Para Dropping & Pay in GA
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SM227 remember it is a pathway to the top of your career, not a race to the bottom.
Every pilot faces the same dilema at 200 hours who is going to employ me... but there has been many before you who have over come thisby not working for free.
It only takes 5 minutes to help that old guy with a baron push it back into the hangar who hates having to fly himself around these days.
or
Helping the chief pilot pissed off that he had to fly 4 hours today to refuel the 210 after you finish refueling your 152.
People dont hate you for wanting to get more epearience just dont be the guy who first fly's for free, pays for icus on a twin because who is going to employ you with no multi right? and what about paying for a Airbus endorsement because no airline will employ you without it....
Every pilot faces the same dilema at 200 hours who is going to employ me... but there has been many before you who have over come thisby not working for free.
It only takes 5 minutes to help that old guy with a baron push it back into the hangar who hates having to fly himself around these days.
or
Helping the chief pilot pissed off that he had to fly 4 hours today to refuel the 210 after you finish refueling your 152.
People dont hate you for wanting to get more epearience just dont be the guy who first fly's for free, pays for icus on a twin because who is going to employ you with no multi right? and what about paying for a Airbus endorsement because no airline will employ you without it....
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never got paid for flying... just turning up and looking really good, technically i paid for the aeroplane... turns out i am a very good looking man so i got paid allot about $25 more that what each load cost me for the plane
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandem Masters won't work for nothing! ...so why should the pilot?
Ironic to think that there is currently some agitation among working skydivers to form a union in order to protect their own interests.
It's interesting to note the arguments of tandem masters and skydiving instructors posting in skydiving forums who maintain they are professionals trying to make a living, who point out they have invested a lot of $$$$ and time in their qualifications and deserve to be paid $50+ per jump. All valid arguments and not at all unreasonable, yet professional skydivers and operators often overlook the fact that the role of the pilot is integral to the BUSINESS and they think that hours in the logbook is just compensation for a pilot. Some jumpers and operators even think they are doing the pilot a favour. Imagine if a customer turned up and asked for the jump for nothing or at cost price! They'd be laughed off the drop zone. Even parachute packers on a drop zone earn $5-$10 for a 10 minute packing job.
In the worst-paid of other industries or professions, apprentices and graduates earn an entry level salary. It's never contemplated nor expected that someone would work for nothing, even if not fully qualified. Aviation should be no different.
To fly a skydiving aircraft safely and efficiently actually takes some skill. Pilots who choose to work for nothing devalue the skill required as well as screw others who NEED to make a buck to survive ahead of their need or want to fly.
There are very few traditional skydiving clubs left in Australia. Most drop zones are run as commercial businesses by professional operators. It's one thing to fly for nothing when it is just fun jumpers (licensed skydivers) covering the cost of the aircraft, but when an operator is taking their cut, charging customers top dollar or paying tandem masters $50 or more for a jump, the pilot simply must insist on being paid a fair wage. To pay the poor old pilot $50/load would not actually add too much to the customers' bills. Even $25/load over 6-10 loads per day would be reasonable compensation and not too far off the Award hourly rate.
If EVERYONE stuck together and refused to work for nothing, the operators would come to the party very quickly to stop their lucrative income stalling. If an operator cannot afford to pay the pilot and other staff they should either put their prices up or go out of business. After all, this is what we would expect a retailer, hotel, or any other business or service provider to do if they wanted to remain operating and retain staff.
It is simply immoral for the pilot and the operator to enter into a no-pay arrangement, unless it is strictly a club environment in which the pilot is also a member of the club and not flying as a career.
It's interesting to note the arguments of tandem masters and skydiving instructors posting in skydiving forums who maintain they are professionals trying to make a living, who point out they have invested a lot of $$$$ and time in their qualifications and deserve to be paid $50+ per jump. All valid arguments and not at all unreasonable, yet professional skydivers and operators often overlook the fact that the role of the pilot is integral to the BUSINESS and they think that hours in the logbook is just compensation for a pilot. Some jumpers and operators even think they are doing the pilot a favour. Imagine if a customer turned up and asked for the jump for nothing or at cost price! They'd be laughed off the drop zone. Even parachute packers on a drop zone earn $5-$10 for a 10 minute packing job.
In the worst-paid of other industries or professions, apprentices and graduates earn an entry level salary. It's never contemplated nor expected that someone would work for nothing, even if not fully qualified. Aviation should be no different.
