Adagold Aviation
A little insight for you guys.
There is a thing known as the defence panel, this little group has representation form operators and brokers and you can "bid" of sorts to get onto it.
Now it was originally devised so that the ADF could rapidly acquire airlift outside of "tender" with competitive bids from industry in order to satisfy short term and one off logistic requirements outside of adf capabilities.
Now what has happened every federal (feral) govt dept that could has jumped on the band wagon.
Next was when the Snowbird saga turned out to be the flop it was destined to be.... how many times did they actually make it to the ice? v what was planned. So the Feds have a 319 on a cubic dollar standing fee not doing its job.
Changes of policy and now the "Rudd Route" is almost the second busiest RPT route in the country out side of SYD-MEL.....
Miraculously Snowbird get so busy that they can afford to get a second 319, our airline are doing better than they ever did in the pacific......
and none of us ever saw a tender....... FFS this is the tax dollars that we all pay and yes there are both operators and brokers making a killing.
Is it a club, yes.
Is it legal, yes.
Is it effective for its purposes, yes.
Is there anything we can do about it, NO, simply because it erases layers of BS in the feral govt bureaucracy.
Anyone that has ever had anything to do with a Fed Govt tender will know the onerous process that one must go through, the defence panel cuts that out and delivers a "charter" at a price.
Chin up boys and girls, dont get mad get even and make sure you and everyone you know, vote this Rudd-erless ship out of office when the time comes.
There is a thing known as the defence panel, this little group has representation form operators and brokers and you can "bid" of sorts to get onto it.
Now it was originally devised so that the ADF could rapidly acquire airlift outside of "tender" with competitive bids from industry in order to satisfy short term and one off logistic requirements outside of adf capabilities.
Now what has happened every federal (feral) govt dept that could has jumped on the band wagon.
Next was when the Snowbird saga turned out to be the flop it was destined to be.... how many times did they actually make it to the ice? v what was planned. So the Feds have a 319 on a cubic dollar standing fee not doing its job.
Changes of policy and now the "Rudd Route" is almost the second busiest RPT route in the country out side of SYD-MEL.....
Miraculously Snowbird get so busy that they can afford to get a second 319, our airline are doing better than they ever did in the pacific......
and none of us ever saw a tender....... FFS this is the tax dollars that we all pay and yes there are both operators and brokers making a killing.
Is it a club, yes.
Is it legal, yes.
Is it effective for its purposes, yes.
Is there anything we can do about it, NO, simply because it erases layers of BS in the feral govt bureaucracy.
Anyone that has ever had anything to do with a Fed Govt tender will know the onerous process that one must go through, the defence panel cuts that out and delivers a "charter" at a price.
Chin up boys and girls, dont get mad get even and make sure you and everyone you know, vote this Rudd-erless ship out of office when the time comes.
TwoBags:
On their website, Adagold announce they have been operating since 1992, when they started under Paul Keating. Since then, they've been operating "under" John Howard, KRudd, Julia, and now back to KRudd.
You can't pin this one solely on KRudd.
On their website, Adagold announce they have been operating since 1992, when they started under Paul Keating. Since then, they've been operating "under" John Howard, KRudd, Julia, and now back to KRudd.
You can't pin this one solely on KRudd.
falconx
One thing that now gets brokers is BARS accreditation.
I'm not in the Jet world but I would be surprised if any Australian jet charter mobs couldn't meet BARS standing on their ear.
Judging by the many and varied interpretations proffered by CAsA, how would a bureaucrat in a non-aviation related department know what the difference is between RPT, "closed charter", "private charter?" and charter and the requirements for such endeavors.
I know we regularly turn down jobs or work with the client at length to ensure the arrangements meet this week's definition of "Charter"
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To BARS or not to BARS?
Horatio, spot on. BARS is nothing more than a money churning business scheme. Do you need it? Nope. Is it worth the outlay in terms of real safety? Nope. It is simply something that the mining companies have decided is a safe system to have in place and are placing subtle pressure on operators to have in place. Remember one size doesn't fit all, that is a downside to the BARS methodology.
I know of RPT/Charter operators who have succumbed to BARS and introduced it. For them it is unnecessary as they get audited by CASA, have their own internal audit program, are audited almost monthly by external third parties and the list goes on. So do they need BARS, heck no. However those operators who are somewhat how do I put it nicely - ****e, then BARS is a god send.
Behind the scenes the BARS vs Hart Aviation is also interesting viewing entertainment, watching them duke it out for a slice of the audit pie!! Cha Ching $$$$$. At the end of the day the main value in BARS to an operator is to simply tick a box so that you get a mining contract. Is an operator any less safe if they don't use BARS? NO. If you think BARS is the be all and end all in systems safety then it shows you don't have a good grasp on what safety is.
