CASA CEO comment.

[wags]

Just received this quoted comment supposedly made by the CASA CEO from a person who will be attending the Gympie Aero Club dinner with the CEO on the 5th December at Noosa. I am interested to see what RAAus aviators make of this because I intend to ask for an explanation from the man himself at the dinner...

 

"Aviation is expensive, if you can't afford the expense you shouldn't be doing it!"

 

This was in relation to the costs being experienced, and expected to be experienced by GA, but the comment equally applies to our operations. 10 airports have just recently had fuel facilities withdrawn by Shell and other airports are being shut-down permanently eg Hoxton Park. Is it because of CASA policy under the direction of this person? Should be an interesting dinner!

 

 

[GraemeK]

While I remain critical of the new regime at CASA, I kinda agree with his statement.

 

Firstly, "expensive" is relative. So I would say whatever you fly, be it rag and tube or the last whizz bang composite with autopilot and full glass - you ought to be able to afford it - the costs in each case will be vastly different, but if it's "expensive" to you, then maybe you need to think about it. Worst thing is to cut corners.

 

However, if he means that he doesn't care what extra cost/regulatory burdens CASA might impose on the industry, then I disagree vehemently.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Flying is expensive, well more expensive than someone trained through the RAAF( not bad getting paid to learn to fly, and went on the fly for Cathay Pacific ?

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Obviously this boofhead has never had to work for his ratings by digging ditches ect. how out of touch and insulting can this clown be?

 

 

[Thx1137]

I dunno if we are missing some context. Hopefully...

 

 

[turboplanner]

I haven't heard any statements from him personally, but if what has been reported in other areas, including Pprune is correct, then sadly this comment fits that pattern.

 

But remember, he's not running aviation in Australia, he's just responsible for a small part of it, and any comments he makes about expense should relate to safety.

 

 

[winsor68]

Hopefully the comments relate to Commercial GA only...There is no doubt in my mind that this sector has been and is going to get a LOT more expensive. Take my local airport...currently tourists going to the Islands of our coast do so an ageing fleet of Cessna 206's...these aircraft although maintained to the correct standards are in atrocious condition simply because of their age. I would imagine the cost of maintaining/replacing the current light commercial GA fleet is going to be massive.

 

 

[farri]

"Aviation is expensive, if you can't afford the expense you shouldn't be doing it!"

QUOTE]

 

Personaly,I don`t see anything wrong with that statement on it`s own, I see it as a statement of fact, because I believe it applies to everything in life.

 

Have a look at "Members Market" in the back of the RAA mag and see how many aircraft are for sale,is it because they jumped in too deep ???????????????.

 

Frank.

[Guest ozzie]

If you trim off all the accessories like hanger rent, landing fees, user fees, reglulatory fees, must comply so buy this and pay for that, it can then become affordable. unfortunatly the 'Klingons' want a slice of your life and wallet and when you complain they come up with statements like the above. another FAT CAT excuse.

 

Aviation is expensive because it's regulation and the people who regulate it are grossly inefficient and every time someone tries to overhaul 'the system' it just gets worse and even less affordable.

 

Australia.. land of the free..girt by sea... and there's no escape!

 

so dig deep,, carbon taxes are coming up as soon as pollies work it out.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Off thread a bit, but i just saw on the news about Carbon credits, we will all have to pay more than a thousand dollars extra, give or take, in electricty, food, etc etc. A year to offset carbon credits.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Yes I can only hope that those in the real polluting countrys are paying it also. That's China, India and the US, in case you were wondering.........................................................:black_eye:

 

 

[turboplanner]

(a) I think the cost will very quickly climb into the thousands per family per year.

 

(b) Hoons like me (Flying, Boat, 4WD, Racing, Chainsaw will face an immediate reduction in lifestyle rather than have to wait until the end of the Century.

 

©Sea level is rising far faster than the IPCC predicted. The Victorian Government Planning changes in 2007 were based on 0.4 to 0.8 sea level rise by 2100, Their latest figures seem to be 0.8 to 1.4 metres.