To fly a skydiving aircraft safely and efficiently actually takes some skill. Pilots who choose to work for nothing devalue the skill required as well as screw others who NEED to make a buck to survive ahead of their need or want to fly.
There are very few traditional skydiving clubs left in Australia. Most drop zones are run as commercial businesses by professional operators. It's one thing to fly for nothing when it is just fun jumpers (licensed skydivers) covering the cost of the aircraft, but when an operator is taking their cut, charging customers top dollar or paying tandem masters $50 or more for a jump, the pilot simply must insist on being paid a fair wage. To pay the poor old pilot $50/load would not actually add too much to the customers' bills. Even $25/load over 6-10 loads per day would be reasonable compensation and not too far off the Award hourly rate.
If EVERYONE stuck together and refused to work for nothing, the operators would come to the party very quickly to stop their lucrative income stalling. If an operator cannot afford to pay the pilot and other staff they should either put their prices up or go out of business. After all, this is what we would expect a retailer, hotel, or any other business or service provider to do if they wanted to remain operating and retain staff.
It is simply immoral for the pilot and the operator to enter into a no-pay arrangement, unless it is strictly a club environment in which the pilot is also a member of the club and not flying as a career.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Zealand
Age: 37
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It stikes me as unfair to demand solidatity with other pilots to a new 250hr CPL. I don't think it's right for the most needy members of the community to refuse flying hours beacause someone with a regular paying gig think it's the "right thing to do".
I fully agree that it isn't right, that a pilot doing a job should be paid for it (unless it's in a club environment, ie. helping out non-profit gliders guys etc), but that there is always going to be new pilot's willing to do anything to get a few more hours (myself included). So despite the sacrafice of those others, nothing will change. It needs to be an organised collective change rather than guilting newbies into refusing such work.
When my training finishes and I most likely have to find a non-flying job I don't know how I'll be able to pay to keep current and raise my infant daughter. Something like that could safe my aviation dream.
I fully agree that it isn't right, that a pilot doing a job should be paid for it (unless it's in a club environment, ie. helping out non-profit gliders guys etc), but that there is always going to be new pilot's willing to do anything to get a few more hours (myself included). So despite the sacrafice of those others, nothing will change. It needs to be an organised collective change rather than guilting newbies into refusing such work.
When my training finishes and I most likely have to find a non-flying job I don't know how I'll be able to pay to keep current and raise my infant daughter. Something like that could safe my aviation dream.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its not really that hard, no need to prostitute yourself out for hours, i worked as an AME to pay for my training, built a successful courier business on the side, sold business to pay for commercial training and Instructor ratings, now work as an instructor at a well paying small school, most of my students have become friends, and still work part time as a AME..
never once worked for nothing.
i wont even give advice, hints or any explanations on flying subjects on internet forums, i worked hard, and invested my time and money in my training, i expect something in return for that investment.
never once worked for nothing.
i wont even give advice, hints or any explanations on flying subjects on internet forums, i worked hard, and invested my time and money in my training, i expect something in return for that investment.
Last edited by Ultralights; 17th Aug 2009 at 08:33.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It stikes me as unfair to demand solidatity with other pilots to a new 250hr CPL. I don't think it's right for the most needy members of the community to refuse flying hours beacause someone with a regular paying gig think it's the "right thing to do"."
Aerozepplin This attitude is eactly what is wrong with the industry. The reason you are being offered the flyng is because someone far more qualified, more bars, bigger wings, larger flight bag with less **** in it, a newer set of ray-bans and better looking than you has said no... your just getting ahead in the race to the bottom.
Your aviation career will be fine without flying for free, just be patient and your turn will come. 9 years and 1500 hours.
Aerozepplin This attitude is eactly what is wrong with the industry. The reason you are being offered the flyng is because someone far more qualified, more bars, bigger wings, larger flight bag with less **** in it, a newer set of ray-bans and better looking than you has said no... your just getting ahead in the race to the bottom.
Your aviation career will be fine without flying for free, just be patient and your turn will come. 9 years and 1500 hours.
Now both sides have (vocally) had their say, I might as well chime in with my two bob. Which is about all my opinion is worth.
I don't work in aviation anymore, like the signature says, I now drive trains. The reason behind this is simple. Family and Money. I am not going to spend upwards of $50,000 to get to the minimum standard and have to fight with every other Tom, Dick and Harry to fly for a company in the middle of nowhere that won't pay the Award. Which in itself is pissweak at about $35,000. All the while hoping for that "elusive" twin job and a pay packet that means more than Maggi noodles for dinner.