I know of RPT/Charter operators who have succumbed to BARS and introduced it. For them it is unnecessary as they get audited by CASA, have their own internal audit program, are audited almost monthly by external third parties and the list goes on. So do they need BARS, heck no. However those operators who are somewhat how do I put it nicely - ****e, then BARS is a god send.
Behind the scenes the BARS vs Hart Aviation is also interesting viewing entertainment, watching them duke it out for a slice of the audit pie!! Cha Ching $$$$$. At the end of the day the main value in BARS to an operator is to simply tick a box so that you get a mining contract. Is an operator any less safe if they don't use BARS? NO. If you think BARS is the be all and end all in systems safety then it shows you don't have a good grasp on what safety is.
Last edited by Cactusjack; 31st Jul 2013 at 23:21.
I don't see any suggestion of collusion there Mick
What I do see is none of the Pprune experts ( except twobags to a degree) have any idea how it all works and cannot figure out whether its cosha or not
Pity no one at CASA has the knowledge to explain it
Adagold are just one of a number of brokers (with no AOC required) but obviously do their job better than the rest
What I do see is none of the Pprune experts ( except twobags to a degree) have any idea how it all works and cannot figure out whether its cosha or not
Pity no one at CASA has the knowledge to explain it
Adagold are just one of a number of brokers (with no AOC required) but obviously do their job better than the rest
Last edited by megle2; 31st Jul 2013 at 23:32.
Adagold does not own, operate or have any financial interest in any aircraft. This decision has been designed to uphold Adagold’s status as an independent air charter service company.
Liabilities for aircraft, crew and related matters are covered by the operator’s Air Operator’s Certificate. Adagold ensures that all operators have appropriate licences, insurances and a high standard of maintenance, safety, pilot check and training procedures.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me that Adagold and other brokers are fulfilling a need. They tend to get the work because they LOOK for the work and are experienced at managing the work. What could be simpler?
Greedy brokers?!?!?........ Can think of a lot of greedy grubby operators as well!!!
For the record, we don't have any association with them, and don't do any work for them....don't really want to or need to to.
Having said that, we do a fair bit of work through other brokers and they plug gaps in our marketing program. Not all bad I would think. I think the regulation is aimed aimed squarely at the naughty boys who advertise and fly their own aircraft without an AOC.
There's a ******** out at Forbes and another in a single turbo prop in the Hunter doing exactly that!! Frightening really.
Grab the money boys and girls...if Adagold and the other brokers are handing out cash...don't see the problem with that!!!
Greedy brokers?!?!?........ Can think of a lot of greedy grubby operators as well!!!
For the record, we don't have any association with them, and don't do any work for them....don't really want to or need to to.
Having said that, we do a fair bit of work through other brokers and they plug gaps in our marketing program. Not all bad I would think. I think the regulation is aimed aimed squarely at the naughty boys who advertise and fly their own aircraft without an AOC.
There's a ******** out at Forbes and another in a single turbo prop in the Hunter doing exactly that!! Frightening really.
Grab the money boys and girls...if Adagold and the other brokers are handing out cash...don't see the problem with that!!!
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my experience brokers become gods they give work to the favourites. Don't dare take work from them even if you are approached by the client direct without solicitation or you will be black banned.
I thought CASA was there to keep every one in line, just as there is bad operators there are also bad brokers. Rules and Regs are there to protect everyone.
I don't have it in for Adagold specially, just the industry of those making money in aviation that are not accountable in any way. The majority of GA operators are good hard working people that love the industry and abide by rules and regs to safely stay in business. This compliance costs in time and money. Those that are doing it tough tend to bend to the whims of requests, just to get the work and then it becomes an issue.
Some Brokers I have dealt with like 601 seem to be fixed on pleasing their clients and expecting us to comply with a request for seats not W&B and safety and don't like the word NO!! They will go and find someone that will take a chance.
I have never heard of a code of conduct or a licence for Aviation Brokers like is mandated and law for any other broker for insurance, home loans etc so why is it allowed in our industry?
I thought CASA was there to keep every one in line, just as there is bad operators there are also bad brokers. Rules and Regs are there to protect everyone.
I don't have it in for Adagold specially, just the industry of those making money in aviation that are not accountable in any way. The majority of GA operators are good hard working people that love the industry and abide by rules and regs to safely stay in business. This compliance costs in time and money. Those that are doing it tough tend to bend to the whims of requests, just to get the work and then it becomes an issue.
Some Brokers I have dealt with like 601 seem to be fixed on pleasing their clients and expecting us to comply with a request for seats not W&B and safety and don't like the word NO!! They will go and find someone that will take a chance.
I have never heard of a code of conduct or a licence for Aviation Brokers like is mandated and law for any other broker for insurance, home loans etc so why is it allowed in our industry?
