There is an FOI named Nishi, definitely not Indian though. And having dealt with him I'd be very surprised if he was tied up with this sh1t

Quote:

---

That's especially true at Moorabbin where you have a dozen operators all doing the same thing.

---

There are nowhere near a dozen operators doing FEE-HELP on Moorabbin airport. Oxford in a big way, The Aeroclub in a limited way. And Soar, BUT NOT ANYMORE!

I blame CASA. The stench of what was going on at Soar must have been overpowering. I’m mean I’m not completely stupid, but even I could see that my school was less than ideal within awhile of graduating with a PPL. RMIT similarly stunk to high heaven.

Okihara, I believe this issue has been brewing for a while now and the complaints were put in a lot longer ago than you'd think so wasn't just sitting there for 2 - 3 years and the way VET-FEE works it can be easy to end up a giant chunk of debt in very quickly as well plus the way it's setup is that people feel once they've made that commitment they're stuck with it and have no other options. It's a crap system overall to be honest, it would have been better if they'd provided a much wider range of Flight Training Providers that a Student could choose from and allow market forces to work things out better rather than a select few flashy ones with money that end up with near monopolies.

is it just me or does this make no practical sense at all?

Yes, perhaps it was the other way around.

As much as that would help with your anger management Sunny, I can't see how CASA are at fault here? CASA don't care if it takes you 200 or 2000 hours to get a CPL (and I actually don't think they should either). Collectively we bemoan that CASA have no mandate to promote aviation - they are the 'safety' authority and not responsible for making aviation viable or even fair. What Soar and RMIT have or haven't done for their students may be unconscionable, I can't see any evidence that it breaches the act, CASRs etc (putting aside who was flying what plane with what license/medical - and not knowing the whole RAA vs CASA story but assuming it is legal if done properly).

These students will have their best chance against Box Hill TAFE - it would seem pretty obvious that they have a duty of care to their students with respect to the flight training organisation they've partnered with. Even a basic level of due diligence should have set off alarm bells.
Soar will go out of business quietly - the money will already have left these shores. The students will get something back out-of-court from the TAFE (but not much) and very very few will ever get their CPL and the cycle will start again - check back again in 5 years time for the next instalment.

FEE-Help should be abolished. Aviation is expensive, these scams make it more expensive and waste the tax-payers money terribly. I'd wager that a fair number of the students caught up in this are now unlikely to ever hit the income threshold to repay the debt or if they do, they'll be saddled with it all their lives and never pay it back. They won't be able (or willing) to go further into debt - for this course or any other - and so won't likely have the same earning potential they could have.

Back to the old days of only rich kids learning to fly? With very few exceptions, most of the pilots I know who made a career of it either worked their backsides off to pay for lessons or came via the military. Add to that cadetships from airlines (based on fair t&cs - difference being airlines have an incentive to get it right and so should recruit properly) and as CASA continue to kill off regional GA then there shouldn't be a pilot shortage....

UTR

GA is in such a dysfunctional state on so many levels at the moment :ugh:

Meanwhile, Soar gives the impression that it's business as usual 50 is a fair bit off the 19 that the other article was mentioning.

The newspaper article said 19 graduates as at April 2019. So if they are up to 50 now then they have completed an additional 30 students in 9 months. Not many given they have had over 400 students this year.

The article also said that only 2 of the 19 were novices (ie; had started from scratch.) I wonder how many of the 50 have gone all the way with Soar.

I would be even more interested to know how many of the 59 have a job in aviation.

It seems to me that it does indeed make practical sense. They certainly couldn't do it the other way around.

UTR, you are correct. CASA has no statutory responsibility for the commercial conduct of SOAR. Morally ?

You’d be opening a can of worms if you’re asking for CASA to become the moral police as well.

It’s a competency based model. If it takes 1 or 10 lessons for the student to reach that level, then they are happy regardless. All they care about is that the ATO’s signature is on the required piece of paper or online form and all of the requirements have been met. It’s caveat emptor.

ATO?
 

The what now?
There haven’t been any ATOs for a long time now.
You mean ‘Flight Examiner’

Showing my age. The oldies know what I meant :-)

The real oldies will know what ATOs were called before ATOs were ‘invented’. Everything old becomes new again...

Actually to be really pedantic the HOO is the one who signs the form, FE can't do the test without that signature. NO idea how it works in RA Aus though.

Well, yes the person under CASR 61.235 (does not have to be the HOO) has some responsibility for recommending, as does the flight examiner that ultimately conducts the flight test, and issues a pass or fail assessment.
The person under CASR 61.235 and the flight examiner can be the same person in some cases, not including CPL tests.

Whoever buys the WeetBix?

CFI does all the tests and signs the papers, unless it's for another CFI. Then it's an Examiner of Airmen....or something.

Quote:

---

These students will have their best chance against Box Hill TAFE - it would seem pretty obvious that they have a duty of care to their students with respect to the flight training organisation they've partnered with. Even a basic level of due diligence should have set off alarm bells.

---

Yep, back in my apprenticeship days, TAFE was fully government funded, free of commercial interest, free of greed. They were great days, taught by ex-tradies (with mangled limbs and bad backs). I had the great fortune of doing my CPL theory at Sydney TAFE, they were all crusty old bastards, current and recently retired pilots. Contrast that with what's happening at TAFE's now.

Quote:

---

Soar will go out of business quietly - the money will already have left these shores. The students will get something back out-of-court from the TAFE (but not much) and very very few will ever get their CPL and the cycle will start again - check back again in 5 years time for the next instalment.

---

So true, the Australian way of doing business, soft white collar corruption at it's best.

Quote:

---

FEE-Help should be abolished. Aviation is expensive, these scams make it more expensive and waste the tax-payers money terribly. I'd wager that a fair number of the students caught up in this are now unlikely to ever hit the income threshold to repay the debt or if they do, they'll be saddled with it all their lives and never pay it back.

---

It has it's place in not for profit educational institutions. Name me one of those in Australia these days. Even if there were you'd still have to deal with the rampant corruption and white collar thieves.

Quote:

---

Back to the old days of only rich kids learning to fly? With very few exceptions, most of the pilots I know who made a career of it either worked their backsides off to pay for lessons or came via the military.

---

And those same people were patient, they knew they weren't going to get that shiny jet NOW. And didn't whinge when they weren't upgraded in under 10 years.