c152 missing between Hamilton and New Plymouth NZ POB1
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloody Nora... just read the updated report. My original impression was of his ETA NP being 1630 Local. The way this thread has developed alerted me to the error in my impression... that's just untidy. Remoak is spot-on with his analysis. The loss of experience, knowledge and ability in the instructor cadre is an issue that the regulators in both NZ and AUS (to my personal knowledge) are aware of and publicly (? within industry anyway...) acknowledge -but they're apparently quite prepared to sit on their fingers and do precisely nothing about it. Darwinism at its most savage? If not quite yet, then surely soon.
Similarly, the reason for the loss of knowledge/experience etc. is readily apparent to the regulator as it is to industry participants. GA pilots doing the "hard yards" in old, poorly equipped and (sometimes) maintained airframes, most of which must be hand-flown 100% of the time VFR and IFR are usually paid less than the pimply 15yo Macca's trainee that hands over the $2.95 burger that probably represents the most nutritious food they can sustainably afford. What a friggin nonsense that is. The regulator however, simply washes their hands of any responsibility to the pilots -beyond making it harder more time consuming and more expensive for them (personally) to meet their regulatory responsibilities. Exactly where did the regulators expect the "I'll fly for free" attitude to wind up? Exactly where it has and will contine to do -until the regulator acknowledges their responsibility to the pilots is the same as their responsibility to ensure the fiscal integrity of the businesses they certificate. Surely you can't be having a fiscally responsible business that doesn't accept their fiscal responsibility to their employees. I certainly can't think of any other business models that would survive like that.
The only way to prevent this sort of thing is to ensure the experienced pilots are encouraged to remain in or return to GA. That means they have to be able to afford to do what they love and they have to be supported by the regulator rather than have the regulator hound them out of industry because of passing some arbitrary number on a calendar -with that number being set by a (medical) profession that can't even get it's own ****e all in the same sock. Too busy playing politics.
<sigh>
/rant_off
Similarly, the reason for the loss of knowledge/experience etc. is readily apparent to the regulator as it is to industry participants. GA pilots doing the "hard yards" in old, poorly equipped and (sometimes) maintained airframes, most of which must be hand-flown 100% of the time VFR and IFR are usually paid less than the pimply 15yo Macca's trainee that hands over the $2.95 burger that probably represents the most nutritious food they can sustainably afford. What a friggin nonsense that is. The regulator however, simply washes their hands of any responsibility to the pilots -beyond making it harder more time consuming and more expensive for them (personally) to meet their regulatory responsibilities. Exactly where did the regulators expect the "I'll fly for free" attitude to wind up? Exactly where it has and will contine to do -until the regulator acknowledges their responsibility to the pilots is the same as their responsibility to ensure the fiscal integrity of the businesses they certificate. Surely you can't be having a fiscally responsible business that doesn't accept their fiscal responsibility to their employees. I certainly can't think of any other business models that would survive like that.
The only way to prevent this sort of thing is to ensure the experienced pilots are encouraged to remain in or return to GA. That means they have to be able to afford to do what they love and they have to be supported by the regulator rather than have the regulator hound them out of industry because of passing some arbitrary number on a calendar -with that number being set by a (medical) profession that can't even get it's own ****e all in the same sock. Too busy playing politics.
<sigh>
/rant_off
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NZ
Age: 72
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most instructors are hour builders who have been taught by hour builders who have been taught by hour builders and so on. As we all know I could quite easily go from no hours to a CCat in 1 year or less and be teaching with only a few hundred hours under my belt. Where's the experience in that?
Totally agree. The ever diminishing circle can only end in a black hole.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for CAA being a hindrance remoak....surely you jest!!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Age: 46
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RadioSaigon
paid less than the pimply 15yo Macca's trainee that hands over the $2.95 burger that probably represents the most nutritious food they can sustainably afford. [...] Exactly where did the regulators expect the "I'll fly for free" attitude to wind up?
