Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Alphabet if’s and but's.
GaGa or Gag?

The old guard drag out this thin old saw every time there’s ‘trouble at mill’, and industry ‘voices’ keep falling for it. How many of these bloody things must we labour through, perhaps some of the older heads can count ‘em up. A gab-fest’ is announced; off go the ‘new’ voices, hundreds of well written pages are produced (again) the powers that be look solemn and swear to ‘get ‘er fixed up’ – ‘onest like.

Ye gods; if ever the ‘Greens’ catch onto how much paper and energy is wasted, playing this old game, there’d be hell to pay. It has been going on, in a repetitive cycle of hope raised, expectations dashed for decades now. We have had Royal commissions (how many for a CF?), multiple inquiry, lots of report and who knows what else; acres of paperwork, decades of hope and countless man-hours invested in these ridiculous charades.  DDDD has just been given another 140 pages to add to the mountain and is expecting more shortly. By the time this round has been ‘considered’ and deemed just another ‘opinion’ there will be a budget, an election and a new DAS (silly bloody title) the duck shoving will continue unabated, impetus lost, yet again, in the white noise.  

The ‘new’ boys run about; claiming to have ‘penetrated’, getting the troops all fired up and ‘match-fit’. Total result from a three decade shooting match? SFA is what and now it all starts, all over again.

History children, history: oft repeated. Even Einstein worked it out – in the end.

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

No steam, can't be bothered.
[Image: Who-Cares-800x400.jpg]

[Image: crisis.gif]

GaGa or Gag?

(03-15-2017, 06:19 AM)kharon Wrote: The old guard drag out this thin old saw every time there’s ‘trouble at mill’, and industry ‘voices’ keep falling for it. How many of these bloody things must we labour through, perhaps some of the older heads can count ‘em up. A gab-fest’ is announced; off go the ‘new’ voices, hundreds of well written pages are produced (again) the powers that be look solemn and swear to ‘get ‘er fixed up’ – ‘onest like.

Ye gods; if ever the ‘Greens’ catch onto how much paper and energy is wasted, playing this old game, there’d be hell to pay. It has been going on, in a repetitive cycle of hope raised, expectations dashed for decades now. We have had Royal commissions (how many for a CF?), multiple inquiry, lots of report and who knows what else; acres of paperwork, decades of hope and countless man-hours invested in these ridiculous charades. DDDD has just been given another 140 pages to add to the mountain and is expecting more shortly. By the time this round has been ‘considered’ and deemed just another ‘opinion’ there will be a budget, an election and a new DAS (silly bloody title) the duck shoving will continue unabated, impetus lost, yet again, in the white noise.

The ‘new’ boys run about; claiming to have ‘penetrated’, getting the troops all fired up and ‘match-fit’. Total result from a three decade shooting match? SFA is what and now it all starts, all over again.

History children, history: oft repeated. Even Einstein worked it out – in the end.

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

No steam, can't be bothered.

Drongo or drone... Huh

[Image: Untitled_Clipping_122516_100738_AM.jpg]

(03-14-2017, 05:46 PM)Peetwo Wrote: Via 4D's media boffin:
Quote:Work begins with GA Advisory Group

The new General Aviation Advisory Group has met for the first time, discussing a range of key issues including the classification of operations, levels of flying activity, skills and training, and regulatory reform.

[*]The first meeting of the Group discussed a range of issues including skills and training, regulatory reform, and categorisation of aircraft operations.
[*]The Group provided initial feedback on the General Aviation Study.

The new General Aviation Advisory Group has met for the first time, discussing a range of key issues including the classification of operations, levels of flying activity, skills and training, and regulatory reform.

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester attended the meeting in Canberra and said direct engagement between the industry and the Government was key to achieving the common goal of a safe, growing and sustainable aviation industry.

"The General Aviation Advisory Group will ensure the industry has a voice at the heart of Government by providing advice directly to me on matters affecting the general aviation (GA) sector,” Mr Chester said.

He reiterated that the aviation sector should develop strategies to attract young people, including more women, into the industry.

The Group received a briefing from the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) on the progress of the General Aviation Study and members provided initial comments to inform the study going forward.

The Group also agreed on its terms of reference and operating protocols.

“I look forward to working with the GA Advisory Group to address the challenges and take advantage of the opportunities that lay ahead for the sector in Australia,” Mr Chester said.

The next meeting of the Group is expected to be held before the BITRE finalises the GA study, which is scheduled to be completed by 30 June 2017.

More information on the GA study is available at:

So did they also mention the progress of the ASRR, the just released Aviation Workforce Skills Study and that disturbing story that featured in the QLD Sunday Mail??
(03-13-2017, 12:21 PM)Peetwo Wrote:
(03-12-2017, 08:43 AM)Peetwo Wrote: SBG weekend mag

Quote:Aviation firms grounded amid skyrocketing costs and regulations
Michael Wray, The Sunday Mail (Qld)
March 12, 2017 1:00am

QUEENSLAND’S general aviation industry is being throttled under skyrocketing costs and ballooning regulations, with half of the flying schools at the region’s largest hub going out of business in the past two years.

Operators claim costs are increasing and regulators such as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority have swamped them with so much paperwork their administrative burden has increased tenfold without making flying any safer.

New CASA licensing regulations introduced in 2014 ran to more than 1200 pages yet were full of problems and have had to be constantly ­revised since then, leaving even the regulators unable to answer queries about what the rules mean.

[Image: e6d9ce004bb6cb51a8e04bec97c8aaa8?width=650]At Brisbane’s Archerfield Airport half of the flying schools have closed in the past two years, including the Royal Queensland Aero Club, the oldest flying club in the southern hemisphere. Pic: Jamie Hanson

Pilots have told The Sunday Mail requirements on medical checks, licensing, safety equipment and other administration are the most onerous in world aviation, but they have not demonstrably improved safety.

The Royal Queensland Aero Club, which was the oldest aero club in the southern hemisphere and counted aviation legends Sir Charles Kingsford Smith and Bert Hinkler as members, folded in March last year, taking out southeast Queensland’s largest operator.

Three other flying schools have closed recently and the general airport activity has dropped dramatically since the industry’s glory days in the 1980s, with flying schools running heavily reduced fleets due to the lack of pilots walking through the door.

[Image: 0a89f1a7cbbca3ea6666e53dab638c9c?width=650]The flying schools still operating at Archerfield Airport think it's only a matter of time before they have to close down. Picture: Jamie Hanson

With general aviation struggling, there are fears that there won’t be enough locally trained pilots for the larger airlines, which would be forced to look overseas for pilots.

A CASA spokesman said the regulator was in constant communication with the general aviation industry, which includes virtually all flying activity below the commercial airlines, and recently set up a joint industry taskforce to address key issues to improve the new licensing regulations.

“CASA agrees the new regulations were not fully ­acceptable when introduced and has apologised for that,” he said. “Yes, we are always working to ease regulatory burden where possible and the taskforce’s work is an ­example of that.”

Dick Smith, a former CASA chairman and record-setting private pilot, said there was “not the slightest hint” that authorities in charge of the industry “had any idea what they are doing”.

“If you are in the general aviation industry, do everything you can to sell out, get out now because it’s really bad what’s happening,” he said. “The new regulations are more and more expensive and you will become completely destroyed.”

Some of the major industry complaints include:
● Skyrocketing landing costs;
● More costly maintenance as businesses fold;
● Invasive medical checks;
● A security card that has to be renewed every two years rather than be linked to a pilot licence;
● Unnecessary airport fences;
● Duplication of civil and military air traffic control costing hundreds of millions of dollars;
● Overzealous enforcement;
● Flight and duty time restrictions to be implemented by May 2018.

[Image: 1b17aa2980245966266b67de03572f17?width=650]Airplanes at Archerfield Airport in Brisbane.

Andrew Nacsa, who was head of operations for the RQAC’s training arm, Airline Academy, said rising cost and regulations in the general aviation industry meant fewer people were interested in flying, ultimately driving the business in to the ground and forcing it to close its hangars and the 20 planes it was operating.

“If general aviation stops then so does the whole industry,” he said.

Australia’s regional carriers are also struggling with 17 airlines folding in the past 13 years.

Mr Smith said regulators seemed to consider that ­policing the skies would be easier if only commercial planes were flying but it would take the “total collapse” of general aviation ­before the public noticed.