Thread Starter
Just to reiterate, I have nothing at all against Adagold making a good living out of the Australian Government.
My personal concern is that the Australian Government is spending our money at ever increasing logarithmic rates supporting a nonsensical policy.
The thing with Government expenditure is that it never has an accountability factor...which is income. They assume that we mugs will always be there to pick up the tab.
Until every Adagold charter has a destination called Canberra...then I refuse to believe they are in the real world.
My personal concern is that the Australian Government is spending our money at ever increasing logarithmic rates supporting a nonsensical policy.
The thing with Government expenditure is that it never has an accountability factor...which is income. They assume that we mugs will always be there to pick up the tab.
Until every Adagold charter has a destination called Canberra...then I refuse to believe they are in the real world.
Mick, agree, that is a reasonable summation
When booked by a broker the operator is not able to run the normal checks and balances as they very often were not given the real details. If a noise was made then the broker would try to apply pressure or simply bypass you next time
They definitely played favourites at the customers expense
That's how it used to be but maybe things have improved these days
When booked by a broker the operator is not able to run the normal checks and balances as they very often were not given the real details. If a noise was made then the broker would try to apply pressure or simply bypass you next time
They definitely played favourites at the customers expense
That's how it used to be but maybe things have improved these days
My personal concern is that the Australian Government is spending our money at ever increasing logarithmic rates supporting a nonsensical policy.
The answer is to change the big spending government --- it is naught to do with any charter broker.
Twobags has just about got it right, it is an annual "tender" of sorts, so there is an annual opportunity to join the panel.
Adagold is a very successful business because they are very good at what they do. This ratbag government and the way they have mishandled the boat people policy ( remember it was Rudd who started the boat race, do you really believe he now has the answer) has been a bonanza for a number of operators from a number of companies from a number of countries ---- but lay the blame for this huge flow of taxpayers dollars where it belongs, with the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd Labor government.
After all, we are talking billions of taxpayers or borrowed (remember the current deficit) $$$$$, not just mere millions. And now the AUD is slipping, the interest cost of servicing the borrowings to pay the federal government's bills/defecit goes through the roof.
As for those of you sounding off about BARS, grow up. It is the (mostly) mining industry that demands this, and anybody who is a BARS accredited auditor can perform an audit --- and there are quite a few around. There is no need to import anybody. BARS is an excellent idea, generally being well handled.
BARS has become the non-scheduled equivalent of the IOSA audits for all members of IATA. If you think "compliance with CASA rules" is good enough, you really don't know much about what happens with a BARS or IOSA audit, or the intent of such audits.
As a very wise former CEO of CASA ( and there ain't too many of them) said:
" A [CASA] compliant operator is not necessarily a safe operator, a non-compliant operator is not necessarily an unsafe operator".
I thought CASA was there to keep every one in line, just as there is bad operators there are also bad brokers. Rules and Regs are there to protect everyone.
CASA is NOT a commercial regulator, indeed its Act and Regulations specifically bars CASA from making decisions on other than air safety grounds ---- CASA cannot (legally) intervene in aviation commercial matters. Could I suggest you spend a little time familiarizing yourself with said Act and Regulations, so you at least have a glimmer of what they actually say.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 1st Aug 2013 at 15:14.
Leadsled, in respect to Mick's comments of problems between brokers and GA operators he is correct. Its nothing to do with commercial activities, its about staying within the law eg 601's comment re pax numbers
Casa know about it but can't do much except to get the brokers to reword their websites, some brokers have done so making it clear they are brokers
To return to the initial thread of the boat charters ( before we drifted off thread ) Twobags and your comments explain the basics
Casa know about it but can't do much except to get the brokers to reword their websites, some brokers have done so making it clear they are brokers
To return to the initial thread of the boat charters ( before we drifted off thread ) Twobags and your comments explain the basics
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled, shall we start by just having a little peek at CAR 206 and CAR 210 and tell me the difference between a unlicensed operator and a broker. I do know of Brokers that have been shut down by 210 alone.
Obviously you are a man that studies law where I am only one that tries to work within it.
Maybe you can enlighten me as to where in the CAR's and REG's that it states that CASA can only enforce the rules to AOC holders and licenced pilots only.
Quick review of 210 states
Can you tell how a broker doesn't come under this reg?
Nope, foolish me - I forgot level playing fields don't exist in Australia as the umpire is out the back arguing semantics with the crowds.
I also fail to understand how a government tender for public transport can be given to a broker who then goes and chooses who can do the work and throws the odd breadcrumbs to all and sundry according to their whim whilst the operators have to jostle and compete for the work.