However, I fail to see how this is a problem that a regulator can fix.
It's an international problem, the same all over the world it seems, and if one country's regulator steps in to mandate some sort of defacto minimum wage for flight instruction or other measure (what other measure can there be?), then it would have one effect, drive most schools out of business as students went overseas. This is particularly true here in NZ where I think it's safe to say that most flight schools are largely training foreign students.
The only way regulators could make a real workable difference, is if it's done globally at the ICAO level, of which there is not a hope in hell.
The sad truth is, that it's a problem that probably can not be fixed, not as long as pilots rate themselves so lowly that they will work for absurd low wages and poor conditions in order to hour build. You can't blame schools for minimising expenses, especially not in this economic climate.
I'm sure it wasn't always like this, but the horse has bolted and it's too late to close the gate.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sleemanj
I fail to see how this is a problem that a regulator can fix...
As a part of the process of certificating any aviation business to conduct that aviation activity, the regulator has a legislatively mandated responsibility to ensure the financial viability of the proposed business. If the proposed business cannot demonstrate the financials to support their business case, no AOC is forthcoming.
How simple would it be for the government to mandate an extension to that via the regulator to ensure that all full-time and/or part-time employees are:
- Paid
- Paid a mandated minimum rate, and
- Paid when they are supposed to be
I'm not advocating that the regulator become any form of quasi-employee advocate in wage negotiations or anything like that. But if the regulator is doing their job comprehensively at the certification (and renewal) stage, the ability of the business to support all its employees must be a critical part of that assessment.
For decades now the regulators have simply washed their hands of pilot remuneration issues, turning a Napoleonic eye to the "work for free to get hours" generation... they're now reaping the return of that lack of due care and attention. Allowing "market forces" to set remuneration levels as low as $0pa hasn't worked, we can all see the mess that that has created and will continue to create for some time to come. The employers are not of their own free will going to set levels of remuneration at a realistic level; the only solution I can see is for the regulator to step in and set a level below which it is illegal to pay, or lose your AOC. The employers will sit up & pay attention then.
They should have done so 20+ years ago.
it is usually the blind leading the blind when it comes to instructors these days. There are a few older, wiser heads around but not nearly enough of them. It is one of my pet gripes that when those of us that have many years experience, including airline-level check and training, seek to get back into some instructing, we are greeted with a bureaucratic nightmare that not only costs a fortune and takes a long time, but is completely unnecessary
But wait there's more, CAA are about to make it compuslory for all flight training to be conducted under a Part 141 certificate, (all in the interest of improving standards you understand). The instructors rating you jumped thru many hoops to get, to allow you to instruct, will be useless unless you have a 141 certificate or work for an organisation that has one. More red tape and expense which will not improve the standard of training.
This is going to drive even more experienced people out of the industry.
What a Crock of S**t.
Guest
Posts: n/a
CPL really worth $139,900
Was doing a google search and came across this website www.isea.edu.au.
Really AUS $139,900, for that you get a CASA/JAR CPL with a Frozen JAR ATPL and a MCC endoresment with a grand total of 200 hours, then on top of that you have to pay for your own Australian ASIC and SPL plus health insurance.??
I am missing somethink here?
Really AUS $139,900, for that you get a CASA/JAR CPL with a Frozen JAR ATPL and a MCC endoresment with a grand total of 200 hours, then on top of that you have to pay for your own Australian ASIC and SPL plus health insurance.??
I am missing somethink here?
see what I'm saying
Last edited by conflict alert; 24th Jul 2009 at 16:11.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
A sad sad tale no doubt, with the usual level of human misery part of the experience..and all completely avoidable.
Those were my thoughts when I read about this incident a couple of days ago, my heart then sank..because like Remoak, I know that the next guy/girl is just waiting in the wings to do the same thing all over again..
I'll go out on a limb here and state that I will be very very surprised to read if this was anything other than CFIT.