Having said that, I do not begrudge anyone who offers to fly for free if no other alternatives are found. Especially locally. Like it or not, the GA pilots of Australia are not a cohesive bunch. Personally I don't think they'll ever be. That being the case, you need have no one elses' interests at heart other than yours and your families.
It is all well and good to say "But what about the next bloke?", well, he will have to manage for himself, just as you've had to. If that was really what was being considered, we wouldn't have operators willing to take blokes on for the hours only, nor operators that don't pay the GA Award - as the blokes that went before you should have made sure of it. But you do. So if that means flying for the hours only and taking a second job to pay the bills, so be it. Or he could do what I chose to. Stop pursuing a career in Commercial aviation for one that more than pays the bills and fly for fun, when I want, where I want, in my own aircraft.
Whatever the next bloke decides or has to do should be no concern of yours. That should be reserved for you and your family, lest you get to a stage where you don't have one.
I'll just don my flameproof suit now, and exit stage right.
I don't work in aviation anymore, like the signature says, I now drive trains. The reason behind this is simple. Family and Money. I am not going to spend upwards of $50,000 to get to the minimum standard and have to fight with every other Tom, Dick and Harry to fly for a company in the middle of nowhere that won't pay the Award. Which in itself is pissweak at about $35,000. All the while hoping for that "elusive" twin job and a pay packet that means more than Maggi noodles for dinner.
Having said that, I do not begrudge anyone who offers to fly for free if no other alternatives are found. Especially locally. Like it or not, the GA pilots of Australia are not a cohesive bunch. Personally I don't think they'll ever be. That being the case, you need have no one elses' interests at heart other than yours and your families.
It is all well and good to say "But what about the next bloke?", well, he will have to manage for himself, just as you've had to. If that was really what was being considered, we wouldn't have operators willing to take blokes on for the hours only, nor operators that don't pay the GA Award - as the blokes that went before you should have made sure of it. But you do. So if that means flying for the hours only and taking a second job to pay the bills, so be it. Or he could do what I chose to. Stop pursuing a career in Commercial aviation for one that more than pays the bills and fly for fun, when I want, where I want, in my own aircraft.
Whatever the next bloke decides or has to do should be no concern of yours. That should be reserved for you and your family, lest you get to a stage where you don't have one.
I'll just don my flameproof suit now, and exit stage right.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Zealand
Age: 37
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it's right at all that pilot's work for free for a commercial operation, but in the absence of a true union movement (at least in this country) there won't be any change.
I was a member of the Engineers, Printers, and Manufacturing Union in my previous job and saw the power that they had from their large membership. However I also saw how it was underminded in my factory by 50% of the workforce refusing to join.
My point was that there are always going to be people who take non-paying positions, and shaming people into not doing it doesn't seem fair to me. There needs to be an organised voice, not just anger.
Much as it pains me I have to agree with KRviator that your family comes first.
I was a member of the Engineers, Printers, and Manufacturing Union in my previous job and saw the power that they had from their large membership. However I also saw how it was underminded in my factory by 50% of the workforce refusing to join.
My point was that there are always going to be people who take non-paying positions, and shaming people into not doing it doesn't seem fair to me. There needs to be an organised voice, not just anger.
Much as it pains me I have to agree with KRviator that your family comes first.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what all the fuss is about here.. Not paying for anything is not exactly a new phenomena in this industry for some operators (often because they don't have the dough to do so anyway!) Just market forces as usual. There are several places where they don't even pay instructors, never mind PPL's. The glut of new shiney G3's means they now have them queuing up, paying for their own check rides, renewals and all. And dont forget, the less they pay their 'employees', the cheaper it will become to learn to fly, parachute or whatever.... 
(yes, in some places that's actually true!) These 'jobs' are not exactly 'careers' are they?
(yes, in some places that's actually true!) These 'jobs' are not exactly 'careers' are they?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearedtoreenter, the fuss is about operators effectively stealing from their employees (and both parties thinking it is alright) while those operators line their own pockets and in turn screw the industry and the rest of us as well.
A PPL should not be getting paid for flying but there are scores of low time CPL holders (and others) who need to make an honest living and get their professional career off the ground and who deserve to be paid for their skills and labour.
