The state of the industry

[fly_tornado]

I have finally had a chance to catch up with my reading and had a chance to read the article in Dec 2015 "The State of the Industry"

 

At the end of the issue there are a few random facts, there are now 383 less aircraft registered from 2013 than 2015. I wonder where they all went? I am assuming that the RAA assumes they are all being flown illegally. Its a big drop over 2 years considering the number of new aircraft being sold and used aircraft imported from the US is probably greater number.

 

Assuming that, there are 600-700 new ex-RAA aircraft floating around the country unregistered!

 

The other thing I noted was also related.

 

In November's issue I noted in the stats for hours had dropped along with the pilot numbers, from 2013 to 2015. Number of pilots is down 455 pilots from 9822 to 9367 and hours are down 2.09 hours from 25.25 to 23.19hours. Its not really until you add all these numbers together you realise the drop from 24800 hours in 2013 to 21720 in 2015, that's a drop of over 2000 hours.

 

Assuming that half those hours are done in flying school aircraft you can see how big a hit the flying schools are taking.

 

 

[SSCBD]

With the world still in decline and Australia still not any better, plus the U.S. dollar at 69 cents I don't see it improving for 2016. People cant afford it plan and simple. Buying of overseas aircraft or any bits is 30% more now. Not good at all.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Another aspect to consider about the decline in pilot numbers. The RAA averages 130 student pilots per month, for a total of 1560 new pilots per year. When you look at the 455 pilots total loss compared to the 3120 new faces over 2 years it gives you an idea of how many older pilots are exiting the sport. Its hard to predict how many pilots are coming into the RAA, if you assume that of the 1560 student pilots, 80% don't continue after the first year, leaving 312 in the 2nd year and maybe 156 (10%) in the 3rd year.

 

I honestly expected that the number of hours per pilot would be increasing as the low hour pilots would be first to depart but its looking like the RAA is losing a lot of high time pilots. That surprised me a lot.

 

As for the state of the flying schools, there are 167 schools and 130 students per month meaning some schools 37 schools won't get a student on any month. If 10% of the students went to the same schools ie 130 students used 117 schools, that number of schools without new students grows to 50 and only 13 schools see 2 new students.

 

Some won't see more than a handful of students a year depending on how you calculate the distribution.

 

 

[skeptic36]

I have finally had a chance to catch up with my reading and had a chance to read the article in Dec 2015 "The State of the Industry"At the end of the issue there are a few random facts, there are now 383 less aircraft registered from 2013 than 2015. I wonder where they all went? I am assuming that the RAA assumes they are all being flown illegally. Its a big drop over 2 years considering the number of new aircraft being sold and used aircraft imported from the US is probably greater number.

 

Assuming that, there are 600-700 new ex-RAA aircraft floating around the country unregistered!

 

The other thing I noted was also related.

 

In November's issue I noted in the stats for hours had dropped along with the pilot numbers, from 2013 to 2015. Number of pilots is down 455 pilots from 9822 to 9367 and hours are down 2.09 hours from 25.25 to 23.19hours. Its not really until you add all these numbers together you realise the drop from 24800 hours in 2013 to 21720 in 2015, that's a drop of over 2000 hours.

 

Assuming that half those hours are done in flying school aircraft you can see how big a hit the flying schools are taking.

Quite a few assumptions and even a probably in there FT.....

 

 

[fly_tornado]

My biggest mistake or assumption, that the RAA figures are 100% certified accurate.

 

 

[pylon500]

Who are you, and what have you done with 'fly_tornado'?

 

Most of that made (some) sense, and didn't sound like a rant.....!?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Arthur, I haven't broken any laws, I am just sharing an opinion on what's happening in the industry.

 

 

[turboplanner]

He's actually Tony Abbot, but don't tell anyone.

 

 

[poteroo]

The figures are 'rubbery' at best, and I'd be hesitant about drawing too many conclusions from them. Rumour has it that there are one heck of a lot of non-current, and never qualified, pilots out there.