What this poor fella was thinking in those last few minutes before it all came unstuck we will never know...but we can probably make an accurate guess.
We can guess because there are plenty of us that have been in similar situations where circumstance dictates we make a decision to save our lives, and there but for the grace of god etc....
Looking back however at my training, and the training of my peers....there appears to be some significant variances with how things are done 17 years later.
Yes "C" cats were still hour building, but "B" cats were far more scarce, and in my experience tended to be lifers' or at the very least ex mil or airline bods, particularly in the provinces..and I certainly benefitted from that knowledge base, it saved my life more than once.
In the years gone by, I've done my fair share of single engine flying in that neck of the woods (I used to have a girlfriend in New Plymouth..and would fly down from Thames often via Te Kuiti) and that terrain scared the living Sh1t outta me on a nice day! why this fella felt the need to be plodding around there at night and in poor weather is frankly beyond me.
Those were my thoughts when I read about this incident a couple of days ago, my heart then sank..because like Remoak, I know that the next guy/girl is just waiting in the wings to do the same thing all over again..
I'll go out on a limb here and state that I will be very very surprised to read if this was anything other than CFIT.
What this poor fella was thinking in those last few minutes before it all came unstuck we will never know...but we can probably make an accurate guess.
We can guess because there are plenty of us that have been in similar situations where circumstance dictates we make a decision to save our lives, and there but for the grace of god etc....
Looking back however at my training, and the training of my peers....there appears to be some significant variances with how things are done 17 years later.
Yes "C" cats were still hour building, but "B" cats were far more scarce, and in my experience tended to be lifers' or at the very least ex mil or airline bods, particularly in the provinces..and I certainly benefitted from that knowledge base, it saved my life more than once.
In the years gone by, I've done my fair share of single engine flying in that neck of the woods (I used to have a girlfriend in New Plymouth..and would fly down from Thames often via Te Kuiti) and that terrain scared the living Sh1t outta me on a nice day! why this fella felt the need to be plodding around there at night and in poor weather is frankly beyond me.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: All over the show like a madwomans crap
Posts: 494
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 Issues
There are two issues being discussed here, and I dont think they are really wrapped up with each other. One being "WTF was he doing out there that night in those condx" and second "His training, or lack of (add experience of his intructors, pay, CAA negligence etc) contributed."
All the issues surrounding the instructors, their pay or lack of, and the CAAs unwillingness to help more experienced pilots who want to give something back are all very valid points, and ones I agree with. Dont forget though why we all, mostly, got into this game....to fly a jet for an airline. Ask yourself, if you were offered the same money to instruct in C152s or fly a jet....what would you take? We are all ambitious, thats why we are where we are, and we all want to continually challenge ourselves and to expand and learn, thats how we get that experience. Its not a bad thing, its to be encouraged, its a great job afterall. However, when its time to give back, it should be an easy process. remoak can probably give a good account of the lack of help from C*#nts Against Aviation unlimited, and Id be interested to know in fact. Afterall, they are charging Pax more tax on their tickets so they can move to a flash new office next to the beehive, obviously THATs more important than say, the airport?!
Although, I cant imagine any LACK of training put that pilot where he ended up that night...it is pure bad decision making. He must have known the wx that night. And who in their right mind would depart to fly over that terrain, at night, in a lighty without knowing the enroute and destination wx? And knowing the wx, who then would take off? It is a truly staggering lack of judgement, and in this case, I dont think the experience level of his instructors, his training or wise words would have made a difference. Ask yourself, would you have done this flight?
All the issues surrounding the instructors, their pay or lack of, and the CAAs unwillingness to help more experienced pilots who want to give something back are all very valid points, and ones I agree with. Dont forget though why we all, mostly, got into this game....to fly a jet for an airline. Ask yourself, if you were offered the same money to instruct in C152s or fly a jet....what would you take? We are all ambitious, thats why we are where we are, and we all want to continually challenge ourselves and to expand and learn, thats how we get that experience. Its not a bad thing, its to be encouraged, its a great job afterall. However, when its time to give back, it should be an easy process. remoak can probably give a good account of the lack of help from C*#nts Against Aviation unlimited, and Id be interested to know in fact. Afterall, they are charging Pax more tax on their tickets so they can move to a flash new office next to the beehive, obviously THATs more important than say, the airport?!
