Natfly 2014

[Teckair]

Don, i agree CASA is getting value for money BUT youre assuming they want the 10000 pilots and 3500 extra aircraft flying at allAs i expect they (us) are not seen as an assett then whats the interest in making it easy or cheap to keep us going

Comes back to the arguement that they have no direction to promote and develop aviation as a whole.

Exactly, rather than spend money on us shutting us down might be the preferred option.

 

 

[Captain]

G'day Don,

 

 

 

I have to say that if I was making business decisions on this in Gov't I would look at the 10,000 RAA members as individuals indulging their passion and I would definitely make it user pays, particularly in the current budgetary climate.

 

 

 

And I would annualise & bump up private GA licence and aircraft rego fees too to a user pays break even basis.

 

 

 

I don't understand how either group could expect any degree of subsidisation.

 

 

 

Not helpful, I know, but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

 

 

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[turboplanner]

Don, i agree CASA is getting value for money BUT youre assuming they want the 10000 pilots and 3500 extra aircraft flying at allAs i expect they (us) are not seen as an assett then whats the interest in making it easy or cheap to keep us going

Comes back to the arguement that they have no direction to promote and develop aviation as a whole.

It's very important to remain vigilant on this issue.

 

We no longer have a Department of Civil Aviation where we had access to Parliamentary debate to decide our future based on an Aviation only group of public servants.

 

We no longer have a Department of Transport and Regional Services where there was still a tenuous line between Aviation and Transport eg politically (internecine) it was "us transport people" against you "regional people"

 

We now have the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, so the entire transport industry including aviation doesn't get a mention, and that's the next step to "out of thought, out of mind"

 

And CASA is just an instrument of that Department which can be terminated at any time, and given what came out in the Senate Hearing, the infighting with ATSB and general disarray in positioning of Airservices, we should expect that some change is quite on the cards at some time.

 

Someone made a comment on here recently that if I remember correctly was referring to the potential half million dollar RAA deficit with possibly bigger ones to come and suggested that if that caused RAA to fall over, "CASA would have to pick up the cost anyway"

 

That is not necessarily correct and I can remember in the days of the Department of Transport and Regional Services, or maybe just Transport, when the truck industry was given the ultimatum of building trucks with a braking system beyond known engineering technology - an academic's thought buckle on how good it would be if trucks could stop in the same distance as cars.

 

In the Board Rooms of the major vehicle and component manufacturers they pragmatic and decided that if the Department wanted us to achieve this higher standard, then the Department didn't would have to pay for it.

 

But the Department didn't, the Australian Design Rule was introduced, and I can still remember the day when PBR announced the end of 16" brake group manufacture in Australia. Very few members of the general public or the politicians realised the significance of that, but it was shortly followed by the extinction of Bedford, International, Dodge, Ford and Leyland medium trucks, and we have to go offshore for vehicles to replace these.

 

So there's a precedent there which make jetr and Teckair's comments well worth remembering, particularly in the light of the current economic pressures on the Federal Government, and particularly in the light that this particular Department# at its top end,

 

may not have the remotest interest in paying millions for people to engage in a hobby

 

# you can see how interested it is in transport by its web page.

 

 

 

[rankamateur]

The transport policy is on the home page, in pictures. Spend all of the money where most of the people play! Minority hobbies aren't likely to get a look in.

 

 

[storchy neil]

That is not necessarily correct and I can remember in the days of the Department of Transport and Regional Services, or maybe just Transport, when the truck industry was given the ultimatum of building trucks with a braking system beyond known engineering technology - an academic's thought buckle on how good it would be if trucks could stop in the same distance as cars.

 

yes

 

what a load xxxx that was I feel that caused a lot of accidents but who am I me was just a dumb truck driver

 

neil

 

 

[robinsm]

Stuff it, if RAA falls over and CASA don't pick up the Tab then they had better get a lot of cops in the air because I suspect the unregistered aircraft count will go through the roof....just sayin"

 

 

[dazza 38]

Stuff it, if RAA falls over and CASDA don't pick up the Tab then they had better get a lot of cops in the air because I suspect the unregistered aircraft count will go through the roof....just sayin"

I agree, if the whole fleet was grounded, do people think that nobody will break the rules and fly anyway ? Fark no, and try and police it. Just saying

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Perhaps it would call for a truck industry type fly-over of Canberra by a couple of thousand (no longer legal) Ultralights. That might get their attention.

