AirVenture funding crisis - Facebook statements.

[bexrbetter]

. What corporate funding did these require?

What ja mean mate, you went for your own reasons to enjoy yourself?

 

Heretic!

 

 

[storchy neil]

yeh the flack that one person got from the so called no it all brigade now wonder and I don't blame her for not continuing

 

and while I'm at it the ones that don't want CASA there must be some thing wrong with there plane or their piloting skills

 

it was I that rang her and put it to her would it be possible to construct a kit plane at temora there carol went well and truly out off her way to accommodate it

 

what wrong with keeping it simple no the so called no it all brigade has to spend your fees on airshows a well advertised fly in would do neil

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Does "Carol" have a last name?

 

 

[turboplanner]

and while I'm at it the ones that don't want CASA there must be some thing wrong with there plane or their piloting skills

As I understand it, the CASA ramp check process is an audit which is used for educational purposes. Does anyone have an information on a check which has resulted in a prosecution?

I've mentioned before that the various motor sports bodies conduct scrutineering/machine examining on every car at every event, with volunteer inspectors, and that this is one of the black holes that RAA needs to fill if it wants to protect itself and its participants day by day, week by week.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I believe that CASA is the only Aviation Authority in the world that performs these checks. It is not the check or the reason they are performed it is the CASA culture of weilding the big stick and the perception among the Aviation fraternity that they are there to punish you if you have even the slightest detail wrong. That is what keeps pilots away IMHO.

 

The perception of CASA the policeman changing to CASA the advisor won't happen until there is a real and sustained effort by CASA to improve its image and relationship with the Aviation industry. The revolving door of directors has done nothing nor has the apparent failure to follow recommendations of report after report. Spending heaps giving away coffees at Avalon doesn't really cut it.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Does "Carol" have a last name?

Richards

 

 

[storchy neil]

oh Melbourne to Townville back to Melbourne checked 9 TIMES in a heavy vehicle

 

kg bloody bulxxx I have BEEN RAMP CHECKED THREE TIMES TWICE AT WAGAA WAGGA ONCE AT ALBURY HAVE NOT FAILED THEIR CHECK

 

education is more important take note off what turbo is saying

 

bring on more ramp checks anywhere I say if your plane and piloting skills wont stand the check get out I don't want you at my location at an airfield neil

 

 

[turboplanner]

I believe that CASA is the only Aviation Authority in the world that performs these checks. It is not the check or the reason they are performed it is the CASA culture of weilding the big stick and the perception among the Aviation fraternity that they are there to punish you if you have even the slightest detail wrong. That is what keeps pilots away IMHO.

"The perception among the aviation fraternity" about says it all; do you have ANY example of a pilot being prosecuted?

 

The perception of CASA the policeman changing to CASA the advisor won't happen until there is a real and sustained effort by CASA to improve its image and relationship with the Aviation industry. The revolving door of directors has done nothing nor has the apparent failure to follow recommendations of report after report.

CASA are charged with maintaining aviation safety.

The methods widely practised by government authorities, companies, and even local sporting clubs are:

 

• Education, publishing information which will make an operation safer
   
   
  
• Auditing to monitor the level of compliance, counselling to encourage future compliance > improving training methods
   
   
  
• Sanctions or prosecutions for contravening laws or rules
   
   
  

 

 

The Director heads up an organisation of around 1400 people, and to a degree can change basic policies, however, unlike in an autonomous Company, he has to carry out the policy of the Government, and that's the Policy of the Government of the day, which can be at 180 degrees to the Government in power last week.

 

It always amuses me when people start using the Director's first name, and quoting anything he says, and assumes that he can reach all 1400 people and change their culture in a matter of weeks after landing in the job. I was part of a culture change in one of Australia's top 100 companies, and it took about 15 years, with the one person driving it hard.

 

The "report" after "report" you are referring to were really the equivalent of the "Community Consulations" which various Councils, electricity and water authorities etc. love, but they have the same status; they are finite, non-binding, and filed, fading with time.

 

Spending heaps giving away coffees at Avalon doesn't really cut it.

While I can understand that people who have been convicted of offences, or had their medical or licence taken away from the, may nurse an endless hatred of an organisation, there is an expectation from the public that the organisation will provide a public touch-point at a major industry event. Rarely do you ever see people taking notes when you approach them at those events, but time and time again, I've been given the contact details of the key person who looks after the area I need to find out about. Show surveys usually show about 80% plus positive reactions to the stand-holder.