 

We are seeing less 50-70yo students, as enquiries, TIFs, or starts. I believe this is due this demographics' fears for their super and pensions, and the cost of living, (particularly in utilities). There is also a marked dropout of older GA pilots - one reason for so many RVs coming on market.

 

But, we're seeing more 20-40yo TIFs and student starts. Mostly, these are not dreamers who want to fly for QF - many are professionals with a secure job and looking to a more demanding pursuit. Not many have indicated they want to even go on to GA. We also have a few who have chosen RAAus as the least cost route to RPL - only so they have the option of 4 seats.

 

happy days,

 

 

[fly_tornado]

So why is the average hours dropping so much? Does the RAA record 0 hours if you don't put in a response when you renew?

 

 

[turboplanner]

C O S T.........

 

 

[fly_tornado]

The COST issue doesn't fully explain what's happening in the RAA at the moment, you've got a very healthy intake at 1500 pilots a year, that's 1/6 of the total number of RAA pilots. So cost isn't putting off people starting their training, the cost of training hasn't increased that much in the last few years, its been around the $6000 mark for a decade. Cost only really becomes more of an issue after training if you want to clock up a lot of hours. The market for used aircraft looks very soft at the moment, you can pickup some pretty decent aircraft for less than $30K now, which is something you couldn't say 5 years ago. So if you do want to do a lot of hours buying has never been more affordable.

 

On a side note, that "aviation advertiser" site the RAA moved their advertising too is a complete turd, if you sort by price you can't view the listings properly. Instead of having the listings going from $1 to $100, each page has a random selection sorted by price. What kind of web developer would sign off on that sort of code?

 

 

[poteroo]

So cost isn't putting off people starting their training, the cost of training hasn't increased that much in the last few years, its been around the $6000 mark for a decade. Cost only really becomes more of an issue after training if you want to clock up a lot of hours

I'd disagree. Once the dual rate goes above $200/hr - then prospective students begin to think twice. Sure, the total cost can be rationalised to $6000 total - but only if you use the legally minimum hours of 20 hrs to PC, then 12 hrs for cross-country, plus maybe another 3-5 hrs to reach 10 hrs for passenger carrying. Lets say 35 hrs total - and that has to be at at $170/hr. Of course, not all our students are Chuck Yeager, and they all can't fly on days when it's calm and beaut. The real hours to completion are higher.

 

But, these charge out numbers might work if you operate a low value aircraft out of a private airstrip and already own your own school building and hangar. If you have purchased something more upmarket @ $120-140,000, are located on a landing charge airport, rent a hangar, and rent a school building - your annual costs are much higher and can only be amortised via high utilisation - plus higher charge out rates. How many schools do more than 500 hrs pa? 300hrs? Less? Once you fall into the above group - then upwards of $220/hr becomes essential, and that will struggle to cover costs. Insurance is a real slug with these new, higher cost aircraft.

 

Actually, I think that it's only after the fresh new pilot gets away from the flying school that they are able to search out lower cost 'hour building' options. There are many aircraft owners who will rent out their aircraft to a relatively inexperienced new pilot. It's a question of what their insurer will require. Renting out for a block of say 30-40hrs done over 2-3 weeks becomes very attractive on a dry hire basis - it can pay the major part of your insurance. It's sometimes said, (and not in jest), that a newly graduated pilot is a safer bet for hire, than a know-it-all, longstanding pilot who has not maintained currency and skills.

 

happy days,

 

 

[facthunter]

Things generally aren't going that well for most and they might be cautious about spending their spare cash. IF they studied the situation carefully they would HAVE to be wary of the direction aviation is taking. I can't see any great bright spots of real progress jumping out at you. Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

No "joy flights" in RAA. Could that explain the high number of registered students.

 

Those not planning to finish......

 

 

[bexrbetter]

It's sometimes said, (and not in jest), that a newly graduated pilot is a safer bet for hire, than a know-it-all, longstanding pilot who has not maintained currency and skills.

Well verified here with Glider pilots, some surprising numbers, go down to 1.3.1.3 ...

