A Country Without GA?
GA won't die. The champagne socialists will still need biz jets to fly them around so they can tell everybody else that they have to freeze in the dark and take the bus because they think it will change the planet's weather.
Last edited by Captain Dart; 8th Apr 2023 at 01:18.
The following 3 users liked this post by Captain Dart:
Thread Starter
Dr Dre you derided and insulted the group that has kept what passes for GA and RAA going as having a "50's mindset" and implied that unless they "get with the program" and adopt the current fashionable paradigm that appeals to you, they will go the way of the dinosaurs. I do not include myself in that group being a relative newcomer to flying. I did however spend the last few years of my career commercialising new inventions, so I believe i do have a little relevant experience of new technology.
For the record, there is nothing wrong with electric aircraft or electric anything; what is obvious to anyone with some experience of life and a little technical background is that there is massive over promising about what can be delivered and when. There are logistical impossibilities relating to supply of raw materials, manufacture, energy supply and infrastructure provision that cannot be solved with current technologies if at all. Then there is the question of whether such a program will make the slightest difference to green house gas emissions or even be counter productive. Then there are ethical questions on top of that.
I think I may be forgiven for observing with bewilderment, perhaps anger and absolute incredulity the bizarre spectacle of CASA falling all over itself to gain a foothold in the regulation and development of electric flying things. Considering CASA's track record, it is not an organisation I would associate with leadership in anything except the production of fear, uncertainty, misery and doubt amongst its victims.
If I were involved in drones, electric aircraft, etc. I would be doing everything in my power to avoid being regulated by CASA who, even now, will be busy crafting a legislative and regulatory straight jacket that will destroy the electric aircraft market segment as surely as they have destroyed GA.
Brighter minds can amuse themselves by speculating on the details of CASA's proposed electric aircraft regulations.
The legal definitions of "Earth potential", "battery capacity" and suchlike should be entertaining, so too the no doubt "special" Australian regulations to prevent pilots and LAMEs from electrocuting themselves (serious subject).
For the record, there is nothing wrong with electric aircraft or electric anything; what is obvious to anyone with some experience of life and a little technical background is that there is massive over promising about what can be delivered and when. There are logistical impossibilities relating to supply of raw materials, manufacture, energy supply and infrastructure provision that cannot be solved with current technologies if at all. Then there is the question of whether such a program will make the slightest difference to green house gas emissions or even be counter productive. Then there are ethical questions on top of that.
I think I may be forgiven for observing with bewilderment, perhaps anger and absolute incredulity the bizarre spectacle of CASA falling all over itself to gain a foothold in the regulation and development of electric flying things. Considering CASA's track record, it is not an organisation I would associate with leadership in anything except the production of fear, uncertainty, misery and doubt amongst its victims.
If I were involved in drones, electric aircraft, etc. I would be doing everything in my power to avoid being regulated by CASA who, even now, will be busy crafting a legislative and regulatory straight jacket that will destroy the electric aircraft market segment as surely as they have destroyed GA.
Brighter minds can amuse themselves by speculating on the details of CASA's proposed electric aircraft regulations.
The legal definitions of "Earth potential", "battery capacity" and suchlike should be entertaining, so too the no doubt "special" Australian regulations to prevent pilots and LAMEs from electrocuting themselves (serious subject).
The following 5 users liked this post by Sunfish:
The champagne swilling business jet owners will be moved from GA to a sub form of Air Transport operation. Everything bigger than say a Navajo for business, charter or whatever other commercial purpose will be Air Transport Category, GA will disappear and RA will cover private recreational flying and activities. In that way no one at CASA has to sign to water down GA rules and become liable and RA will be externally managed as 'none of our concern, they're just amateur aviators'.
Everything changes as technology changes, nothing really to do with greens or whatever other conspiracy. GA is dead from cost overload, from the top down, too much certification cost, liability, lack of evolution to keep costs down over regulation of everything from security to licencing and maintenance and so on...
100 years ago most passengers moved by ship and rail, lots of charter ships, boats etc... Now shipping is either large corporate or small end is personal private recreational vessels, and its still incredibly expensive even without regulatory cost burdens.
Everything changes as technology changes, nothing really to do with greens or whatever other conspiracy. GA is dead from cost overload, from the top down, too much certification cost, liability, lack of evolution to keep costs down over regulation of everything from security to licencing and maintenance and so on...
