100 hours flight or 12 months, as per section one of the MR, some aircraft, such as C310 ( charter aircraft ) operate on 220 hour maintenance releases.
It is not illegal to earn money from private operations, read CAR 206. many companies use their own aircraft to move people around, private category, does not require an AOC as they are mobilising and demobilising, does not fit into CAR 206, therefore private.
Your unterstanding of what defines a commercial operator requiring an AOC is completely incorrect.
Tell me the last time a pilot operating on an AOC was penalised for a similar mistake ?, all facets of VH registered aviation is controlled by the basic legislation, VMC, basic operational requirments etc etc, maintenance, schedule 5 or similar.
If a parachuting organisation was required to hold an AOC, it would be actually cheaper than being a member of the APF, do the maths on the Temorary Memberships fee's etc etc that are paid by one off tandems and fun jumpers alike. CASA's has handed over the regulation of this industry to those that know the most about it, a group of senior operators.
What will happen sooner or later is one of the parachute organisations that does not recieve preferential treatment will take the APF to court, that will be an interesting turning point.
Quote "Two tandems were dropped kms out to sea last year and nothing ever happened to operators or pilot. Last week tandem master and passenger drowned in hawaii a few hundred metres off shore" end qoute, is that better or worse than say a , metroliner crashing into a hill and killing 16 RPT passengers ?.
Hawaii - why weren't they wearing floatation equipment, we are required too, for dropping at the beach. Your information is somewhat flawed right, does the APF regulate Hawaii ( rule are obviously different right ) ?, your statement seems rather nonsensical in that light doesn't it ?.
Lets wait and see what the ATSB has to say about this horrible event.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: between 800HP
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
LHRT,
Mate in the correct legal term yes your right they are not a fare paying passenger,but for the love of god your splitting hairs.
They utilise an A/C and they pay to do it, Aviation is elementry to the sport.
Mate I got payed but not enough,there isn't even a award,not that it would mean sh#t,hardly anyone abides by it anyway.
Mate I couldn't agree more that we shouldn't undercut each other and have never, It's not what it about. If your getting a great deal fantastic.
This is about CASA and the AFP. Regulation so its then fair for Passengers and Pilots.
Note: Ive never worked for nothing,and never would and get payed well now, thank god. and I'm a long way down the track from meat bombing.
Me thinks your NEW!
RWS888
Mate in the correct legal term yes your right they are not a fare paying passenger,but for the love of god your splitting hairs.
They utilise an A/C and they pay to do it, Aviation is elementry to the sport.
Mate I got payed but not enough,there isn't even a award,not that it would mean sh#t,hardly anyone abides by it anyway.
Mate I couldn't agree more that we shouldn't undercut each other and have never, It's not what it about. If your getting a great deal fantastic.
This is about CASA and the AFP. Regulation so its then fair for Passengers and Pilots.
Note: Ive never worked for nothing,and never would and get payed well now, thank god. and I'm a long way down the track from meat bombing.
Me thinks your NEW!
RWS888
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Quote "Me thinks your NEW!" end quote, well compared to some on PPRUNE, yes, unfortunately only on my second logbook ( and no the dog did not eat my first one, it's proping up the door to my cockys cage.
Do you mean APF as opposed to AFP ?, very different entities.
"Legally Correct" and "Splitting Hairs", well CASA deals on exactly those levels of the Law, they can not go on gut feeling or personal preferences, thats in the realm of Malfeasance.
The reason Parachuting is Private Operations and Parachutist are not Fare paying Passengers, is defined by CASA being legally correct and intouch with present legislation and splitting hairs in the grey areas.
You clearly can not remove your emotive response from the actual legislation ( as it stands ), if you were the fine upstanding citizen you claim to be none of what you claim in your first post would or could have happened to you.
Do you mean APF as opposed to AFP ?, very different entities.
"Legally Correct" and "Splitting Hairs", well CASA deals on exactly those levels of the Law, they can not go on gut feeling or personal preferences, thats in the realm of Malfeasance.
The reason Parachuting is Private Operations and Parachutist are not Fare paying Passengers, is defined by CASA being legally correct and intouch with present legislation and splitting hairs in the grey areas.