Yes, operators have a big investment that is not without risk and deserve to make a buck. I understand business and commercial considerations better than some and will always strive to improve the boss's bottom line, but if the margins are so tight that the pilot cannot be paid, the operator does not deserve to be in business. This is more about greed, exploitation and an archaic attitude. The skydiving customers are already paying top dollar and many would be appalled if they knew the conditions pilots work under.
It's fine for those who see GA as a stepping stone to the airlines, but makes it damn difficult for those of us who would be happy spending an entire career in GA. As someone else pointed out earlier, the willingness of pilots to work for nothing on the bottom rung only erodes the pay and conditions for those of us who've clawed our way up a rung or two. As pilots we only have our labour to sell. Let's put a value on it and not look at our own short term gain at the expense of everyone else. Things would change overnight if everyone stood firm together. The aircraft simply can't fly without the pilot.
Because there are people in various parts of GA willing to work for nothing or a mere pittance (or even pay for hours), and the operator knows it, there are experienced, older pilots out there right now with families and mortgages (I am one of them) being forced to work under some pretty ordinary conditions with the implied threat that if we won't do it, some young fella will.
It's time to get into the modern age and stop this acceptance of the lower end of GA being the shonky sweatshop that it is and nothing more than a right of passage. Everyone should consider themselves, and be treated as, professionals from Day 1.
A PPL should not be getting paid for flying but there are scores of low time CPL holders (and others) who need to make an honest living and get their professional career off the ground and who deserve to be paid for their skills and labour.
Yes, operators have a big investment that is not without risk and deserve to make a buck. I understand business and commercial considerations better than some and will always strive to improve the boss's bottom line, but if the margins are so tight that the pilot cannot be paid, the operator does not deserve to be in business. This is more about greed, exploitation and an archaic attitude. The skydiving customers are already paying top dollar and many would be appalled if they knew the conditions pilots work under.
It's fine for those who see GA as a stepping stone to the airlines, but makes it damn difficult for those of us who would be happy spending an entire career in GA. As someone else pointed out earlier, the willingness of pilots to work for nothing on the bottom rung only erodes the pay and conditions for those of us who've clawed our way up a rung or two. As pilots we only have our labour to sell. Let's put a value on it and not look at our own short term gain at the expense of everyone else. Things would change overnight if everyone stood firm together. The aircraft simply can't fly without the pilot.
Because there are people in various parts of GA willing to work for nothing or a mere pittance (or even pay for hours), and the operator knows it, there are experienced, older pilots out there right now with families and mortgages (I am one of them) being forced to work under some pretty ordinary conditions with the implied threat that if we won't do it, some young fella will.
It's time to get into the modern age and stop this acceptance of the lower end of GA being the shonky sweatshop that it is and nothing more than a right of passage. Everyone should consider themselves, and be treated as, professionals from Day 1.
Not sure what the rest of the people on here think but Ik978 I really think that demeaning other peoples comments (which they have every right to voice seeing as this is a forum) is a pretty low act. Have some respect for others opinions.
Pretty sure its people like you who think they are always right that are the problem in the industry, not companies unable to pay there pilots.
Pretty sure its people like you who think they are always right that are the problem in the industry, not companies unable to pay there pilots.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Middle of the Road
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RichFine-Green, you are exactly right. A pilot can not accept hire or reward to fly for a private operator. The place I used to drop for paid me as an aircraft caretaker (washing, overseeing maintenance, refuelling etc) and I flew "for free".
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 33
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankfully with the soon to be introduced regs making skydive commercial ops, we'll get rid of these PPL flyers who have nothing better to do which in turn should raise the standard of flying a bit at least if nothing else
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mmmm......perhaps I didn't make myself very clear so I'll repeat it....in the hope I make myself clear ...again.
If you are working for a meat bombing type....who runs a business and draws a profit from that business...then you my friend, whether you hold a ppl or cpl...are no better than a scab. Particulary if you are doing it for free or less than the award!!!
The business owner...you my friend are most certainly a piece of excrement!
Christ....what is so hard to understand??
Krviator and the rest...probably best you lot stay out of the industry. People like you ARE the problem.
I think I covered the causes of the problem in an earlier post relating to Aerospace Aviation
If you are working for a meat bombing type....who runs a business and draws a profit from that business...then you my friend, whether you hold a ppl or cpl...are no better than a scab. Particulary if you are doing it for free or less than the award!!!
The business owner...you my friend are most certainly a piece of excrement!