Although, I cant imagine any LACK of training put that pilot where he ended up that night...it is pure bad decision making. He must have known the wx that night. And who in their right mind would depart to fly over that terrain, at night, in a lighty without knowing the enroute and destination wx? And knowing the wx, who then would take off? It is a truly staggering lack of judgement, and in this case, I dont think the experience level of his instructors, his training or wise words would have made a difference. Ask yourself, would you have done this flight?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: At home
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As this was an unauthorised flight, perhaps the pilot thought the risk of getting back through the bad wx to save getting a bollocking and potential instructing job, outweighed the risk of the conditions. If so then he cleary paid the ultimate price. Why would you not climb above MSA, get onto control and get help if you were instrument rated. I would suggest if you didn't want anyone finding out.
Maybe the good old human factors decision making model is at work here. The get-home-itis effect. Always take some over night gear with you on a x-country cos you never know what might happen. I know a few guys that have been stuck in the middle of nowhere and decided to stay due wx. Might have got some grief but lived to move on to bigger and better things.
And I'll thrown in my agreement with remoak too. There is no experience in aeroclubs (on the day to day flying level generally). Fresh outta school instructors with no experience themselves can't teach what they don't know.
Maybe the good old human factors decision making model is at work here. The get-home-itis effect. Always take some over night gear with you on a x-country cos you never know what might happen. I know a few guys that have been stuck in the middle of nowhere and decided to stay due wx. Might have got some grief but lived to move on to bigger and better things.
And I'll thrown in my agreement with remoak too. There is no experience in aeroclubs (on the day to day flying level generally). Fresh outta school instructors with no experience themselves can't teach what they don't know.
To add to what I wrote before. I understand that the said person was a graduate of one of them there Part 141 flight schools with all the smart manuals on how to train pilots. Kinda helps prove my point about the value of Part 141.
Is it that bad out there now?
I'm not in the know, I don't know, I'm asking.
You guys seem to paint a sad picture.
I ask because these seem to be the same comments that have been floating around for a long time. The only difference is that it's the next generation now saying them.
Some pretty big brushes being used on these pages.
Are those holding the brush in the know? I'm not.
I like Nosey's thinking, airmanship can be tough to teach.
I don't get what Conflict is going on about with the cut and paste of a headliner referring to the costs of staying in Sweden to get a JAA licence. Bizarre.
27/09 - that doesn't wash either, the bell curve is always in effect.
I feel for the guy that trained him. The way this thread reads, you guys are ready to string 'em up. What's being said here is that a poor job was done. Based on what is beyond me, but I guess that's a result of keeping that big brush moving.
I'm not in the know, I don't know, I'm asking.
You guys seem to paint a sad picture.
I ask because these seem to be the same comments that have been floating around for a long time. The only difference is that it's the next generation now saying them.
Some pretty big brushes being used on these pages.
Are those holding the brush in the know? I'm not.
I like Nosey's thinking, airmanship can be tough to teach.
I don't get what Conflict is going on about with the cut and paste of a headliner referring to the costs of staying in Sweden to get a JAA licence. Bizarre.
27/09 - that doesn't wash either, the bell curve is always in effect.
I feel for the guy that trained him. The way this thread reads, you guys are ready to string 'em up. What's being said here is that a poor job was done. Based on what is beyond me, but I guess that's a result of keeping that big brush moving.
nike,
As you have probably guessed I think Part 141 is an unnecessary encumberance of paper work and bureaucracy.
My last comment was tongue in cheek. CAA have used similar events in the past to justify their actions. If this sad accident had involved a trainee from a non Part 141 organisation it would not surprise me if CAA used it to promote the introduction of Part 141.