You clearly can not remove your emotive response from the actual legislation ( as it stands ), if you were the fine upstanding citizen you claim to be none of what you claim in your first post would or could have happened to you.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 10th Jan 2006 at 03:37.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
afternnon all
with all the vitriol being thrown around, just pause a bit - take a deeep breath and let the investigators finish their inspection of the engine. when all the details are known, then and only then will this finger pointing game have any relevance.
Until then, condolences to the families of the deceased and I hope that the survivors get well soon
with all the vitriol being thrown around, just pause a bit - take a deeep breath and let the investigators finish their inspection of the engine. when all the details are known, then and only then will this finger pointing game have any relevance.
Until then, condolences to the families of the deceased and I hope that the survivors get well soon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Recent goss i've heard from people who sit on the APF Board of Directors indicates that the direction most OZ pruners believe the industry should take is where it's ultimately headed. Though before we get into any of that, it's important for contextual reasons to try and bare in mind how and where this all started.....
In it's modern form, the tandem industry really hasn't been around that long. Let's take a historical look and consider that the first recorded tandem jump was made in 1977. US Patent number 4,746,084 - issued to Strong Enterprises on three major tandem concepts - wasn't even issued until 1987. Let's say it took another 10 years for the tandem jump to make it's way over from the US of A and become established in Australia - making it 1997 (give or take a little) before the industry started to resemble a 'Commercial Operation'. Prior to '97, jumping fell well inside the definition of 'sports aviation' and was accordingly delegated responsibility for self-regulation. (In just the same way that gliding and hang gliding were).
Now think about it - that's around 10 years that PJE has been a Commercial Operation masquerading as a private one. And then ask yourself - does it really surprise me that the current legislation framework is about 10 years behind the industry it's supposed to be regulating?
Hint: Forget the sinister belief that APF are a bunch of cowboys running a dodgy industry in order to feather their own pockets. Stop hating CASA because they do such a bad job at regulating aviation - for there's nothing particularly unusual about CASA's performance here. All regulatory bodies have an equally crappy preformance, if not more so. It's one of the realities of regulating.
Now - back to my first paragraph. Recent goss from the APF BOD indicates that there is growing support for a split in the industry.
Group A - Tandem Operations - to be regulated as a commercial operation
Group B - Sport and Student Operations - to remain as a private operation
Interesting to note that Gliding clubs operate powered aircraft in the private category and use these powered aircraft to take joyriding members of the public to altitude before releasing them and their instructor to make their own independant descent with their own aircraft. If you ask me, it makes perfect sense for the gliding industry to self regulate - though technically, there's very little difference between the gliding and skydiving industries.....
One gets a few more fatalities and a few more headlines because it's infinately more popular and has so many more participants. Which highlights the bottom line here. There's only one real reason that the skydiving industry is the way that it currently is -because it's just so much goddamn fun!
In it's modern form, the tandem industry really hasn't been around that long. Let's take a historical look and consider that the first recorded tandem jump was made in 1977. US Patent number 4,746,084 - issued to Strong Enterprises on three major tandem concepts - wasn't even issued until 1987. Let's say it took another 10 years for the tandem jump to make it's way over from the US of A and become established in Australia - making it 1997 (give or take a little) before the industry started to resemble a 'Commercial Operation'. Prior to '97, jumping fell well inside the definition of 'sports aviation' and was accordingly delegated responsibility for self-regulation. (In just the same way that gliding and hang gliding were).
Now think about it - that's around 10 years that PJE has been a Commercial Operation masquerading as a private one. And then ask yourself - does it really surprise me that the current legislation framework is about 10 years behind the industry it's supposed to be regulating?
Hint: Forget the sinister belief that APF are a bunch of cowboys running a dodgy industry in order to feather their own pockets. Stop hating CASA because they do such a bad job at regulating aviation - for there's nothing particularly unusual about CASA's performance here. All regulatory bodies have an equally crappy preformance, if not more so. It's one of the realities of regulating.
Now - back to my first paragraph. Recent goss from the APF BOD indicates that there is growing support for a split in the industry.
Group A - Tandem Operations - to be regulated as a commercial operation
Group B - Sport and Student Operations - to remain as a private operation
Interesting to note that Gliding clubs operate powered aircraft in the private category and use these powered aircraft to take joyriding members of the public to altitude before releasing them and their instructor to make their own independant descent with their own aircraft. If you ask me, it makes perfect sense for the gliding industry to self regulate - though technically, there's very little difference between the gliding and skydiving industries.....
