Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Alphabet if’s and but's.
Mr. Carmody might believe that the ASSR recommendations are largely implemented and that industry trust of the regulator is being restored.

Too bad that the General Aviation industry is still in a nose dive and that as every day that passes fewer pilots are flying, more aircraft are lying about unused and depreciating in value.

Where there used to be hundreds of flying schools, especially in country areas, this once busy scene is still virtually a desert. One senior instructor nearby to me paid $8000 up front with a flying school AOC application eighteen months ago, still nothing but grief from CASA and no AOC. In the USA this instructor would have been making a living from day one and been able to put $8000 into a suitable training aircraft.

The GA industry is still strangled by all the disastrous strict liability criminal sanction and unworkable rules of Part 61. What used to be a biennial flight review is now a flight test. No consideration or incentives are built into the regime. For example no amelioration for aircraft owners, commercial licence or instructor ratings.

Same for the outlandish ASIC requirements, $283 two years only. No clarity or help to industry which the AVID could easily substitute and the excuse that this is controlled solely by the Department of Infrastructure won’t wash. How many pilots actually have either of these two security identification cards? I have enquired for comparative figures from ten years to the present, same for flying school numbers but CASA doesn’t bother keeping such unimportant numbers. Living in the Can’tberra bubble.

The best potential real reform in years is Mr. Carmody’s belated medical changes which, if implemented in the present form actually will induce pilots to either drop their instrument ratings or not bother obtaining such in the future thus depriving flying schools from valuable work Forget that Instrument Flight Rules is a higher and safer standard of flying operations.

The separating out of the low weight category to induce thousands of flyers into less capable and less strong aircraft remains one of the worst decisions ever perpetrated on the flying industry. Hats off to all those that have had to design down to an extremely low weight and all segments should have a fair go but there’s so many that would have been much better off in fully certified (IFR capable) aircraft. But no, CASA in its lack of wisdom still supports this massive error of public policy.

The whole fee gouging and unsupportable system is still in place and no amount of twiddling at the edges and hoping against hope that some ‘just culture’ attitude change will materially alter the outlook is not realistic.

Only legislative changes, political determination, will cause a true revival of GA. Expecting CASA reforming itself is a forlorn hope, it’s just not capable.
Reply
Turnbull government 2017 report card on aviation policy - Part I Dodgy


(12-20-2017, 08:52 AM)Sandy Reith Wrote: Mr. Carmody might believe that the ASSR recommendations are largely implemented and that industry trust of the regulator is being restored.

Too bad that the General Aviation industry is still in a nose dive and that as every day that passes fewer pilots are flying, more aircraft are lying about unused and depreciating in value.

Where there used to be hundreds of flying schools, especially in country areas, this once busy scene is still virtually a desert. One senior instructor nearby to me paid $8000 up front with a flying school AOC application eighteen months ago, still nothing but grief from CASA and no AOC. In the USA this instructor would have been making a living from day one and been able to put $8000 into a suitable training aircraft.

The GA industry is still strangled by all the disastrous strict liability criminal sanction and unworkable rules of Part 61. What used to be a biennial flight review is now a flight test. No consideration or incentives are built into the regime. For example no amelioration for aircraft owners, commercial licence or instructor ratings.

Same for the outlandish ASIC requirements, $283 two years only. No clarity or help to industry which the AVID could easily substitute and the excuse that this is controlled solely by the Department of Infrastructure won’t wash. How many pilots actually have either of these two security identification cards? I have enquired for comparative figures from ten years to the present, same for flying school numbers but CASA doesn’t bother keeping such unimportant numbers. Living in the Can’tberra bubble.

The best potential real reform in years is Mr. Carmody’s belated medical changes which, if implemented in the present form actually will induce pilots to either drop their instrument ratings or not bother obtaining such in the future thus depriving flying schools from valuable work Forget that Instrument Flight Rules is a higher and safer standard of flying operations.

The separating out of the low weight category to induce thousands of flyers into less capable and less strong aircraft remains one of the worst decisions ever perpetrated on the flying industry. Hats off to all those that have had to design down to an extremely low weight and all segments should have a fair go but there’s so many that would have been much better off in fully certified (IFR capable) aircraft. But no, CASA in its lack of wisdom still supports this massive error of public policy.

The whole fee gouging and unsupportable system is still in place and no amount of twiddling at the edges and hoping against hope that some ‘just culture’ attitude change will materially alter the outlook is not realistic.

Only legislative changes, political determination, will cause a true revival of GA. Expecting CASA reforming itself is a forlorn hope, it’s just not capable.

And today from Annabel Hepworth, via the Oz:

Quote:Aviation’s slow regional burn

[Image: ffa2579c25082ce17a6b337485ed0bd6]1:23pmAnnabel Hepworth

The aviation sector that provides critical regional services has been in decline since 2010, with warnings of “destruction”.

A landmark study has confirmed the decline in the general aviation sector that plays a crucial role in serving regional communities.

A day after a cabinet reshuffle that sees Barnaby Joyce take on aviation, a long-awaited Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics report has found the sector has been decreasing since 2010.

But while private flying and flight training have faced “significant” decreases, this has been partly offset by growth in other areas including aerial mustering and search and rescue activity.

The report was announced last year by former Transport Minister Darren Chester.

It came after warnings that the sector had been hit by red tape and skyrocketing costs.

Businessman and aviation veteran Dick Smith has previously warned that the sector faces “destruction”.

Internationally, general aviation — which serves roles ranging from enabling regional families to fly to town to get their groceries rather than doing huge drives to flying training, firefighting, mustering, private flying and aerial surveying — has been in decline or static in nations including the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.

“Like many other industry sectors, the demand for and supply of the services offered by GA has changed over the past few decades and will continue to do so with developments in aviation technology and the way in which our economy operates,” the report said.

It finds that “while overall GA activity is declining, it is not accurate to say that all sectors of GA are declining”.

“What is apparent is that for some aviators, operating a GA business is a way of funding their passion. Some aviators continue to operate the same way they have for decades, in aircraft that are decades old, and at airports with few GA operators remaining.”

Among the “challenges” confronting the sector are the cost of pilot and maintenance training, airport leases and charges and regulatory changes including multiple reviews of aviation safety rules by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

As well, the fleet is ageing, with the most popular group of small single engine aeroplanes used by the sector at an average age of 36.4 years.

“While they are very robust aircraft, many are beginning to develop age-related faults such as corrosion and metal fatigue, which are very expensive to repair,” the report says.

“Most still require leaded fuel (aviation gasoline or avgas), which is becoming increasingly harder to source and more expensive, with production likely to cease over the next decade.”

According to the report, people from the GA sector “ have clearly expressed concerns that aviation safety regulatory changes are having an unnecessary adverse impact on the GA sector”. Among these concerns were that a “one size fits all” approach meant changes were introduced for all aircraft that were not appropriate for the smaller planes used in general aviation.

The report finds that while the fees charged by CASA “were relatively small, the true cost was higher as additional wages and administration costs are required to achieve regulatory compliance in areas such as flight crew licencing, flying training and maintenance”.

According to the report, “key opportunities” include for CASA to review the hourly rates it charges, fleet renewal, measures to boost the training and retention of pilots and maintenance staff, and for CASA to look at harmonisation of rules.

& from a IOS/PAIN email chain:

Quote:Folks,
I have had several long discussions with Barnaby re. CASA and aviation generally, and he has a pretty good grasp of where the problems are, but particularly CASA being a “lawless” operation that pays no regard to anything but what it sees as its own interests --- “its own” being the “iron ring’s” best interests. I think he probably understands that Carmody doesn’t really control CASA, and Carmody seems to have become very reliant on Johnathan Alec, not a “good thing”.
 
Interestingly, my last discussion with Barnaby included me putting the view, in my usual subtle and understated way, that he should be Minister for Transport etc., he was less than enthusiastic because of the minefield of aviation. I told him the same as I told John Anderson, he may as well exercise real control and really achieve reform, because if there is a major accident, he will be wearing it in the eyes of the public, regardless of the circumstances. The reason for the accident will be reform/lack of reform.
 
At least Mrdak has already gone.
 
We need to inject into Barnaby the same kind of backbone that both John Sharp and Mark Vaile possessed.
 
One of the biggest problems in the aviation community is that there is no idea, let alone consensus, on the way ahead, the “big picture”.
 
Most discussions are about weed control, not getting rid of the weeds.
 
After what CASA did to Tiger, airlines are more timid (and not just in public) than ever, their “consultations with CASA” are all about pre-emptive damage control.
 
Qantas didn’t build the biggest hangar on Los Angeles International Airport just to park their aircraft out of the SoCal sunshine. If you think it is only wage rates, you are kidding yourself.
 
In 1996, the incoming Howard Government had a policy that was implemented, despite vehement resistance from CASA, Airservices and their unions. We achieved major reforms that most of you seem to have forgotten.
 
That policy is about as valid today, as it was then.  As was the way Sharp and Vaile achieved those reforms.
 
Cheers,
Bill H.


& KC in reply:  

Bill,
 
Where there was reformists within CASA pre 2002, none exist today.
The iron ring protects their jobs not understanding the functions and responsibilities they hold sacrosanct, have been devolved to industry in the FAA system, TCA system and starting to happen in the EASA system.
 
Instead of adopting FAR Parts 61/91, CASA legal want to create quasi regulators putting volunteers under liability they don’t deserve.
 
This is not the economic reform that was originally being pushed. Part 91 provides the freedoms to flight for all sectors.