 

 

[aro]

various motor sports bodies conduct scrutineering/machine examining on every car at every event

I've been to quite a few motor sports events, and never had my car checked. They only check cars participating in the actual event, not spectators.

 

On the other hand, a well recognized police tactic if they want to shut an event down is to set up and do license and registration checks of everyone attending. Do that a couple of times and people stop coming. I drive a new car and have no problem with my license etc., but if I knew that license checks were being done at an event I would just say screw it, I have better things to do.

 

 

[turboplanner]

oh Melbourne to Townville back to Melbourne checked 9 TIMES in a heavy vehiclekg bloody bulxxx I have BEEN RAMP CHECKED THREE TIMES TWICE AT WAGAA WAGGA ONCE AT ALBURY HAVE NOT FAILED THEIR CHECK

education is more important take note off what turbo is saying

 

bring on more ramp checks anywhere I say if your plane and piloting skills wont stand the check get out I don't want you at my location at an airfield neil

Good point; every semi trailer travelling from Melbourne to Sydney is checked including dimensional checks at Marulan; same process as a CASA ramp check

I recently travelled the Newell Highway, and saw dozens of new timing cameras being installed; the days of slowing down for a fixed camera are over, I was timed over various distances of an hour or more, and for all I know, timed for the aggregate of several cameras.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I've been to quite a few motor sports events, and never had my car checked. They only check cars participating in the actual event, not spectators.On the other hand, a well recognized police tactic if they want to shut an event down is to set up and do license and registration checks of everyone attending. Do that a couple of times and people stop coming. I drive a new car and have no problem with my license etc., but if I knew that license checks were being done at an event I would just say screw it, I have better things to do.

Yes, I've seen both those things happen; however the PARTICIPANTS at motor sports events have their machines inspected on every occasion; I've been inspected about 300 times - it becomes just part of the process, and you get the chance to correct your mistake which I understand and so far no one has contradicted, that is what CASA do.

The people who fly in to a fly in are the participants; they may also be spectators to an air show, and there will also be people who drive to a fly in who are spectators. THEY may well all be audited for blood alcohol content on their way there or on their way home.

 

What these emotional comments are indicating is that there could be quite a high level of non-compliance with safety regulations out there.

 

 

[aro]

The people who fly in to a fly in are the participants

I don't want to be a participant, just a spectator. If merely arriving makes me a participant, I will pass.

 

there could be quite a high level of non-compliance with safety regulations out there

That is probably true, there is a lot of truth in the joke that the regulations are written in a way that means every flight is breaking some rule.

 

For example, for aircraft our size we are required to use ACTUAL passenger weights for weight and balance.

 

How do you get ACTUAL weight without weighing your passenger? Do you weigh every passenger? Or at least ask them their actual weight?

 

 

[storchy neil]

aro yes to know the weight of passenger is mandatory as they may put your life in danger MTOW

 

turbs said What these emotional comments are indicating is that there could be quite a high level of non-compliance with safety regulations out there

 

gee turbs what make you think oh assume that bit like the bloke that blue 1.40 and told the policeman go catch a thief some just dob them selves in neil

 

 

[M61A1]

Yes, I've seen both those things happen; however the PARTICIPANTS at motor sports events have their machines inspected on every occasion; I've been inspected about 300 times - it becomes just part of the process, and you get the chance to correct your mistake which I understand and so far no one has contradicted, that is what CASA do.The people who fly in to a fly in are the participants; they may also be spectators to an air show, and there will also be people who drive to a fly in who are spectators. THEY may well all be audited for blood alcohol content on their way there or on their way home.

 

What these emotional comments are indicating is that there could be quite a high level of non-compliance with safety regulations out there.

And people wonder why aviation is dying out.......We are NOT participants unless there is some kind of competition, we ARE recreational pilots, showing up at social events.

If they actually allowed us to have competitions as we used to have, I would have no problem with scrutineering prior to competing. You've used a very poor analogy, and you make assumptions of guilt that are typical of regulators, which demonstrate rather clearly why people avoid them.

 

CASA and RAA have killed off many good fly-ins, no one wants to show up when you have the cops watching everything you say and do, whether it's a party or a fly-in. People feel like they just can't relax and enjoy the event, so they don't go. Organisers see smaller and smaller crowds until it's just not worth the effort any more.

 

Generally pilots are highly compliant with regs, being the risk averse bunch that we are, CASA and other regulators add another layer of risk. Risk that you will end up with a fine or in court over interpretation of uninterpretable regs.

 

 

[Yenn]

I don't have a very high opinion of CASA, because they have been forever re writing the rules, so that now it is hard to find out what is actually legal.

