Property rights

A motorised attendance module is simply a school bus.

 

 

"bipedal mentee relocation"

 

 

and there's no point to a School Bus. It's blunt both ends. and when you are ON a bus you are actually IN it .(unless the place is INDIA) Nev

 

 

Yes, what's your point?

My point is this; bureaucracy can take a simple three letter word that everybody can understand and turn it into three words that have very little meaning that very few people understand. This is only to the benefit of those who are "in the know" and to make some simple seem complex which to my mind sums up aviation. This is why we are all parked in silos depending on aircraft categories with blatant inconsistencies across the spectrum. Nowhere is this more evident to the different treatment of EAB VH-reg and RAA aircraft when it comes to maintenance and construction.

 

 

My point is this; bureaucracy can take a simple three letter word that everybody can understand and turn it into three words that have very little meaning that very few people understand. This is only to the benefit of those who are "in the know" and to make some simple seem complex which to my mind sums up aviation. This is why we are all parked in silos depending on aircraft categories with blatant inconsistencies across the spectrum. Nowhere is this more evident to the different treatment of EAB VH-reg and RAA aircraft when it comes to maintenance and construction.

Well, I'll give you one word, CHOICE.

 

 

Well, I'll give you one word, CHOICE.

What is the choice RAA or ELAAA? Part 149 (as administered by CASA) is demonstrably anti-choice. Choice has nothing to do with safety in the case of the different treatment of EAB VH-reg and RAA aircraft. RAA (and CASA) should not be putting place requirements that are not consistent with the legislation, irrespective of how desirable it may be from an (RAA)organisation point of view.

 

Another inconsistency. GFA VH sailplanes can be flown in controlled airspace by unlicenced pilots, any other category requires PPL or better AND can have a MTOW of 850kg with no visible means of support (ie gravity and the atmospheric movements are the only motive forces).

 

And another; Basic med pilots have to inform passengers that they are not "medically qualified" by Avmed and yet CASA is quite happy for passengers to be lured into gliders for joy flights (thinly disguised as TIF's) with generally unlicenced personnel as PIC with no disclosure about medical certification status (which is concerning given the aged demography of the glider movement).

 

 

Choice is there, somewhere but if THEY can't decide where we are and where we are going there is not enough certainty to invest time or money in this GAME. This indecision goes on and on and is like a death by a thousand cuts experience combined with an incurable gambling instinct for motivation.

 

People in aviation, unless they are just tire kickers and voyeurs, should be able to make decisions and get on with it... There's never really time to fiddle and procrastinate. IF you aren't moving you are going backwards or downwards in our case Nev

 

 

I don't see any choice. For the type of flying I do there is GA for my RV and the only option for the Corby is RAAus. ELAAA is just not operating yet, courtesy of CASA. I suppose I could convert the Corby to GA, but what an expensive way to go. I would have to get an Approved Person to sign off on the Corby, after I have it taken off the RAAus register. The cheapest way to do that is as an SAAA member and there is no Approved Person any nearer than the Gold Coast to me.

 

 

Yenn.

 

The same applied to the Hummel Bird, !6 builders took their choice of NOT continuing with their dream.

 

spacesailor

 

 

Today there was a story in the paper about how excessive regulation and bureaucracy was making houses unaffordable , with terrible consequences for employment in the house-building industry. Lots of builders going broke, lots of customers paying for no outcome.

 

We in rec aviation  are further down that path. Cost imposts loaded onto aircraft maintenance deter people from the activity and we are all poorer.

 

The problem is that they ( CASA) can make expensive regulations with no financial cost to themselves.

 

 

 There are still some U/L's flying, so it's "unfinished business" for CASA . The NO pay with NO say doesn't apply . Nev

 

 

I find it bizarre that you can " own " a plane and yet you are not allowed to do your own maintenance and servicing of your own property.

 

 

 

Bruce - Strictly speaking; aircraft, along with millions of other manufactured articles, are not "property". They are "chattels", not fixed to the ground, and able to be moved and repositioned at will.

 

When we own motorised equipment of any type, there is a duty of care attached to that equipment, that says we must take reasonable steps and precautions to ensure that innocent parties are not injured, killed, or suffer loss due to our carelessness in operating and maintaining that motorised equipment. 

 

I own cars and trucks and plant and equipment, yet I am responsible for the safe operation and conscientious maintenance of those items.

 

There are current laws that apply to me to ensure that maintenance and repair on those (non-aviation) items is carried out by "qualified persons".