Christ....what is so hard to understand??
Krviator and the rest...probably best you lot stay out of the industry. People like you ARE the problem.
I think I covered the causes of the problem in an earlier post relating to Aerospace Aviation
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: au
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mowed my lawn the other day. Should I feel guilty for cheating the owner of the local lawnmowing musiness out of a job? After all, he did invest in the equipment (a decent ride-on and slasher) and he depends on mowing lawns to feed his family.
A sad fact is that somone is not entitled to a job just because they spent a ton of money, time and effort training for it. Supply and demand rules. Because so many people see flying as a "fun career" (and get told of impending pilot shortages by schools) we have more pilots then jobs. In our cruel capitalist society, that devalues the job, to the point where some fly for free to stay current - or simply because they enjoy it.
If you want to improve conditions for pilots, either
1) somehow convince people being a pilot isn't glamorous or exciting
or
2) somehow convince flight schools to train fewer pilots.
I can't see either of these happening
A sad fact is that somone is not entitled to a job just because they spent a ton of money, time and effort training for it. Supply and demand rules. Because so many people see flying as a "fun career" (and get told of impending pilot shortages by schools) we have more pilots then jobs. In our cruel capitalist society, that devalues the job, to the point where some fly for free to stay current - or simply because they enjoy it.
If you want to improve conditions for pilots, either
1) somehow convince people being a pilot isn't glamorous or exciting
or
2) somehow convince flight schools to train fewer pilots.
I can't see either of these happening
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Regs
Hi. Thanks all. Sounds like the new regs should be a step forward, does anyone have any info on what they'll involve, what will be required for para drops and when they'll be introduced?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In a caravan
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How true is this statement and when can we expect these new regs to come in effect?
Hi. Thanks all. Sounds like the new regs should be a step forward, does anyone have any info on what they'll involve, what will be required for para drops and when they'll be introduced?
Revocation
1 Instrument CASA 278/97 is revoked.
Application
2 This instrument applies to aircraft engaged in parachute training operations.
Direction
3 Aircraft engaged in parachute training operations must comply with the conditions set out in section 6.
Commencement
4.1 Subject to subsections 6.2 and 6.3, this instrument comes into effect on the day after registration.
4.2 Subsection 6.1 comes into effect 90 days after the registration of this instrument.
4.3 Subsections 6.2 and 6.3 come into effect on 1 March 2010.
Definitions
5 In this instrument:
APF means the Australian Parachuting Federation Inc.
APF Jump Pilot’s Handbook means a handbook issued by the APF, as approved by CASA from time to time, setting out rules and procedures for carrying out parachuting operations.
APF Jump Pilot’s rating means a certificate issued by the APF to certify that a pilot is trained and competent to carry out parachuting operations.
ATC means air traffic control.
ATC frequency means a radio frequency used by air traffic control.
controlled airspace(CTA) means airspace that is Class A, C, D, or E airspace or a GAAP Control Zone.
Chief Instructor means an instructor “A” approved by the APF in accordance with the APF Operations Regulations to supervise parachute training operations for a training organisation .
CTAF means a common traffic advisory frequency.
CTAF(R) area means an area within which radio carriage and use are required and in which aircraft use a CTAF.
drop aircraft means any aircraft engaged in the dropping of parachutists in parachute training operations.
drop zone means the area within which parachutists taking part in a parachute training operation are required to land.
training organisation means an APF member organisation authorised by the APF to conduct parachute training operations, including
student and novice training descents and tandem jumps.
General Conditions
6.1 A drop aircraft when dropping parachutists must be operated in accordance with the APF Jump Pilot’s Handbook.
6.2 A pilot in command of a drop aircraft must hold an APF Jump Pilot’s Certificate.
6.3 A drop aircraft that is not a Class A aircraft must be maintained as if it were a Class B charter aircraft and must have a current maintenance release issued in that category.
6.4 Applications for exemptions to carry fire extinguishes may be made for certain type aircraft i.e. C172, C182, C206
6.5 Any alteration of the APF Jump Pilot’s Handbook must be notified to CASA for acceptance.
6.6 If CASA does not accept the alteration, it must notify the APF.
[6.5 is necessary if CASA is to consider whether to accept or not.]
Supervision of parachute training operations
7.1 Parachute training operations must be conducted under the supervision of a Chief Instructor.
Supervision by Chief Instructor
O.R. 13.1.3 All training Descents must be made under the supervision of a Chief Instructor and conducted in accordance with an Approved Training Operations Manual.