Part 61 provides the independent flight instructors so desperately need in aviation.
 
Adoption of the FAR system would empower industry and reduce jobs in CASA.
Parts 43 enables greater flexibility without CASA involvement.
Re harmonisation of Part 21 with amended FAR Part 21 - saved US manufacturing $136M for $2M cost to implement. FAA devolved functions to industry.
 
Until we get a smart Minister, hopefully Barnaby, that directs adoption of the FAR system then the anti-modernisation, non-reformists will continue to exist.
 
Merry Xmas to all, will raise me glass to Barnaby if he can break the ring.
Best chance we have had for over a decade
 
Regards
 
Ken
    
BITRE GAS report:

Quote:General Aviation Study
Listen
A A A
[Image: cr_001.jpg]

Publication Type: [url=https://bitre.gov.au/publications/publications.aspx?query=e:"commissioned%20report"&link-search=true]Commissioned Report[/url]

Publication Subject(s): [url=https://bitre.gov.au/publications/publications.aspx?query=s:"aviation"&link-search=true]aviation[/url]

ISBN: 978-1-925531-77-0
Release Date: December 2017

General aviation is a diverse sector that is undergoing change. While overall GA activity appears to be declining slowly, it is not accurate to say that all parts of GA are declining.
Those parts of GA that are discretionary in nature, such as pleasure flying, appear to decline in more conservative economic times, while those parts of GA that are a key part of an expanding industry, such as aerial mustering, have been growing strongly. Detailed economic analysis of these relationships is not currently possible due to the current lack of financial statistics for GA, however this report outlines some of the key challenges facing GA and identifies some key opportunities for the industry and Government to respond to these challenges.



TICK..TOCK Barnaby, TICK TOCK indeed... Confused


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
I’m getting that slow burning sensation. General Aviation going downhill only since 2010? Try 1988 which was about the last time when the stupidity of CASA was partly overbalanced by commonsense and a blind eye looking into the bureaucratic telescope. When flying could be a half reasonable pursuit.
The news article says downhill since 2010; who makes up such a stinking untruth? Is this another fellow Cantberran trying to care for fellow Cantberrans? To save them from the excruciating truth that they have squandered taxpayer funds, three quarters destroyed a perfectly good industry and smashed numerous businesses and the legitimate livelihoods of thousands of fellow Australians?
Barnaby I hope you take note.
Reply
MT/BJ Govt Aviation report card - Part II. 

Again from Annabel, via the Oz... Wink :
 
Quote:Aviation faces training crisis

[Image: a6730d3ea25f26b335b6453c7e8bb2fc]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH

A report has pointed to the cost of pilot and maintenance training as among several ‘challenges’ facing general aviation.


A flagship report has pointed to the cost of pilot and maintenance training as among several “challenges” facing Australia’s once-vibrant general aviation industry.

Amid a cabinet reshuffle that has seen Barnaby Joyce take on aviation, the report by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics says “opportunities” for the industry and government to respond include targeted measures to boost training and retention of pilots and maintenance staff in general aviation.

The study confirmed the decline in general aviation, saying the sector — which is important to regional communities — had been shrinking since 2010.

General aviation provides connections to areas not serviced by airlines and covers work outside commercial transport operations including mustering, flying training, private flying and firefighting.

Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia chief executive Martin Laverty, chairman of the federal government’s General Aviation Advisory Group, said the group was working on a policy framework “GA Flight Plan” that tried to boost industry capability through better workforce development.

Mr Laverty said this area offered prospects for growth in the GA sector.

In previous shortages of pilots, Australia’s major airlines recruited from either Defence or regional carriers, while regionals in turn recruited from GA.

“But the workforce well that general aviation has historically provided is drier than in the past,” Mr Laverty said. “It’s not likely to be refilled without help.”

Even the Royal Flying Doctor Service was experiencing shor­tages of pilots and engineers. “If the flying public want continued on-time, cheap but safe flights, a plentiful supply of aviation workers is key. Aviation workers are drawn from the full aviation ecosystem, which means ensuring the sustainability of the workforce in general aviation.”

The BITRE report, which was announced last year by then transport minister Darren Chester, came amid warnings that the sector had been struck by skyrocketing costs and red tape.

“Several GA sectors, including private flying and flight training activities, have experienced significant decreases since 2010, but this has been partially offset by increases in other areas, such as aerial mustering and search- and-rescue activity,” the report found.

MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Ops at uncontrolled aerodromes - A point of comparison. Shy

(12-15-2017, 08:19 AM)Peetwo Wrote: VHF Multicom saga continues - Rolleyes

Dick Smith via the Oz:

Quote:Smith takes swipe at CASA

[Image: 6eb9158b3fe74c7a2686f2b7c60e099b]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH

Dick Smith has hit out at proposals to expand the size of common traffic advisory frequency broadcast areas.


And yesterday an excellent OP piece from Hitch... Wink

Via Oz Flying:

Quote:[Image: Helimed_One.jpg]Victorian air ambulance Helimed One, a Bell 412. (Steve Hitchen)


Alerted See and Avoid: a True Story
14 December 2017

–Steve Hitchen

Opinion
The day had not gone as planned. A club lunch jaunt from Lilydale to Apollo Bay had seen me put the Piper Archer on the ground at Tyabb when the weather turned decidedly dark and threatening. It stayed that way until it was no longer practical time-wise to consider continuing the flight. A few hours later, I taxied in improving weather for the flight back to Lilydale.

For those who don't know that route, it's a 35-minute straightline that slices across the busy Latrobe Valley - Moorabbin route and tracks in close to Mount Dandenong. The only consideration is the 2500-foot CTA step to the west of the mountain ... unless you want to hug the ridge. That was not looking like a comfortable option in weather that was improving, but still offered grey masses of cloud loitering with intent around the mountain peaks. No thanks; I'll be well and truly under the clouds and the CTA step.

The route flirts with the Moorabbin GMH approach point, so I was generally vigilant as I approached, with the comm tuned to Melbourne 135.7. There are times I have thought that MB TWR would be a better frequency there so I could hear the inbounds to GMH. I am pleased I stayed on 135.7.

"Aircraft tracking north at 3000 10 miles south-east of Moorabbin, Melbourne Centre, are you on frequency?"

I reckoned that was me, and so responded with a chirpy "Good afternoon radar, I think you are refering to me, ABC."

"ABC, squawk ident." I did so, and was rewarded with "ABC standby."

"Aircraft 10 miles east of Moorabbin at 2500 tracking west, Melbourne Centre, are you on frequency?" Interesting, I thought. The pilot's reply was similar, with call sign, let's say XYZ. He was also asked to squawk ident then put on standby.

"Helimed One, Melbourne Centre, we have you tracking south at 3500, confirm." Helimed One confirmed.

"Helimed One, ABC and XYZ, in about three minutes you are all going to converge on a point around eight miles east of Moorabbin at exactly the same moment. Can I get you all to check you're on QNH 1015?"

This was going to be interesting. If Centre was right, I was going to be sandwiched between a Cessna underneath me and an air ambulance going over the top. "If you all keep doing what you're doing and don't change levels you'll be right. Report when you have the traffic sighted."

I had been thinking about going down to 2500 to get under the step, but given the circumstances, decided it could wait for a minute or two.

"Helimed One, traffic sighted."

"ABC, traffic sighted."

"XYZ, traffic not sighted."

The radar prediction was deadly accurate. A few minutes later I was treated to the rare spectacle of Helimed One roaring overhead going south whilst simultaneously the Cessna slid underneath on its way to Moorabbin. We reported back in.

"Centre VH-ABC is clear of traffic. Thanks for that and g'day." Helimed One reported the same, but XYZ had to confess they hadn't seen either of us at any point. Centre told them they were clear.

Melbourne Centre didn't have to help out like that; all three of us were in G Class airspace and were VFR. The controller saw something developing and did something about it. Not so many years earlier, an IFR Chieftain crashed on approach to Benalla because it was flying off-track on the GPS line. ATC had known that, but it wasn't in their remit to tell the pilot. Now, they were actively doing something even though they had no operational obligation. Commonsense had won the day.

But it looks like those days are now over if CASA goes ahead with the NPRM that would have all VFR aircraft below 5000 feet in G airspace operating on 126.7 en route. With the advent of ADS-B, ATC has even more surveillance over aircraft in G, even if they are operating VFR. However, it becomes useless under the NPRM because ATC can neither monitor nor broadcast on 126.7. Now they could see ABC, see XYZ and see Helimed One ... and do nothing but watch and hope.

Somehow, an issue that was about which radio frequency to use for uncharted airports has become an issue about frequency congestion and keeping RNAVs inside the frequency zone of airports. It really is a Frankensolution for an issue that, with analytical hindsight, may not have existed in the first place.

The question to be answered was: if the airport is unmarked, do we use the area VHF or Multicom 126.7? En route airspace and the size of the CTAF areas were not part of the problem, but it seems they have become embroiled. The argument against the area VHF was one of congestion and over-transmitting, which may be have been the genesis of the scattergun application of Multicom proposed in the NPRM. CASA, in its wisdom(?) wrote the discussion paper to effectively say "OK, if you want 126.7 then you're getting it everywhere." There was no option simply to change the system back to the way it had been working (126.7) for two decades.

