What is the percentage of commercial pilots trained by foreign schools in Australia
Folks,
There is a large degree of unrealistic train of thought, here, when it comes to dealing with CASA.
It is NOT a level playing field, and the tilt only starts with CASA being reluctant to take on anybody who is large and well funded, particularly if they are NOT an Australian operation.
It goes well beyond just lawyers at 10 paces, CASA are very wary of Qantas, for example, because Qantas lawyers, over the years, have proved to be more effective than CASA lawyers, not because Qantas owns CASA.
Not flying training, but one example from a little while ago involving an airworthiness matter involving US certified aircraft, and CASA making life difficult, "because they could"..
An approach to the aviation liaison at the US Embassy in Canberra, and in the blink of an eye (in public service terms), Foreign Affairs is onto "the Department" ----- demanding explanations from US State Department complaint about Australia (aka CASA) violating an Australia/US aviation treaty ---- citing deliberate bureaucratic obstruction as restraint of trade, contrary to WTO rules.
And that is exactly what was going on!!
Needless to say, CASA pulled their collective head in, quick fast, but, as always, nobody took responsibility in CASA (responsibility ---what;s that??) and the poor sodding business might have won the battle, but the war went on until a change of DAS/CEO.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Dick, My memory tells that Citic, a HK based company nominally, but Beijing controlled, is at the end of the daisy chain of who owns FTA. If it is not Citic, it is one of several very similar companies.
There is a large degree of unrealistic train of thought, here, when it comes to dealing with CASA.
It is NOT a level playing field, and the tilt only starts with CASA being reluctant to take on anybody who is large and well funded, particularly if they are NOT an Australian operation.
It goes well beyond just lawyers at 10 paces, CASA are very wary of Qantas, for example, because Qantas lawyers, over the years, have proved to be more effective than CASA lawyers, not because Qantas owns CASA.
Not flying training, but one example from a little while ago involving an airworthiness matter involving US certified aircraft, and CASA making life difficult, "because they could"..
An approach to the aviation liaison at the US Embassy in Canberra, and in the blink of an eye (in public service terms), Foreign Affairs is onto "the Department" ----- demanding explanations from US State Department complaint about Australia (aka CASA) violating an Australia/US aviation treaty ---- citing deliberate bureaucratic obstruction as restraint of trade, contrary to WTO rules.
And that is exactly what was going on!!
Needless to say, CASA pulled their collective head in, quick fast, but, as always, nobody took responsibility in CASA (responsibility ---what;s that??) and the poor sodding business might have won the battle, but the war went on until a change of DAS/CEO.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Dick, My memory tells that Citic, a HK based company nominally, but Beijing controlled, is at the end of the daisy chain of who owns FTA. If it is not Citic, it is one of several very similar companies.
My 2c based on gut feel...
I don't think flying training schools have ever been a great way to make a lot of money even when economic times were better.
I don't believe overseas companies are training here to make money on the training side - they have a need for pilots trained the way they want and are looking for a return on investment later, by feeding in pilots they need, the return is not on the initial training itself
In Oz, I think there is still a market for good operators who provide quality customer focused training and they don't have to be big either - you won't make a fortune but will make a living and if you enjoy that sort of work, that is why you would persist doing it.
The big issue is training and retaining good instructors, instructors are a big investment and many instructors are looking further down the runway than a career in instructing (which is fair enough). Good instructors and a well run business are what matters, get that together and the business has a good chance.
It would be great to see people coming out of airline careers thinking of maybe giving a bit back at the end of their careers feeding back into the system as instructors but I also understand many are a bit over it by then, sadly. Such people would offer great mentoring to newcomers but can understand why they want to retire quietly.
Not sure the large sausage factory, cookie cutter schools ever really have a long term viability, too dependent on economic conditions - when the 'pilot shortage' phase of the inevitable boom/bust aviation cycle collapses they tend to be too cumbersome to scale back.
Smaller operators who offer good value or specialised/niche training (I think) will be around for a while to come. They are not in it to make their fortune - they enjoy and are proud of what they do.
I don't think flying training schools have ever been a great way to make a lot of money even when economic times were better.
I don't believe overseas companies are training here to make money on the training side - they have a need for pilots trained the way they want and are looking for a return on investment later, by feeding in pilots they need, the return is not on the initial training itself
In Oz, I think there is still a market for good operators who provide quality customer focused training and they don't have to be big either - you won't make a fortune but will make a living and if you enjoy that sort of work, that is why you would persist doing it.