 

Not that I would ever propose anyone break the law

 

 

[turboplanner]

The thinking of the motor companies was the same as you lot - "It can't happen"

 

But I just printed hard facts for you

 

Seen a new Bedford J3, International D Line, Dodge D5N, Ford F350, Leyland Terrier lately?

 

My words were: "It's very important to remain vigilant on this issue."

 

I'm not predicting it; in fact I'm very heartened by Major Millards frank and honest assessment of the present situation, and rather than make unrealistic statements like CASA will have to pay, which don't have any historic foundation, it gives us the chance and the time to come up with strategies to ensure the worst case scenario does NOT come to pass.

 

Groups faced bigger issues than these in the 1980's and came up with solutions, time to stop whistling past the graveyard and get to work.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I agree with Don that the the current system between GA and RAAus shows there are inequities in CASA funding. However in reality a GA participant will need a sh!tload more $$$ to play in that sandpit than we will need to play in ours. Asking that they pay more so its equitable may well result in equality, but create as a consequence a further contraction in a sector than shouldn't be contracting any further. As it shrinks the remaining players all have to pay more to keep the fixed LAME infrastructure and CASA infrastructure in place. I don't want to cause them heartache and I equally hope that they don't want to cause us heartache.

 

I would like to ask CASA to pay RAAus the worth of what it is that RAAus do, but I must have missed the part that said Governments will always fund the costs of recreational flying, just like they do for recreational soccer, or recreational rally driving......Oh hang on in general they simply don't in reality!

 

The points made about an SMS are real, there are real costs and real employees that need to be put in place but I submit if we the members don't pay for those things then we will pay more for legal damages and legal participation. We are asked to put an SMS in place because ignoring the human realities around increased fatalities, from a purely financial perspective an SMS is a risk mitigation action where the cost of the mitigation is, or should be, significantly less than the cost of ignoring the risk, and therefore is "what a reasonable (business)man would do" and what we will be measured against in court.

 

However the reality is that well before we would felt the impact in courts our insurance providers would have abandoned us by either asking us to go elsewhere (as happened last year) or increasing premiums as a result of the insurance company's managing their risks. The absolute facts are that its not just RAAus, but rather insurance company, RAAus and CASA and all of us have to manage our risks.

 

So, I agree with Geoff(Captain Elrato) even more

 

Andy

 

 

[turboplanner]

What has been proven to work elsewhere is that the participants in a sport pay the costs with the exception that anyone making money out of the sport, like a promoter pays the costs of infrastructure.

 

In Speedway which is still alive and healthy today, volunteers, not employees cover the SMS/Safety costs at over 100 tracks Australia-wide, and Promoters build the tracks and insure for PL arising from racing (simplified explanation)

 

RAA do not have to get bogged out of existence with an employee structure for a sport where people just want to enjoy themselves - that's a crazy idea.

 

 

[spacesailor]

The UK has had a few Illegals flying since the gov only allows GA planes. At last It's allowing LSA.

 

If we have to become none legal flyers at least we have lots backyard to fly in.

 

Who knows were the airstrip at "Tobermory" is ?, somewere north of the "Plenty hwy "in NT I think,

 

spacesailor

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Nobody is going to ask GA to fund pay more to fund RA. We are talking about an amount that CASA would hardly notice in reduction of their surplus. We are not asking the taxpayers for more either. CASA can afford to do their job of administering aircraft safety. If they paid RA-Aus to do CASA's job of administering safe aviation it would cost them less than $1 million per annum and RA-Aus could stop this nonsense of renewing memberships and registrations every year and get on with real work.

 

I believe that CASA (eventually) will be forced to extend to the RPL level of GA the same privileges that RA-Aus enjoys because the risk management sums work out the same for a light aircraft flying day VFR with one passenger whether it is GA or RA. But, CASA will continue to cover the cost of an RPL flying an LSA or Experimental home built and not cove the cost of a Pilot Cert flying an LSA or ELSA.

 

The logic is indisputable.