 

I don't think aircraft are a lot different to any other motorised equipment in those respects. The simple fact remains, aircraft need to repaired and maintained by people who have demonstrated that they have the necessary skills to repair and maintain aircraft.

 

If you think you should be allowed to repair and maintain your aircraft without proving to anyone that you can do so competently, then I'm afraid your thought processes are not in line with the laws and regulations of the country in general.

 

I understand that what you're complaining about, is that a full LAME course and qualification, is not really necessary to repair and maintain RAAus aircraft.

 

As such, I'd respectfully suggest you would be well-advised to pursue legal and regulatory changes to develop a new level of lower R&M qualification (than LAME), that would only be applicable to privately-owned RAAus aircraft.

 

 

The internationally recognised qualification to maintain and repair aircraft under CASA rules is a Certificate IV in Aeroskills (Mechanical). Attaining that qualification makes you an AME. (Grandfather AMEs just  need to have a 

 

Maintenance Engineer Licence (Mechanical) issued by CASA. If you want to be a LAME, able to sign off on maintenance, you have to have the qualification Diploma of Aviation Maintenance Management (Mechanical) https://training.gov.au/Training/Details/MEA50418

 

The problem with letting people do their own maintenance on RAAus aircraft is establishing that the person in competent to do the work. That competency comes from 20% theoretical knowledge and 80% practical experience on a  large number of different aircraft. By "large number of different aircraft", I mean not working on the same individual aircraft all the time, but working on a lot of similar types. That way you encounter a wider range of problems and idiosyncrasies. 

 

After you have gained this experience, the examination to determine competency has to be pretty tough because lives depend on your being competent. But who can develop the exam, and how can it be conducted? CASA won't issue you with an AME licence until you have passed THEIR exams. The Cert IV just prepares you for the CASA exam.

 

As an aside, CASA has done it again.  Training.gov.au is managed by the Department of Education and Training on behalf of State and Territory Governments, but CASA won't sit down with them to develop a system whereby gaining the Cert IV is sufficient to be issued with an AME licence.

 

 

the examination to determine competency has to be pretty tough because lives depend on your being competent

 

From what I've seen the main reason the exams are tough is that they contain a lot of irrelevant content. 

 

I have no problem with tough, as long as it is knowledge you should have.

 

Unfortunately, for the most part it's like the people who develop the courses and the people who write the exams never talk to each other.

 

 

I fully agree with providing training for would-be maintainers.  In my experience, owners are if anything too fearful about doing things to their planes, and the last thing they need is  legislation banning them from doing things .

 

As for houses, I bet most people  do minor plumbing and electrical things themselves, even if this is illegal. Gosh, you can buy the bits you need at Bunnings, even though the vested interests have been trying to stop hardware shops selling this stuff  for years.

 

But what about your weight? This is a much greater risk factor than illegal plumbing work. And what if you are overweight and  have a stroke while driving past a kindergarten?

 

 

 There are still some U/L's flying, so it's "unfinished business" for CASA . The NO pay with NO say doesn't apply . Nev

 

There are all the trikes, although a lot went to HGFA, and as one person said once (and I hope he's wrong), "about a third of them don't bother with registration."

 

And there would be heaps sitting in sheds.

 

 

And what if you are overweight and  have a stroke while driving past a kindergarten?

 

Don't worry, any marks on your car from hitting a kindergarten kid will buff out easily.

 

 

I said competency exams have to be pretty tough because  people are dealing with the lives of others. How many in-service courses have you been on where the examiner nearly does the exam for the less competent just so pass rates are kept high?

 

Although you are right about course content writers being out of touch with reality. That's why practical, on-the-job experience plays such an important part in being a good AME. That's why I said that to be considered competent, you should work on many similar aircraft. 

 

 

How many in-service courses have you been on where the examiner nearly does the exam for the less competent just so pass rates are kept high?

 

On the actual aviation side of things, I haven't seen that unless the student has the correct anatomy (read between the lines), for the most part, the examiners appear to be pedants with no actual on the job experience, arguing the finer points of  unnecessary irrelevant material.

 

When it come to more industrial stuff like confined space and working at heights, yes the contracted training organisation tends to spoon feed and coax trainees a lot more. You get a pretty certificate, and your employer can tick that box, along with Diversity and Equity, Security, Workplace Harassment and Bullying, among other things.

 

 

On the actual aviation side of things, I haven't seen that unless the student has the correct anatomy (read between the lines), for the most part, the examiners appear to be pedants with no actual on the job experience, arguing the finer points of  unnecessary irrelevant material.

