Dick's latest rant

[Old Koreelah]

Our club hosted Joyce and some local decision-makers a year or so back. A TV crew were there as well.

 

When I told them about the damage being done to Oz aviation and our aircraft builders by CASA, BJ clearly indicated his frustration with the bureaucrats. Now he's the minister responsible.

 

As Frankus says, the aviation sector needs to unite and present clear demands...and keep up the pressure.

 

Perhaps we might get some action when the public notices our airlines hiring foreign pilots.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I was referring to the outer part of the 4500 ft step.It runs from Mt Pleasant through Callington etc and goes all the way to Mannum on the river.At Mount Pleasant, the step could be raised to 6500 on the outer part with no effect on West Beach traffic. The airspace is unused right now and has been since DC4's and probably not even then.

But it would enable VFR planes at Mount Pleasant to have enough height to glide to a safe landing spot in the event of engine failure.

 

This was put into a submission to RAPAC ( the airspace advisory group) with so far no written reply. I did hear that it was rejected for vague reasons. My guess is that they were not going to move Important Lines on Official Maps for the likes of no-account people like me. And reducing controlled airspace would impact on their budget arguments. Safety? Don't be silly. Who cares about safety?

How far would you have to deviate to fly safety?

 

 

[facthunter]

A fair bit in my view . I was fairly familiar with the area from flying aircraft out of ADL to the east where you can struggle to make the heights when loaded up and/or hot days and a bit of Ga also and I have friends who I visit regularly in the hills and of course the Wineries. I don't really know how you would get reliably around on the south side etc as the inbound track from the east to Port Stanvac is the track used to land to the north east and the north if an instrument let down is needed. I don't have the latest charts but the hills aren't likely to move. Nev

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

The flights concerned, from Gawler to the South-East, would be about 40 km more to fly LEGALLY in the 8,500 ft step. No deviation is required to fly SAFELY because the airspace I want to use is not used at present. That is the whole point of the argument, the fact is that Airservices and CASA are forcing unsafe practices on us for no good reason.

 

For many years, our aircraft had to fly to Tasmania under 5,000 ft to do it legally, when to do it safely you need about 8,000 ft. The argument took years because of bureaucratic resistance, and was finally won in our favor. But there is much similar work to be done so that we can fly without stupid and dangerous practices being forced on us by so-called "safety " bureaucracies.

 

 

[facthunter]

I completely agree with your concern about your situation. A similar situation exists at Williamtown and Coff's Harbour. A route you are forced on to is not safe. I could always get a clearance though Wlliamtown from the tower years ago..( I guess some emergency would preclude that and there could be firing near Nelson Bay sometimes. Same as Singleton). I don't think you get any priority or much consideration in the big scheme of things. Are you an AOPA member? That would be the only organisation likely to do much for you.. Nev

 

 

[Frankus1aust]

Excellent thinking ... so what have you done about it so far?

Spent a lot of phone, email and forum time banging on about a peak body, consultative process, blah blah blah etc. It is easy as a noisy GA/RAA amateur to sound off, but the real action is with the industry professionals who have a detailed understanding of the industry. I have previously worked in peak body reform before, in an industry I understand and you are often not assisted by enthusiastic individuals running their own campaign, unless it is part of a coordinated and resourced plan. All the same, pretty ready to start one or join one if we on the rec-av site want to form a group.

 

 

[Frankus1aust]

Spent a lot of phone, email and forum time banging on about a peak body, consultative process, blah blah blah etc. It is easy as a noisy GA/RAA amateur to sound off, but the real action is with the industry professionals who have a detailed understanding of the industry. I have previously worked in peak body reform before, in an industry I understand and you are often not assisted by enthusiastic individuals running their own campaign, unless it is part of a coordinated and resourced plan. All the same, pretty ready to start one or join one if we on the rec-av site want to form a group.

PS..... An AOPA member

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Spent a lot of phone, email and forum time banging on about a peak body, consultative process, blah blah blah etc. It is easy as a noisy GA/RAA amateur to sound off, but the real action is with the industry professionals who have a detailed understanding of the industry. I have previously worked in peak body reform before, in an industry I understand and you are often not assisted by enthusiastic individuals running their own campaign, unless it is part of a coordinated and resourced plan. All the same, pretty ready to start one or join one if we on the rec-av site want to form a group.

To judge the response and participation you're likely to get, I think it'd be worth starting a thread, at the least. Probably in the Governing Bodies forum.

 

 

[coljones]

The flights concerned, from Gawler to the South-East, would be about 40 km more to fly LEGALLY in the 8,500 ft step. No deviation is required to fly SAFELY because the airspace I want to use is not used at present. That is the whole point of the argument, the fact is that Airservices and CASA are forcing unsafe practices on us for no good reason.For many years, our aircraft had to fly to Tasmania under 5,000 ft to do it legally, when to do it safely you need about 8,000 ft. The argument took years because of bureaucratic resistance, and was finally won in our favor. But there is much similar work to be done so that we can fly without stupid and dangerous practices being forced on us by so-called "safety " bureaucracies.

You could approach RAA to make contact with their SA RAPAC rep about having this issue formally raised at RAPAC. If RAA doesn't have a rep on the SA RAPAC you could volunteer your services and represent ALL rec flyers on your turf.

If you search for RAPAC on the CASA website you will find a schedule of meetings, minutes and papers. Look here. Regional airspace and procedures advisory committees (RAPAC) | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

 

 

[kaz3g]

Too late...Dick's been nominated for Australian of the Year by the Oz and will undoubtedly now suck up all the oxygen.

 

Kaz