“When people find that they can’t get a rescue helicopter because there’s no maintenance people and they can’t get an aerial ambulance because there’s no maintenance people, then they’ll start to write to their minister and ask what’s happened,” he said.

A CASA spokesman denied commercial airlines were favoured and said authorities “allocated very significant resources to supporting the general aviation sector each year”.

Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester has commissioned a study into the state of the general aviation industry, and has said it will include a review of private pilot medical requirements.

The review is due to be completed by June 30.

* * * * * * * * *
[Image: 224b3d9562f0e21832644bee24a90332?width=650]Southern Skies Aviation owner Brian Westin. Picture: Jamie Hanson


PILOT Brian Westin says his office high above Brisbane’s Archerfield Airport is the best in the world.

A pilot for 45 years, the freedom he feels in the sky and the satisfaction he gets from passing his skills on to budding young pilots have not diminished.

But lately he has dreaded returning to his office on the ground, where a mountain of never-ending paperwork and bills awaits.

The situation has become so bad after a raft of new regulations from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority that Mr Westin said the only thing keeping him flying was his passion for the industry.

“It’s getting to the point now where most of the operators I’ve known over the years are saying that it’s not worth it any more,” he said.

In the past two years, the number of operators at Archerfield has halved, with just four flight schools left. Two of those have been there for decades and are only hanging on because of their love for the industry.

“People are just walking away,” Mr Westin said. “I’ve been at Archerfield for 27 years and I’ve seen the demise of the industry, the amount of machinery operating here has halved in that time.”

The owner of Southern Skies Aviation has trained hundreds of pilots, including senior captains at some of the world’s major airlines, and could not see that flying was being made safer with the new regulations.

“It’s great to make regulations but we still have to make the system work,” he said.

“It makes them feel all warm and fuzzy that they make you tick all the boxes but is it really achieving the effect that they say it should?

“I don’t think so.”

With so many operators dropping out of the industry and few budding pilots walking through the door because of the cost of getting a licence, Mr Westin said he feared for the future of the industry.

“The airlines are Australia’s umbilical cord to the world and we are the ones who supply them with pilots,” he said.

“If you don’t have general aviation you can’t get pilots for the top echelon.”

Still trying to get my head around the bizarre disconnect where we have the miniscule trying to increase the uptake of women to offset the industry skills loss and prattling on about his favoured 'GAS' report due to be released in July:

"..Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester has commissioned a study into the state of the general aviation industry, and has said it will include a review of private pilot medical requirements.."

Then in the MR 4D says:

 ..."This report is important to the future of an industry estimated to have added more than $15 billion to the Australian economy in 2015–16.

“The findings will now be considered by key industry stakeholders and the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) in the context of the General Aviation Study.

“I look forward to working with the Department of Education and Training and our stakeholders to develop solutions that will ensure that the supply of quality trained aviation professionals meets the future demand.

“Delivering this study fulfils a key election commitment of the Coalition's Policy for Aviation...

Yet the Aviation Workforce Skills Study was commissioned by the miniscule's own department and included input from pretty much all highly credited professional industry stakeholders and  Alphabet associations...

...providing not only a comprehensive top down look at the present & future issues industry faces, but also provides suggested solutions... Wink

So what is it exactly the 4D GAS report will add to the argument and proposed solutions as outlined in the AWSS & the ASRR?

[Image: UFO_Duck.jpg]
Well: who’d a thunk it?

Finally managed to catch up with the few IOS who visited the Avalon air show; they seemed to enjoy the event well enough, although much pleased they decided not to fly in; ‘nuff said.

As it was a BRB ‘group therapy’ session (big match next week) the tales of Avalon were part of a general discussion – you know, the usual run of the mill stuff, until the AOPA ‘session’ with the departmental heads doing their 10 minute ‘turn’, sans the ministerial presence. Not sure I’d want to turn up either if I was minister; I digress.

Opinion: ASA failed to impress or excite. The performances at ‘Estimates’ have solidified the general opinion of a lost, conflicted outfit, up to it’s collective in alligators. Next…

Opinion: The ATSB elected to use a ‘story’ format in a bid to delight the crowd. Failed; the costume selection OTT and the tales of wandering AAI poorly delivered. Lacklustre..Next...

Opinion: Seems our Mr. Carmody has ben awarded a choc frog. No kidding, I’m serious. When the IOS crew spun the yarn, there was silence at the end of it, the usual cat-calls and ribald comments forgotten. “Say again” was the general call – backed up by “You’re kidding ain’tcha”. Nope, all true and so the tale was retold to calls of WTF.. In short: a long harangue from the floor materialised; Carmody at bat. Apart from being a rudely hostile rant, it achieved very little and probably detracted from any credibility AOPA may have gained. This sort of deleterious behaviour does no one any favours. The AOPA ringmaster should never have allowed it. Anyway; seems Carmody not only managed to keep his temper, but his wits as well; masterfully and positively handled.  Bravo. Choc frog awarded, unanimously, by a vicariously embarrassed BRB.

The mood of the evening changed a little after that and the AOPA situation got some serious attention and comment; much of it derogatory. P7 and I strolled home (as per) “best they pull their socks up” says he, which just about say’s it all. I was tempted to suggest a letter of apology; but neither Aunty Pru or the BRB have a dog in the fight, so I just kept quiet and nodded in tacit agreement.

Toot toot.
Airport security report due to be tabled - Huh

Via Oz Flying yesterday... Wink

Quote:[Image:]Security at airports has been a contentious issue for decades. (Steve Hitchen)

Senate Report on Aviation Security due on 30 March
22 March 2017

The secretariat of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee (RRAT) confirmed yesterday that the long-awaited report into airport and aviation security is scheduled to be tabled on 30 March.

On 4 December 2014, the senate referred airport and aviation security to the RRAT with a reporting date of 26 April 2015.

Since then, the RRAT has been granted 10 extensions to the reporting date, complicated by the 2016 federal election, which caused the inquiry to lapse, then be re-referred in September 2016.

By the time the report is tabled, presuming another extension is not granted, it will be nearly two years since it was originally due.

Thursday 30 March is the last day the senate will sit for this term.

More information on the inquiry is on the RRAT parliament house website.

Also via Oz Flying and very much related, former AMPA president John Hillard tells some home truths about ASICs and the supposed implementation of recommendation 36 of the Forsyth (ASRR) review report... Wink :
Quote:[Image:]You keep-a knocking, but you can't come in: those without an ASIC have to stay behind the security fence at Bathurst, NSW. (Steve Hitchen)

The Last Refuge of the Desperate Bureaucrat
22 March 2017

– by John Hillard

"Security is the last refuge of a desperate bureaucrat." – credited to Sir Humphrey Appleby, Yes Minister, BBC TV.

Once upon a time, the government appointed three wise men to review the aviation regulatory system in Australia. The wise men were pretty well qualified with resumes including leadership of the Canadian and UK regulators and Airservices Australia as well as extensive experience in airline and commercial aviation.

In December 2014 the Deputy PM Warren Truss said ”The Government has fully agreed to, or agreed to undertake a more detailed examination of, 36 of the 37 recommendations.”

I had a particular interest in one of those 36 recommendations:

"The Australian government amends regulations so that background checks and the requirement to hold an Aviation Security Identification Card [ASIC] are only required for unescorted access to Security Restricted Areas, not for general airside access. This approach would align with international practice."

An ASIC card is currently required by any pilot that needs to “fly to or from a security designated airport that has regular public transport operations”. This is an additional cost ($220 every at every two year renewal) to pilots that serves no valid purpose. In the six years that I’ve had one, I’ve only ever been asked for it a few times – usually to prove that I’m a pilot so as to gain access to a locked gate. I could just as easily have proved that by showing the pilot licence that I’m also required to carry or a driver’s licence if photo ID is required.

The ridiculously broad definition used in Australia means that pilots have to carry an ASIC at tiny airports in remote central Australia (e.g. Birdsville, Tennant Creek and Thargomindah) due to their having a (very) occasional RPT service. While $200 every couple of years is but a drop in the ocean of costs involved in owning an aircraft, think of the benefits to the nation from our having ASICs.