If we go to Multicom everywhere and cut ATC out of our lives, are we not negating the lessons we learned from the Benalla tragedy and ignoring the advantages of technology?
I am often reminded of William of Ockham, who wrote a piece of philosophy known today as Ockham's Razor. He said "All things being equal, the simplest answer tends to be the correct one." I think CASA has forgotten this, and gone instead with the most complex answer. All they needed to do was to change their CAAP advice back to 126.7 for uncharted airports and leave the en route with the area VHF and I doubt there would have been much hue and cry, or demonstrable loss of safety.

One thing I do remember from the day recounted above was that my hand had just reached for the Archer's throttle to start the descent down to 2500. Had Centre not chimed in, I have no doubt that Piper would have met Cessna and today the editor of Australian Flying would be someone else. Mind you, Helimed One would have been on scene quickly.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...uLbiir6.99

Meanwhile in a hemisphere...far..far away -  Rolleyes

Via FAA AC 90-66B... Wink :

[Image: FAA-AC-1.jpg][Image: FAA-AC-2.jpg][Image: FAA-AC-3.jpg][Image: FAA-AC-4.jpg][Image: FAA-AC-5.jpg]


"..Where there is no tower, CTAF, or UNICOM station depicted for an airport on an aeronautical chart, use MULTICOM frequency 122.9 for self-announce procedures. Such airports should be identified in appropriate aeronautical information publications.." - Sounds like a simple and understandable solution for the current CASA created VHF Multicom clusterduck - Rolleyes

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
MT/BJ Govt Aviation report card - Part III.


Via the Weekend Oz today  Wink :


New CASA regulations blow training costs sky-high
[Image: 2daa3e32acc52642e4e8e533e1a910cd?width=650]
Glen Buckley of Melbourne Flight Training school says he paid $700,000 to comply with new CASA regulations. Picture: Aaron Francis
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM December 23, 2017
  • ANDREW BURRELL
    [Image: andrew_burrell.png]
    WA Chief Reporter
    Perth
    @AndrewBurrell7

One of Australia’s most experienced flight trainers, Glen Buckley, says he has just spent a “staggering” $700,000 to comply with new regulations imposed on the industry by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

And it almost broke him.

“The cost (of complying) was much, much higher than I’d expected,” he said. “I would have ­exited the industry if I had known it was going to be that much.”

The Weekend Australian has spoken to many smaller industry players who are highly critical of the new regulations and the hugely increased cost of compliance, but few are prepared to criticise CASA for fear of being targeted.

Mr Buckley, the chief executive of Melbourne Flight Training, one of the larger firms, said he had spent $700,000 moving to CASA’s new scheme that governs training.

His salary bill has risen from $1 million a year to $1.3m because of the requirement for more staff and the increased regulatory burden.

He was concerned the extra ­expenditure was not the most cost-effective way to increase­ ­safety.

Under the new system, all of Australia’s 350 flight training organisations had to decide by September 1 whether they wished to operate under a lower classification, known as Part 141, or a higher classification, Part 142.

A Part 142 school will be able to train pilots for a shorter syllabus of 150 hours of training, compared with 200 hours under Part 141.

Mr Buckley said he had had no option but to become a Part 142 school so he could continue to offer the 150-hour course. “The 150-hour course makes up 90 per cent of my revenue, and no business could afford to lose 90 per cent of its revenue and expect to survive,” he said.

Although Mr Buckley complied, fewer than 10 per cent of training businesses had moved to the new system, forcing CASA to delay the deadline for a year Mr Buckley predicted many businesses, especially smaller ones, would be forced to close in coming months because of the cost of compliance.

“Schools delivering the 150-hour syllabus will lose that approval in September next year and customers will gravitate to the larger 142 schools to access the 150-hour course, which is about $15,000 cheaper than the 200-hour course,” he said.

“This will impact many schools, especially those in rural areas that can’t afford the transition to a Part 142 organisation.”

A CASA spokesman said the regulations were introduced in September 2014 and the agency had consulted widely. “The transition for a flying school to Parts 141 and 142 has been made much easier and cost-efficient,” he said.

CASA had also removed impediments to flying training organisations that wished to set up in remote areas, he said. Some flying schools had transitioned to Part 141 recently and CASA was receiving “very positive” feedback.




China swoops on flight schools to solve pilot shortage

[Image: ad8d1b20afd41396b8a8f6872d086a99?width=650]
Aminta Hennessy of Clamback & Hennessy at Bankstown. Picture: John Feder
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM December 23, 2017
  • ANDREW BURRELL
    [/url]

Chinese companies are swooping on Australian flight training schools increasingly stricken by skyrocketing costs and crippling red tape, amid predictions that the nation will be forced to import scores of commercial pilots from Asia and Africa in coming years.

The Weekend Australian has spoken to several of the country’s 350 aviation training businesses that say they are unprofitable and are considering selling to the ­Chinese. Scores of local firms have folded in recent years and several of the larger schools are now foreign-owned.

China will need an estimated 110,000 new pilots by 2035 but is relying on other countries for most of its training because of its heavy smog, military-controlled airspace and lack of qualified teachers who speak English.

A federal government report this week confirmed the local industry’s drastic decline, showing the number of general aviation flying hours in Australia fell by 40 per cent — from 500,000 hours a year to 300,000 hours a year — between 2010 and 2015.

The increasing foreign ownership in the flight training industry — particularly the concentration of Chinese acquisitions — is raising concern among senior security experts.

Peter Jennings, the executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said the “aggregation effect’’ could be of the same concern in flight training as it had been to Scott Morrison in other sectors.

“It may be acceptable to own one or two flight training schools,’’ Mr Jennings said, but if the ­Chinese acquired flight training schools to the point where there was a dependence on it, “the aggregation ­effect of that could be negative from a government perspective’’. Flying training is seen as vital to allow Australia to keep up with the increasing demand for pilots, with predictions of a major shortage in coming years.

[url=http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/1bf0f9ac13252e647fbcf44d8b0c60ac][Image: 1bf0f9ac13252e647fbcf44d8b0c60ac?width=650]
 
The landmark study by the ­Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics also raised industry fears about the cost of pilot and maintenance training, soaring airport charges and recent regulatory changes that were “not supported by adequate justification”.

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association chief executive Ben Morgan said he believed more than 50 per cent of all flight training in Australia was now being carried out by foreign companies, and most of them were Chinese.

He said it was “realistic” to predict the industry could be entirely foreign-owned in the next 10 years. “The Chinese are cleaning up,” he said. “Australia is selling out its flight training industry to foreign interests.”

Chinese airlines have been investing heavily in Australian flight training in recent years. In 2015, a China Eastern Airlines subsidiary bought a 50 per cent stake in CAE’s Melbourne training school. Its rival, China Southern Airlines, owns 50 per cent of a West Australian academy.

One of the biggest regional schools, Australian International Aviation College in Port Macquarie, is now owned by Hainan Airlines after the local operator ran into financial trouble in 2014.

The Chinese sale was facilitated by the federal government’s Austrade agency.

The business is now planning an $18 million training facility at Kempsey airport to train Chinese students.

Dick Smith, a former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, blamed the destruction of the industry on the former Howard government’s directive to CASA to ignore costs in relation to air safety, which he said had led to the adoption of the world’s most expensive regulations.

“Australian companies are going broke because of paperwork and red tape,” he said. “Now we have a shortage of ­pilots. Does it matter that in five years … we will have pilots from developing countries — from India, Indonesia and China — flying our airlines?”

Mr Smith said he was also concerned that Australian flight training companies were unable to get approval from China to train ­Chinese students, in the same way Chinese-run schools do in ­Australia.

Mr Morgan, of AOPA, welcomed the appointment this week of Barnaby Joyce as Transport Minister and called on him to urgently address how the local flight training industry could deliver crews for Australian airlines rather than relying on Asian and African pilots.

He said CASA should allow independent flight instructors to be used by smaller businesses, noting that 70 per cent of training in the US was conducted by independent instructors.

“If you are not an organisation with a bucket of cash, there’s no way you can get involved in flight training,” he said.

“We used to be a leader in flight training but we have created an expensive and cumbersome system.”

A CASA spokesman said the concept of independent flight instructors was raised during consultations but was not widely supported at the time.

“If the aviation community believes the concept of independent instructors needs to be looked at again, CASA is willing to listen to constructive suggestions,” he said.

Industry veteran John Douglas, the former head of the Royal Aero Club of WA, said conditions were the worst he had seen in 50 years.

He said the number of training hours a year at the club had fallen from 36,000 hours a year to 16,000 over the past two decades.

Mr Douglas slammed new CASA requirements for schools to spend money to gain new certification for training. “The cost of compliance is killing the industry,” he said.

Bill Whitworth, the owner of Whitworth Aviation at Bankstown Airport, recently agreed to sell his troubled business to a Chinese company. “They want to get a foothold here at Bankstown Airport,” he said. “They want to bring students down and train them, starting with 30 students.”

Mr Whitworth, who has been teaching flying since 1965, said his decision to sell was driven by soaring costs and changes to the system of government loans for students.

Another long-term operator at Bankstown, Aminta Hennessy, said businesses were also being hurt by rising airport fees and charges.

She said she had been recently approached by foreign companies to sell.

The chief executive of Melbourne Flight Training, Glen Buckley, said he had received five offers from Chinese companies to buy up to 20 per cent of his business, but he had so far resisted the temptation to sell.

