PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions-91/)
-   -   SOAR VS APTA? (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/626627-soar-vs-apta.html)

Sunfish 24th Oct 2019 16:41
SOAR VS APTA?
 
Could somebody explain why apparently the SOAR flight training business model is acceptable to CASA yet Glen Buckley’s APTA business model isn’t?

Squawk7700 24th Oct 2019 19:40
Originally Posted by Sunfish (Post 10602501)
Could somebody explain why apparently the SOAR flight training business model is acceptable to CASA yet Glen Buckley’s APTA business model isn’t?
Only time will tell if it IS actually acceptable.

BigPapi 24th Oct 2019 22:14
A good deal of it is probably due to the fact that Soar is operating a Part 141 operation versus APTA Part 142.

Sunfish 24th Oct 2019 22:29
So the APTA model allowed integrated training and SOAR can’t do that? I would have thought that made the APTA offering more comprehensive or am I missing something?

40+ Foxbats operating out of YMMB? LSA’S in controlled airspace? That must have required lots of exemptions mustn’t it?

BigPapi 24th Oct 2019 22:35
As far as I'm aware, no, Soar cannot offer integrated courses of training.

Sure 142 is more comprehensive, however surely also more onerous and expensive to get and maintain approval for

Also worth saying that Glen's original intention was to actually train pilots. Soar is a money making exercise.

wishiwasupthere 24th Oct 2019 22:40
Apparently the brother of the uncle of the second cousin of the owner of SOAR is in the RAAF. Quite clearly it’s another example of the RAAF trying to stop GA.

Squawk7700 24th Oct 2019 22:42
Originally Posted by Sunfish (Post 10602718)
40+ Foxbats operating out of YMMB? LSA’S in controlled airspace? That must have required lots of exemptions mustn’t it?
Why would they need an exception to operate 20’ish Foxbats, a dozen Bristells and a half dozen Tecnam LSA’s out of Moorabbin?

Why can’t LSA’s operate in CTA?

I feel like you are either seriously lazy Sunfish and can’t be bothered to research this stuff yourself, or you’re listening to too much aeroclub bar talk.

BigPapi 24th Oct 2019 22:51
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 (Post 10602729)


Why would they need an exception to operate 20’ish Foxbats, a dozen Bristells and a half dozen Tecnam LSA’s out of Moorabbin?

Why can’t LSA’s operate in CTA?

I feel like you are either seriously lazy Sunfish and can’t be bothered to research this stuff yourself, or you’re listening to too much aeroclub bar talk.
I don't think there as many exemptions as Sunny thinks there is, but I'm almost certain that they need an exemption to allow student pilots (i.e. no license or certificate) to fly RAAUS aircraft at a controlled aerodrome.

Squawk7700 24th Oct 2019 23:31
Originally Posted by BigPapi (Post 10602736)
I don't think there as many exemptions as Sunny thinks there is, but I'm almost certain that they need an exemption to allow student pilots (i.e. no license or certificate) to fly RAAUS aircraft at a controlled aerodrome.
I was choosing to be careful with my wording. LSA aircraft can fly in CTA. Who they are piloted by is a different story and yes, an RA-Aus student needs to be covered under the schools exemption.

Perhaps Sundish doesn’t realise that LSA’s come in GA and RA-Aus rego and many in their fleet are GA registered.

megle2 25th Oct 2019 01:25
I see Soar feature in todays “ Australian “. Lots of unhappy students it seems.

Horatio Leafblower 25th Oct 2019 23:29
A good deal of it is probably due to the fact that Soar is operating a Part 141 operation versus APTA Part 142.
Why should 141 engender poorer student outcomes than 142?
Part 141 requiring 200-hour CPLs would surely give more lattitude than 150 hour integrated CPL

BigPapi 25th Oct 2019 23:47
Originally Posted by Horatio Leafblower (Post 10603519)
Why should 141 engender poorer student outcomes than 142?
Part 141 requiring 200-hour CPLs would surely give more lattitude than 150 hour integrated CPL
Where did I say anything about student outcomes?

They're different paths to the same result.

Horatio Leafblower 26th Oct 2019 01:12
Fair point - sorry I forgot this thread pre-dates Friday's report in the Australian.

That said, I don't know why the greater level of management, supervision and assurance delivered by a Part 142 organisation wouldn't make APTA perfectly OK.

BASAIR operates bases at Bankstown, Cessnock and Archerfield - do they have HOOs and Safety & Quality managers at each location?

Squawk7700 26th Oct 2019 01:50
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c1adcb72eb.png

Never did end up hearing what this mob was all about. Looks like a closely related operation.

The name is Porter 26th Oct 2019 03:46
A construction fella, doing training courses through the RTO, good bloke.

Sunfish 26th Oct 2019 06:48
Yet APTA gets closed down, destroying Glen Buckley, while SOAR prospers despite the allegations made in “The Australian”? Can someone tell me why an apparently reputable flight training organisation is closed while an alleged dubious operation owned by a very rich gentleman prospers?

But Shirley unhappy students do not good safe pilots make?

CASA? Where are you? CASA? CASA? (crickets)

Leafblower:
Fair point - sorry I forgot this thread pre-dates Friday's report in the Australian.
What a coincidence.

BigPapi 26th Oct 2019 07:11
APTA has not been closed.

It continues to operate.

Sunfish 26th Oct 2019 11:43
APTAS heart has been cut out by CASA. It’s now a zombie.

AerialPerspective 16th Nov 2022 04:23
Originally Posted by The name is Porter (Post 10603600)
A construction fella, doing training courses through the RTO, good bloke.
That's right. Glen had the RTO so he used it to assist delivery of Construction Training courses.


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:00.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.