 

At Copenhagen in March 2009, the estimate was 0.75 to 1.9 metres.

 

The most recent estimate from CSIRO was 1 to 2 metres

 

Penny Wong recently quoted an upper limit of 1.1 metres, but the report she quoted from said 0.75 to 1.95 metres.

 

Depending on whoi is rightand who is wrong, about a qarter of a million homes could be lost around the Australian coast.

 

Since we now have a million years of temperature data from isotope counts in Antarctic ice cores, and there is correlation between CO2 and temperature, the race is on to drop our production of CO2 by massive amounts.

 

(d) A couple of nights ago I heard a presenter saying we could fix the problem by cutting world CO2 production to 1 tonne per person per year in some impossibly short time. The interesting point was that for much of India, China, this would be easy becaise current output was around 0.2 tonnes per year, and China in particular is trying to modernise with as little CO2 production as possible, learning from the mistakes of the west.

 

 

[Shanghai]

Global warming myths

 

:cool:Don't worry! The end of the world is not about to arrive. Global Warming is a crock. Buy or borrow "Heaven and Earth" by an Australian geology Professor, Ian Plimer. It explains all you need to know about the subject. You can then stop worrying, and sleep at nights.

 

 

[Yenn]

Global warming. Why should we believe it? 2 years ago we were all going to die from bird flu, earlier this year we were all going to die from swine flu. Who was telling us these predictions? Was it the same people who are predicting global warming being the end of the world?

 

Personally I believe we are having an impact on the climate and the main problem is too many people, especially rich people, but I don't think the solution is to be found in Kevin Rudd strutting the international stage and big noting himself like Howard did.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

OK so the world is not ending. but guess what? It just means that the Pollies have a lot longer to stick it up you. so better start saving for your fuel, power, water, food, transport and anything else they can think of. I find the disscussion of 'global warming' to be along the same lines as whether that God person reallyexists or not.

 

Might really be a job for "Deep Thought" :)

 

 

[turboplanner]

:cool:Don't worry! The end of the world is not about to arrive. Global Warming is a crock. Buy or borrow "Heaven and Earth" by an Australian geology Professor, Ian Plimer. It explains all you need to know about the subject. You can then stop worrying, and sleep at nights.

Really Shanghai?

 

the scientists drill down and collect ice core, do an isotope count which gives them the year, then measure the amount of CO2 for that year. The Isotope count also gives them the temperature for that year - not exactly rocket science.

 

Here's an excerpt from Barry Brook's review of the book you mentioned. The full review is on BraveNewClimate

 

"

 

Ian Plimer’s book is a case study in how not to be objective. Decide on your position from the outset, and then seek out all the facts that apparently support your case, and discard or ignore all of those that contravene it. He quotes a couple of thousand peer-reviewed scientific papers when mounting specific arguments. What Ian doesn’t say is that the vast majority of these authors have considered the totality of evidence on the topic of human-induced global warming and conclude that it is real and a problem. Some researchers have show that the Earth has been hotter before, and that more CO2 has been present in the atmosphere in past ages. Yes, quite — this is an entirely uncontroversial viewpoint. What is relevant now is the rate of climate change, the specific causes, and its impact on modern civilisation that is dependent, for agricultural and societal security, on a relatively stable climate. Ian pushes mainstream science far out of context, again and again."

 

 

[Robert]

What ever the case maybe we should we reducing crap we are putting in the atmosphere and other pollution not to mention the growing world population

 

What nurks me about this perticular climate change case is that it seems to be being setup so someone can make heaps of money at our exspence.

 

 

[dazza 38]

What ever the case maybe we should we reducing crap we are putting in the atmosphere and other pollution not to mention the growing world populationWhat nurks me about this perticular climate change case is that it seems to be being setup so someone can make heaps of money at our exspence.

talking about growing population, how about the queue jumping boat people? (just joking)

 

 

[Ultralights]

i live right on the water, 20 ft from it. and recently i read that the Oceans, due to climate change have already risen 20Cm! really? have you noticed? hmmmm

 

sad thing is, the ETS scheme, will do NOTHING to reduce emissions, as said before, it will alter lifestyles (something not many are happy about), and hypothetically creates a 50% reduction in electricity usage. well, great news, the power station has reduced emissions by 50% WHOOHOO...... well, guess what, that now means the power station can now sell that 50% reduction as carbon credits to say, a steel mill, who now, can INCREASE their carbon output by the same amount the power station reduced it. they bought the credits, so they can!

 

net carbon reduction...... Zip. cost to Us, the consumer, well, that will be $$$ thousands! and just where did our money go?? electricity company makes a fortune increasing the cost of electricity to us., and they also made $$ on selling the carbon credits for the electricity we didnt use! (not to mention the ruddsy credit compo payout using taxpayer $$) sure, the steel mill, bought the carbon credits, well, whos products will be price adjusted to factor in the cost of the carbon credit. the steel mill wont pay it, the consumer will.

 

its nothing but a Massive TAX, to do nothing but build another industry that will benefit only more multinational companies, and the Govt.

 

keep telling yourself your saving the planet if it makes you feel good about this ripoff.

 

back on topic, what does this have to do with CASA? their full of Hot air?

 

Sa

 

 

[winsor68]

Well said Ultralights...

 

 

[winsor68]

"I was in China earlier this year and they are commissioning coal fired power stations at the rate of one per week. That means that each month they add an electricity generating capacity equivalent to all of NSW and every three months they add the equivalent to the whole of Australia."

 

But they still use a fraction of the power from that coal for power per person when compared to Australia...and has adopted one of the worlds most aggresive energy efficiency programs.

 

 

[turboplanner]

i live right on the water, 20 ft from it. and recently i read that the Oceans, due to climate change have already risen 20Cm! really? have you noticed? hmmmm

At the moment, in some protected areas of our shore, you'll only pick up the increase by referring to tide gauge records.

 

However, if you download the House of Representatives Committee report presented to the Parliament just a few weeks ago, you'll read about the evidence of massive erosion caused by storm surges, groynes being built all round the country to bolster sand retention, and sea walls being constructed in some locations.

 

At Old Bar, NSW houses are being undermined and at least one has fallen into the ocean.

 

The general consensus of maximum sea level rise by 2100 is about 1.9 metres, with the typical shore line receding being multiplied by 100, or 190 metres. Most of Australia, away from populated centres is not going to miss this amount of loss.

 

For most of Australia's Urban shoreline this can be handled by sea walls. In the case of Melbourne, a lock across Port Philip Heads would isolate Melbourne from sea level rise, and in other areas, management action can be taken.

 

The real damage and cost to Australia will be storm surges, and the effect of climate on agriculture.

 

The Victorian Government has been actively replanning the State for four or five years now, the first area to be protected being the Alpine tourist market. The State was divided into seven regions and the Department of Primary Industry recirds the increemental changes and advises agribusiness on how to change species and methods to cope with the drying out which Victoria will experience.

 

As to the ETS and the money making, yes that's going to happen and yes the politicians are bewildered, as you can see by the disarray in the Liberal Party.

 

 

[antzx6r]

Money makes the world go round... 'till it suffers critical failure. Thats just the way it is. Cabon offsets will only line someones pockets as you've all mentioned. Industry will still grow and thus actuall carbons in the atmosphere (paid for or otherwise) will increase because "money..."

 

My take on it is to do what i can personally in a real sence. (buy less plastics etc.)And hope that at least some are doing the same. And hope that Revelation 11:18 comes around soon. "and the appointed time... to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Writen well before anyone knew about climate change by the way.

 

The pollies just make me laugh. You know they spoke for an hour just on how long for each day they were going to spend talking about climate change. It's like those aliens in hitchhikers guide.

 

As for casa, there probably was some context to it. He's right in a sence. But the guy does sound like a douche. Somebody vote him out please. You should ask what he thinks about the GYFTS program. Prob thinks the little slackers should get a job!