Jump to content

Part 61 delayed?


Guest ozzie

Recommended Posts

Frank would you include the ability of say a plumber flying themselves to a remote site and taking their basic tools, because as I understand it at the moment that is not available.Chris

That is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I talked about 'certain commercial activities'. RAA class aircraft could never be 'scheduled' service providers, but we stand to gain a whole lot of public support if people associate RAA-class aircraft as something which is, at least potentially, 'useful' to the community. It's certainly a matter that needs to be delicately handled and very well thought-out, but I believe there are far more pluses than minuses for us if we can get some common-sense into the regulations about the sort of uses that our aircraft can be put to.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well having been to 2 of the CASA presentations on the new Part 61 I would have to say pilots would have to be grouped with some of the stupidest people on the planet. I'd like to think of myself as a stand-out however my grasp of the whiz-wheel technology drags me back down...The only real change that the recreational GA pilots were going to see immediately was they'll get a new licence in the mail. The amount of times I heard the CASA presenters making this statement was quite unbelievable. That and so many of the "but i'm a night-rated frozen ATPL and CPL holder with an american licence who only flies in the right-hand seat (because I prefer it and why doesn't everyone etc...) of my SAAA-registered RV7 but I get paid by my wife who flies in the left-hand seat so I can claim a tax break and you're taking away my right to fly" statements...

My point was to try and direct blame away from CASA. They're trying to juggle "pressure" from so many angles and personal interest groups it really gets my goat. Everyone wants to change everything to get a perfect set of laws to suit themselves. Rather than adapting to work within the laws as they stand and waiting for change to occur.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CASA was unable to answer question at the seminar I went to, it seems the same at most venues, quote what Casa said that they first do an NPRM then gather public response then spent 3 years planing and introduce a well thought out plan. What a load of crap, obviously they only wanted to wave the big stick around and show that no one is to have fun or have an easy path to success and enjoyment, Casa do not bother about the public, they do what they feel like and the dummies follow them. The medical part is a joke it went from a motor vehicle type medical to a heavy duty medical with restriction because that is what they wanted not the public. They start off with good intention but then they can't help themselves and start ranting that they are in charge and we must do what they say.

 

CASA know more about nothing than most people ! When it's all said and done there is more said than done !

 

CASA are totally impractical and should use the window method and have a look outside !

 

Bad rules need to be changed sooner than later, Casa was introducing more bad rules, making life harder for some.

 

If a RAA instructor can teach an abinito pilot to fly and a PPL pilot can teach certain advanced flying without a commercial licence or an AOC, a RAA pilot certificate holder can get a RPL by doing a flight test with a GA school, then why could not a RAA instuctor with PPL not be able to issue a RPL ?

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CASA was unable to answer question at the seminar I went to, it seems the same at most venues, quote what Casa said that they first do an NPRM then gather public response then spent 3 years planing and introduce a well thought out plan. What a load of crap, obviously they only wanted to wave the big stick around and show that no one is to have fun or have an easy path to success and enjoyment, Casa do not bother about the public, they do what they feel like and the dummies follow them. The medical part is a joke it went from a motor vehicle type medical to a heavy duty medical with restriction because that is what they wanted not the public. They start off with good intention but then they can't help themselves and start ranting that they are in charge and we must do what they say.CASA know more about nothing than most people ! When it's all said and done there is more said than done !

CASA are totally impractical and should use the window method and have a look outside !

 

Bad rules need to be changed sooner than later, Casa was introducing more bad rules, making life harder for some.

 

If a RAA instructor can teach an abinito pilot to fly and a PPL pilot can teach certain advanced flying without a commercial licence or an AOC, a RAA pilot certificate holder can get a RPL by doing a flight test with a GA school, then why could not a RAA instuctor with PPL not be able to issue a RPL ?

Read the last sentence - seems a perfect example of my point? I'd love someone to find me a single law in this country that caters perfectly for every minority group in existence.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
.... a PPL pilot can teach certain advanced flying without a commercial licence or an AOC ...

they will need one of the new flight instructor ratings with endorsements - I wouldn't call it "advanced" - limited to private operations so cannot teach people to fly to RPL or PPL.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank would you include the ability of say a plumber flying themselves to a remote site and taking their basic tools, because as I understand it at the moment that is not available.Chris

Chris

 

The same rules apply for a PPL in relation to commercial ops. I know where you are coming from with the example and this has been argued forever in GA (at length some time ago on this forum) You can read the definition of private operations and gain your own opinion of what it means - my opinion would be no more valid then yours (I believe by virtue of the definition it is very restrictive and probably by design).

 

I would be surprised if anything changes in relation to private operations but then that is only an opinion also.

 

I couldn't see where RAA ops would be considered above PVT VH ops in this matter.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
My point was to try and direct blame away from CASA. They're trying to juggle "pressure" from so many angles and personal interest groups it really gets my goat. Everyone wants to change everything to get a perfect set of laws to suit themselves. Rather than adapting to work within the laws as they stand and waiting for change to occur.

I don't agree with directing blame away from CASA as they are a federal body in a unique position with only one skill set to handle and they still have not got it right. States co-operating on road rules do a better job than this lot.

 

CASA had a good as it gets system with the restricted licence and the RPL could easily have been managed by having one passenger the same as the driving rules for new drivers. Why does everything have to be made so complicated?