I remember thinking the last time that I renewed my ASIC in 2015 that this would be the last. Since it expires in a few months, I thought I should check how the government is getting on with implementing what was a pretty clear recommendation. In August 2016, the new Minister Darren Chester updated Parliament on the Government’s response to the recommendations of the report. What it says is:

Completed: The Department has consulted industry and significant implementation issues have been identified. Further progress will be considered as part of a review of the current categorisation of security controlled airports

This is a very obtuse response to a very clear recommendation – Sir Humphrey would approve. Apparently it reflects that government’s reluctance to do anything that would give the Opposition the opportunity to attack it for being lax on “homeland security”. If that is the case, then clearly neither party understands that the current ASIC system actually results in a less secure aviation system.

The wide availability of ASICS in Australia devalues the valid purpose that such identification has in controlling access to those parts of airports that really do need to be secure. Many countries (e.g. USA and Canada) have access badge systems but, unlike the ASIC, it is available to pilots only if they have good reason to visit the secure areas of major airports. You can’t just apply for a Secure Identification Display Area (SIDA) badge in the USA – your employer has to process the application on your behalf after which you will be subject to background checks and may be required to undergo training.

The definition of where an ASIC is required should be amended to align with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) definition in the USA, i.e., the baggage loading areas, taxiways, runways and boarding gates of a commercial airport. In all other areas, the license that pilots are already required to carry should be sufficient identification.

If you are as aspiring terrorist, then the ASIC scheme is a gift. You don’t need to go to the trouble of stealing an ASIC – you need only apply. If you don’t have a criminal record or feature on an ASIO watchlist then you’ll almost certainly get one. Since the ASIC issued to GA pilots is identical to those issued to airline pilots, you need only buy a uniform (including four gold bars), attach your ASIC and it will take you just about anywhere in an airport. I’ve not personally tried this in Australia but I have when flying GA aircraft in the Middle East and the Pacific Islands and it works just fine.

So why has there been a delay in implementing the ASSR recommendation? While it makes good sense to eliminate the requirement that GA pilots have ASICs, I suspect that some out there will be lobbying to retain it. There is now a whole industry built around ASICs and there will be some in government (and the private companies that service it) who will try to retain the system by arguing that “they didn’t understand” and “Australia is different”. 

This is, of course, pure crap and the Industry should push now to ensure that the government implements that recommendation.

John Hillard is a former president of the Australian Mooney Pilots Association.


MTF...P2 Cool
What a load of complete bollocks aviation security is! You want to know how flawed it is? Pop an IPhone or a Tablet on the flat screening belt rather than in the plastic tray when you go through security - it doesn't pick up the item!! That's right, if your electronic device is under 10mm thick, not in one of those tubs but sitting flat on the belt it will get through undetected.

The entire aviation security farce is utter BULLSHIT!!!!!!
Update: Airport security disconnections.

(03-24-2017, 02:26 PM)Peetwo Wrote: LMH with more on airport security etc.

Previous reference off Alphabets:
(03-23-2017, 11:39 AM)Peetwo Wrote: Airport security report due to be tabled - Huh

Via Oz Flying yesterday... Wink

Quote:[Image:]Security at airports has been a contentious issue for decades. (Steve Hitchen)

Senate Report on Aviation Security due on 30 March
22 March 2017

More information on the inquiry is on the RRAT parliament house website.

Also via Oz Flying and very much related, former AMPA president John Hillard tells some home truths about ASICs and the supposed implementation of recommendation 36 of the Forsyth (ASRR) review report... Wink :
Quote:[Image:]You keep-a knocking, but you can't come in: those without an ASIC have to stay behind the security fence at Bathurst, NSW. (Steve Hitchen)

The Last Refuge of the Desperate Bureaucrat
22 March 2017

– by John Hillard

"Security is the last refuge of a desperate bureaucrat." – credited to Sir Humphrey Appleby, Yes Minister, BBC TV.

John Hillard is a former president of the Australian Mooney Pilots Association.


And today's LMH Wink :
Quote:Is it really going to happen? Is the waiting over? Will the report on the senate inquiry into airport and aviation security really be tabled next Thursday? The secretariat of the Senate Standing Committee on Regional and Rural Affairs and Transport (don't worry, I'll use an initialism: RRAT) has assured me that it will, and the time is running out for them to request another extension, so I'm going to pull out my optimism hat and say we will see the report next week. When it comes, it will be nearly two years since the first reporting date lapsed. The senate referred the matter in December 2014 with the report due the following April, but after that came no less than 10 deadline extensions! The RRATs senators must have had a lot to sift through, so we can expect some momentous conclusions next Thursday, right? Well, it's being tabled on the last sitting day of the senate term, so I suspect we might see a dump-and-run, leaving no-one left in the red chamber to answer inconvenient questions.

And it's almost incomprehensible to believe that many submissions to the RRAT inquiry didn't point out the myth and folly behind the Aviation Security Identification Card (ASIC) for pilots. The ASIC has been around for a few years, and as far as it relates to pilots, has not increased aviation security to any degree at all. Recommendation 36 in the Forsyth Report, tackled this week by former AMPA President John Hillard, said that an ASIC should be valid only for certain areas of airports with RPT, not the whole airport. The government didn't agree with this, but promised some more consultation. That was never going to produce anything, because there's not much desire in either parliament or the bureaucracy to change. Hillard quotes the BBC TV series Yes, Minister in his article, which is appropriate given the ASIC system is one of Australia's great political shibboleths protected by a self-serving bureaucracy. I can almost hear any suggestion of relaxing ASIC laws being greeted with "That's very brave of you, Minister."


Sandy has responded directly (via Oz Flying) to this week's LMH with the following... Wink :

Quote:Good on you Hitch for keeping the airport security issue alive. I sincerely hope your optimism is justified but until politicians take control there will be little or no improvements. The reason nothing happens, no dinkum reforms anywhere for General Aviation, are clear. The Minister, by law that is now 30 years old and by practice, has abrogated his responsibilities to govern aviation. Hence once again, 21st March, a Ministerial "Statement of Expectations", a bunch of generalisations that contains nothing of substance. There are no KPIs, no deadlines, no sanctions for inaction, no proper delineation between the Board and the farcically titled "Director of Air Safety". Is there any incentive for reform? Reforms would lower the numbers employed by CASA, lower their prestige and power and possibly uncover the numerous skeletons that CASA would much prefer to remain buried.


Talk about ridiculous, who cares about the Minister's "Expectations"? We've had all the Minister expectations for nearly 30 years with the nutters left in charge doing willy nilly, nest feathering and destroying General Aviation. Without absolute prescribed goals CASA and Infrastructure have no incentives to change.

Why should we not demand a "Statement of Directions"?

Why doesn't the Minister take charge? The Westminster system cannot work if the Minister is not responsible. The independent Commonwealth corporate body type governance, a new and experimental form of government from the late '80s, has failed, is failing and will not, cannot, work without a major rework by Parliament.

MTF...P2 Cool

Ps In reference to the very good John Hillard blog piece on ASRR recommendation 36 and the OTT ASIC card system. Well apparently that transport security card system has been officially made more onerous by our NFI miniscule and the Turnbull government:
Quote:Security boosted against insider threats
Media Release
20 March 2017

  • Less chance of aviation insiders smuggling weapons through secure areas.
The Coalition Government is keeping Australians safe by strengthening security in our airports with tough new changes to guard against insider threats.

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester said Australia's transport sector would be more secure in the future with the passing of the Transport Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 through the Parliament today.

Mr Chester said this security upgrade would play a critical role in securing our transport infrastructure.

“Additional changes to the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 would empower airport security to subject airport workers and vehicles to random security checks when they are inside secure airside areas,” Mr Chester said.

“These changes provide further protection from the threat of the so-called ‘trusted insider’, significantly reduce the chance of an attack against aviation.

“We have high expectations of individuals who are granted access to the secure areas of our airports and seaports.

“The successful passage of this Bill is further evidence that the Australian Government takes seriously its responsibility for ensuring that our aviation environments are well protected,” Mr Chester said.

A review of the Alan Kessing evidence given and submission to the Senate inquiry perhaps highlights why there was a need for this amendment to the Aviation Transport Security Act (in strengthening the conditions for obtaining ASICs etc., for airside workers) at our major airports.

 Airport and aviation security

"..On 4 December 2014, the Senate moved that the following matters be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 26 April 2015..."