 

I have been ramp checked at a fly in and found it a non threatening experience. I was treated with courtesy, not bullied, and as I was fully conforming I was thanked for participating. At the end of that fly in one pilot and his passengers died in an aircrash that should not have happened. I don't know if he was ramp checked there.

 

At another fly in a pilot asked me if I knew where CASA were as he wanted to get away without being ramp checked. He admitted that he had flown in from SA to Temora, with no charts, relying solely on his GPS. That was before the days of Oz Runways and legal electronic charts.

 

My experience with CASA has all been good. I find those I meet to be enthusiastic and knowledgable pilots. The pity is that CASA as it stands is just not achieving anything worthwhile. It has been all this century spending vast amounts, twisting the paperwork, so that it is not understandable.

 

They would be better off just adopting the FARs and their field officers would be able to cope with any problems.

 

 

[kgwilson]

"The perception among the aviation fraternity" about says it all; do you have ANY example of a pilot being prosecuted?

I don't have any examples of pilots being prosecuted and I never said I had. CASA by their actions have created the "Big Brother" perception. You may say "well that is not real" but I beg to differ. Perception IS reality.

 

The Director heads up an organisation of around 1400 people, and to a degree can change basic policies, however, unlike in an autonomous Company, he has to carry out the policy of the Government, and that's the Policy of the Government of the day, which can be at 180 degrees to the Government in power last week.It always amuses me when people start using the Director's first name, and quoting anything he says, and assumes that he can reach all 1400 people and change their culture in a matter of weeks after landing in the job.

When did the government make any real change? The legislation needs a complete overhaul and a system based on the FAA or NZ CAA implemented. When AOPA went in to bat for such change the arrogant answer was "Can't be done, our legislation is different".

 

Based on the reduction of the GA fleet and RAA managing the rest they should have reduced their staff levels dramatically but the opposite has occurred.

 

The "report" after "report" you are referring to were really the equivalent of the "Community Consulations" which various Councils, electricity and water authorities etc. love, but they have the same status; they are finite, non-binding, and filed, fading with time.

One of the reports is the Forsyth report, commissioned by the government and 37 of the 38 recommendations approved by the government. How many have been implemented? When CASA creates draconian rules based on flawed information as in the Jabiru engine fiasco is it any wonder that pilots lose faith in their regulator?

 

 

[turboplanner]

I don't want to be a participant, just a spectator. If merely arriving makes me a participant, I will pass.

At a Fly In you are a participant in the Fly In; if you are stressed about being under scrutiny, yes, you have the option of staying away.

That is probably true, there is a lot of truth in the joke that the regulations are written in a way that means every flight is breaking some rule.

 

For example, for aircraft our size we are required to use ACTUAL passenger weights for weight and balance.

 

How do you get ACTUAL weight without weighing your passenger? Do you weigh every passenger? Or at least ask them their actual weight?

 

I weigh them; they go on the scales and their weight goes into the W&B calculation. It's very important that the inputs into a W&B calculation are correct, or the outputs will be incorrect, and you face the risk of a very uncomfortable trim situation when the wheels leave the ground, or even a return to earth by one end of the aircraft.

 

Remember that almost all single engine aircraft can carry full fuel, full pax, or full luggage, but never all three, and often, if you are planning a long trip and need full fuel, you will have to compromise baggage, 1 passenger or make a no-go decision, which is why it's better to do the W&B calculations with plenty of time up your sleeve. The other issue you don't want when you are off on a long trip is to turn up at the airport and find someone has filled the fuel tanks when you had to do the take off with half tanks and short legs.

 

The quite interesting subject of Performance & Operations just doesn't seem to be taught well in RAA, and that's a pity because it is so much more critical:

 

Remember the case when Slarti put a 15 kg tool box on the floor next to him, and almost lost control of the Morgan on take off.

 

Or the spectacular flop in front of the DAS, apparently caused by a barbecue.

 

I think one of the main reasons this subject doesn't get air time, is that during the training phase, the Instructor long ago worked out what size student he could take up on a full tank, so it is out of mind during the training.

 

 

[turboplanner]

And people wonder why aviation is dying out.......We are NOT participants unless there is some kind of competition, we ARE recreational pilots, showing up at social events.If they actually allowed us to have competitions as we used to have, I would have no problem with scrutineering prior to competing. You've used a very poor analogy, and you make assumptions of guilt that are typical of regulators, which demonstrate rather clearly why people avoid them.