Additional reporting: Sid Maher



Merry Xmas All!  Big Grin  

..Oh and TICK...TOCK Barnaby... Rolleyes

[Image: Untitled_Clipping_100117_112009_PM.jpg]


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
MT/BJ Govt Aviation report card - Part IV

(12-23-2017, 09:00 AM)Peetwo Wrote: Via the Weekend Oz today  Wink :


New CASA regulations blow training costs sky-high
[Image: 2daa3e32acc52642e4e8e533e1a910cd?width=650]
Glen Buckley of Melbourne Flight Training school says he paid $700,000 to comply with new CASA regulations. Picture: Aaron Francis
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM December 23, 2017
  • ANDREW BURRELL
    [Image: andrew_burrell.png]
    WA Chief Reporter
    Perth
    @AndrewBurrell7

One of Australia’s most experienced flight trainers, Glen Buckley, says he has just spent a “staggering” $700,000 to comply with new regulations imposed on the industry by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

And it almost broke him.

“The cost (of complying) was much, much higher than I’d expected,” he said. “I would have ­exited the industry if I had known it was going to be that much.”

The Weekend Australian has spoken to many smaller industry players who are highly critical of the new regulations and the hugely increased cost of compliance, but few are prepared to criticise CASA for fear of being targeted.

Mr Buckley, the chief executive of Melbourne Flight Training, one of the larger firms, said he had spent $700,000 moving to CASA’s new scheme that governs training.

His salary bill has risen from $1 million a year to $1.3m because of the requirement for more staff and the increased regulatory burden.

He was concerned the extra ­expenditure was not the most cost-effective way to increase­ ­safety.

Under the new system, all of Australia’s 350 flight training organisations had to decide by September 1 whether they wished to operate under a lower classification, known as Part 141, or a higher classification, Part 142.

A Part 142 school will be able to train pilots for a shorter syllabus of 150 hours of training, compared with 200 hours under Part 141.

Mr Buckley said he had had no option but to become a Part 142 school so he could continue to offer the 150-hour course. “The 150-hour course makes up 90 per cent of my revenue, and no business could afford to lose 90 per cent of its revenue and expect to survive,” he said.

Although Mr Buckley complied, fewer than 10 per cent of training businesses had moved to the new system, forcing CASA to delay the deadline for a year Mr Buckley predicted many businesses, especially smaller ones, would be forced to close in coming months because of the cost of compliance.

“Schools delivering the 150-hour syllabus will lose that approval in September next year and customers will gravitate to the larger 142 schools to access the 150-hour course, which is about $15,000 cheaper than the 200-hour course,” he said.

“This will impact many schools, especially those in rural areas that can’t afford the transition to a Part 142 organisation.”

A CASA spokesman said the regulations were introduced in September 2014 and the agency had consulted widely. “The transition for a flying school to Parts 141 and 142 has been made much easier and cost-efficient,” he said.

CASA had also removed impediments to flying training organisations that wished to set up in remote areas, he said. Some flying schools had transitioned to Part 141 recently and CASA was receiving “very positive” feedback.



& Sandy in response:

Alexander


“CASA had also removed impediments to flying training organisations that wished to set up in remote areas, he said. Some flying schools had transitioned to Part 141 recently and CASA was receiving “very positive” feedback.” I know one senior instructor had to put $8000 up front for a flying school application still no approval 18 months on where in the USA that instructor would have been underway with no fee or the Australia famous ‘Air Operators Certificate’. 

Regarding the quote, I’ve read some utter rubbish from CASA in my 50 years in General Aviation. This one gets the prize raspberry for 2017.

There used to be flying schools everywhere, now regulated practically out of existence especially out in the bush where the need is greatest. Great to see some reporting of probably the worst case of bureaucratic overreach in Australia’s history. Alex in the Rises

+

One more thing, CASA claims there are 350 flying schools. Hmm, nice round number. For years I tried to get the numbers of flying schools from CASA in order to compare and understand the disastrous decline of the flying training industry. 

They always told me these figures were unavailable. The same goes for the question how many Aviation Security Identification Cards, now around $283 every two years irrespective of flying qualifications, age or CASA history, have been issued to pilots with a comparison over the last ten years. Not available, excuse is that’s Department of Infrastructure. CASA’s figures have been shown to be dodgy in the past like counting the activation of a boat electronic survival beacon as one from an aircraft when padding out figures to argue for a more expensive system to be foisted on General Aviation aircraft.

Sad but true, you just can’t believe what this mega $millions bureaucracy puts out through its PR outlet. Thanks be to the Australian for at last prising open the lid. Standby for more CASA story telling. Alex in the Rises



China swoops on flight schools to solve pilot shortage

[Image: ad8d1b20afd41396b8a8f6872d086a99?width=650]
Aminta Hennessy of Clamback & Hennessy at Bankstown. Picture: John Feder
  • The Australian
  • 12:00AM December 23, 2017
  • ANDREW BURRELL
    [/url]

Chinese companies are swooping on Australian flight training schools increasingly stricken by skyrocketing costs and crippling red tape, amid predictions that the nation will be forced to import scores of commercial pilots from Asia and Africa in coming years.

The Weekend Australian has spoken to several of the country’s 350 aviation training businesses that say they are unprofitable and are considering selling to the ­Chinese. Scores of local firms have folded in recent years and several of the larger schools are now foreign-owned.

China will need an estimated 110,000 new pilots by 2035 but is relying on other countries for most of its training because of its heavy smog, military-controlled airspace and lack of qualified teachers who speak English.

A federal government report this week confirmed the local industry’s drastic decline, showing the number of general aviation flying hours in Australia fell by 40 per cent — from 500,000 hours a year to 300,000 hours a year — between 2010 and 2015.

The increasing foreign ownership in the flight training industry — particularly the concentration of Chinese acquisitions — is raising concern among senior security experts.

Peter Jennings, the executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said the “aggregation effect’’ could be of the same concern in flight training as it had been to Scott Morrison in other sectors.

“It may be acceptable to own one or two flight training schools,’’ Mr Jennings said, but if the ­Chinese acquired flight training schools to the point where there was a dependence on it, “the aggregation ­effect of that could be negative from a government perspective’’. Flying training is seen as vital to allow Australia to keep up with the increasing demand for pilots, with predictions of a major shortage in coming years.

[url=http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/1bf0f9ac13252e647fbcf44d8b0c60ac][Image: 1bf0f9ac13252e647fbcf44d8b0c60ac?width=650]
 
The landmark study by the ­Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics also raised industry fears about the cost of pilot and maintenance training, soaring airport charges and recent regulatory changes that were “not supported by adequate justification”.

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association chief executive Ben Morgan said he believed more than 50 per cent of all flight training in Australia was now being carried out by foreign companies, and most of them were Chinese.

He said it was “realistic” to predict the industry could be entirely foreign-owned in the next 10 years. “The Chinese are cleaning up,” he said. “Australia is selling out its flight training industry to foreign interests.”

Chinese airlines have been investing heavily in Australian flight training in recent years. In 2015, a China Eastern Airlines subsidiary bought a 50 per cent stake in CAE’s Melbourne training school. Its rival, China Southern Airlines, owns 50 per cent of a West Australian academy.

One of the biggest regional schools, Australian International Aviation College in Port Macquarie, is now owned by Hainan Airlines after the local operator ran into financial trouble in 2014.

The Chinese sale was facilitated by the federal government’s Austrade agency.

The business is now planning an $18 million training facility at Kempsey airport to train Chinese students.

Dick Smith, a former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, blamed the destruction of the industry on the former Howard government’s directive to CASA to ignore costs in relation to air safety, which he said had led to the adoption of the world’s most expensive regulations.

“Australian companies are going broke because of paperwork and red tape,” he said. “Now we have a shortage of ­pilots. Does it matter that in five years … we will have pilots from developing countries — from India, Indonesia and China — flying our airlines?”

Mr Smith said he was also concerned that Australian flight training companies were unable to get approval from China to train ­Chinese students, in the same way Chinese-run schools do in ­Australia.

Mr Morgan, of AOPA, welcomed the appointment this week of Barnaby Joyce as Transport Minister and called on him to urgently address how the local flight training industry could deliver crews for Australian airlines rather than relying on Asian and African pilots.

He said CASA should allow independent flight instructors to be used by smaller businesses, noting that 70 per cent of training in the US was conducted by independent instructors.

“If you are not an organisation with a bucket of cash, there’s no way you can get involved in flight training,” he said.

“We used to be a leader in flight training but we have created an expensive and cumbersome system.”

A CASA spokesman said the concept of independent flight instructors was raised during consultations but was not widely supported at the time.

“If the aviation community believes the concept of independent instructors needs to be looked at again, CASA is willing to listen to constructive suggestions,” he said.

Industry veteran John Douglas, the former head of the Royal Aero Club of WA, said conditions were the worst he had seen in 50 years.

He said the number of training hours a year at the club had fallen from 36,000 hours a year to 16,000 over the past two decades.

Mr Douglas slammed new CASA requirements for schools to spend money to gain new certification for training. “The cost of compliance is killing the industry,” he said.

Bill Whitworth, the owner of Whitworth Aviation at Bankstown Airport, recently agreed to sell his troubled business to a Chinese company. “They want to get a foothold here at Bankstown Airport,” he said. “They want to bring students down and train them, starting with 30 students.”

Mr Whitworth, who has been teaching flying since 1965, said his decision to sell was driven by soaring costs and changes to the system of government loans for students.

Another long-term operator at Bankstown, Aminta Hennessy, said businesses were also being hurt by rising airport fees and charges.

She said she had been recently approached by foreign companies to sell.

The chief executive of Melbourne Flight Training, Glen Buckley, said he had received five offers from Chinese companies to buy up to 20 per cent of his business, but he had so far resisted the temptation to sell.