Referencing the submissions page:

Quote:Submissions  (44th Parliament)

1 Mr Bryan Seymour (PDF 1186 KB)  Attachment 1 (PDF 33622 KB) 

2 Mr Robin Darroch (PDF 55 KB) 

3 Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development  (PDF 102 KB) 

4 Homeland Security Asia/Pacific (PDF 928 KB)  Attachment 1 (PDF 1626 KB)  Attachment 2 (PDF 209 KB) 

5 Board of Airline Representatives of Australia (PDF 570 KB) 

6 Australian & International Pilots Association  (PDF 286 KB) 

7 Mr Richard Rudd (PDF 46 KB) 

8 Australia Pacific Airports (Melbourne) Pty Ltd (PDF 3898 KB) 

9 Regional Aviation Association of Australia (PDF 432 KB) 

10 Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) (PDF 109 KB) 

11 Regional Express (PDF 354 KB) 

12 Law Council of Australia (PDF 85 KB) 

13 Australian Security Industry Association Ltd  (PDF 58 KB) 

14 Qantas Airways Limited (PDF 465 KB) 

15 Office of the Inspector of Transport Security (PDF 61 KB) 

16 Australian Federal Police (PDF 110 KB) 

17 Australian Airports Association  (PDF 381 KB) 

18 United Voice (PDF 511 KB) 

19 Immigration and Border Protection Portfolio (PDF 1935 KB) 

20 National LGBTI Health Alliance (PDF 1349 KB) 

Submissions (45th Parliament)

21 Mr Allan Kessing (PDF 102 KB) 

Pps P2 Q/ My question is - where is the AOPA submission? Surely an organisation like AOPA should have the ASRR R36 and ASIC card issues, as highlighted by John Hillard, high on the list of advocacy campaigning, yet if you refer to the AOPA ASRR submission... 
Quote:70 Aircraft Owners and Pilot Association of Australia (AOPA) PDF: 376 KB

or the AOPA webpage - - it would seem the ASIC is not high on the AOPA agenda - just saying... Rolleyes
Good post P2 – Got me wondering just why our ‘alphabet-soup-groups’ are staying so silent on recent matters which could benefit their ‘members’. Is there a ‘secret scheme’ afoot to confound the red tape machines? No, thought not. The ASIC thing needs to be pushed, hard; and, the latest FAA easement (with provisions and cautions) on the Class three medical would make a great soapbox. Then there is Archerfield and the other secondary airports being eaten alive by development sharks – Essendon is a perfect platform for some serious ‘tub-thumping’ about encroachment, rights and operational ‘safety’ etc. Yet no one has stepped up to try and win a couple of points for the benefit of all their members and industry in general. Super star  AMROBA still lead the way, they have quietly captured a little ray of sunshine, which will benefit their members – at least in principal, if nothing else.

The Texans have a lovely expression “all hat and no cattle” which they use to various purpose, quite apt, is it not?
Alphabet issues in the spotlight - Rolleyes  

ALAEA Steve, One Nation and Qantas management feature in the Oz today:

Quote:Qantas pressured on jobs flight

[Image: 3e2e45dcb259161e5c159cb51410f076]12:00am

In January, two senior ministers officiated over a ceremony that may involve moving more highly skilled jobs offshore.

In January this year, two of the Turnbull government’s most senior ministers officiated over a ceremony in Los Angeles that may involve moving more highly skilled Australian jobs offshore.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Trade Minister Steve Ciobo flew to Los Angeles airport and cut the ribbon on a sprawling maintenance hangar designed to service Qantas’s big aeroplanes.

After shutting down its heavy maintenance in Sydney, Melbourne and Avalon over the past decade, Qantas will have the ­capacity to service A380s, 747s and the incoming 787 Dreamliner at the $US30 million ($40m) state-of-the-art facility.

While Qantas has been doing heavy maintenance in LAX since 2005, the new facility is 50 per cent larger than the previous hangar and can service four of these big planes at the same time.

Qantas has said the new facility would allow it to bid for work on other carriers’ aircraft, but it is hard to escape the conclusion that this investment means moving more maintenance offshore.

While Qantas does more of its maintenance in Australia than its competitors, the intense cost pressures in the industry are driving the pursuit of low servicing costs.

But the engineers’ association warned that the strategy was compromising Qantas’s unique selling point as the world’s safest airline. It claimed staff at LAX were less quali­fied than in Australia and they were signing off on maintenance work that was far greater than the hours they work.

Qantas would not say exactly how much maintenance was still done at facilities in Brisbane and Tamworth, but it said the “vast majority” was still done here.

A Virgin Australia spokesman said while the airline employed hundreds of engineers to maintain its aircraft in Australia, “heavy airframe maintenance and overhaul works (are) carried out at specialist facilities overseas”.

A Regional Express spokeswoman said all engines and gearboxes, including propeller shafts, were maintained and overhauled by General Electric-approved ­facilities in Britain. Rex employs 175 ­engineers and 15 apprentices to maintain its Saab 340 fleet.

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, who flies extensively in a light plane with her chief of staff James Ashby, who is a qualified pilot, has taken an interest in what the ­industry is doing for jobs in Australia.

Senator Hanson has been speaking at length with leading ­industry bodies and key figures such as Dick Smith about the ­issues affecting Australian jobs.

A spokesman for Senator Hanson said Australia had the skills to service big planes like the A380 and he questioned why Qantas had moved these jobs offshore.

Senator Hanson is also concerned about the declining number of pilots and the impact of Civil Aviation Safety Authority red tape on the industry.

The spokesman cited the case of how a tear in the ­upholstery of a plane would have to be repaired by a CASA-certified business.

He confirmed that One Nation was working on an aviation policy that would be released soon.

“We expect to release a policy in the next four weeks,” he said.

Steve Purvinas, federal secretary of the Australian ­Licensed Aircraft Engineers’ ­Association, said Qantas’s drive offshore, and Virgin’s decision to carry out all heavy maintenance overseas, had had a massive impact on the jobs of Australian engineers and other technicians.

He said Qantas’s decision to close the three facilities had cost 2500 jobs, while another 500 jobs had gone in line maintenance. He claimed the airline was gambling with its envious safety record.

“Qantas no longer wants Australia to be its home and instead sees the airline’s first class safety record as a commodity they can gamble with to increase executive bonuses,” he said. He claimed planes came back from overseas servicing with faults that needed to be rectified. He said there was as example of this in January involving a 747-400.
He also produced documents that showed how two engineers at the Qantas LAX operation logged 50 hours of work over a 10-hour shift, and another one did 170 hours over a 13-hour shift.

“The LAX workforce runs on a shoestring budget where aircraft safety is not even taken into ­account. The LAX engineers regularly lodge reports for excessive workloads and insufficient labour but nothing is ever done to fix the problem,” Mr Purvinas said.
He also warned of “latent faults” that only emerge when the planes are in the air.
But a Qantas spokesman said the work at LAX was carried out to the highest standard and was ­approved by CASA.

“All maintenance is done to the highest Qantas standards no matter where the work is carried out,” the spokesman said. “We have had arrangements in place for many years for certain maintenance to be completed overseas. Los Angeles is a major hub for Qantas and maintenance work on Qantas airplanes in Los Angeles is carried out in a Qantas facility ­approved by CASA.”

Mr Purvinas said he was ­appalled when the two ministers opened the LAX hangar as it followed a serious act of bad faith by Qantas management in negotiations over the servicing of the 787 Dreamliner.

Qantas invited ALAEA last year to join talks over the 787 on the premise that the maintenance could be based in Australia in order to seek concessions.

“After several months we found out that the decision to base this work in their new LAX hangar had been made 12 months earlier, making their phony consultation process nothing more than a box-ticking exercise,” Mr Purvinas said.

He warned that the decision to base 787 maintenance at LAX was “shortsighted and risky”. He said the LAX workforce had 80 engineers and only one in five of them held a licence to work on aircraft.

“Half of the remaining 60 would have less experience than the average Australian apprentice. A similar workforce in Australia would have two-thirds of the engineers licensed and the others with an average 20 years’ experience.”

A Qantas spokesman initially said the “majority” of maintenance and engineering was undertaken in Australia, and then corrected this to “vast majority” when asked what this meant. While he declined to provide a specific percentage, he said “there are no plans to change this”.

“We are the only Australian airline to conduct heavy maintenance in the country and (we) ­employ more than 3000 people in our ­engineering and maintenance division,” he said in a written ­response. “Our replacement hangar in Los Angeles provides us with a fit for purpose space to complete tasks on our A380 and 747 fleet. The facility’s more efficient design means we’re able to reduce the time it takes to complete tasks by giving engineers easier access to aircraft.”