 

There was no need for CASA (or AUF) to do much administering when aircraft flew in back paddocks below 300 ft and didn't cross roads. But in the 21st Century, there is as much risk to manage with an LSA regardless of whether it is RA or GA.

 

CASA just has to get its head out of where the sun don't shine and face the realities of present day non commercial aviation whether it is GA or RA.

 

Don

 

 

[Keith Page]

Stuff it, if RAA falls over and CASDA don't pick up the Tab then they had better get a lot of cops in the air because I suspect the unregistered aircraft count will go through the roof....just sayin"

Come on missed one point there.. "Unlicenced Pilot"

 

The other points:- There will be too many to yard hence they will have to paddock us.. Catch us if you can.. Analogy:- From the cattle camps.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page

 

 

[king_daniels]

Amazing

 

We don't fly under the same rules as VH registered aircraft?

 

Gee, I haven't seen anyone saying here that if you want to fly under the same rules as the CAR's 'get a PPL'.

 

No sarcasm!!!!!

 

So, if we want to take one pax, fly cross country in day VFR or fly around your local area, get a PPL. Obviously there are different rules for RAA certificate holders flying RAA aircraft, then PPL lic holders flying in the same air space.

 

Just a little tongue in cheek.

 

 

[Guernsey]

 

The UK has had a few Illegals flying since the gov only allows GA planes. At last It's allowing LSA.If we have to become none legal flyers at least we have lots backyard to fly in.

Who knows were the airstrip at "Tobermory" is ?, somewere north of the "Plenty hwy "in NT I think,

 

spacesailor

A good place for Natfly??

 

 

[Keith Page]

I am not sensitive about anything, I will even fly over the border into Queensland!

Seeing that you don't mind coming up into Qld must let you know there is a fly-in at Thangool on the Queen's Birthday Weekend 7th 8th 9th June.

 

Thangool is the airport for Biloela. Bring your woolies.

 

If you need contact details:- [email protected]

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[turboplanner]

AmazingWe don't fly under the same rules as VH registered aircraft?

Gee, I haven't seen anyone saying here that if you want to fly under the same rules as the CAR's 'get a PPL'.

 

No sarcasm!!!!!

 

So, if we want to take one pax, fly cross country in day VFR or fly around your local area, get a PPL. Obviously there are different rules for RAA certificate holders flying RAA aircraft, then PPL lic holders flying in the same air space.

 

Just a little tongue in cheek.

You don't need a B Double licence to drive a small car, you just need to know and comply with the rules of the road.

 

You don't need a PPL to fly in open air space, you can fly with a Pilot Certificate, you just need to know and comply with the CARs and any other air legislation applicable.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Seeing that you don't mind coming up into Qld must let you know there is a fly-in at Thangool on the Queen's Birthday Weekend 7th 8th 9th June.Thangool is the airport for Biloela. Bring your woolies.

If you need contact details:- [email protected]

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

Thanks Keith, I know Biloela (and Thangool), We bought our first home there and had our first child there too, when I did a stint at he DPI Research Station there in the very early '90s. My plane is still yet to be painted, assembled and fitted out so maybe next year, Stoke the fire and have fun.

 

 

[Powerin]

Excuse my ignorance...but what's the history of not having any PPL license or GA rego fees? How did that come about?

 

Is the cost recovered from Avgas excise or was it a moment of extraordinary sanity by some government in recognising that aviation was an important thing to encourage in a place as big as Australia?

 

 

[David Isaac]

is it a fact that because most?? RAA planes don't use Avgas that they aren't subserdised by CASA?

That is speculation not fact.

 

 

[frank marriott]

CASA lic free ? I just paid $75 to CASA to process a medical, DAME costs are on top of that. And I use (by choice) avgas in my RAA registered aircraft. No such thing as a free lunch when you look into it.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

In 1970 the free stuff sent to a new pilot by the DCA was amazing. And the services like FSUs that went with it. I thought then that it was recognition of how important aviation had been in the war. Certainly the aero club scholarship that I won, which paid half my training, had an acknowledgement of the importance of pilots to that war effort.

 

 

[David Isaac]

I agree PM, it was amazing the free stuff we got back then, and that went right through till the early 90s from memory

 

 

[johnm]

nothings free .......................... someone always pays (know what you mean though)