Safe conduct of parachute operations
8.1 The pilot in command of a drop aircraft must take all reasonable measures to ensure that:
(a) parachutists exit the aircraft only if there is no risk of any part of the aircraft being fouled by parachutists or their equipment when they exit; and
(b) the operation does not impose any adverse stress on any part of the aircraft structure; and
(c) loose objects that if dropped could create a hazard to persons or property on ground or water are not carried by parachutists exiting the aircraft.
8.2 Except in accordance with a specification issued by CASA, the person in charge of the parachuting operation, the parachutist and the pilot in command of the aircraft must ensure that:
(a) a parachute descent is made in meteorological conditions in which the target is clearly visible; and
(b) that the parachutist does not enter cloud.
Equipment
9.1 A drop aircraft must be equipped with:
(a) 2 VHF radio transceivers.; or
(b) if operating in Class G airspace, 1 VHF radio transceiver.
9.2 The radio transceivers or transceiver must be used to make broadcasts in accordance with this approval.
Radio procedures
10.1 Subject to subsection 10.4, a broadcast advising the intention to drop parachutists must be made from the drop aircraft not less than 2 minutes before the parachutists exit the aircraft.
10.2 A broadcast under subsection 10.1 must be made on all relevant frequencies for the airspace through which the parachutists descend and in which the drop aircraft operates.
10.3 A broadcast made under subsection 10.1 must give notice of:
(a) the location of the drop zone;
(b) the altitude at which the parachutists will exit the aircraft.
10.4 The relevant frequencies include:
(a) any ATC frequency for airspace used by the drop aircraft;
(b) any other frequency used in airspace through which the parachutists may descend after exiting the aircraft;
(c) where the landing area for the parachutists is located in the vicinity of an aerodrome where an air traffic control service is not provided—the CTAF for the surrounding airspace.
10.5 A broadcast made by ATC on an ATC frequency advising that parachutists will be dropped at a time stated in the broadcast is taken to be a broadcast on that frequency under subsection 10.1, subject to meeting the requirements of subsections 10.3 and 10.4.
Additional requirements in controlled airspace
11.1 The pilot in command must not allow parachutists to exit a drop aircraft in controlled airspace until he or she has received from ATC the clearance “[Aircraft call-sign] clear to drop”.
11.2 A drop aircraft must use its VHF radio transceivers to communicate with ATC and to monitor and advise air traffic outside the controlled airspace.
11.3 If parachutists will not be dropped within 3 nautical miles radius of the centre of the drop zone, the pilot in command must advise ATC of the direction and extent of any extension required to the drop zone.
Additional requirements at aerodromes requiring radio carriage and use
12.1 A drop aircraft must not engage in an operation involving parachute descents at, or in the vicinity of, an aerodrome in a CTAF(R) area, unless the pilot in command uses its VHF radio transceivers to monitor and advise air traffic in the vicinity of the aerodrome and the surrounding areas, using the relevant CTAF(R) and any other relevant frequencies.
12.2 In addition to the broadcast required under subsection 10.1, a broadcast advising the intention to drop parachutists at the location specified in the broadcast must be made from the drop aircraft on the relevant frequencies not less than 4 minutes before the parachutists exit the aircraft.
12.3 A broadcast under subsection 12.2 must be made on the relevant frequencies specified in subsection 10.4.
12.4 The pilot in command must ensure that parachutists do not exit a drop aircraft at, in the vicinity of, an aerodrome in a CTAF(R) area, if the descent would take place 15 minutes or less before the estimated time of arrival of an aircraft engaged in regular public transport operations (an RPT aircraft).
12.5 Subsection 12.4 does not apply if:
(a) the 2 aircraft are in direct radiocommunication with each other; and
(b) all parachutists are able to exit the aircraft and land before the RPT aircraft arrives within the circuit area of the aerodrome.
12.6 After an RPT aircraft arrives at an aerodrome in a CTAF(R) area, the pilot in command of a drop aircraft must ensure that parachutists do not exit the aircraft at, or in the vicinity of, the aerodrome until the RPT aircraft has landed and taxied clear of the runway.
12.7 After an RPT aircraft has broadcast that it is taxiing for departure from an aerodrome where radio carriage and use is required, the pilot in command of a drop aircraft must ensure that parachutists do not exit the aircraft at, in the vicinity of, the aerodrome until the RPT aircraft is clear of the circuit area of the aerodrome.