Qantas has argued that the LAX hangar made the airline more ­efficient because its flying schedule meant Qantas could have up to four aircraft on the ground in LA for up to 10 hours at a time, so it made sense for some ­engineering tasks to be completed at LAX. Qantas operates 40 flights each week to LAX.

The previous hangar, which was built at the start of the jet era in 1958, was not big enough to ­accommodate an A380 under cover. This meant that in the event of bad weather, some tasks on the plane’s tail could not be carried out, which affected the schedule.

A spokeswoman for Ms Bishop said she was in Los Angeles for the G’Day USA program and this was why she officiated at the hangar launch. She said Qantas’s commercial decisions were a matter for the airline.

“Qantas has a global presence and its commercial operational decisions are a matter for Qantas,” the spokeswoman said.

“Qantas is a founding member of the G’Day USA program and the minister attended the event at the invitation of Qantas. The launch coincided with the minister’s attendance at the annual G’Day USA program.”

Mr Ciobo said “Qantas has ­advised there are no job losses as a ­result of the hangar. In fact, it is generating services exports for Qantas.”

This is interesting... Rolleyes : ...One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, who flies extensively in a light plane with her chief of staff James Ashby, who is a qualified pilot, has taken an interest in what the ­industry is doing for jobs in Australia.

Senator Hanson has been speaking at length with leading ­industry bodies and key figures such as Dick Smith about the ­issues affecting Australian jobs.

A spokesman for Senator Hanson said Australia had the skills to service big planes like the A380 and he questioned why Qantas had moved these jobs offshore.

Senator Hanson is also concerned about the declining number of pilots and the impact of Civil Aviation Safety Authority red tape on the industry.

The spokesman cited the case of how a tear in the ­upholstery of a plane would have to be repaired by a CASA-certified business.

He confirmed that One Nation was working on an aviation policy that would be released soon.

“We expect to release a policy in the next four weeks,” he said...

A "policy"?? I find it somewhat ironic that the ON party will have an aviation policy and yet the Coalition has none... Blush

Hopefully the ON policy will mirror much of TAAAF policy 2016 (ref: AMROBA post #32 ) as representative of the majority of industry Alphabet groups... Wink

Next a bit more pressure on regional aviation issues, in particular the woes of regional airports and airlines... Confused

 Via the Oz:
Quote:Regional airports facing a ‘crisis’
[Image: bfc812c0c966f4e03102dde12edb7eea]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH
Dozens of small regional aerodromes face a ‘perfect storm’ that includes a funding shortfall for runway maintenance.

Dozens of small regional airports face a “perfect storm” with a funding “crisis” at the same time they need to upgrade infrastructure.

Ahead of the May budget, a survey by the Australian Airports Association found almost one-third of 74 small regional aerodromes said that raising money was their No 1 concern in 2017.

Association chief executive Caro­line Wilkie said the funding crisis had become more pressing than concerns about regulation and compliance.

“Along with the need for new investment in aerodrome infrastructure and the declining condition of assets, the challenge of raising revenue is creating a perfect storm for regional aerodromes during 2017,” Ms Wilkie said.

For Peter Scott, Mayor of Cook Shire — Queensland’s largest geographical shire and the gateway to Cape York Peninsula — the small population and rate base of less than 3000 people has left the shire stretched when it comes to raising its own revenues.

The Cooktown Airport airstrip, taxiway and apron need resealing and the aerodrome is crucial to staff flying to the Cape Flattery silica mine and for the Royal Flying Doctor Services, but “we’re financially strapped for cash,” Mr Scott said.

As well, the shire wants to upgrade the airport and expand the industrial area in the precinct over the longer term to drive jobs and ­investment.

“We’re always looking for opportunity for business, for employment,” Mr Scott said.
State government money has been directed to the airport and its associated aviation park, but the shire is hopeful of also tapping the Turnbull government’s Building Better Regions Fund.

Quote:Putting wind beneath their wings
[Image: b0ab31a6091fdd8ef9efa92ac27e0e58]12:00amRICO MERKERT
The essential role of regional airlines should be recognised.

[Image: 89b5e7007bed11c625148fddf1a1fa82?width=650]Profitability is a major issue for regional airports.

Although Rex has recently reported a slight improvement in outlook, Virgin Australia and Qantas are still seeing tough trading conditions in the regional and domestic Australian aviation markets. With continued volatility in the resources sector and tourism being inherently seasonal, soft demand from regional and business communities has unsurprisingly resulted in lower profit margins for regional airlines.

Profitability is an even greater issue for regional airports, with their number having dropped by 46 per cent over the past 20 years. Additionally the Australian Airports Association reported in 2016 that 60 per cent of Australian regional airports are still operating at a loss with many of them struggling to fund infrastructure maintenance and ongoing operation. Being largely council run, they suffer from restricted access to capital markets, and lack management and incentive structures to grow profitability.

Consolidation appears to be the name of the game.

It therefore seems to be timely to ask what policymakers can do to improve commercial viability of regional aviation in Australia?

Before answering this question one needs to evaluate whether it is worth having regional air services at all. For the regions themselves this is a no-brainer because the economic impact of regional aviation is substantial and also because, quite frankly, many regional and remote communities would not exist without regular scheduled air services. In Europe and the US they are often referred to as essential or lifeline services. However, what value do such services present to people and businesses residing in cities?

Our recently published research* provides evidence for such willingness to pay. Our findings suggest that, compared with other modes of travel to regional areas, Sydney residents are willing to pay a premium for regional air services of on average $126 ($99 leisure; $153 business) for one hour of travel time savings. Regional airlines, for example QantasLink, could charge a premium of $189 as part of the ticket price from say Sydney to Port Macquarie, where the saved travel time is 1.5 hours compared with driving a car.

This has important implications on regulation and public support of such services. The high premiums on time savings resulting from regional aviation services suggest that some form of industry support may be warranted, at the least through ensuring a business friendly institutional environment. Industry subsidies may not be required if the regional air services’ essential role is otherwise recognised as part of the future development of the regions. In the context of regulating Sydney Airport our findings provide justification for the mandated level of peak hour slots for regional carriers. Our findings also suggest that there is value in considering a further scheme to provide “medium” and “large” regional airports with guaranteed access to slots at Sydney Airport.

This would include a minimum of two slots in both the morning and evening peak-hours (ideally six) which in turn would generate the potential for some true competition between regional carriers. Allowing multiple operators to compete for the ­lucrative business travel market, which demands morning departures and an evening return, would make regional air services more competitive and therefore attractive to the travelling public.

This may prove more difficult in the regional context than at metropolitan airports and certainly won’t be the panacea to solve low passenger numbers.

Attracting non-aeronautical revenues such as through car parking, adjacent business parks or freight is another option that some airports are exploring, for example Wellcamp, Dubbo and Tamworth. Opportunities around jointly developing routes with all stakeholders (including tourism agencies) which could include federal or local government route development funds is also an option that should be explored.

The potential game change is however something else, namely better integration of regional aviation.

First, the better integration of federal, state and council plans, policies, initiatives and legislation would not only result in a better product but also in improved cost effectiveness. For example, reconsidering the need for federal “red tape” security regulation at all airports may yield regional benefits, as clearly one size does not fit all in the airport context.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, there could be greater integration of aviation within the transport sector. Presently, aviation is not recognised as a form of public transport. However, given that people use scheduled, publicly supported and/or regulated regional air services for a range of purposes, it could be said that regional air services have given the name Airbus a more literal meaning, and that aviation could be a mode of public transport which would benefit from greater integration with road and rail public transport.

Our latest study findings suggest that while the business traveller prefers the current air service and taxi model, the leisure market is more open to integrated land shuttle services from the airport to their destination. Through 11,280 choice experiment observations we determined that metropolitan leisure travellers are willing to pay a premium of $45.88 for a plane and integrated shuttle at the regional destination and an additional premium of $23.97 where the shuttle can be booked at the same time as the airfare. This combined willingness to pay ($69.85) for just those two integration features (there are many more to explore) represents potentially attractive opportunities to regional airlines and airports that look at mobility as a service that requires management across modes to get people to their destination. The ability to charge this premium may lead to improvements in the profitability of the aviation value chain. If they charge fares below that premium, the competitiveness and attractiveness of regional air services may be enhanced which may ultimately result in higher patronage and boost commercial viability of services, and the economic performance of the regions.