Wasn't this simular to what used to happen at the docks and work houses during the depression. Meanwhile the brokers get richer as the operators cut the bottom line to get work to survive. Tell me that's in the interest of safety.
Obviously you are a man that studies law where I am only one that tries to work within it.
Maybe you can enlighten me as to where in the CAR's and REG's that it states that CASA can only enforce the rules to AOC holders and licenced pilots only.
Quick review of 210 states
A person must not give a public notice, by newspaper advertisement, broadcast statement or any other means of public announcement, to the effect that a person is willing to undertake by use of an Australian aircraft any commercial operations if the last-mentioned person has not obtained an Air Operator's Certificate authorising the conduct of those operations.
Nope, foolish me - I forgot level playing fields don't exist in Australia as the umpire is out the back arguing semantics with the crowds.
I also fail to understand how a government tender for public transport can be given to a broker who then goes and chooses who can do the work and throws the odd breadcrumbs to all and sundry according to their whim whilst the operators have to jostle and compete for the work.
Wasn't this simular to what used to happen at the docks and work houses during the depression. Meanwhile the brokers get richer as the operators cut the bottom line to get work to survive. Tell me that's in the interest of safety.
Last edited by Mick Stuped; 1st Aug 2013 at 23:54.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mick
Where does this put the travel agent? He/she buys part of an aircraft for a flight for a passenger... isn't he a broker?
"Broker" is just another word for "Agent".
Where does this put the travel agent? He/she buys part of an aircraft for a flight for a passenger... isn't he a broker?
"Broker" is just another word for "Agent".
Mick,
No.1, Re-read TWOBAGS post, or go and do some reading elsewhere, including how the panel works.Google is your friend.
No.2, Develop a more nuanced understanding of CAR 206, and its history, AAT decisions etc., brokers like Adagold are advertising services as brokers, not as operators. You haven't really made a case as to why CAR 210 is relevant. You have made an assertion.
No.3 CASA has no role in commercial relations between brokers and the operators, whom they contract to carry out work. It's all in the Act and Regulations.
Indeed, in many cases, CASA has no role at all, beyond its normal role involving any foreign operator flying in and out of Australia, be it scheduled or non-scheduled. In many ( possibly most, where international non-scheduled operations are concerned) cases, no Australian AOC is involved.
Tootle pip!!
No.1, Re-read TWOBAGS post, or go and do some reading elsewhere, including how the panel works.Google is your friend.
No.2, Develop a more nuanced understanding of CAR 206, and its history, AAT decisions etc., brokers like Adagold are advertising services as brokers, not as operators. You haven't really made a case as to why CAR 210 is relevant. You have made an assertion.
No.3 CASA has no role in commercial relations between brokers and the operators, whom they contract to carry out work. It's all in the Act and Regulations.
Indeed, in many cases, CASA has no role at all, beyond its normal role involving any foreign operator flying in and out of Australia, be it scheduled or non-scheduled. In many ( possibly most, where international non-scheduled operations are concerned) cases, no Australian AOC is involved.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 2nd Aug 2013 at 04:11.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Animalclub
I don't understand the "beef" with Adagold. I've known them for years and chartered aircraft to them on many occasion. Is it the tall poppy syndrome?
My employer works with brokers quite frequently. Personally, my preference would be that my company dealt directly with the client thus getting the whole pie, but the reality is that for whatever reason, the brokers have access to clients that our sales department doesn't, and we want those clients. And on the other end of the deal the brokers offer a service to the client. Imagine being someone in industry with no particular knowledge of the air cargo business who suddenly finds themselves with a time critical cargo shipment. How much time would you spend, finding out what type of aircraft is appropriate for the load and destination, finding operators of appropriate aircraft, and contacting them individually to find out which one had aircraft availability for the charter? You might spend a couple of days on the phone spinning your wheels. Remember, this is a time critical shipment (otherwise you'd be trucking it, or sending it by barge) A broker starts to look pretty attractive to a client like that.
As far as those sniffing that Adagold doesn't have an AOC; So what? Do you have any reason at all to believe that any the charters they broker are not being operated someone's AOC?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Subversive1
Are you saying that anyone that does business with the government (this lot don't deserve a capital G) shouldn't drive a big car? Crikey, look at the contractors like Qantas, Holland and the road building crew executives drive!!!
Crazy.
Are you saying that anyone that does business with the government (this lot don't deserve a capital G) shouldn't drive a big car? Crikey, look at the contractors like Qantas, Holland and the road building crew executives drive!!!
Crazy.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I use the term greedy, because company staff are driving brand new Jaguars and Aston Martins purchased with public money.
Seems to me that if you're dissatisfied with the way in which charter work is contracted, your beef is with your government, not those who are apparently fulfilling a need.
brokers like Adagold are advertising services as brokers, not as operators.