100 years ago most passengers moved by ship and rail, lots of charter ships, boats etc... Now shipping is either large corporate or small end is personal private recreational vessels, and its still incredibly expensive even without regulatory cost burdens.
The following users liked this post:
The following 4 users liked this post by bugged on the right:
Thread Starter
Aeromariner:
Yes, certainly, of course. It makes good sense, maybe, assuming the operation minimises carbon dioxide emissions when life cycle costs are added into the greenhouse gas account.
Dirt cheap sounds nice too - just wait till it gets taxed.
However, since nobody has enacted a comprehensive carbon tax, no one, including you and me, has any idea of the actual greenhouse balance improvement, if any.
To explain, we can't account for the excess CO2 produced to build and later replace the windfarm, solar farm and transmission infrastructure without a carbon tax. We already know for example, that wind turbine blades do not recycle.
It is also ironic that the greens scream "life cycle costs" when criticising nuclear energy, but that is another debate.
Of course we are talking stuff that doesn't move. The transport energy budget is at least twice the size of fixed domestic. Then you still have the big three - steel, concrete and fertiliser production.
And Seattle doesnt matter a tinkers curse unless you can replicate the technology all the way down to the poorest village in lower slobovia and the transport needs of the poorest African republic = which we cannot do without turning the entire planet into a copper mine for one thing.
So Seattle is a nice feel good example, like buying a Tesla. Happy talk for green voting idiots.
There are arguments for going green but saving the planet tomorrow isnt one of them.
Meanwhile, the food price and availability disasters these green idiots cause are going to kill at least 200 million.
80% of seattles electricity comes from renewables - dirt cheap too.
Dirt cheap sounds nice too - just wait till it gets taxed.
However, since nobody has enacted a comprehensive carbon tax, no one, including you and me, has any idea of the actual greenhouse balance improvement, if any.
To explain, we can't account for the excess CO2 produced to build and later replace the windfarm, solar farm and transmission infrastructure without a carbon tax. We already know for example, that wind turbine blades do not recycle.
It is also ironic that the greens scream "life cycle costs" when criticising nuclear energy, but that is another debate.
Of course we are talking stuff that doesn't move. The transport energy budget is at least twice the size of fixed domestic. Then you still have the big three - steel, concrete and fertiliser production.
And Seattle doesnt matter a tinkers curse unless you can replicate the technology all the way down to the poorest village in lower slobovia and the transport needs of the poorest African republic = which we cannot do without turning the entire planet into a copper mine for one thing.
So Seattle is a nice feel good example, like buying a Tesla. Happy talk for green voting idiots.
There are arguments for going green but saving the planet tomorrow isnt one of them.
Meanwhile, the food price and availability disasters these green idiots cause are going to kill at least 200 million.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.
Sunfish We built aircraft in Seattle - place called Boeing - you might have heard of it. Turbine blades will be recycled just like everything else - as technology moves along. I can remember in the dark days at 11PM in the office at Gippsland Aeronautics, knowing that there were guys like you out there. Spruiking rubbish like LCC. I don't know how many people showed up and quoted crap as to why Airvan would fail. Yeah and I saw the fads about what was going to go wrong in the world. For you its copper - thirty years ago it was aluminium and ironically aluminium will probably replace copper in the power grid. And maybe an electric version of the Airvan might at this stage only fly 15-20 minutes on electricity, but that is a lot longer than wilbur and orville managed first up
Regardless of pistons or electric motors or whether your willy is an inner or outer, who wouldn't want to don their goggles and go for a spin on a nice sunny weekend day?
Somehow the climate change thing is distracting us all from the underlying realities - will those in GA have a flying school and runway and aircraft and refuelling facilities to get our hobby jollies?
Australia is a big country and those outback folks need to get around in something faster than a carbon free bicycle.
CASA won't disappear - no public circus organisations do - they have self preservation down to a fine art. They need GA to help justify their existence.
Yes the squeaky wheel gets the attention - where is the GA lobby group?
Somehow the climate change thing is distracting us all from the underlying realities - will those in GA have a flying school and runway and aircraft and refuelling facilities to get our hobby jollies?
Australia is a big country and those outback folks need to get around in something faster than a carbon free bicycle.
CASA won't disappear - no public circus organisations do - they have self preservation down to a fine art. They need GA to help justify their existence.