One gets a few more fatalities and a few more headlines because it's infinately more popular and has so many more participants. Which highlights the bottom line here. There's only one real reason that the skydiving industry is the way that it currently is -because it's just so much goddamn fun!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
SC,
I'd be suprised if the APF is terribly supportive of CASA taking the reins back, they'd be out of a job.
Those supporting CASA taking back control are doing so mainly on financial grounds, which with the AAT protection ( administrative process before removal of AOC ) measures in place, nearly makes it a better option.
Again, lets see what the ATSB has to say.
I'd be suprised if the APF is terribly supportive of CASA taking the reins back, they'd be out of a job.
Those supporting CASA taking back control are doing so mainly on financial grounds, which with the AAT protection ( administrative process before removal of AOC ) measures in place, nearly makes it a better option.
Again, lets see what the ATSB has to say.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: between 800HP
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Rock thrower,
Of course it didn't happen to me and couldn't, you'd know wouldn't you? being the Guru of all things parachute.
You will leave meat bombing one day and move on to the real world of aviation and then you will realise that there is a lot more to the industry.
Until you progress from the first stop in your career I suggest you hop off your high horse.
I've had a handful of self appointed experts sit on the other side of a desk and ask me for a job and you guys stick out like dogs balls,needless to say they don't get the call.
Thing in this game are going to get a lot harder for you my boy.
See you round I hope.
RWS888
Of course it didn't happen to me and couldn't, you'd know wouldn't you? being the Guru of all things parachute.
You will leave meat bombing one day and move on to the real world of aviation and then you will realise that there is a lot more to the industry.
Until you progress from the first stop in your career I suggest you hop off your high horse.
I've had a handful of self appointed experts sit on the other side of a desk and ask me for a job and you guys stick out like dogs balls,needless to say they don't get the call.
Thing in this game are going to get a lot harder for you my boy.
See you round I hope.
RWS888
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
RWS,
Oh that's gold.
You come to this discussion with nothing, no actual information, no ability to logically present your opinion, no ability to debate, a very poor understanding of the legislative frame work aviation operates within, apparently no ability to reason, just emotional abuse, bordering on school yard antics.
In your opinion a parachutist is a fare paying passengers, and should be protected under the same banner as RPT, well good on you. Shame you have no idea what you are talking about.
Self appointed expert, hardly !!. Just not willing to listen to some hill billy defaming an industry based on little other than one bad experience of their own creation.
Get the call, good on you champ !!.
You said:
Yes I was pushed to fly overwieght.
Yes I was treated like Sh#t
Yes I was paid jack.
Yes they jumped through cloud
Yes they insisted that I fly with the MR due with work
I have done none of the above, how many breaches of the legislation is that you've owned up to ?.
You are not my equal, good bye.
Oh that's gold.
You come to this discussion with nothing, no actual information, no ability to logically present your opinion, no ability to debate, a very poor understanding of the legislative frame work aviation operates within, apparently no ability to reason, just emotional abuse, bordering on school yard antics.
In your opinion a parachutist is a fare paying passengers, and should be protected under the same banner as RPT, well good on you. Shame you have no idea what you are talking about.
Self appointed expert, hardly !!. Just not willing to listen to some hill billy defaming an industry based on little other than one bad experience of their own creation.
Get the call, good on you champ !!.
You said:
Yes I was pushed to fly overwieght.
Yes I was treated like Sh#t
Yes I was paid jack.
Yes they jumped through cloud
Yes they insisted that I fly with the MR due with work
I have done none of the above, how many breaches of the legislation is that you've owned up to ?.
You are not my equal, good bye.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: between 800HP
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 206 Crash into Dam West of Ipswich
Enough understanding to get out of meat bombing into a long career of professional aviation.
Your right your, not my equal,your still flying a parachute A/C.
I laugh!
****** EditW
RWS888
Naughty RWS. Take the rest of the week off. Zero tolerance on name calling matey.
The rest of you take note
Woomera (Eastern States)
Your right your, not my equal,your still flying a parachute A/C.
I laugh!
****** EditW
RWS888
Naughty RWS. Take the rest of the week off. Zero tolerance on name calling matey.
The rest of you take note
Woomera (Eastern States)
Last edited by Woomera; 10th Jan 2006 at 22:41. Reason: Name calling towards others
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: QLD, Australia
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Evolution of The Student Parachutist
If you all wonder where Tandems (student parachutists) came from, and why they are the way they are, here it is.