 

I'm pleased to know that I am "one of the stupidest people on the planet" - really did not need that in this discussion

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard
My point was to try and direct blame away from CASA. They're trying to juggle "pressure" from so many angles and personal interest groups it really gets my goat. Everyone wants to change everything to get a perfect set of laws to suit themselves. Rather than adapting to work within the laws as they stand and waiting for change to occur.

Not exactly right Volsky. All we need is a simple set of regulations that are to the point without the bullshit, written in common mans language, that we can easily interpret and understand. Any regulation should be written with aviation safety in mind period....not to cover anyone's butt, or only to indicate on whose neck the noose goes on, when a reg is broken. (Either deliberate or accidental ) The yanks and the Kiwis have done it, why the hell can't we ?................Maj.....024_cool.gif.7a88a3168ebd868f5549631161e2b369.gif

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
It has me farked why CASA changed it from restricted PPL to the GFPT anyway back in the day.

A good way to elicit an angry response from CASA staff is to call an RPL just what it is/should be........ a 'restricted PPL' once known as the RPPL. They really bite when you hit them with that opening line. Can't understand that - because most of them were not even flying a kite when CASA decided to change the system in 1989/90. The reason it was changed?......... have you ever heard of Murphys' Law #5 ? Work expands to fill the available time. And in Canberra - that's infinite.

 

happy days,

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to see the change in views form 12 or 18 months ago when many of the threads were along the line that RAA was the devil and should be removed from licensing and handled by CASA. Now with some exposure to CASA they are the devil.

 

 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

You never heard ME say that. My view expressed here was that CASA don't relate well to the concept of U/L's and I still believe that is the basic problem. I'm not basing it on feelings. I base it on exact words they have used . Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with what you have posted Frank. I wish what I feared would occur hadn't. I think AOPA is the vehicle for some resolution of this as we are too beaten up and disorganised, to do it for ourselves. This not having any idea where we are going is happening for too long. Get behind your organisation and stay united . It's never been more important to get the show on the road with a bit of certainty. You could lose the lot.. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard

I can tell you that there is a LOT of behind the scenes work going on by the RAAus board to keep the bear with bad breath from knocking down the door. Do not think for one moment they are not doing something on your behalf........Maj....

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want everyone to support YOU guys Maj. You have Spencer Ferrier available, don't you?. Hang in there. The disorganised doesn't refer to those who are at the coal face, just the general rank and file don't know where they are at and it's not the kind of thing that can be conveyed day by day. I have been in similar situations and know what it is like. IF you are not supported it is demoralising.. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
A good way to elicit an angry response from CASA staff is to call an RPL just what it is/should be........ a 'restricted PPL' once known as the RPPL. They really bite when you hit them with that opening line. Can't understand that - because most of them were not even flying a kite when CASA decided to change the system in 1989/90. The reason it was changed?......... have you ever heard of Murphys' Law #5 ? Work expands to fill the available time. And in Canberra - that's infinite.

happy days,

Er, Parkinson's Law, actually ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law ).

 

However, it is blindingly obvious that a significant part of the operation of CASA is directed towards the objective of ensuring that the operatives have a necessary tenure of employment to implement its regulation and rules rather than achieving the objective of simplification and increased effectiveness of regulations and rules to improve safety outcomes. The loss to aviation of a significant number of skilled (ex)-CAR 35 engineers is directly an outcome of useless turnips in CASA carving out an employment future for themselves.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, Parkinson's Law, actually ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law ).However, it is blindingly obvious that a significant part of the operation of CASA is directed towards the objective of ensuring that the operatives have a necessary tenure of employment to implement its regulation and rules rather than achieving the objective of simplification and increased effectiveness of regulations and rules to improve safety outcomes. The loss to aviation of a significant number of skilled (ex)-CAR 35 engineers is directly an outcome of useless turnips in CASA carving out an employment future for themselves.

Correct of course. Murphy must have come to my mind because of it's association with stuff-ups and disasters. happy days,

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of years ago it was said that CASA had spent 22 years and over 230 million and had achieved basically nought for it. So must be around 300 million by now and same result ie sweet f a.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
PoterooHow about increasing your font for easier reading?

OK, how about that? Trying to save paper and bring the budget back into surplus, and you mob are unappreciative:crying:

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
And then there is the variation on Parkinsons "Staff numbers increase to fill the office space available".A law determined empirically in Canberra.

From what I've recently seen - what office space? It's a rabbit warren!

 

happy days,

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
And then there is the variation on Parkinsons "Staff numbers increase to fill the office space available".A law determined empirically in Canberra.

Whereas, of course, private enterprise empties the office and ships all the jobs overseas to call centres that don't know the products or adopt attitudes that aussies are stupid. Or in order to avoid their legal obligations turns the corporation into a dutch company with head office in the Cayman Islands tax and governance haven. It must be hard to run an organisation that is the butt of dodgy deals by politicians and airlines and cowboys in GA and rec. aviation. I don't subscribe to the view that all would be well inside RAA if only CASA went away.

At least CASA has had the decency to publish drafts of part 61, and others, for user comment and contribution, RAA is still hiding the proposed changes to the Ops manual. Something about motes and logs spring to mind.

 

RAA may need some rules changes but the seismic shift really needed is a serious attitude change from top to bottom. Mark is a good start but we need to get the members to realise that they have elected some people who are unfit to sit on the board of RAA, or any board. Changing the size of the board will not fix this, indeed it may well produce a board without leaks and much more secretive than the current board with its 13 members.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...