 

Witness the Parafield TAFE  aviation saga of a year or so ago. I believe candidates had to be re-examined due to the "tick and flick" culture endemic in the TAFE system.

 

 

" That competency comes from 20% theoretical knowledge and 80% practical experience on a  large number of different aircraft. By "large number of different aircraft", I mean not working on the same individual aircraft all the time, but working on a lot of similar types. That way you encounter a wider range of problems and idiosyncrasies. "

 

A large number of aircraft, Multi engine'd, turbine, & high flying jumbo's.

 

Just so an owner can service his one & only Two cylinder two-stroke, Rotax, Hirth  or McCullough (four-pot) engine that most Mechanical engineers have never seen, ( motorcycle mechanics excepted).

 

" And what if you are overweight and  have a stroke while driving past a kindergarten? "

 

Saturday I go for my heart monitoring test. Slow heart beat makes doctors worry,

 

BUT

 

I'm saving beats for my OLD age. LoL

 

spacesailor

 

 

As for houses, I bet most people  do minor plumbing and electrical things themselves, even if this is illegal

 

All too true, and it's not confined to electrical and plumbing, there's a lot of construction work and additions that are not building law compliant, nor are they approved by council.

 

But the problems start when there's an accident, or a failure of major concern. About then, is when the ordure hits the rotating blades, and the authorities are looking for the person responsible.

 

Thus, the reason for going over properties that you propose purchasing, very carefully.

 

In W.A. (not sure about other States), an electrician is now fully responsible for everything in an area he has worked in - even if he only opened up a manhole in the ceiling to fit a smoke alarm.

 

He/She is then deemed responsible for all wiring in the roof cavity, as he is supposed to have checked it all out, and made sure it was all compliant.

 

This has to be complete BS, I don't know how this can be enforced in a court of law - and I don't recall knowing of any recent cases where it has arisen.

 

The original installer needs to bear the burden of responsibility, not some poor bugger who came along later, and who didn't have time to, or couldn't inspect, every single item installed in the roof.

 

I understand our training systems are in a parlous state, and it's not getting any better. Many good, manual-job-training institutions, have been discarded in Govt reshuffles.

 

Govts are always looking to offload training responsibility onto businesses and organisations, and businesses are reluctant to train people unless there is great benefit to them, or some type of Govt subsidy for the training.

 

Apprenticeships are difficult to get, and mechanics and fitters are becoming merely component replacers, rather than good troubleshooters with excellent diagnostic skills.

 

Hook up the diagnostic computer or the code reader, and it'll tell you what's wrong, you don't need diagnostic skills or full understanding. It's not helped by manufacturers adding engineering complexity onto complexity every year. 

 

The simple problem is, that there are less and less people interested in fixing anything any more, as the years progress. So the trainers are retiring, and their skills are not being sought, nor passed on.

 

We baby boomers did our training courses and gained extensive experience in repairing all manner of things - and we were taught by master mechanics, and technicians with major skills sets.

 

The younger generations see no need to repair anything, it's, "rip out the offending major component and install a new one - or dump the whole thing, and buy a complete new unit".

 

It's hardly helped by the fact that the manufacturers have reduced costs so extensively, the cost to carry out major repair to items, is often simply uneconomic.

 

I don't know what the answer is, it's a very complex situation, but it's not getting any better. To me, there appears to be a concerted effort to dumb down the nation, with automated systems appearing everywhere - and aviation won't be spared from that, either.

 

I go to a lot of auctions, and I'm stunned that driving skills are dumbed down so much today, that the auction houses post signs, warning employees and auction buyers, that certain vehicles have manual transmissions, and special skill and training are required to operate those vehicles. 

 

 

OOPS

 

I forgot the Half-V W.

 

" 45 horsepower dual ignition engine by . Scott Casler "

 

Onetrack, " In W.A. (not sure about other States), an electrician is now fully responsible for everything in an area he has worked in -"

 

In NSW !. I've never been given a Certificate For any electrical work done by Licensed sparkies or Licensed plumber's.

 

My last electrical project was almost finished & the sparky got killed in a road accident, were does that leave my certificated wiring !.

 

spacesailor

 

 

All too true, and it's not confined to electrical and plumbing, there's a lot of construction work and additions that are not building law compliant, nor are they approved by council.

 

But the problems start when there's an accident, or a failure of major concern. About then, is when the ordure hits the rotating blades, and the authorities are looking for the person responsible.

 

Thus, the reason for going over properties that you propose purchasing, very carefully.

 

In W.A. (not sure about other States), an electrician is now fully responsible for everything in an area he has worked in - even if he only opened up a manhole in the ceiling to fit a smoke alarm.

