Bring it on

Did a little digging on this subject
 

Wont be happening any time soon, watch it quietly fade away, squashed by the usual factions. That's OK soon the banks will come knocking at a few of the doors of those involved as the whole industry collapses. (aircraft repossessions are already under way)

Just cant wait to get out of aviation and get back to building the RV8

Folks,
I just love the idea that shelfware has much to do with aviation safety.

When I cast my mind back to my first "Charter License", it was somewhat more simple than CASA is now proposing for joyrides. All single engine, daylight VFR --- IFR was a real rarity in those days, as were twin engine aircraft.

It took me about two days to assemble the 20 odd page manual, which was accepted by DCA without amendment -- in fact they were really only interested in P1, all the names and addresses and the nominated Chief Pilot, the only formal position, and P2, a statement that all operations would be conducted in conformity with the Act, ANRs and ANOs, signed by the Chief Pilot.

No inspections, interviews, proving flights and all that rubbish.

In Australia, there has been no improvement in airsafety outcomes, over the years, to match the increasingly expensive and complex CASA requirements, indeed, in the last several years, GA safety outcomes have gone backwards.

CASA requirements as detailed by Ding Duck are a pretty good exposition on what is wrong with aviation regulation in Australia, a sledgehammer to crack a nut. A light aircraft operation is not an airline, FCS.

Folks, have a look at the FAA requirements for joyflights!! Their accident rate is about half the Australian equivalent.

Tootle pip!!

So few months on now, any news with this?

Gone by the wayside..
 

Have it from a reliable source that it has been strangled at birth by some big operators. So this patiently waiting (2 years), wannabe scenic flight pilot (me) is selling the aircraft that's been sitting idle waiting for this to come through.

Latest
 

Been watching these new rules and have receive the latest update.

Basically CASA are to busy with all the other changes underway at the moment that this has been put into a hold. They said unlikely to have any movement until the second half of next year. :ugh:

I am all for the change. I think all the cost and fees involved makes a small operation have to run on an oily rag and a operator that is struggling will try save some money from somewhere. There goes money spent on doing other things right.

To many rules and fees can cause money spent on things that aren't as important. Rather a nicer plane and working environment than a expensive piece of paper saying she will be right.

A small scenic operation running according to the criteria specified is no more dangerous than taking your mates up for a lap. Pilots are giving a CPL because they prove they can make safe decisions. If they can't be safe and handle running a C206 up and down VFR then they never should have been granted a licence from CASA. An AOC for this operation is basically saying they don't believe pilots have common sense. Any decisions about safety in these ops a licensed pilot should know so to me an AOC for this is just a hassle, cost and waste of time.

Besides the proposed changes aren't meaning nothing required just cheaper and less time consuming.

To be honest there is no trust left to operators and pilots. CASA sometimes forgets the pilot likes his life as well (most I hope) :ooh:

I believe most against the idea will already be operators that were nagged they had to go through the AOC process and are just jelly that its going to get easier. Come on guys that isn't the point of the change, its about safety. :=

Reduced fees for GA, will improve GA.:D

AOC clearly overkill for scenics
 

Here was casa s chance for a win with GA pilots, operators and the public. A simplified low cost option.

Mr Skidmore please reconsider. This could be top of the regulatory reform list to show the way for your staff. To get something to completion that is not controversial and In the interests of getting GA going again. And most important..low cost. AOC costs for GA are just crazy.

so i guess this is dead in the water?

Yep, the pointy headed folk in Canberra would have seen to that. They flew this like a kite, knowing "the industry" would advise them it's all too dangerous. A bit like flying instructors having to work under an AOC. ICAO only require an AOC type structure for integrated pilot training courses and multi-crew training activities.

In my own experience, I can name a few larger operators whom would be very threatened by this occurring, whilst they don't necessarily take the majority of their money from Scenic Flights it keeps them afloat and increased competition from competitors that have entered the market with a much lower operating cost is certainly going to hurt them.

That being said, those same operators also use slightly larger Aircraft, 7 or 12 seaters for example which by their nature when full are exceptional money makers, but this would make it far more difficult for them to fill those aircraft. I think for those to work properly Aircraft need to be considered by Type, not just seats, I'd dare say a good Caravan would be far safer than a clapped out 206 or 182 and this should be about the safety of the Aircraft rather than just how many people dead from a flight CASA are willing to see in the headlines.

Personally I think this has great potential for more operators to get up and running, to increase the number of GA Aircraft in the air and the potential for newcomers to get some experience and start their careers. But perhaps we should be looking at the Aircraft being used, perhaps limiting the Age and Types of Aircraft in an attempt to encourage operators to be using better quality, this would bring up their initial costs due to Aircraft Purchase Price but their overall costs would be lower making it easier and perhaps balance out whilst creating a good safety standard and preventing just anyone would getting in?

Perhaps we need a new regulation:I'm sure there will be no end of suggestions as to what the criteria should be.

Maybe we need a "Clap Inspector" Lead Balloon, a person whose job it is to apply common sense and decide when something is "Clapped Out" :D

Bit different to the usual "Clap Inspections" some of us undergo...

Ah good ol' "common sense".

If everyone had the same "common sense", why would these "clapped out" aircraft be flying?

I thought that only happened in the military and then many years ago? ;)

Whats the obsession with the age of aircrafts? When was the last time a piper or cessna disintergrated in mid air due to metal fatigue? Pilots have proven to be more than capable of crashing brand new state of the art jetliners vs. a 40yo cessnas

Scenic flights NPRM
 

Not Dead...yet.
I inquired about it last year and was told that it was bottom of the list of competing projects for its team lead. Anyone who would like to see it moved higher up the list email the project team lead:
[email protected]

The squeaky wheel gets the oil....even in CASA

That's right: Waste your energy writing to the latest Pollyanna pretending it's all going to happen. Soon.

You CASA folk stand out like the proverbials, P.

If you don't like what I wrote then why don't you provide a constructive answer? Or you could instead waste your energy moaning on internet forums about how the industry is dying and CASA never do what you want.

By writing to "Pollyanna's" I have: had a hand in overturning a proposed AD, helped several operators achieve CASA certification and found solutions which allow existing operators to be more profitable - in the last 12 months.What have you achieved LB?

Those who know me can attest to the fact that I DO NOT WORK FOR CASA
and HAVE NOT EVER WORKED FOR CASA.

If you think that writing to CASA makes thing one of difference in the regulatory reform program, other than to make it more complicated and costly, good luck to you. You obviously don't subscribe to the orthodox definition of "insanity".

Good work on the prop AD. You weren't alone. That work hopefully gave you an insight into the lack of intellectual rigour, risk analysis, failure data and time in service data analysis and cost/benefit analysis that goes into CASA-initiated "safety" requirements.

I've made many submissions and assisted others to do the same in relation to aviation regulation. Just not to CASA. It's pointless. CASA's a self-licking ice cream.

I apologise for accusing you of working for CASA. It is a serious slur on your character if untrue.

RE invigorate GEneral Aviation
 

Here’s a plan.

1. Get this simplified scenic flights model up and flying. (And get rid of that RAA scenic flights mascarading as trial instructional flights nonsense. ). AOC costs and time demands is a huge roadblock to small business startups.

2. Get instructors untied from AOC requirements.

3. Give RAA simple low cost opportunities to be trained up for Controlled Airspace.