Yes the squeaky wheel gets the attention - where is the GA lobby group?
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Dear Aeromariner, Yes I know about Boeing in Seattle, i think you are operating under the misapprehension that I don't like renewable energy or electric vehicles; that isn't true.
What I am talking about is LOGISTICS; with our current technologies, we do not have access to the raw materials necessary to migrate the whole world to sustainable renewables now. We can't do it. Furthermore your suggestion that aluminium might replace copper is a good one - until you discover that aluminum is nick named "congealed electricity" . The turbine blades may one day be recycled - you know they are a product of a giant gas and oil based petrochemical industry as was the boat that grandstanding idiot, Thunberg, crossed the Atlantic in?
The Logistics side effects and unintended consequences of curtailing oil, gas and coal use are REAL and will kill a lot of people in third world countries - they are going to starve. Many in Australia are going to see their standard of living collapse along with the economy. They are going to be cold, hungry and destitute as a direct result of inner city idiot greens pursuing policies that have huge unintended consequences. Repeat after me Electricity, Steel, Concrete and Fertilizer. Furthermore, the environment is also going to suffer because poor people have no time for environmental conservation. They will chop down forests to keep warm.
For the record, I first visited Renton and Everett circa 1976. I watched Boeing build the B767 prototype. I've also visited Los Angeles (Douglas, Lockheed), Phoenix (Garrett), Lynne (GE F404), Cincinatti (GE CF6), PW Canada and PW Hartford. There was also BAC Filton (BAe 146 and Airbus wings designed by brother in law Andy).
Here is a video that may give you an idea of the enormity of the logistics problem.
What I am talking about is LOGISTICS; with our current technologies, we do not have access to the raw materials necessary to migrate the whole world to sustainable renewables now. We can't do it. Furthermore your suggestion that aluminium might replace copper is a good one - until you discover that aluminum is nick named "congealed electricity" . The turbine blades may one day be recycled - you know they are a product of a giant gas and oil based petrochemical industry as was the boat that grandstanding idiot, Thunberg, crossed the Atlantic in?
The Logistics side effects and unintended consequences of curtailing oil, gas and coal use are REAL and will kill a lot of people in third world countries - they are going to starve. Many in Australia are going to see their standard of living collapse along with the economy. They are going to be cold, hungry and destitute as a direct result of inner city idiot greens pursuing policies that have huge unintended consequences. Repeat after me Electricity, Steel, Concrete and Fertilizer. Furthermore, the environment is also going to suffer because poor people have no time for environmental conservation. They will chop down forests to keep warm.
For the record, I first visited Renton and Everett circa 1976. I watched Boeing build the B767 prototype. I've also visited Los Angeles (Douglas, Lockheed), Phoenix (Garrett), Lynne (GE F404), Cincinatti (GE CF6), PW Canada and PW Hartford. There was also BAC Filton (BAe 146 and Airbus wings designed by brother in law Andy).
Here is a video that may give you an idea of the enormity of the logistics problem.
Certainly it does appear that CASA would like GA to disappear…I have it on good authority that they estimate that 20% of GA operators will shut down as a consequence of the current regulatory “reform”….and CASA are quite OK with that decrease in industry.
statistically, there is currently one CASA staff member for every VH registered aircraft in Australia (that’s my maths, so willing to be corrected if wrong).
however, when we think of GA, the common perception is of ageing crusty Chief Pilots forcing newby pilots to work 26 hours a day 8 days a week for less than pittance to fly ageing aircraft in ****e weather.
when we think of GA, we should also include:
firespotting / firefighting
aeromedical transfers
tuna / whale shark / whale spotting
freight / bank runs.
parachute ops
animal surveys / culls
bore runs / mustering.
endangered species translocations
scenics - over the Reef, horizontal falls, the Rock, the Bridge.
passenger transport on routes where there aren’t enough passengers to make RPT viable.
a more emotional picture would be -
aeromedical evacuations, saving the lives of people across Australia.
medical professionals to remote communities,
grocery deliveries to remote communities, cut off by flood waters.
I am getting a bit sick of being told GA is as dodgy AF, and needs more regulation to make it “safer”. What we need is a regulator who actually gives AF, who:
recognised GA as a viable and vital part of aviation, rather than a nuisance to be regulated out of existence.