CASA and RAA have killed off many good fly-ins, no one wants to show up when you have the cops watching everything you say and do, whether it's a party or a fly-in. People feel like they just can't relax and enjoy the event, so they don't go. Organisers see smaller and smaller crowds until it's just not worth the effort any more.

 

Generally pilots are highly compliant with regs, being the risk averse bunch that we are, CASA and other regulators add another layer of risk. Risk that you will end up with a fine or in court over interpretation of uninterpretable regs.

Well based on your definition a few days ago, if you flew into the circuit in a Drifter, at Jabiru height, you'd probably attract attention right from the start; that's not interpreting an uninterpretable reg.

There's no "competition" trigger to differentiate between a spectator and a participant; if several people go for a walk together, they all participate in the walk.

 

I think we all have a fairly good idea why some people stay away when we know there's a ramp check on.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I don't have a very high opinion of CASA, because they have been forever re writing the rules, so that now it is hard to find out what is actually legal.

I agree with you; I think this has virtually reached the stage of negligence.

 

I have been ramp checked at a fly in and found it a non threatening experience. I was treated with courtesy, not bullied, and as I was fully conforming I was thanked for participating. At the end of that fly in one pilot and his passengers died in an aircrash that should not have happened. I don't know if he was ramp checked there.At another fly in a pilot asked me if I knew where CASA were as he wanted to get away without being ramp checked. He admitted that he had flown in from SA to Temora, with no charts, relying solely on his GPS. That was before the days of Oz Runways and legal electronic charts.

My experience with CASA has all been good. I find those I meet to be enthusiastic and knowledgable pilots.

That's about the mix that I'm hearing too.

 

The pity is that CASA as it stands is just not achieving anything worthwhile. It has been all this century spending vast amounts, twisting the paperwork, so that it is not understandable.They would be better off just adopting the FARs and their field officers would be able to cope with any problems.

Both Countries are committed to complying with ICAO regulations now, and last time I looked we would be no better off these days in the US system.

This compares with about 30 years ago when I phoned up and booked an aircraft in Las Vegas, saying I was from Australia, went out the next day and the Instructor threw me the keys to a Cherokee without any discussion.

 

 

[aro]

I'm not denying the importance of W&B - although I would agree that W&B training in RAA is poor to nonexistent.

 

the Instructor long ago worked out what size student he could take up on a full tank, so it is out of mind during the training

If they are ramp checked, have they legally calculated W&B if actual passenger weight must be used?

 

Many people e.g. flying a C172 would have done a generic W&B and know that with one passenger of any reasonable weight, they will be within W&B limits. However, is it legal to fly without determining the actual weight of the passenger? Can CASA ask to see a W&B calculation using actual weights, or are you safe saying "Well we're obviously NOT overweight".

 

 

[KRviator]

If you want examples of CASA bullying pilots, you only have to look at the cases of John Quadrio, or Richard Rudd. And given these are unlikely to be isolated incidents, you could reasonably expect there to be others that aren't as public.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I'm not denying the importance of W&B - although I would agree that W&B training in RAA is poor to nonexistent.If they are ramp checked, have they legally calculated W&B if actual passenger weight must be used?

Many people e.g. flying a C172 would have done a generic W&B and know that with one passenger of any reasonable weight, they will be within W&B limits. However, is it legal to fly without determining the actual weight of the passenger? Can CASA ask to see a W&B calculation using actual weights, or are you safe saying "Well we're obviously NOT overweight".

I had a quick look for the CAR earlier in the day and couldn't find it in the time I had. If you can find it, we'll then have the wording exactly.Otherwise I'll keep looking. I've been lucky enough to have scales where I was picking up.

 

 

[robinsm]

Does "Carol" have a last name?

Carol Richards and her Husband are very kind, hard working, genuine people with a great sense of community. The mammoth task of organising that Carol undertook was never acknowledged fully by RAA Aus. The flyins that she was involved in were the most successful ever staged by the Recreational flying community. An example where RAA Aus should hang its head in shame.

 

 

[aro]

CASAs ramp check guidance sheet says:

 

The inspector will check:

 

...

 

Evidence of pilot and passenger weights (standard weights should not be used in

 

aircraft with fewer than 7 seats)

 

The guidance sheet quotes CAO 20.16.1 however on a quick look that doesn't support the guidance sheet. Which is my main beef with ramp checks - the CASA list of what is required seems to be far greater than what is in the actual regulations.

 

 

[440032]

Show me "ramp check" in the regulations. Anywhere. Anyone? Your time starts.........................now.