Integrated timetabling, transport service offering, ticketing and marketing are all normal in cities. Who would doubt the benefits of the Opal card in Sydney? Why don’t we have something similar for regional aviation and regional transport in general? FlyPelican is now applying elements of this concept as it offers customers an integrated fare of $135 “Pelican Sydney Connex” that includes in addition to the air service (from Newcastle) all transfer and ground transportation to/from Sydney airport. With new technologies and apps becoming available on a daily basis, it is only a matter of time until fully integrated regional air service solutions will become the norm and force policymakers to rethink their strategies.

* Journal of Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

Rico Merkert is professor and chair in transport and supply chain management at the University of Sydney, and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Air Transport Management
MTF...P2 Cool
(04-28-2017, 11:05 AM)Peetwo Wrote: RAAA on disbandment of 457 visas - Confused

By RAAA CEO Mike Higgins, via the Oz: 
Quote:Unintended consequences of 457 visa changes could ground airlines

[Image: 59083b02c9677bf318e522fb5dd137f0?width=650]REX have invested heavily in a pilot training school. Picture: Grahame Hutchison.
  • Mike Higgins
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM April 28, 2017
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection issued a media release on April 18 announcing the abolition and replacement of the Temporary Work Visa (457). The document includes about 20 reforms, summarised in dot points. The Regional Aviation Association of Australia agrees with about 85 per cent of these.

The RAAA welcomes the government’s review of all programs from time to time to ensure they remain fit for purpose, have not drifted in scope and still address the initial problem. However, the published changes have some serious unintended consequences for many regional airline and charter operators. In a nutshell, pilots and avionic engineers are now totally excluded, while airframe/engine engineers are only eligible for temporary visas without any access to residency, which makes it virtually impossible to employ them.

Examples include Chartair, a large operator in the Northern Territory. Since November 2015, they have had a massive turnover of pilots — of the 31 crew with the business at that time, only four of them remain.

They have lost 12 experienced pilots to large Australian national carriers in the past 12 months alone. The large Australian carriers don’t see an end to this recruitment drive any time soon, with a well-known international carrier recruiting some 1200 pilots by years end. The internationals recruit experienced pilots from the large Australian carriers and they in turn recruit experienced pilots from our member organisations. Chartair currently have parked three of their biggest aircraft because they don’t have crew for them!

Chartair is not unique in its role within the industry. Most Regional Aviation Association of Australia member airlines take in entry-level pilots and offer them a career path through small single pistons, small twins, up to single and twin turbines. Although they are all too aware of their position in the aviation food chain, they are proud of their record in providing high-quality pilots for the Australian national carriers. However, they are at that stage where our ranks at the upper middle and senior pilot levels are so depleted that overseas candidates locked in for four years on a visa were about the only solution to get them through this crazy phase of recruiting by the major carriers around the world.

Therefore, they currently have seriously limited capabilities in-house for check and training and need desperately to bring in contractors to cover these vital roles. However, with the changes to the 457 visa they will not be able to sponsor these pilots to undertake vital roles for the survival of their businesses.

Perhaps the largest (in terms of number of aircraft) RAAA member is Regional Express and they may have the most compelling case. REX have invested heavily in a pilot training school and take most of the Australian graduates into their airline.

The international and Australian national carrier recruitment activity mentioned above has been so intense that this member soon won’t have a sufficient number of experienced captains to continue the training of the first officers. So we will see aircraft and first officers grounded because they can no longer employ direct entry captains, thanks to the 457 changes.

In the mid-1970s Qantas would routinely train over 200 aircraft maintenance engineers per year, and I was fortunate to be one of them. They now train 15 per year. This is not a criticism of Qantas, as their engineering business model has had to change over the intervening period due to changes in technology and a host of other reasons.

The fact is, though, that the once vibrant training ground has all but vanished. It is now incumbent on the smaller end of town to take a more active role in producing engineers.

This is widely recognised and commendable efforts are being made by industry. However, a combination of ‘‘centres of excellence’’ (silos) within both the federal and state governments, with no single controlling mind, has resulted in a gridlock where it is not possible for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to issue licences to graduating apprentices.

The RAAA has been campaigning for some time and is working very closely with the Australian Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association, the Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers association, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and soon the federal and state education departments to address this situation. So it was pleasing to read a recent release from the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport on Aviation training issues.

The document refers to the recent Aviation Workforce Skills Study which clearly articulates a need to ‘‘develop practical and workable solutions to overcome any shortfalls in the supply of professionally trained staff’’. ‘‘I look forward to working with the Department of Education and Training.”

Commendable indeed, yet at the same time another arm of the government makes these breathtaking changes to 457 that are designed to kill jobs and growth in our sector of the industry. The RAAA remains willing and able to be a part of the solution and would welcome an urgent review of these new arrangements.

Update: REX on 457 visa disbandment.

Via the ABC online... Wink

Quote:457 visas: Airlines warn loss of foreign pilots could 'tear apart' fabric of regional communities

By Gavin Coote
Posted Fri at 5:48pmFri 28 Apr 2017, 5:48pm
[Image: 554566-3x2-340x227.jpg]

Photo: Regional Express is warning the scrapping of the 457 visa may force it to axe some services. (Graham Tidy: Reuters)

Regional aviation operators are warning that a decision to axe the 457 temporary working visa could spell the end for some air services in regional Australia.

The Federal Government is introducing a new temporary skilled visa program, reducing the number of eligible occupations.

Under the changes, pilots would no longer be eligible.

Regional Express (REX) said it relied heavily on the 457 visa to attract experienced captains due to a drainage of Australian pilots going to work at bigger carriers domestically and abroad.

Chief operating officer Neville Howell said it could have dire consequences for regional Australia.

"On the thinner routes, some of the marginal routes that we're operating, it could very well mean that we have to cease those operations or indeed reduce the frequency," Mr Howell said.

"That has all sorts of implications to the people in those remote communities."
Mr Howell would not say which routes could be potentially scrapped.

"I don't want to start hypothesising and jumping to conclusions in terms of which routes in particular, but suffice to say on some of the runs where we're not getting a great deal of passengers we would have to look at that first of all," he said.

"The other runs like, for example Orange and Griffith and so forth, those numbers are fine. But it is the thinner routes where our passenger uptake is not particularly good."

Call for immediate moratorium

Mr Howell said the Government needed to place an immediate moratorium on the changes until a well-considered replacement list of occupations was drawn up.
"If indeed changes need to be made, okay. But to just completely cut the legs off without consultation it doesn't make a great deal of sense," he said.

Quote:"It will undoubtedly tear apart the socio-economic fabric of many of the smaller regional cities that are heavily reliant on our services for medical, educational and business links.

"It's mindless policy-making. There is a shortage of that skilled labour."

In March, REX grounded six of its aircraft after a plane travelling from Albury to Sydney lost one of its propellers mid-air.

Why the 457 visa is going

[Image: 457-custom-image-data.jpg]
After two decades and tens of thousands of visas, the 457 visa category has been abolished. But what was it and why does this matter?

The Regional Aviation Association of Australia echoed REX's concerns, saying Northern Territory operator Chartair had already grounded three of its largest aircraft because of a shortage of captains.

But its CEO, Mike Higgins, stopped short of backing calls for a moratorium.

"What we're saying is that we're happy to work with the Government to do a review," Mr Higgins said.

"We feel that while there are some professions that are exempt, for example real estate agents, hairdressers and so forth, it's breathtaking that captains and aircraft engineers who are in dire shortage have been excluded.

Quote:"It's going to cause a great harm. We're very hopeful that we can sit down and have a sensible discussion about the way forward, particularly with experienced captains."

List of Jobs Removed From 457 Visa List

  [Image: List-of-Jobs-Removed-From-457-Visa-List-p1-normal.gif]

p. 2

[Image: List-of-Jobs-Removed-From-457-Visa-List-p2-normal.gif]

p. 3

[Image: List-of-Jobs-Removed-From-457-Visa-List-p3-normal.gif]

List of Jobs Removed From 457 Visa List

Original Document (PDF) »
Related Article »
Contributed by: ABC News, Australian Broadcasting Corporation
MTF...P2 Tongue
Alphabets continue to soft cock aviation security overkill - Dodgy

Via the Oz today:
Quote:Security review to stay secret
[Image: 6f77c6b93b36e077b1e0e936797fdd12]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH
The Inspector of Transport Security review will not be made public despite calls by a Senate committee for its release.

   Annabel Hepworth

Aviation Editor

A government-ordered review into aviation security training will be kept secret amid warnings that terrorists will continue trying to thwart security measures.