Allows staff to fly in GA aircraft. Better known as “put your money where your mouth is”.
Did not micro manage the training sector, which now means organisations that employ low time pilots now have to have a C&T training syllabus equivalent to a training school, to make up for deficiencies in the approved training.
looks to Canada (same land mass, similar population) rather than USA for aviation inspiration.
stops with the “ego projects”. The manufacturers of GPS must have been delighted when CaSA mandated GPS to all IFR aircraft ahead of the USA. Gave the manufacturers a golden opportunity to iron out any bugs before releasing units into their largest market.
I have been flying long enough that I can remember when working for CASA was by invitation, and was considered a real feather in the cap. Now - pilots are having to explain to the regulator the real time effect of the regulations, rather than the regulator having the knowledge to assess for themselves.
statistically, there is currently one CASA staff member for every VH registered aircraft in Australia (that’s my maths, so willing to be corrected if wrong).
however, when we think of GA, the common perception is of ageing crusty Chief Pilots forcing newby pilots to work 26 hours a day 8 days a week for less than pittance to fly ageing aircraft in ****e weather.
when we think of GA, we should also include:
firespotting / firefighting
aeromedical transfers
tuna / whale shark / whale spotting
freight / bank runs.
parachute ops
animal surveys / culls
bore runs / mustering.
endangered species translocations
scenics - over the Reef, horizontal falls, the Rock, the Bridge.
passenger transport on routes where there aren’t enough passengers to make RPT viable.
a more emotional picture would be -
aeromedical evacuations, saving the lives of people across Australia.
medical professionals to remote communities,
grocery deliveries to remote communities, cut off by flood waters.
I am getting a bit sick of being told GA is as dodgy AF, and needs more regulation to make it “safer”. What we need is a regulator who actually gives AF, who:
recognised GA as a viable and vital part of aviation, rather than a nuisance to be regulated out of existence.
Allows staff to fly in GA aircraft. Better known as “put your money where your mouth is”.
Did not micro manage the training sector, which now means organisations that employ low time pilots now have to have a C&T training syllabus equivalent to a training school, to make up for deficiencies in the approved training.
looks to Canada (same land mass, similar population) rather than USA for aviation inspiration.
stops with the “ego projects”. The manufacturers of GPS must have been delighted when CaSA mandated GPS to all IFR aircraft ahead of the USA. Gave the manufacturers a golden opportunity to iron out any bugs before releasing units into their largest market.
I have been flying long enough that I can remember when working for CASA was by invitation, and was considered a real feather in the cap. Now - pilots are having to explain to the regulator the real time effect of the regulations, rather than the regulator having the knowledge to assess for themselves.
The following 4 users liked this post by outnabout:
Is it true that CASA will not let its employees fly on GA piston aircraft on work business? Is this what outnabout was implying in his above statement?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
Originally Posted by aeromariner
80% of seattles electriciy comes from renewables - dirt cheap too
Is it true that CASA will not let its employees fly on GA piston aircraft on work business? Is this what outnabout was implying in his above statement?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
statistically, there is currently one CASA staff member for every VH registered aircraft in Australia (that’s my maths, so willing to be corrected if wrong).
I think what you’re referring to is the old DCA which included the functions of what are now CASA, Airservices and the aviation ‘bit’ of the current Department of whatever-it’s-called-this-week, and which ‘ran’ all the airports that are now assets for the generation of private profits and ‘ran’ all those aerodromes that are now a pain in the backside for so many local Councils and the target of property developers.
There are many things for which CASA may legitimately be criticised, but the number of staff equalling the number of VH-registered aircraft isn’t one of them.
Last edited by Clinton McKenzie; 12th Apr 2023 at 09:23.
Is it true that CASA will not let its employees fly on GA piston aircraft on work business? Is this what outnabout was implying in his above statement?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
If true that must surely sum up the nanny state madness that is "modern" Australia?
going for an audit or a CASA safety seminar in a location such as William Creek, on the Oodnadatta Track inn South Australia.
Then fly on REX to Coober Pedy, and rent a 4WD to drive to William Creek.
cant get a seat on REX? Then drive from Adelaide.
I stand corrected on the number of CaSA staff vs number of VH registered aircraft in Australia.
CASA will need a lot less staff now the policy of getting the public to check if pilots and companies have licences and AOC's then reporting back to CASA is being touted.
The following users liked this post: