A further destruction of industry with $6000.00 life raft service costs.
Thread Starter
A further destruction of industry with $6000.00 life raft service costs.
I think everyone understands that every so often a life raft has to be re-checked. My life raft is a Winslow 46FAUL and in the past could be serviced in Australia. I am now told that there is no servicing facility available as it is not economic with our industry in such a down turn. Aeromil had to send the life raft overseas to have it serviced and it cost $6000.00.
This is another nail in the coffin of Australian General Aviation, as an industry gets below a certain efficiency of scale, suppliers and distributers close down and costs go up exponentially, its already happening!
This is another nail in the coffin of Australian General Aviation, as an industry gets below a certain efficiency of scale, suppliers and distributers close down and costs go up exponentially, its already happening!
Winslow raft service
Winslow Rafts are now a division of UTC Aerospace systems, UTC aerospace have a branch in Melbourne under the name Kidde Aerospace and Defence who can service rafts.
UTC AEROSPACE SYSTEMS
Kidde Aerospace & Defence Pty Ltd
Unit 2, 13/14 National Drive, HALLAM VIC 3803, Australia
Tel: +61 3 9709 3602 Fax: +61 3 9709 3606
(AOG) +61 409 265 643 (Out of Business Hours)
Actually I believe they are in the process of INCREASING their aviation capability.
UTC AEROSPACE SYSTEMS
Kidde Aerospace & Defence Pty Ltd
Unit 2, 13/14 National Drive, HALLAM VIC 3803, Australia
Tel: +61 3 9709 3602 Fax: +61 3 9709 3606
(AOG) +61 409 265 643 (Out of Business Hours)
Actually I believe they are in the process of INCREASING their aviation capability.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WAY TOO EARLY FOR FACTS
Folks,
You must have more discipline and remember the unwritten rules: it is improper to introduce facts into threads such as this until the second page.
MJG
You must have more discipline and remember the unwritten rules: it is improper to introduce facts into threads such as this until the second page.
MJG
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OEM's
The major OEM's are oblivious to how they contribute to this issue. Singapore is within our region of the word and apparently a cost effective maintenance solution. Yes, UTC is now here but unfortunately the damage is done. A North American company is working on a 5 year limited disposable raft design for multiple size aviation TSO rafts, which is where we are at with commercial preservers. Where the dinosaur OEM's are stuck in the dark ages, this revolutionary company is working on inflation systems for the same cost as a constant wear jacket. Look out once they sort out the raft.
Thread Starter
Mgahan Where are the facts missing here? US$6900 is about Aus$9300 plus freight and customs. Think I did better with the service.
Has anyone checked if UTC can service the raft in Aus? Last time I checked they could not.
Great to see the indefensible being defended.
Has anyone checked if UTC can service the raft in Aus? Last time I checked they could not.
Great to see the indefensible being defended.
Moderator
Is there still the ludicrous situation where aircraft life rafts and aircraft life jackets, being transported for service/recertification, can not travel by air?
"No Sir, we can not carry your life raft/life jackets by airline passenger aircraft as they contain compressed gasses!"
"No Sir, we can not carry your life raft/life jackets by airline passenger aircraft as they contain compressed gasses!"
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would this be the same Dick Smith who quite recently recommended to the GA community .........' Get out while you still can".
Dick Smith, when people get out of GA the need for goods and services will of course decline. Why are you surprised when you find yourself in this position? (Too few suppliers and no price competition). For mine, you're unmistakably playing a part in the contraction of the GA industry.
How's about a little less observationism and more activism. I understand you're supportive of AOPA's president Marc de Stoop and his approach to the GA issues. I would suggest you counsel him to put a hold on his Project Eureka, get that disaster of a website modernized, attractive to prospective new members and CURRENT (GAAP airports news... really???), put a target on new annual membership growth and gain a critical mass of aviation people that will mean real influence. (After over a year into the role Marc finally acknowledges, to some degree at least, the massive difference between AOPA USA and Australia's AOPA, and the significantly disproportionately low membership here).
A growing GA will get to a tipping point where its sustainability and stability is far more likely once the sector’s leaders such as yourself back a regeneration programme and stick to the proposed plan. Broadcasting personal issues wouldn’t be part of the plan.
Dick Smith, when people get out of GA the need for goods and services will of course decline. Why are you surprised when you find yourself in this position? (Too few suppliers and no price competition). For mine, you're unmistakably playing a part in the contraction of the GA industry.
How's about a little less observationism and more activism. I understand you're supportive of AOPA's president Marc de Stoop and his approach to the GA issues. I would suggest you counsel him to put a hold on his Project Eureka, get that disaster of a website modernized, attractive to prospective new members and CURRENT (GAAP airports news... really???), put a target on new annual membership growth and gain a critical mass of aviation people that will mean real influence. (After over a year into the role Marc finally acknowledges, to some degree at least, the massive difference between AOPA USA and Australia's AOPA, and the significantly disproportionately low membership here).
A growing GA will get to a tipping point where its sustainability and stability is far more likely once the sector’s leaders such as yourself back a regeneration programme and stick to the proposed plan. Broadcasting personal issues wouldn’t be part of the plan.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Perth
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tail wheel
for the past 5 years at least lifejackets, rafts and slides have all been able to travel by air, but only if they have been declared a 'DG'... still a stupid rule, but the requirements aren't very restrictive..
it's now even less restrictive- upto 30 or so Kg can be carried undeclared..
for the past 5 years at least lifejackets, rafts and slides have all been able to travel by air, but only if they have been declared a 'DG'... still a stupid rule, but the requirements aren't very restrictive..
it's now even less restrictive- upto 30 or so Kg can be carried undeclared..