The Australian can reveal that the Inspector of Transport Security review will not be made public despite calls by a Senate committee that it be published.

This is because the inquiry covers “security sensitive information”, a spokesman from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development said.

The move comes as a new Senate committee report into airport security warns that despite the “profound” changes in the wake of the September 11 terrorist strikes, “the aviation sector can expect continued attempts to subvert security measures as terrorists evolve their capabilities”.

The report points to advice from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation that terrorists are adapting to security measures that are already in place and are refining their methods.

“Attacks against airports and airlines have the potential to cause massive damage and disruption through mass casualties, significant detrimental economic impacts and the creation of a climate of fear and anxiety among the travelling public,” the report says.

“It is clear from evidence received by the committee that there are areas of airport and aviation security that require significant improvement to guard against any possible breaches of Australia’s air transport infrastructure, by individuals or organised groups.”

Pointing to concerns about the training of airport screening staff, the committee recommended that the Inspector of Transport Security inquiry should be released.

The Australian Security Industry Association told the committee that fewer security certificate training courses were available and the National LGBTI Health Alliance complained about the attitude of some screening staff.

The Australian and International Pilots Association has argued that security screening of flight crew should be halted because it served no actual purpose and instead exposed them to “repetitive mini-power-plays by screeners”.

The inquiry was finished in September and the government accepted its recommendations the following month, the Infrastructure spokesman said.

“The government has discussed relevant findings with industry participants through the transport security consultative forums,” the spokesman said.

“However, as the inquiry covers security sensitive information, the inquiry’s final report will not be made public.

“The early stages of implementing the recommendations from the inquiry will focus on the aviation sector and work is ­already well under way.”

The inquiry was ordered by former deputy prime minister Warren Truss to look at the quality of industry and other in-house security training programs and any gaps.
MTF...P2 Cool
FASA control cable AD back down... Rolleyes    

Via the UP.. Confused :

Quote:Control cables for rent or sale or gifted to some poor Casarooted aircraft owner

"An airworthiness directive issued in early 2015 - AD/GENERAL/87 Primary Flight Control Cable Assembly Retirement – put in place the mandatory replacement regime.

The directive covered primary flight control cable assemblies with terminals constructed of SAE-AISI 303 Se or SAE-AISI 304 stainless steel with a total time in service of 15 years or more.

The requirements of this airworthiness directive take effect from 1 January 2018."

If you care to read the full official version it pretty much means everyone had to throw out all their cables and install all new, practically speaking.

But now the idiots who are bent on destroying a once good industry are showing a glimmer of sense, and are saying that inspections are ok after all, so wonderful, won't that save us lots of dollars?

Except that some of us have already paid out several thousands because we had all the area concerned opened up and it was therefore logical to proceed earlier than the 1st. Jan '18. 

So thanks so much you half witted clowns, what a total shambles we have for a regulator, and a totally hopeless Minister who wouldn't tie his shoelaces without the say so of his bosses, those that are supposed to be under his control, but, as is so plain, are the real power. 

This is completely predictable because we have an 'independent' Commonwealth corporation run by the "Director of Air Safety" ( could you devise a more fatuous title? There he is up on cloud 9 with his baton...) who gets near twice the salary of the Minister. Same for Dept head Mr M, it's all back to front and GA continues to slide. 

For all that; too late for me but it would be good to know who precipitated this welcome change, has the Iron Ring got a rust hole in it? Has someone with a brain moved to a position of influence?
Sandy's GAS submission to miniscule Chester... Confused :

Quote:Project Leader,
General Aviation Study,
Dept. of Infrastructure 

Dear Glen Malam,

I understand that your Minister wants to look at why General Aviation is not growing as it should. To those of us that have been involved for many years it's more surprising that there's enough GA activity left to gain the Minister's attention.

This is an industry that has been worked over, over regulated and taxed with fees for all sorts of non essential permissions with little relief for some twenty nine years.

This is an industry that was supposed to have a new set of rules as per the Minister's directive from 1988, still not finished, after hundreds of $millions, and the latest 2014 tranche of strict liability criminal sanction rules have proven unworkable hence they are being reworked to this day.

There are some of these strict liability rules that would not have even a minor counter part in the US. Would not be considered a transgression of any sort. Let alone the reverse onus of proof provisions, all of this amounts to GA looking like a very unfriendly field of activity for any outsider. 

As for business opportunities, there's virtually no freehold on airports anywhere and operators like those at Bankstown would never invest again as they did with assurances (false or at best misleading) from the then Federal Airports Commission before so called privatisation.

One recent example of the regulator's incompetence;  the reversal of it's 2015 Airworthiness Directive regarding the replacement of primary control cables. 

While the change back to inspection is welcome, there's many of us who have already complied. Why? because often it will be most efficient to do this work when the aircraft has already been flown to a maintenance base and opened up for other maintenance. In my case I spent several thousand dollars removing  perfectly serviceable cables and replacing same with new cables in view of the then requirement to complete a total swap to new cables (irrespective of condition) by 1st Jan 2018. 

The wasted money and time in this case is one of many mistakes made by CASA which is killing GA. Maybe a case for a class action, just for the cables, to recover what might well be several million dollars wasted?


Sandy Reith

MTF...P2 Cool
[Image: new_aaaa_logo_lg.jpg]

How it should be done.

Phil Hurst and his AAAA crew are impressive. They represent a vibrant industry providing a vital ‘general aviation’ service to this country, from farming to fire fighting. Not the most ‘glamorous’ arm of aviation, little in way of discussion about uniform shirts; or career paths; or, the usual clap trap surrounding ‘aviation’. Just a quiet acceptance that their work is dangerous, difficult, often dirty and unacknowledged. What is most impressive is the way AAAA is leading the way in the ‘safety stakes’; not only in the air, but environmentally. To me it is a classic demonstration of how industry expertise can lead the way, rather than blindly follow. Improvements generated through industry experience and expertise should form the basis of not only ‘regulation’ but operational standards. Enough of that; congratulations AAAA, well done all. A gold key to the Tim Tam box is AP’s highest award, thanks Phil. What else needs be said:- Bravo..

[Image: DBWjJ-YVwAAMk-u.jpg]

AAAA Convention 2017. (From Phil Hurst on 'Twitter').

Hurst – “And that's a wrap! AAAA Convention 2017 finishes with a great session on tech & safety. Thx to speakers, sponsors, exhibitors and delegates!”

[Image: DBSns3pV0AAs77H.jpg]

ATSB Commissioners Greg Hood and Chris Manning working with AAAA on safety. Expert panel established to boost ATSB capability. Great work!

Matthew Cossey CropLife Australia
Very much looking forward to speaking at the Aerial Application Ass of Australia National Convention today. A critical sector for #ausag

[Image: DBSctt5VwAQ2Kgc.jpg]

Final session convention 2017. Joe Urli Pres of Certified UAV Operators telling us about RPA 'drones' potential and how we can work together

Long term aerial application and drift management expert Nick Woods outlining the research program driven by AAAA and NWPP

Chair of National Working Party on Pesticide Application Gavan Cattanach outlining the science drive to improve APVMA & chemical regs

CEO of Croplife Matthew Cossey - strong message on stewardship, leadership and the critical role aviation plays in feeding the world

[Image: DBR2C2cUMAAK2c2.jpg]

Chris Manning, fmr chief pilot of Qantas and ATSB Commissioner launching our Powerline Safety Program-big safety initiative with landholders

QBE Aviation Insurance joins our Powerline Safety Program as Foundation Safety Partner with great sponsorship support. Let's mark wires!

Ergon Energy announces progress on mapping & marking & Foundation Safety Partner support of our new Powerline Safety Program

Winners of 2017 Leland Snow Innovation Award, Essential Energy announce Foundation Safety Partner support of our new Powerline Safety Progrm

Final day of Convention 2017. Our AAAA Program Manager Adam Hooper talking safety and our new Powerline Safety Program launch.

[Image: DBNvybLV0AA6SqR.jpg]

Jim Wolfe from the Commonwealth Dept of Infra outlining airspace protection, GA review, skills report and GA Advisory Group. Positive stuff.

Bruce Peterson, owner of Aerospread in NZ, taking delegates through emergency response and the importance of preparation

Convention day 2- inspiring talk on resilience to a packed room by Stacey Copas

Panel at 'fire' part of Convention 2017. Safety, quality, training,cooperation. Welcome reception thanks to Vector Aerospace!