I think most training organisations, whether or not they are part 141, try to do their best by their students with the resources (including instructors) available to to them. There has been a lack of experience in instructing ranks due to the high turnover of recent times. With this accident I don't think the quality of training is the issue.
There has been much discussion on how to solve this problem. It's dog eat dog. Some places pay their instructors a fair wage, others...... well who knows. Then we have the age old problem of new instructors/pilots being willing to work for free to get that first job. How do the places that pay well compete with places that don't pay and pilots that are willing to work for free?
As much as I don't think regulation is the way to fix a problem sometimes it seems it is the only way. The suggestion that organisations need to be capable of paying their staff properly and this is monitored might be one way.
As you have probably guessed I think Part 141 is an unnecessary encumberance of paper work and bureaucracy.
My last comment was tongue in cheek. CAA have used similar events in the past to justify their actions. If this sad accident had involved a trainee from a non Part 141 organisation it would not surprise me if CAA used it to promote the introduction of Part 141.
I think most training organisations, whether or not they are part 141, try to do their best by their students with the resources (including instructors) available to to them. There has been a lack of experience in instructing ranks due to the high turnover of recent times. With this accident I don't think the quality of training is the issue.
There has been much discussion on how to solve this problem. It's dog eat dog. Some places pay their instructors a fair wage, others...... well who knows. Then we have the age old problem of new instructors/pilots being willing to work for free to get that first job. How do the places that pay well compete with places that don't pay and pilots that are willing to work for free?
As much as I don't think regulation is the way to fix a problem sometimes it seems it is the only way. The suggestion that organisations need to be capable of paying their staff properly and this is monitored might be one way.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night Xcountry VFR over terrain around the King Country etc has got to be the craziest thing to attempt....look at the crash site, there is no hope if you need to get down quickly...
To an extent it is possible to see what it is like to fly in adverse weather with instructors both experienced enough and familiar enough with the area, certainly has advantages over doing all one's training in purely ideal conditions.
To an extent it is possible to see what it is like to fly in adverse weather with instructors both experienced enough and familiar enough with the area, certainly has advantages over doing all one's training in purely ideal conditions.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/09, very interesting. i heard from someone at the Flying NZ conference recently that they are doing away with the 141 requirement. Ironically, it is the individual instructors providing quality and experience to their flight training that would lose out and have to try and find a 141 organisation to operate under - imagine that, a 10,000 hr ex military/airline pilot being supervised by a 1000hr B Cat with 950 of those hours in a cherokee, oh crikey don't forget the 25 hrs on twins, it is just ridiculous.
I have received the best instruction from guys not connected to 141, D cats etc. Brilliant brilliant teachers (one was ex US Navy and another ex US Marine) and an experienced GA instructor with 3000+ including 1000hr on De Haviland types. Great learning experiences.
I have received the best instruction from guys not connected to 141, D cats etc. Brilliant brilliant teachers (one was ex US Navy and another ex US Marine) and an experienced GA instructor with 3000+ including 1000hr on De Haviland types. Great learning experiences.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't get what Conflict is going on about with the cut and paste of a headliner referring to the costs of staying in Sweden to get a JAA licence. Bizarre.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: City of Kings
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok can we not blow it out of proportion here. Yes, I do agree it was a bad decision to go that night but if we look at what we've been told so far.
He reported over Raglan at 6.50 pm, therefore I don't think he was planning on going over rough terrain, seems as though he was going to track via the coast to NP. Also to be over Raglan at 6.50 he must have left NE around 5.30 pm plus or minus, That's still light, albeit, just. We don't know whether he planned to leave at that time or if he was delayed at any stage. Also the weather was not as bad as everyone's making out, yes there was a ****eload of wind out, I had the cloud base around 2500', visibility was average. The weather for NP was forecast to get worse though.