The big issue is training and retaining good instructors, instructors are a big investment and many instructors are looking further down the runway than a career in instructing (which is fair enough). Good instructors and a well run business are what matters, get that together and the business has a good chance.
It would be great to see people coming out of airline careers thinking of maybe giving a bit back at the end of their careers feeding back into the system as instructors but I also understand many are a bit over it by then, sadly. Such people would offer great mentoring to newcomers but can understand why they want to retire quietly.
Not sure the large sausage factory, cookie cutter schools ever really have a long term viability, too dependent on economic conditions - when the 'pilot shortage' phase of the inevitable boom/bust aviation cycle collapses they tend to be too cumbersome to scale back.
Smaller operators who offer good value or specialised/niche training (I think) will be around for a while to come. They are not in it to make their fortune - they enjoy and are proud of what they do.
Folks,
Flying Schools must be fabulously profitable.
https://www.superyachtfan.com/yacht-ambrosia.html
What's the chance of CASA taking on these guys??
Tootle pip!!
Flying Schools must be fabulously profitable.
https://www.superyachtfan.com/yacht-ambrosia.html
What's the chance of CASA taking on these guys??
Tootle pip!!
My 2c based on gut feel...
It would be great to see people coming out of airline careers thinking of maybe giving a bit back at the end of their careers feeding back into the system as instructors but I also understand many are a bit over it by then, sadly. Such people would offer great mentoring to newcomers but can understand why they want to retire quietly.
.
It would be great to see people coming out of airline careers thinking of maybe giving a bit back at the end of their careers feeding back into the system as instructors but I also understand many are a bit over it by then, sadly. Such people would offer great mentoring to newcomers but can understand why they want to retire quietly.
.
Do you have any idea how thoroughly the CASA system discourages the use of such experience??
Very few well experienced and qualified older pilots will put up with the bulldust from the amateurs in CASA. Indeed, very few well qualified and experienced pilots who join CASA in their latter years as FOIs last very long, for the same reason.
In contrast to the US/FAA, where, in certain forms of advanced training, the instructor does not even need a current medical.
Tootle pip!!
Sadly.
the return is not on the initial training itself
Not sure the large sausage factory, cookie cutter schools ever really have a long term viability, too dependent on economic conditions - when the 'pilot shortage' phase of the inevitable boom/bust aviation cycle collapses they tend to be too cumbersome to scale back.
Side note; I love how people jump at the opportunity to take dodgy personal swipes at an outspoken public figure. The fact that Dick comes on here to converse with you plebs says that maybe he does give a hoot about the little guys. And still your insults roll off his back.
But as an aside, why do so many people denigrate large "sausage factory, cookie cutter etc" flying training schools? The big employers want pilots trained to strict SOP's, who have come through structured, standardised training with a lot of oversight and who all have roughly the same way of thinking and tackling problems. They want a fairly standard product at the end.
What I'd be very wary of is a pilots trained at smaller schools where one instructor could teach radically different methods based on personal preferences to each other and nothing the employers want.
Last edited by dr dre; 14th Jun 2019 at 08:37.
I think the larger schools would have a better chance of surviving in the long term than the smaller ones.
But as an aside, why do so many people denigrate large "sausage factory, cookie cutter etc" flying training schools? The big employers want pilots trained to strict SOP's, who have come through structured, standardised training with a lot of oversight and who all have roughly the same way of thinking and tackling problems. They want a fairly standard product at the end.
What I'd be very wary of is a pilots trained at smaller schools where one instructor could teach radically different methods based on personal preferences to each other and nothing the employers want.
But as an aside, why do so many people denigrate large "sausage factory, cookie cutter etc" flying training schools? The big employers want pilots trained to strict SOP's, who have come through structured, standardised training with a lot of oversight and who all have roughly the same way of thinking and tackling problems. They want a fairly standard product at the end.
What I'd be very wary of is a pilots trained at smaller schools where one instructor could teach radically different methods based on personal preferences to each other and nothing the employers want.
You are part right, part wrong, these days, the output of all schools (with several honourable exception) regardless of size, is distinctly ordinary -- I could say, not entirely facetiously, that "stick and rudder" skills are now optional.
Tootle pip!!