Technology rich ops. Andrew Matthews explains ARENA - tracks aircraft for safety, speeds tasking,cuts workload. Great system in use now.

[Image: DBIUn3kVwAIKBAp.jpg]

Assistant Commisioner Jason Heffernan of NSWRFS explaining significant improvements in agency/industry relationships and performance

We're back! David Pearce from CFS SA on rapid initial attack to keep fires small - airborne in minutes to make a real difference.

Ray Cronin, Vice President of the Australian Helicopter Industry Association, outlying the issues being addressed for that sector

'The importance of aerial firefighting' from Wayne Rigg of the CFA Victoria. Great presentation on the very real positive impact of aircraft

[Image: DBHiE1CUwAEJ969.jpg]

Setting the scene for Australia's aerial firefighting 50 years of operations - Richard Alder CEO of National Aerial Firefighting Centre.

That, boys and girls is an impressive line up of expert speakers; all on the same song sheet, leading from the front.  There's a lesson there for other 'wannabe' important outfits.

[Image: Fxkvp1Ix_400x400.jpg]
VA/RedRat feedback on the importance of 24/7 Badgerys - Rolleyes

Courtesy Annabel Hepworth (the Oz) at the IATA conference Cancun Mexico..Wink   

Quote:Badgerys Creek must run 24 hours a day: Virgin

[Image: cc50aa57c65f02dd2e2278e03ffa9b6f?width=650]Virgin and Qantas say it is important that there is no curfew on flights at Badgerys Creek.
  • Annabel Hepworth
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM June 6, 2017
    Aviation Editor
It is “critical” there is no curfew on flights at Sydney’s proposed $5.3 billion airport at Badgerys Creek, with 24-hour operations likely to spur the growth in passenger traffic, says Virgin Australia Airlines group executive John Thomas.

Speaking on the sidelines of the International Air Transport Association’s annual general meeting in Cancun, Mexico, Mr Thomas said “Sydney is going to run out of capacity at some stage”.

“The fact that it is going to be a curfew-free airport I think is critical because you just look at the amount of activity at Melbourne now at midnight or one o’clock in the morning — I mean it’s crazy,” Mr Thomas told The Australian.

“It’s the law of geography. For an Asian carrier to have a 7am or 8am arrival they need to leave post the curfew here. So we think it will actually generate more traffic by giving those later departures out of Sydney, which again, Sydney has never had.”

Last month, the federal government announced it would be builder and equity owner of Sydney’s proposed second airport, after Sydney Airport rejected its option to develop the project.

The government has said that no curfew is planned but demand for night-time flights will be lower than during the day. The government has also said the curfew-free status at Melbourne Airport allows an extra two million passengers to travel through it each year.

Qantas boss Alan Joyce has also argued that Badgerys Creek needs to be a 24-hour operation.

Mr Thomas backed the move to develop the project with public funding so it could eventually be privatised at a later date, which is the same model used for the rollout of the National Broadband Network.

“It’s very hard to get a private operator ... for 10 years, to basically be investing with no return over a 10-year period, or worse still getting your airline operators to pay for it over that period,” he said.

He hit out at the substantial increases in charges for airport ­access in the past few years.

“It sort of perplexes us at a time when they are building these great revenue streams in terms of their food and beverage and their retail, plus also their car parks, plus also their advertising, why do we still have such pressure on aeronautical charges?” he said.

Earlier this year, the competition regulator estimated that the four biggest airports had collected $1.57bn more in revenue from airlines over the last decade than they would have if average prices had stayed the same in real terms.

Mr Thomas said the market for corporate travel accounts was “relatively soft”.

The reporter travelled to Cancun courtesy of Virgin Australia and IATA.

MTF...P2  Cool
CASA (read Carmody) snubs GA once again - Dodgy  

Via Oz Flying:

Quote:[Image: Morgan_Cannane.jpg]AOPA's Ben Morgan and AMROBA's Ken Cannane are both concerned over the make-up of ASAP. (Steve Hitchen)

Associations express Concern over ASAP Make-up
29 June 2017

The Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association (AMROBA) and AOPA Australia have both slammed the make-up of CASA's new Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP), saying that it marginalises the bulk of general aviation.

CASA announced the new panel last week, which in time will replace several other consultative bodies currently in place. Initial members of ASAP are:
  • Virgin Australia
  • Qantas
  • Australian Airports Association
  • The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF)
  • Regional Aviation Association of Australia
  • Recreational Aviation Australia
"Once again we have a committee without GA representation," AMROBA Executive Director Ken Cannane told Australian Flying. "I have many comments from our members that the top and bottom of aviation is represented but the nucleus in the middle (GA) is not."

AOPA Australia Executive Director Ben Morgan said ASAP was unlikely to be effective without proper GA representation.

"This is incredibly disappointing," Morgan said. "It doesn't matter how CASA puts this, it's a cheerleading squad. Having an advisory panel that excludes some voices dilutes its effectiveness.

"Consultation should be open and free dialogue with the whole industry, not just some sections of it.

"What does it mean going forward? Not a thing! If this panel is so important, why is it going to meet only three or four times a year?

"It appears to me that Shane Carmody has fallen victim to the same thing that other Directors of Aviation Safety have done: the first thing they do is restructure their industry panels. Carmody has shown that this could just be business as usual."

When asked to respond, a CASA spokesperson said "CASA looks forward to continuing working with all our industry stakeholders.

"Both AOPA and AMROBA are members of the TAAAF and we are confident that the three TAAAF members on the Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) will represent all their membership.

"Importantly AOPA and AMROBA and the numerous other aviation associations will continue to have a valuable role in the technical advisory committees that also form part of our new approach to consultation."

And Hitch today in the LMH Wink :
Quote:"..This may reflect on AOPA's determination not to play by the traditional Canberra political rules.."

AOPA Australia
must be feeling a tad marginalised in Canberra at the moment. AOPA has done as much as any association to try to shepherd genuine reforms through the bureaucratic maze, but they find themselves on the outer when it comes to consultation groups. AOPA has not been included on the Forum on Western Sydney Airport (FOWSA), which Ed Husic MP raised in parliament last week, nor on CASA's new Aviation Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP). Admittedly, not every association can sit on every panel or committee (it would make it completely disfunctional), but AOPA is a big one to leave out.

In the case of ASAP, The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF) of which AOPA is a member, has got a guernsey, so CASA has pointed out that AOPA has representation through them. Here's one possible, but not the only, answer why AOPA doesn't make it to the tables. CASA and the department see TAAAF, RAAus and RAAA as professional organisations, but AOPA may come across to them as well-meaning, but perhaps a tad amateurish. This may reflect on AOPA's determination not to play by the traditional Canberra political rules.

Dodgy - Dodgy! - Undecided

MTF...P2 Cool
•  Regional Aviation Association of Australia
•  Recreational Aviation Australia

Some of the RAAA membership are beholding to CASA; not all, but there is a (for want of better) comfortable relationship created when manuals and paper-work are generated to the liking, therefore ‘acceptance’ by the FOI. It is no good denying this; the facts are there for all to see; play by the CASA rules and all is well. Innovation and expansion beyond the CASA interpretation of ‘what’s right’ is not acceptable; independent thinking forbidden and to question is a pathway to trouble. ‘Go along to get along’ is the mantra, investors and jobs to protect, the results of even minor discontent are publicly available for all to see. The big guys are not so ‘dependent’ on CASA good will, with the expertise and legal support granted they can at least agree compromise.

RAA Oz have a clear financial incentive to keep AOPA out of the game. That too is indisputable; their last public statement on aviation medicals reflects this.

So that leaves AOPA out in the cold, dependent on others to carry their message. There can be no doubt that they have ‘upset’ a few sensitive folk; but, careful analysis shows that many of those providing self serving advice have been removed, certain elements which offended are missing and the attitude of the AOPA president being reflected is worthy of our respect. AOPA is a voice which speaks for many; bumpy history to be sure and many mistakes along the way to maturity. They do however exist in a democracy and to deny them a voice in their future must be supported by more argument than ‘they are represented through others’; or 'Sorry, not enough seats". Bollocks.

AOPA is a part of Australian aviation; warts and all. They need a full explanation for their exclusion. I would pay a lot of money to see the FAA try to exclude the USA AOPA from such an important panel – I truly would. That would be a show worth watching. Enough of politics and personalities – excluding AOPA is just plain wrong. 

Toot toot.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)