1. Up until the mid 1980's all first parachute jumps were static line jumps - very scary and also quite dangerous. This is were a student was expelled out of an aircraft at low level with a static line attached to the aircraft used to deploy their parachute.
Student was all alone once he/she exited the aircraft. Most dangerous method of training due to many students becoming immediatly unstable on exiting the aircraft, with possible fowling of parachute deployment.
Most students never did a second jump.
2. Accelerated Free Fall arrived in the mid 1980's. This is were the student and 2 instructors leave the aircraft together at 10,000 ft or higher. The instructors hang onto the student during the free fall and keep them stable up until the student parachute pulls their own ripcord and deploys the parachute.
This method was a safer but the student was still left to his/her own devices once the parachute was deployed i.e. had to handle failures in a mind set (not much stiuational awareness) which was not conducive to a favourable outcome.
Most students never did a second jump.
3. Tandem Student Parachutist training arrived in the late 1980's, it was to be used for the initial stages of the program above. This is were the student is attached via a harness to the front of the instructor. They exit the aircraft attached and therefore stable. The freefall drill is exactly the same as above including pulling their own ripcord to begin parachute deployment. The instructor is still there if the student screws up or there is an emergency.
This is by far the safest method of initial training for a student parachutist. Until last week only one death in Australia in over 15 years.
4. Today in most cases the deployment of the parachute is carried out by the instructor.
Still to this day ALL Tandem Masters MUST be instructors. ALL so called "passengers" MUST be students.
Probably 99% of students never do a second jump.
The saftey record of this form of training is such that it has become extremely popular method of introducing one self to sky diving. Ask many younger sky divers today how they got into the sport, and they will tell you through doing their first tandem.
So now that the APF has made the initial training so SAFE and therefore popular, it seems everyone wants to regulate it. Hmmm go figure!
Parachuting is about parachutists - NOT pilots.
The owners, and instructors use the same aircraft as the students.
Higher caliber operations require higher caliber pilots who require to be paid properly and are less likely to break rules - JUST LIKE IN G.A.
RWS888
Who the hell are you to judge the aviation experience of another whom you have absolutely no idea about.
1. Up until the mid 1980's all first parachute jumps were static line jumps - very scary and also quite dangerous. This is were a student was expelled out of an aircraft at low level with a static line attached to the aircraft used to deploy their parachute.
Student was all alone once he/she exited the aircraft. Most dangerous method of training due to many students becoming immediatly unstable on exiting the aircraft, with possible fowling of parachute deployment.
Most students never did a second jump.
2. Accelerated Free Fall arrived in the mid 1980's. This is were the student and 2 instructors leave the aircraft together at 10,000 ft or higher. The instructors hang onto the student during the free fall and keep them stable up until the student parachute pulls their own ripcord and deploys the parachute.
This method was a safer but the student was still left to his/her own devices once the parachute was deployed i.e. had to handle failures in a mind set (not much stiuational awareness) which was not conducive to a favourable outcome.
Most students never did a second jump.
3. Tandem Student Parachutist training arrived in the late 1980's, it was to be used for the initial stages of the program above. This is were the student is attached via a harness to the front of the instructor. They exit the aircraft attached and therefore stable. The freefall drill is exactly the same as above including pulling their own ripcord to begin parachute deployment. The instructor is still there if the student screws up or there is an emergency.
This is by far the safest method of initial training for a student parachutist. Until last week only one death in Australia in over 15 years.
4. Today in most cases the deployment of the parachute is carried out by the instructor.
Still to this day ALL Tandem Masters MUST be instructors. ALL so called "passengers" MUST be students.
Probably 99% of students never do a second jump.
The saftey record of this form of training is such that it has become extremely popular method of introducing one self to sky diving. Ask many younger sky divers today how they got into the sport, and they will tell you through doing their first tandem.
So now that the APF has made the initial training so SAFE and therefore popular, it seems everyone wants to regulate it. Hmmm go figure!
Parachuting is about parachutists - NOT pilots.
The owners, and instructors use the same aircraft as the students.
Higher caliber operations require higher caliber pilots who require to be paid properly and are less likely to break rules - JUST LIKE IN G.A.
RWS888
Who the hell are you to judge the aviation experience of another whom you have absolutely no idea about.