 

He/She is then deemed responsible for all wiring in the roof cavity, as he is supposed to have checked it all out, and made sure it was all compliant.

 

This has to be complete BS, I don't know how this can be enforced in a court of law - and I don't recall knowing of any recent cases where it has arisen.

 

The original installer needs to bear the burden of responsibility, not some poor bugger who came along later, and who didn't have time to, or couldn't inspect, every single item installed in the roof.

 

I understand our training systems are in a parlous state, and it's not getting any better. Many good, manual-job-training institutions, have been discarded in Govt reshuffles.

 

Govts are always looking to offload training responsibility onto businesses and organisations, and businesses are reluctant to train people unless there is great benefit to them, or some type of Govt subsidy for the training.

 

Apprenticeships are difficult to get, and mechanics and fitters are becoming merely component replacers, rather than good troubleshooters with excellent diagnostic skills.

 

Hook up the diagnostic computer or the code reader, and it'll tell you what's wrong, you don't need diagnostic skills or full understanding. It's not helped by manufacturers adding engineering complexity onto complexity every year. 

 

The simple problem is, that there are less and less people interested in fixing anything any more, as the years progress. So the trainers are retiring, and their skills are not being sought, nor passed on.

 

We baby boomers did our training courses and gained extensive experience in repairing all manner of things - and we were taught by master mechanics, and technicians with major skills sets.

 

The younger generations see no need to repair anything, it's, "rip out the offending major component and install a new one - or dump the whole thing, and buy a complete new unit".

 

It's hardly helped by the fact that the manufacturers have reduced costs so extensively, the cost to carry out major repair to items, is often simply uneconomic.

 

I don't know what the answer is, it's a very complex situation, but it's not getting any better. To me, there appears to be a concerted effort to dumb down the nation, with automated systems appearing everywhere - and aviation won't be spared from that, either.

 

I go to a lot of auctions, and I'm stunned that driving skills are dumbed down so much today, that the auction houses post signs, warning employees and auction buyers, that certain vehicles have manual transmissions, and special skill and training are required to operate those vehicles. 

 

Para 1

 

Yes, it all starts with the accident. This has saved Australia billions of dollars in costs for over-priced tradesmen,  time lost waiting for inspectors to arrive, and the cost of employing inspectors.

 

Effectively to avoid catastrophic penalties if you do your own electrical work, you either have to train to ATO standard, or emply an qualified electrician, but the cost factors are lower and the tradesmen still make a living.

 

Para 2

 

Public Liability law is based on duty of care, so yes, he is responsible for everything he has worked on, and everything that work affects.

 

I think there is a misunderstanding on the second line; it certainly could be something adopted locally - even on this site there are people who post regularly who have no idea where the boundaries of duty of care lie. If anyone in WA is disadvantaged by this I'd recommend getting a PL lawyer to cehck it out.

 

The rest

 

The people themselves have caused this. The trend has been to buy the cheapest product, so the good manufacturers die out. The same people double down on that by never bringing it in for scheduled maintenance, so the low-cost repair industries disappear. There is heaps of income floating around so people just put products with a minor faul out for hard rubbish and buy a new one, and that means that companies drop slow moving parts from their warehouses, then the whole infrastructure starts to fail. I was in a crazy situation once, where a mechanic had ripped a spark plug boot off a European car and would electrical tape around the terminal which caused a miss in the engine to either cast my own rubber boot, or pay $380.00 for an ignition module.

 

To a degree smart people have started selling plug in modules for spares, which although costing more than the 2 cent washer we used to buy, at leat don't require a mechanic at $120.00 an hour.

 

It's a plug and play world.

 

Not only are manual transmissions dying out, but torque converter autos have started to follow. I'm driving my first CVT and they're a dream to operate, so we'll soon be getting to an era when no one can repair a manual or auto transmisison, Lost Skills like finding steam train drivers. I'd bet there are less than a hundred people in Australian now who could drive a truck with a two stick joey box, and truck drivers who can handle a Roadranger will get a special premium salary.....until the truck is sold.

 

 

IF in the course of repairing something, you notice that something else is in a dangerous condition, can you say "not my problem  I wasn't brought here to fix that". I would imagine on an onus of duty of care there would be an expectation that you would do SOMETHING about it.  I would think covering yourself by requiring a disclaimer. I am aware that further repairs need to be made to make this circuit comply, and that I have requested and paid for " ABC" only from T Jones..

 

     Electricians will not work on houses that don't have the fully operational earth return isolators and that's a straight out safety issue.. Nev