I'm not the biggest fan of night nav's even in the best weather but I think there are confounding and extraneous variables here that we could be overlooking.
People are all too eager to blame pilots from the start and I think it's our duty as fellow pilots to just as quickly jump to their defence, at least 'til all the facts are known.
And just as a post script I've found some of the best instructors I've had have been hour-builders and the career instructors I've dealt with had lost touch with what its like to be a student. Not saying this applies overall, just my experience.
He reported over Raglan at 6.50 pm, therefore I don't think he was planning on going over rough terrain, seems as though he was going to track via the coast to NP. Also to be over Raglan at 6.50 he must have left NE around 5.30 pm plus or minus, That's still light, albeit, just. We don't know whether he planned to leave at that time or if he was delayed at any stage. Also the weather was not as bad as everyone's making out, yes there was a ****eload of wind out, I had the cloud base around 2500', visibility was average. The weather for NP was forecast to get worse though.
I'm not the biggest fan of night nav's even in the best weather but I think there are confounding and extraneous variables here that we could be overlooking.
People are all too eager to blame pilots from the start and I think it's our duty as fellow pilots to just as quickly jump to their defence, at least 'til all the facts are known.
And just as a post script I've found some of the best instructors I've had have been hour-builders and the career instructors I've dealt with had lost touch with what its like to be a student. Not saying this applies overall, just my experience.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
m14lp
you wont believe this one
a Dcat with 13000 hr wants to get a C cat
The Caa dosent want to help him probably because he has more experence than they have
he has completed both the 2 day /4 day ITC courswe
The 4 day one is just out of date he applied for a 3 month extension declined by the Mountain FLYING GORU cARLTON CAMPBELL BECAUSE HE HADNT ORGANISED HIS TIME PROPLEY AMAZING This is defintiately Comissioon Against Avation
C A A
you wont believe this one
a Dcat with 13000 hr wants to get a C cat
The Caa dosent want to help him probably because he has more experence than they have
he has completed both the 2 day /4 day ITC courswe
The 4 day one is just out of date he applied for a 3 month extension declined by the Mountain FLYING GORU cARLTON CAMPBELL BECAUSE HE HADNT ORGANISED HIS TIME PROPLEY AMAZING This is defintiately Comissioon Against Avation
C A A
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Some tough calls being made here, especially by all of you old timers getting misty eyed about how better the training was in the good old days.
Can all of you please stand up who NEVER made an iffy decision to get airborne when you were a young fella with low hours, and subsequently found themselves in a scary situation wishing they were somewhere else.
This thread is going down the normal road of bagging NZ instructor standards and experience levels and that's just not right here. In fact if the flight was unauthorized as some of you are reporting, then it's got absolutely zero to do with it.
I feel for the guy's instructor as well, he must be absolutely gutted and wondering what he did wrong to have this guy go and ignore his training and get airborne and do what he did.
NZ has a bloody tricky environment of weather and terrain at the best of times, regardless of experience levels it's so so hard sometimes when you're the B cat sitting in the briefing room signing the guy out and trying to mentally determine from a few bits of paper if what this guy is presenting you with is a normal day with potential to be challenging, or whether it's a killer.
Can all of you please stand up who NEVER made an iffy decision to get airborne when you were a young fella with low hours, and subsequently found themselves in a scary situation wishing they were somewhere else.
This thread is going down the normal road of bagging NZ instructor standards and experience levels and that's just not right here. In fact if the flight was unauthorized as some of you are reporting, then it's got absolutely zero to do with it.
I feel for the guy's instructor as well, he must be absolutely gutted and wondering what he did wrong to have this guy go and ignore his training and get airborne and do what he did.
NZ has a bloody tricky environment of weather and terrain at the best of times, regardless of experience levels it's so so hard sometimes when you're the B cat sitting in the briefing room signing the guy out and trying to mentally determine from a few bits of paper if what this guy is presenting you with is a normal day with potential to be challenging, or whether it's a killer.