Additional reporting: Sid Maher



Merry Xmas All!  Big Grin  

..Oh and TICK...TOCK Barnaby... Rolleyes

[Image: Untitled_Clipping_100117_112009_PM.jpg]


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
MT/BJ Govt Aviation report card - Part V

Via the Airports thread:

Quote:The slow death of the local airport - [Image: confused.gif]


Between cashed up developers, Chinese investors and encroaching building/wind farm developments - what used to be regarded as essential infrastructure - the local town airport will continue to go the way of the Dodo bird... [Image: confused.gif]

Via the Oz today:

Quote: Wrote:Aviation outrage over Chinese ownership of Merredin airport
[Image: bfe3d60cb3881aac1a05e0f941e4c10a?width=650]
The sign outside Merredin aerodrome. Picture: Colin Murty

The Australian
12:00AM December 27, 2017
ANDREW BURRELL
[Image: andrew_burrell.png]
WA Chief Reporter
Perth

@AndrewBurrell7



Merredin airport in Western Australia is effectively under the control of a Chinese government enterprise, prompting outrage in aviation circles, as safety concerns shut down its pilot training school.

The airport’s runways, control tower, hangars and all of its assets are 50 per cent owned, and may soon be fully owned, by China’s biggest airline, state-owned China Southern Airlines.

In 1993, the secretive company quietly paid $1 to the WA government to lease the airport for 100 years to use as a base to train thousands of Chinese pilots for employment in the world’s fastest- growing aviation market.

In recent years it has owned the flight school with Canadian company CAE.

So far, more than 2000 pilots have graduated from the ­facility, making it China Southern Airlines’ biggest training base in the world.

For an Australian town’s sole airstrip to be effectively controlled by the Chinese government is unusual.

Anyone who wishes to land at the aerodrome, 260km east of Perth, must seek approval from the flying school. Locals say permission has never been denied, but aviation veteran and businessman Dick Smith believes the airport should not be owned by a foreign company or government.

“It is outrageous that an Aussie pilot can’t go to a country airport without getting approval from the Chinese to land there,” he said.

“I’ve never heard of this happening anywhere.” In recent months, however, the Chinese flying school has suspended its operations in WA after the Civil Aviation Safety Authority raised safety concerns.

Aviation industry sources say the company has continued to pay millions of dollars in wages — without any students — since March this year.

One source said he believed a dispute between Guangzhou-based China Southern Airlines and CAE could lead to China Southern taking full ownership of the flying school within months.

A spokesman for China Southern West Australian Flying College declined to comment.

Merredin shire president Ken Hooper said nobody in town had been able to find out when the flying school would reopen.

“It’s quite important for our economy here but we just can’t get any information,” he said.

A CASA spokesman said the regulator would not publicly discuss details of its dealings with aviation organisations unless serious action was taken, such as suspending or cancelling a certificate.

“CASA and China Southern have been working to address identified safety and regulatory issues over a period of time,” the spokesman said. “CASA is hopeful that China Southern can meet all requirements as soon as possible.”

There is broader concern in the aviation industry about growing foreign ownership and control of pilot training schools in Australia.

With a looming shortage of commercial pilots predicted, there are fears Australia will have to import pilots while foreign-controlled pilot schools in this country send their graduates to China and elsewhere in Asia. At the same time, flight schools claim they are being crippled by skyrocketing costs and over-regulation.

& also via NBN news:
Quote:[Image: GLEN-FLIGHT.png]

AAFT ABANDONS GLEN INNES FLIGHT TRAINING SCHOOL
Amelia Bernasconi December 23, 2017 North West News Leave a comment

Australia Asia Flight Training has withdrawn its interest from the Glen Innes Flight Training School.

In a letter to Glen Innes Severn Council, the A-A-F-T stated after 12 years of attempting to realise an independent residential pilot training academy in regional Australia, it has decided to abandon the project as of Decemeber 31st.

Company Chairman Kingsley Mundey says the land, lease and approved DA will be handed back to Council.

Mayor Steve Toms says council was disappointed to receive the news and will explore other options for the site in the New Year.

NOTE: VISION ONLY

http://www.nbnnews.com.au/2017/12/23/aaf...ng-school/
 
MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
MT/BJ Govt Aviation report card - Part VI

Reference Re Joyce post - Update: Aviation industry in crisis.

Following on from that shameful exposé, I note that the 'happy little chappy' from Tassie has backed up with this offering, courtesy of the Oz Wink :  

Quote:Aussie pilots land $750k in China

[Image: 5fa17ea8b0bb1d49632b55027f022aa0]12:00amMATTHEW DENHOLM

Chinese airlines are poaching experienced Australian pilots by doubling their pay-packets, threatening a pilot shortage.


Chinese airlines are poaching ­experienced Australian pilots by offering more than $750,000 a year, leading to concerns pilot shortages may spread from ­regional Australia to major routes.

Combined with a decline in Australian pilot training, the ­lucrative Chinese contracts have prompted some pilots to warn of potential shortages of major airline captains amid a developing global shortage.

Captain Murray Butt, president of the Australian and International Pilots Association, representing 2250 Qantas Group pilots, told The Australian Chinese airlines were offering salaries for domestic pilots beyond the capacity of Australia’s main carriers.

“They are talking about 737 training captains earning ­upwards of $US600,000 ($769,000) tax-free and that’s going to be difficult even for the major Australian airlines to cope with,” he said. “The evidence is out there. People have been talking about a worldwide shortage for a long time and we’ve been a little bit protected because of the number of Australians that have been overseas and have wanted to ... come back.”

It is understood significant numbers of Qantas pilots granted leave without pay to work with overseas carriers during a cost-cutting period are now returning, with pilots again in demand. While this is helping to offset any attrition for Qantas, the decline in pilot training — and the purchase of Australian pilot schools by Chinese airlines — has raised concerns about pilot numbers in the long term. “That’s the problem you have when you are not feeding (new pilots) in from the bottom and allowing people to go through a system to get to the top,” Mr Butt said.

Industry sources told The Australian experienced pilots could earn more operating 737s on Chinese domestic routes than at the controls of Qantas’s new Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

Globally advertised 737 captain positions for Chinese domestic routes offer salaries in excess of $400,000; roughly double the salary of a Jetstar or Tigerair 737 captain (about $200,000, according to industry sources).

Sources said Dreamliner captains were expected to earn about $330,000. In China, Xiamen Air is offering $400,000 for 737 captains, Suparna Airlines $415,000 and Fuzhou Airlines $375,000 for EMB190 captains.

It is estimated that China will need an extra 110,000 pilots by 2035, a demand it cannot meet at home. Mr Butt said he recently ­attended a conference where representatives from five Chinese airlines “all spoke about how they expected to double within the next five years and … were just there to recruit”.

The Australian yesterday revealed government plans to allow regional airlines to hire foreign ­pilots on two-year work visas, from next month, to overcome a shortage of pilots on regional routes, but Mr Butt’s union has questioned whether the right calibre of pilots will be found, given global wages competition.

Captain David Booth, president of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots, representing about 4500 commercial pilots, had not heard of Chinese companies ­offering as much as $769,000, but said Chinese pay packets of $400,000 were on offer on websites pitched to Australian pilots.

He said some Australian pilots were taking up such offers, but that most would likely be deterred by the loss of their airline seniority status on return to Australia.

“China is offering 100 per cent more than everyone else to fly a narrow-bodied aeroplane, but flying there also has its unique challenges,” he said.

Qantas Group spokesman ­Andrew McGinnes said the airline had no difficulty attracting ­pilots, with a recent recruitment drive attracting 1000 applications for 170 positions.

Virgin Australia chief pilot Mike Fitzgerald said while pilots were in “high demand” globally, the airline could compete.

“Virgin Australia has a number of pilot recruitment drivers including our cadetship program, the work we do with universities through their pilot training programs, as well as using jobseeker platforms to advertise for experienced pilots,” he said. “All Virgin Australia pilots ­receive international-standard training, a competitive salary and opportunities to fly a range of aircraft.”

Opposition transport spokesman Anthony Albanese said the Turnbull government had “dropped the ball when it comes to workforce training in aviation”.

“Australia must ensure we have enough pilots and engineers to ensure the ongoing success of our industry,” he said.

Albo said - “dropped the ball when it comes to workforce training in aviation”.

“Australia must ensure we have enough pilots and engineers to ensure the ongoing success of our industry,”

Sheer, utter hypocrisy from the former miniscule for non-aviation, who did as much to contribute to the current aviation cluster-duck, merely by hiring one John McCormick as CASA DAS and one Martin (Beaker) Dolan as Chief (Top cover) Commissioner to the ATSB.

Here is Albo singing McCormick's praises in a bollocks 2014 APH speech in response to the ASRR and TSBC reports Dodgy :



  

&.. from Sandy in response to same... Wink :

Quote:Opposition transport spokesman Anthony Albanese said the Turnbull government had “dropped the ball when it comes to workforce training in aviation”.

The former Minister who allowed CASA to have a one off increase in the fuel levy for extra safety studies. CASA promptly put on nearly another two hundred staff and in 2014 came out with the worst, most expensive and almost impossible flying training rules hence the death of General Aviation and pilot shortage. Admittedly just part of CASA’s great make work rules rewrite stared 1988 and still not finished, but nevertheless well done Mr Albanese for your part in the scandal that is the maladministration of aviation in Australia. Alex in the Rises

P2 comment - On the search 4 IP thread there is a perfect example of how Albo's 'hands off' and leaving it to JMAC & Beaker policy has negatively impacted on our aviation safety standards: PelAir MKII: SMS a lip service exercise - Part III



MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Update: 04/01/2018

Almost missed this one.. Blush

Via the DT.. Wink

Quote:Foreign pilots decision puts our safety at risk

[Image: 80e6f0665b4a4906b920eeae649162f5?width=150]
Nick Dyrenfurth
January 4, 2018 12:00am





THE Turnbull government think they can play the Australian people like a piano.