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hempy, fair comment. I don't know too much about what was proposed, but it seems there is and has been a lot of ideas and proposals advocated, but quite simply, until somebody with practical and proven leadership and implementation skills steps up in GA, its simply illogical to expect a resurgency or a vibrancy to return to Australian aviation.
There are plenty of people in this country with "practical and proven leadership and implementation skills " to fix GA...BUT you wont find them in CAsA or the Political spectrum. And its proven.
If CAsA and the pollies had the interest and skills, GA wouldnt be where it is today
Here in Regulatastan the (non) Aviation House mafia rule the roost, and have rooted the industry in the process.
We are partly to blame because over the decades we've just put up with the sh!t shovelled at us, tugged the forelock ...and just got on with trying to stay in business in spite of CAsA not because of it.
Its a tragic state of affairs. Drastic change is a must.
Back to the Life Raft. I would have thought a reputable company would have advised first whether it was worth repairing or replacing before sending it overseas, and arriving at a bill equaling or more than a new one. I'd be pissed off, too
I got lucky, pumped up and left inflated for 4 days . Then I found the time life date stamp. End of story. RIP the RFD float?boat
If CAsA and the pollies had the interest and skills, GA wouldnt be where it is today
Here in Regulatastan the (non) Aviation House mafia rule the roost, and have rooted the industry in the process.
We are partly to blame because over the decades we've just put up with the sh!t shovelled at us, tugged the forelock ...and just got on with trying to stay in business in spite of CAsA not because of it.
Its a tragic state of affairs. Drastic change is a must.
Back to the Life Raft. I would have thought a reputable company would have advised first whether it was worth repairing or replacing before sending it overseas, and arriving at a bill equaling or more than a new one. I'd be pissed off, too
I got lucky, pumped up and left inflated for 4 days . Then I found the time life date stamp. End of story. RIP the RFD float?boat
Thread Starter
Fortunately I can easily afford all of the costs .
I point them out because I can't see how a charter operator could run a viable business with these type of costs.
I cannot see any light on the horizon re copying the best lowest resultant cost regulations from around the world.
That's why I advise everyone to get out of commercial aviation now before they lose even more.
Please don't write to me in a couple of years and say you have lost everything.
Surely it's clear that people like Mike Mrdak ,Mark Skidmore and Sir Angus Houston have no grasp of how serious the cost problems are- if they did they would be doing something about the issue.
That's why I am convinced the problems will have to get far worse before any changes are supported by these powerful people.
You have been warned - so don't complain when you lose everything- even your house.
I point them out because I can't see how a charter operator could run a viable business with these type of costs.
I cannot see any light on the horizon re copying the best lowest resultant cost regulations from around the world.
That's why I advise everyone to get out of commercial aviation now before they lose even more.
Please don't write to me in a couple of years and say you have lost everything.
Surely it's clear that people like Mike Mrdak ,Mark Skidmore and Sir Angus Houston have no grasp of how serious the cost problems are- if they did they would be doing something about the issue.
That's why I am convinced the problems will have to get far worse before any changes are supported by these powerful people.
You have been warned - so don't complain when you lose everything- even your house.
Holy s!ht a dude paid 5 million for a toy and had to pay .1% for the batteries!!! Oh the humanity!
Isn't it about time pprune got a "Like" button!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably those being critical of the comment about paying $5k are happy to contribute some of their own $$$ if the issue is that trivial to them?
Or have they missed the point of the discussion completely??
Sadly, we seem to be bickering amongst ourselves (and trying to belittle somebody who invests their own cash in our shared passion) rather than facing the issue at hand of regulatory costs smothering our industry. Disappointing.
Or have they missed the point of the discussion completely??
Sadly, we seem to be bickering amongst ourselves (and trying to belittle somebody who invests their own cash in our shared passion) rather than facing the issue at hand of regulatory costs smothering our industry. Disappointing.
Tailwheel,
Cast your mind back, a little while, a pilot was threatened with prosecution by CASA because he carried two life-rafts on a trans-Pacific ferry.
The "CASA OLC Determination" was that one was mandatory, the second one was an offense, dangerous good, the subject of the threatened action against the pilot.
The additional "dangerous good" due "undeclared pressurised gasses" only came to CASA's attention because the aircraft ditched, one raft was punctured by a part of the damaged but temporally floating aircraft, so he used his backup raft.
Having floated around the Pacific, "boyd up" by dangerous good, he was finally rescued, after many hours in the water.
Isn't it just great to know that air safety "compliance" comes first with CASA.
Tootle pip!!
Cast your mind back, a little while, a pilot was threatened with prosecution by CASA because he carried two life-rafts on a trans-Pacific ferry.
The "CASA OLC Determination" was that one was mandatory, the second one was an offense, dangerous good, the subject of the threatened action against the pilot.
The additional "dangerous good" due "undeclared pressurised gasses" only came to CASA's attention because the aircraft ditched, one raft was punctured by a part of the damaged but temporally floating aircraft, so he used his backup raft.
Having floated around the Pacific, "boyd up" by dangerous good, he was finally rescued, after many hours in the water.
Isn't it just great to know that air safety "compliance" comes first with CASA.
Tootle pip!!