Additional requirements at certified or registered aerodromes
13.1 The pilot in command must ensure that parachutists do not exit a drop aircraft at a certified or registered aerodrome, unless:
(a) the aerodrome operator has approved parachute descents at the aerodrome; and
(b) regular and local users of the aerodrome have been given timely
notice of the intended descents;
(c) the target set out for the parachutists is separated from the movement area by a distance equal to the applicable minimum drop zone radius; and
(d) the descents do not conflict with any aircraft that are:
(i) on the live side of any circuit that is in use, or that could reasonably be expected to be used, by known traffic in prevailing conditions; or
(ii) using any runway, taxiway or apron.
13.2 Subsection 13.1 does not apply to an operation involving parachute descents at a certified or registered aerodrome if written specifications issued under regulation 152 of CAR 1988 require or allow those descents to be conducted differently.
13.3 The pilot in command must ensure that parachutists do not exit a drop aircraft at a certified or registered aerodrome if the pilot in command of another aircraft:
(a) is carrying out an instrument approach procedure at the aerodrome; or
(b) is expected to commence an instrument approach procedure within the next 5 minutes.
Additional requirements for operations more than 10 0000 feet above mean sea level (amsl)
14.1 A flight crew member who is on duty in an unpressurised drop aircraft must be provided with, and continuously use, supplemental oxygen:
(a) if the aircraft is above flight level 120; or
(b) if the aircraft operates above 10 000 feet amsl:
(i) for more than 15 minutes during an operation involving parachute descents; or
(ii) at night; or
(iii) in IMC.
Last edited by D-J; 17th Aug 2009 at 23:04.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QldPilotGuy I am sorry for my post i thought that they were realy just trying to wind people up... I didn't think there was anyone that naive.
Last thing I am going to say on this... feel free to go and fly for free, just remember.
1) it is wrong
2) everyone always remembers the person who fly's for free
3) no one respects you
4) someone has already sad no before you said yes
If you don't put your foot down for flying small A/C where does it stop?
you will always be the one who pays for endorsements, works for below the award, jumps over anyone for an upgrade, bitches about the other FO's to secure that command.
My only advice is to think hard about how much is the short term gain really worth.
Last thing I am going to say on this... feel free to go and fly for free, just remember.
1) it is wrong
2) everyone always remembers the person who fly's for free
3) no one respects you
4) someone has already sad no before you said yes
If you don't put your foot down for flying small A/C where does it stop?
you will always be the one who pays for endorsements, works for below the award, jumps over anyone for an upgrade, bitches about the other FO's to secure that command.
My only advice is to think hard about how much is the short term gain really worth.
The other question is if your flying for free at the parachute moab - where do you stop and draw the line. Your next job your going to be inexperienced at charter - will you work for free there ? Your next job you might have no twin time - do you work for free there ?
Name ANY other industry where people work for free for companies that are making income off the activity you are performing for free for them ? Do people work for free at the local servo to get cash register experience to work at Coles?
If these same pilots that bitch about the crap conditions they eventually get at their airline - who do they have to blame ?
Pilots on one hand bitch and moan about crap conditions - however lets face it - if VB or JQ offered guys 500 hours for 'free' on a 737/A320 after you paid $50K for an endorsement - they would be knocked over with applicants of people that would do it to make them 'more experienced' to get a job, then wonder why they can't get a job because all the other 737/A320 operators are full of 'freebie' F/Os!
The race to the bottom continues! I don't think anyone denies that people fly because they enjoy it - but they also deserve to make a decent wage or allow for all the money spent and crap one has to put up with to get a decent job.
Name ANY other industry where people work for free for companies that are making income off the activity you are performing for free for them ? Do people work for free at the local servo to get cash register experience to work at Coles?
If these same pilots that bitch about the crap conditions they eventually get at their airline - who do they have to blame ?
Pilots on one hand bitch and moan about crap conditions - however lets face it - if VB or JQ offered guys 500 hours for 'free' on a 737/A320 after you paid $50K for an endorsement - they would be knocked over with applicants of people that would do it to make them 'more experienced' to get a job, then wonder why they can't get a job because all the other 737/A320 operators are full of 'freebie' F/Os!
The race to the bottom continues! I don't think anyone denies that people fly because they enjoy it - but they also deserve to make a decent wage or allow for all the money spent and crap one has to put up with to get a decent job.