In April, Prime Minister announced a so-called ‘ban’ on 457 foreign worker visas. It would ‘ensure Australian workers are given the absolute first priority for jobs.’ Yet an almost identical Temporary Work Visas became law at the same time.

Turnbull went on: ‘We are making it easier for Australians to find work and we have restored order to our borders so we can ensure foreign workers have an opportunity to arrive through the appropriate channels.’

Note the stress on ‘restoring order to our borders’ and ‘absolute first priority for jobs’. Because just this week comes news that foreign pilots will be allowed into Australia on two-year visas to address what Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton’s suggests is a growing shortage of local pilots. ‘Airline pilot’ will be found on a revised list of skilled occupations allowed into Australia under the list of new TWVs to be announced next month.

The shortage has, according to industry lobbyists and the government, already led to flight cancellations, not that any concrete evidence has been provided.

[Image: 56d386013296f4c6253ab4ea05cb1813?width=650]We should make it easier for student pilots like Claire Gipps, Nick Evans, Bec Spencer and Noah Mirosch to get their licences rather than importing foreign pilots. (Pic: Mark Calleja)

Even if the problem exists this solution is a sugar-hit which masks a larger issue. Why in the first place are we not properly investing in the domestic training of domestic pilots to fill labour market gaps?

Unemployment is at 7 per cent, not to mention massive underemployment, particularly in regional areas.

And why are we allowing our best and most experienced pilots to be poached by overseas carriers, notably Chinese companies?

The same goes for ownership of our airports.

It is a national disgrace that we are not training enough or retaining skilled pilots for our airlines when they should be expanding into a booming Asian market. We need government, business and unions to come together to fix this mess. Our safety depends upon it.

There is a real question mark over the qualifications and expertise of the foreign pilots flown in under the new visa system. Just ask the pilots who fly our iconic Qantas airline who have already voiced serious concerns. Every time we step on a plane we are told that our safety is their number one priority. Just who are we importing to fly millions of Australians across the expanses of our wide brown land?

In particular, regional flyers have reason for concern. This at a time when aviation safety has repeatedly been called into question as the Turnbull government under-resources both AirServices and Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

[Image: 9ec54275ff2938b6820ad2568161472c?width=650]Australian and International Pilots Association president, Captain Murray Butt, has spoken of his concerns about the foreign pilot visas. (Pic: Justin Lloyd)

There are legitimate fears about what these foreign pilots will be paid too, at a time when wages growth is at its lowest ever recorded levels. Can the government provide a rock-solid guarantee that these pilots will not be used to undermine hard-earned wages and conditions of our local workers?

That doesn’t just go for pilots. It owes the same iron-clad guarantee to our hardworking airline hosties, baggage handlers and aircraft maintenance workers. Otherwise the idea of having foreign pilots is simply a smokescreen for the Liberals’ ideological obsession with creating a low-wage, insecure work, race-to-the-bottom economy.

Peter Dutton has made much of his role in the Abbott government’s success in stopping unauthorised boat arrivals to Australia through a tough policy combination of offshore detention and turnbacks. He is meant to be the nation’s tough cop-on-the-beat, protecting us against very real terrorist threats. Yet now appears Dutton’s plan for offshore retention.

Malcolm Turnbull’s main protector doesn’t want to protect the Australian public when they are flying, as so many of us are over the Christmas and New Year period.


Offshore retention entails people not trained to our highest safety standards and on lower wages being brought into the country and in charge of the precious human cargo navigating our skies.


Nick Dyrenfurth is Executive Director of the John Curtin Research Centre


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
Alphabet wars continue on 457 pilots - Confused

Via the Oz:


Union wants bush pilots ahead of foreigners

[Image: 21293d6175dd1eca82d55ce717ce8f3a?width=650]
Jesse Moll flies Navajo Chieftain ferrying remote workers. Picture: Justin Kennedy.

The Australian
12:00AM January 19, 2018
[Image: matthew_denholm.png]
MATTHEW DENHOLM
Tasmania correspondent Hobart
@MatthewRDenholm

Australia’s largest pilot union is demanding a review of the use of foreign pilots in regional areas, ­arguing there are hundreds of young bush pilots who could fill the vacancies.

The Australian Federation of Air Pilots, which represents more than 4500 commercial pilots, says the decision to grant two-year visas to foreign pilots on ­regional routes was a cop-out and a blow to hundreds of young pilots desperate for airline jobs.

“There are hundreds of Australian pilots across the nation who are qualified, ready, willing and able to fill these airline roles,” federation president David Booth said. “These are local Australians who are coming through the training system and flying up in remote areas in the Northern Territory, Queensland and the Kimberley.

“There are many more with dormant licences who could easily reactivate their careers if ­demand warranted. Furthermore, there are many Australian expat pilots eager to return home to Australia after years of being abroad. This latter category are willing to take a junior position just to get back home.”

Some young bush pilots, such as those flying charters or shifting workers in and out of remote worksites, already have sufficient experience to work on regional passenger routes, while others could be supported to gain the necessarily levels.

Mr Booth accused regional airlines, which lobbied the Turnbull government for the visas after the abolition of 457 visas, of preferring to replace ­experienced ­pilots with overseas captains ­rather than investing in training first officers for those roles.

Regional airline pilots are being poached by the major airlines for the big city routes, as global demand for pilots increases and Qantas shifts some 737 crews up to its new 787 Dreamliners.

Regional Aviation Association of Australia chief executive Mike Higgins rejected the union’s claims, arguing that the speed of the attrition of regional captains and constraints of pilot training regulation meant foreign captains were needed as an urgent fix.

“Whilst there are young guys out there, they simply are not qualified enough, or experienced enough, to move across,” Mr Higgins said. “Therefore the 457 visa pilots we’re looking for are only experienced captains. They can mentor and train the young guys to come through.”

Mr Booth said the definition of “regional” for the purposes of granting visas to foreign pilots was anywhere outside Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne.

“It’s ­impossible to say Perth, Adelaide, Darwin are regional areas,” Mr Booth said. “We say a better way for the industry to deal with this is to train Australians into the positions, improve the working conditions (at regional airlines), and that will drive better retention.”

Jesse Moll, 30, who moved to Darwin from Perth to take up a job flying staff in and out of sandal­wood plantations in a seven-seater Navajo Chieftain, is one young pilot ready to move up to regional airlines. “To go up to a turbo prop (passenger plane), I wouldn’t need much at all,” he said. “I’ve applied a couple of times to a few places and I haven’t got the hours just yet. Some are asking for 1500 (flying hours), some are asking 1000. I’m just short of 1000 but I have enough twin (engine) time.”

Mr Moll, who has had his commercial pilot’s licence for about three years, said it was disappointing to see regional airlines import foreign pilots. He said airlines needed to lift salaries and were partly to blame for the shortage.

“Surely if they had a bit of ­forward thinking they could have seen they would need more pilots soon, ­espec­ially as a lot are going to be retiring,” he said.
However, unions and employers argue for streamlining of what they see as overly burdensome regulation recently imposed by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on pilot licensing.

Mr Booth said this had led to “serious delays” for “no safety benefit”. “They’ve imposed a huge amount of red tape on to ­especially the smaller operators, who can ill afford it. For example, if you flew small turbo props you used to have to do one instrument rating flight test a year. That changed to requiring you to do as many checked flights as types of aircraft you fly, so you might have to do four or five of these tests a year, at a cost of $5000 a test.”

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton did not respond to ­requests for comment but has defended the use of visas for pilots as balancing the need to give priority to local workers while also meeting skills shortages.




& from Jamie Freed, via Reuters this AM Wink :



Outback Australians grounded as pilot crisis worsens

Jamie Freed

(Reuters) - A recruitment drive by Australia’s Qantas Airways Ltd (QAN.AX) after a seven-year hiatus is exacerbating shortages of pilots at regional air services that provide a lifeline to remote communities in the country’s sparsely populated Outback.

[Image: ?m=02&d=20180118&t=2&i=1223167989&r=LYNX...25U&w=1280]

A Qantas Airways Airbus A330 aircraft can be seen on the tarmac near the domestic terminal at Sydney Airport in Australia, November 30, 2017. REUTERS/David Gray

As airlines from Asia, Europe and North America vie for pilots amid a global shortage, there is growing concern among people in Australia’s vast interior who rely on flights to major cities for medical treatment.

Ewen McPhee, a doctor in the remote mining town of Emerald, said that when he referred patients for specialist care they often needed to travel nearly 1,000 km (621 miles) to the nearest big city, Brisbane.

“Then they have to fly,” he said. “It is an 11-hour drive otherwise for an ill patient with quite a significant problem.”

Over the last four months the 80-minute flights have not been as reliable as usual, McPhee said, with last-minute cancellations for lack of pilots.

Regional Australia’s predicament illustrates the broader risks the aviation industry faces from a lack of pilots as the number of annual air passengers globally is expected to nearly double to 7.8 billion over the next 20 years.

Around the world, airlines will be forced to review the wages, training and conditions they offer younger pilots as they open new routes and pursue ambitious expansion plans.

Australia’s pilot shortage closely parallels one in the United States, where major airlines are on a hiring spree and regional carriers like Seattle-based Horizon Air have canceled hundreds of flights because of a lack of aviators.

Both countries have a culture of pilots paying up to $100,000 of their own money for training and flying for years at regional carriers on low pay to gain experience to be hired by major airlines.

To help fill in the gaps, the Australian government has reopened two-year visas for foreign pilots. Regional airlines however say longer visas are required to attract pilots from overseas.



MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
Par Avion steps up to the plate - Wink

Via the Oz:



Small airline Par Avion spreads its pilot training wings

[Image: 3352d09358d3553d7d63e1df020f3ac0?width=650]

A Par Avion aircraft over Tasmania.

The Australian12:00AM January 23, 2018

[Image: matthew_denholm.png]
MATTHEW DENHOLM
Tasmania correspondent Hobart
@MatthewRDenholm


A small Tasmanian airline is to double its pilot training school and is urging reform to ensure Australia cashes in on the strong global demand for pilots.

As airlines complain of a regional pilot shortage, and overseas airlines poach Australian pilots, Par Avion Flight Training, at Cambridge Aerodrome, near Hobart, will this week unveil plans to train about 100 pilots a year.

The company will offer two diploma courses — a commercial pilot licence diploma and another on instrument rating, upskilling qualified pilots to fly at night and in poor weather.

Managing director Shannon Wells said the courses would be offered under the Vocational Education and Training Student Loans scheme, meaning graduating pilots would not pay the $90,000 to $100,000 cost until they starting earning.

“This … will provide jobs locally, allow student pilots to remain in Tasmania to train and it will help Australia address the national shortage of trained commercial pilots,” Mr Wells said. “We plan to expand our training classrooms and facilities at Cambridge, including the purchase of new aircraft, to meet the growing demand for places.”

Par Avion, which flies regional routes and charters in Tasmania, had been approved to provide pilot training to overseas students, and was in discussion with a Southeast Asian airline about training its pilots in Tasmania. “We are in advanced discussions with some international schools and airlines to help them meet increasing demand for training commercial pilots and flight instructors,” Mr Wells said.

It is understood Par Avion is close to a deal with a Malaysia-based airline. Combined with the VET courses, the developments are a rare win for Australian pilot schools. Some pilot schools in other states have been purchased by foreign interests.

Mr Wells said pilot training was complex, with providers having to meet the dual requirements of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Australian Skills Quality Authority. While each brought valuable contributions, he believed some “harmonisation” of requirements would help the industry expand.

There was huge scope for Australia to dramatically expand pilot training for domestic and overseas airlines. “There is nothing physically or logistically stopping us training more pilots up; it’s just the paper work. If that can be brought to order there’s no reason why every airport in the nation couldn’t set something up. There’s enough demand,” Mr Wells said.



Top stuff Shannon... Wink

Also yesterday from the Oz:

Quote:Love is in the air with China

[Image: f16b553106777d25ead71beae81212a5]12:00amGEOFF CHAMBERS, EMILY RITCHIE

The number of flights to and from China has soared, and Australian pilots are reaping the benefits.


The number of flights to and from China has soared to almost 2.7 million passenger movements a year, fuelling the poaching by ­Chinese airlines of experienced Australian pilots.

Passenger capacity has tripled in the past decade and risen again since China struck the first agreement of its kind in December 2016 to allow unlimited flights between Australia and China.

Trade Minister Steve Ciobo said China was poised to replace New Zealand as Australia’s top tourism market due to the deal.

Analysis by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade using Department of Immigration and Border Protection data shows the greatest rise has been in Chinese travellers to Australia.

The number of foreigners travelling on Australian airlines (Qantas) to and from China jumped from 123,800 to 445,000 between 2007 and 2016.

During the same period, the number of passengers flying on Chinese airlines jumped from 590,300 to 2.225 million (including 659,000 Australians).

“China has been gaining on New Zealand for more than a decade,” Mr Ciobo said. “Importantly, this growth is set to continue with China’s increased prosperity forecast to fuel another trebling of numbers over the next decade to 3.9 million by 2026-27.”

For Australian pilot Brett Austen, 51, the boom has had benefits.

Taking up a position with China’s Tianjin Airlines meant higher pay, faster career progression, flying larger aircraft, generous annual leave and the prospect of early retirement.

He has also fallen in love and married Chinese woman Rui Li, with whom he has a four-week-old daughter, Mikaela.

Tianjin Airlines has expanded from a fleet of small Embraer 190 and Fairchild Dornier aircraft when Mr Austen joined in 2010 to Airbus A320s and A330s with international routes to Japan, South Korea, Russia, Thailand and now London, Auckland, Melbourne and Sydney.

Captain Austen’s career has grown with the airline and he now commands the A330 on international routes. He was the first foreign pilot employed by the airline but there are now more than 100.

The Australian last month revealed Chinese airlines were poaching experienced Australian pilots by offering in some cases more than $750,000 a year, sparking concerns that pilot shortages in regional Australia could spread to major domestic routes.

While it would be difficult to return to Australia and step into the same role on the same aircraft, Captain Austen said China was attractive for pilots nearing the end of their careers.

“Once you go to China it is very difficult to come back. Airlines in Australia are based on seniority, so all the experience you have means nothing. You will start as first officer again with the major Australian airlines and maybe work back up to captain in eight to 10 years. For me, even though working in China was unplanned, it has given me great opportunities that were not possible in Australia,” he said.

Captain Austen moved to China in January 2010 after the collapse of his employer Sky Air World in Brisbane during the global financial crisis. His contract is a typical Chinese airline deal that allows for 110 holiday days a year and pays more than $US300,000 ($375,000) a year after tax.

“For money and vacation, these are one of the best contracts in the world today. This is the reason pilots are heading to China for work,” he said.

Mr Ciobo said the government’s “historic aviation agreement with China” had helped drive the record influx of Chinese visitors and the explosion in flights from China.

Mr Ciobo, who led a tourism delegation to China last year to explore opportunities arising from the agreement, said Chinese tourists had been the biggest spenders since 2011, racking up a record $10.3 billion in the year ending September 2017.

The DFAT trade report shows Australia’s total trade in goods and services has reached a record $735.5bn, headlined by a 16.8 per cent surge in exports to $373.2bn on the back of iron ore and coal.



MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Poms not keen on divorcing EASA  Huh

When you consider recent comments from our guru on such matters the Reverend Forsyth:  (Refer: The Rev is back banging the drum)

Quote:..The Abbott government’s air ­safety tsar has called for reform of “unnecessary” red tape stymieing aviation, urging a more “collaborative” approach by the “hard-line, bureaucratic” regulator.

David Forsyth, who chaired a 2013-14 review into air safety regulation, said needless red tape was still imposed across all areas of Civil Aviation Safety Authority regulation, four years after his ­report was delivered.

“Australia has quite a lot of unique regulations, unnecessarily so,” Mr Forsyth said. “It would be a good thing for Australia if we harmonised our regulations with overseas, particularly with the two big regulatory bodies around the world: the Federal Aviation Administration in the US and the European agency.

“We shouldn’t try to reinvent the wheel all the time and have something different and unique … because we don’t need to.”

Mr Forsyth said “unique” ­requirements existed “across the whole suite” of CASA regulation.

“(That is) operations, flying training, maintenance, air traffic control, the airports,” he said...


Now can anyone see the irony of the following Reuters article when compared to our bureaucratically embuggered, non-harmonised, isolationist policy in regards to aviation safety regulation and administration?
 
Via Reuters Wink :




EU could dash hopes for UK to remain in aviation safety agency


Julia Fioretti


4 Min Read

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Britain could be excluded from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) after it quits the EU, raising the prospect of increased certification costs for airlines and manufacturers and dashing London’s hopes of keeping its membership.

[Image: ?m=02&d=20180125&t=2&i=1225262216&r=LYNX...1IX&w=1280]

FILE PHOTO - An aircraft makes its approach to Heathrow airport in London, Britain, October 30 2017. REUTERS/Toby Melville

EASA ensures airlines respect safety rules and certifies aerospace products across the bloc, helping to bring down the costs of development and production within the industry. In addition, the EU has a bilateral agreement with the United States under which they accept each other’s certifications.

The EU is preparing its negotiating position for its future relationship with Britain and appears to be taking a hard line on aviation.

“UK membership of EASA is not possible,” the European Commission said in slides presented to member states last week which will inform its negotiating position for a transitional agreement and the future relationship with Britain.

The Commission sketched out a vision of the UK having an aviation agreement with the EU along the lines of those the bloc has with the United States and Canada.

Membership of EASA is contingent upon accepting the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union, something Britain has ruled out.

The British government, airlines, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have all called for Britain to remain a part of EASA once it quits the EU in March 2019, to ensure cooperation on safety continues and avoid increased certification costs.

Should the UK leave EASA, its manufacturers would have to pay for FAA certification to sell their products in the United States and maintenance facilities would have to pay to be certified as meeting FAA standards.

“It makes no sense to recreate a national regulator. At best, you replicate the vast majority of European regulation, and you’d have to do it over an extended period of time. At worst, you create unnecessary barriers,” CAA Chief Executive Andrew Haines said in a speech in September.

If Britain is not allowed to remain a part of EASA, the CAA would have to take over its responsibilities in making sure airlines respect safety rules and manufacturers and maintenance companies meet standards, raising questions about whether it has the capacity to do that.