 

http://www.bea-fr.org/etudes/glideraccidents19992001a/glideraccidents19992001a.htm

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I thought CASA had shutdown all the "Joyflight" schools a few years ago? Either way you would think that "Joyflight" business would feel the pinch more than or at least proportionally the same as the school business in a down turn.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

There is no denying that RAAus went through a very bleak period from 2012 when CASA audits turned up some very poor administration requiring a 100% review of its aircraft registration records. Many members suffered with aircraft stuck on the ground in some cases, for many, many months. Many members had to jump through many hoops sometimes more than once. The hangover from the GFC certainly didn't help. There is no doubt that some members who may have been getting towards the end of their love affair with flying simply moved on.

 

Currently, the best source of data is the last Annual Report. Data was still not rock solid but just the best available. The fix of RAAus records and the big rewrite of RAAus systems has meant that reports in future will be much more reliable.

 

I doubt that looking back is going to shed much useful intelligence that isn't already obvious and that we don't already know. However, after a massive effort by the RAAus staff through 2014 and 2015, RAAus us in the best shape it has ever been in and still improving rapidly. We know what needs to be done to get RAAus as good as it can be and Michael Linke and his team are pushing ahead at full steam.

 

 

[kasper]

So why is the average hours dropping so much? Does the RAA record 0 hours if you don't put in a response when you renew?

They do better than that - according to my 'records' with RAA I have currently no flying experience at all ... the systems are not in any way validated as positive total flying hours from prior years has simply disappeared - even in the year I got my original certificate or instructor rating RAA now holds zero hours in each year and zero total hours.

I know that you can jump in and say the data from the past is being corrected and its never been better BUT if the current system does not even test that total hours this year >= last year or total hours = 0 and you currently hold a certificate its not much of a system in terms of instilling any form of confidence in the underlying data or the robustness of the system going forward

 

 

[poteroo]

They do better than that - according to my 'records' with RAA I have currently no flying experience at all ... the systems are not in any way validated as positive total flying hours from prior years has simply disappeared - even in the year I got my original certificate or instructor rating RAA now holds zero hours in each year and zero total hours.I know that you can jump in and say the data from the past is being corrected and its never been better BUT if the current system does not even test that total hours this year >= last year or total hours = 0 and you currently hold a certificate its not much of a system in terms of instilling any form of confidence in the underlying data or the robustness of the system going forward

This lack of information could be easily corrected. At their next BFR, each PC holder could provide proof via logbook of all endorsements held, and flight times to date, eg TT, instructing time, and perhaps time on major types? The qualifications detail is what CASA asks for the changeover from old Part V licences to new Part 61 licences. It's a lot of paperwork for instructors, but it should result in correct pilot records within another year. (if you provide the correct numbers of course.) RAAus could easily provide an extra column or two in the electronic BFR submissions from CFI's - and this would enable at least a 2 year accounting for hours flown. happy days,

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Record keeping should be a core competency of the RAA, someone somewhere should look into this issue and fix it.

 

So @DonRamsay does the revenue now match the pilot count or is it still out?

 

@poteroo historical records of past pilots are just as important as current pilots, 10 and 15 year trends are as important as year to year ones.

[kasper]

Yes record keeping ... like the fact that ratings previously held are no at all shown on RAA records ... yet non-current registrations and certificates are.

 

Very inconsistent.

 

For record keeping ANY rating held at any time should be held and a separate record of its currency held - exactly as exists for pilot certificates.

 

Otherwise when you come to apply for renewal of an expired rating the RAA can turn around and say 'what rating?' and more practically without record of when the rating became non-current how are the Ops and Tech managers to reasonably work out an appropriate path for re-validation and work out what if any educational changes/updates are required?

 

The back end database as visible to members through the portal shows the depth of error within the underlying data ... but IMHO the design of the portal access and display of data evidences an inconsistent and illogical design to the actual database which is more concerning.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

It would be disappointing if someone had an accident and the investigation noted that he had not flown for a couple of years, based on the records.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It would be disappointing if someone had an accident and the investigation noted that he had not flown for a couple of years, based on the records.

That would be subject to correction though.

 

 

[facthunter]

YOUR logbook is the essential reference when all else fails. Nev