Haines said the CAA was purposely not planning for that scenario “as it would be misleading to suggest that’s a viable option.”

UK aerospace industry body ADS, which counts Airbus (AIR.PA) as a member, said last week it would take approximately 5-10 years for the CAA to rebuild its safety regulation capability to take over EASA’s current responsibilities.

In the slides, the Commission says there could be a bilateral aviation safety agreement with the UK where both sides have separate certification systems. If there is “reciprocal trust”, there could be a simplified certification process of products from the other side, but no mutual recognition.

The head of the U.S. FAA was in Brussels in December to call for clarity on the safety regime Britain would operate under post Brexit, saying it would be highly costly for manufacturers if Britain left EASA as the FAA would have to make its own findings, “manufacturer by manufacturer.”

“Seeking new aviation arrangements is a top priority and we aim to have the new arrangements in place before the day of exit,” said a spokesman for Britain’s Department for Transport.



Safe skies are empty skies! - Dodgy



MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Courtesy Hitch off the Yaffa:

Quote:[Image: BITRE_report_2.jpg]The BITRE GA Study report was released in December 2017 after a 12-month study.

GA Study Report reflects Reality: Industry
30 January 2018

The BITRE GA Study report released in December last year is an accurate representation of the current state of the industry, but provides no answers, according to two of Australia's largest lobby groups.

The report came after a 12-month study into the GA industry by the Bureau of Infrastructure Transport and Regional Economics, which presented several conclusions and opportunities for government action.

Ken Cannane, Executive Director of the Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association (AMROBA), said the GA Study report accurately presented the current challenges facing the general aviation community.

"AMROBA is of the opinion that this study provides a fairly presentable report of the situation confronting general aviation in Australia even if it does not provide the answers to fix the decline that our members principally place on regulatory reform over the ages," he said.

"What the study clearly identifies is it is time for economic regulatory reform that will lower on-going costs to all aspects of the general aviation sectors including providing regulatory services in a timely commercial manner. Like the FAA modernisation of their regulatory environment, this study economically supports the transfer of CASA engineering functions and responsibilities to industry entities.

"AMROBA’s only concern is that this study could be used by the public service to not make the economic reforms that are necessary to create a sustainable and safer general aviation industry that would also meet government expectations of jobs and growth."

Cannane did express disappointment that the study failed to identify what he considers the root cause of the GA downturn: the removal of independent flying instructors.

"When I was in the CAA, we knew in the mid 1990s that the removal of the (ANR) independent flight instructor in 1988 was the real reason for the decline in pilot training/numbers," he said.

"Until re-introduced, based on the FAR Part 61 model, private flying and flight training will continue to decline. Independents kept flying clubs and regional access to flying training.

"They were the heart of GA."

Greg Russell, Honorary Chairman of The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF), said the study report not only reflected the reality for GA, but also highlighted the magnitude of the regulatory reform needed.

"What the report has done is recount a lot of what we already knew," he said. "Yes, the fleet's ageing and that's not getting any better, and there's has to be some strategies to help the industry start the process of rejuvenation.

"The issue of access to airports, and a myriad of things related to training and small private pilots out of some of these bigger airports. This has been an issue for some time.

"But for me one of the bigger conclusions relates to the safety regulator, and I think it just points again to the job that's ahead of CASA in terms of the reform program and its impact on the industry, and GA in particular."

Russell also said that a flagging GA sector has had a knock-on effect right across the entire aviation industry, which underlines the importance of GA

"We've looked in the past at various sectors of the aviation industry–the domestic, the regional and GA–and there's been a view that they are quite distinct sectors, when in fact they are a continuum, and an important continuum in the industry. A healthy GA is increasingly going to mean a healthy aviation industry right across the board."

When asked if the BITRE GA Study was the plan of action GA needed for recovery to begin, Russell was reserved in reply.

"There's a feeling of healthy scepticism still around the whole process," he said. "We'll study it further and consider the conclusions."

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...TfdRB39.99
MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
AAAA voice concerns for loss of CASA indemnity - Confused

Yet another potential nail in the industry coffin could be delivered if the aviation safety bureaucrats decide to do away with indemnifying authorised flight testing officers.

Via the Oz:   

Quote:Warnings over test indemnity plan

[Image: b7bd04d387ee452156951adcba646560]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH

Agricultural aircraft operators have warned of a ‘disastrous ­impact’ from abolishing CASA indemnity for pilot flight testers.




Agricultural aircraft operators have warned of a “disastrous ­impact”, including exacerbating the pilot shortage, from abolishing the indemnity provided by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for industry people conducting flight tests of pilots.

Without the indemnity cover, approved testing officers “will be even less likely to continue providing the services they do, and no senior application pilots will take up the challenge of providing an ATO service without the backing of a government indemnity”, the Aerial Application Association of Australia warns.

“The removal of the indemnity would have a disastrous impact on aviation safety, specialised training capacity and the already existing pilot shortage,” the group warns. “It is likely that in the face of no indemnity being provided, the number of available ATOs for training and checking in aerial ­applications will collapse.”

The comments are contained in a submission, obtained by The Australian, to a high-powered ­review into CASA’s indemnity and insurance arrangements.

The warnings comes amid fears of a regional pilot shortage and overseas airlines poaching Australian pilots.

While CASA has been indemnifying “delegated” personnel doing aviation-related functions, including tests of flight crew, since 1991, new rules change this. Under the changes, ATOs are expected to transition to get a “flight examiner rating”, where they are no longer considered to be doing CASA functions as delegates, but instead exercising “privileges” of a rating — and need to get their own insurance on the private market. New flight examiners who have never been an ATO have never had CASA ­indemnity.

CASA has extended the time for ATOs to surrender their ­delegation and get the rating to midyear. But, reigniting debate, the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, ­assisted by CASA and the powerful ­Finance Department, is ­reviewing the indemnity arrange­ments for industry delegates and “authorised” people, which also include designated aviation medical ­examiners.

The agricultural operators say there are only a “handful” of ATOs and examiners doing aerial training. As well, they are concentrated on the east coast.

They see the service “as ‘putting something back into the ­industry’,” the submission says. “It is certainly not a viable commercial venture in its own right "...The already very fragile basis to the provision of low throughput training/testing/checking would be severely challenged by any ­significant negative impact from the lack of provision of an indemnity, or a significant increase in costs due to a need for commercial insurance..."

“The obvious consequence of this would be a crisis in the provision of training/testing/checking for aerial application and other highly specialised sectors.”

A spokeswoman for CASA said that as consultation is under way, the body would not comment on individual concerns being raised at the moment.

The consultation is considering four proposals: keeping the present arrangements; extending indemnities to anyone doing work previously done by delegates; giving indemnities on a case-by-case basis; and giving them where commercial insur­ance is not available.

A representative for the Infrastructure Department said: “All submissions received during the consultation process will be considered before any decisions are taken on future indemnity and ­insurance arrangements.”

The Regional Aviation Association of Australia is also strongly opposed to moves to wind back the indemnity, warning that commercial insurance policy here is “simply not adequate and it is an increased cost to industry”.




TICK..TOCK Barnaby, the aviation shit-list is growing! Dodgy  




[Image: Untitled_Clipping_013118_093436_AM.jpg]


&.. also from the Oz today:

Quote:Demand means pilots take shorter route in flying for major airlines

[Image: 673a541bb4455ce1108c63a874827586?width=650]

The time spent in “feeder jobs” before flying for major airlines has fallen dramatically, according to pilots, amid concerns a shortage may lead to foreign airlines poaching Australian talent.

Rhys McClintock is a senior pilot at Navair, a luxury private air charter operation based in Sydney. A former surf instructor, he changed career flight path after a pilot came in for a lesson.

“He said, ‘come and learn’. I worked my way up,” Mr McClintock said.

The 27-year-old has been working in Sydney for two years and in that time he’s witnessed a major change. “The guys that are coming through used to go fly freight,” he said. “They’re only there for a short period of time and are being snapped up by Australian airlines. Two years ago, people were sitting in there five or six years. Now they’re doing six months and are out and up.”

The Australian recently revealed ­that Chinese airlines are looking to poach Australian pilots by offering enormous salaries of $750,000 a year.

Mr McClintock said he’s not at all surprised. “Corporate aviation has a ­select group of guys that fit the mould,” he said. “The dream for most pilots is the whole airline thing. This used to be a feeder job, now people skip this one.”

It’s not a dream for him, however. “I like flying in corporate aviation, you’re not just a pilot — you do heaps of stuff.”

Rick Pegus, a pilot and man­aging director of Navair, said ­Chinese airlines would do well to base pilots in Australia but fly them to China.

“It would not surprise me if they hired some, even if they based them here,” he said. “If you fly for Chinese airlines, you can fly to China for a day.”

Mr Pegus said only the most experienced pilots would be ­offered salaries as high as $750,000, but they would be who China would look to hire. “They’d be the ones you want to poach, they’d want the expertise that’d drive the safety culture,” he said.

The comments come as recent figures about the surge in flights to and from China, partly on the back of an “open skies”-style agreement struck in Dec­ember 2016, have added to concerns about poaching by ­Chinese airlines of experienced Australian pilots.

Recent figures show that the hours flown in flying training has plunged by more than one-third since peaking in 2009.

A landmark review into general aviation by the Bureau of ­Infrastructure, Transport and ­Regional Economics last year ­described the combined costs of pilot training and attracting and retaining staff were “key challenges” for the general aviation industry.

MTF...P2 Cool
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)