The Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF) released their policy paper yesterday as the country charges headlong toward a very contentious federal election. To sum it up, it's 66 pages of common bloody sense, and a copy-and-paste policy for a government that finds itself devoid of any out-right winners. Aviation will be on a more stable footing if the Minister for Transport Darren Chester gives it a good read and comes up with the same conclusions. Similar to AOPA's Project Eureka, the TAAAF paper hinges on the government selling Airservices Australia, something that was under serious consideration not that many years ago. TAAAF and AOPA both advocate using funds from the sale to revitalise aviation in Australia, a fair point given that the industry has largely funded Airservices so far. However, the TAAAF solution suggests setting up a not-for-profit privatised substitute along the Canadian lines. To get the TAAAF suggestion up, there would need to be a massive change in nature from the kings of privatisation: the Coalition. Over here we sell government things on the back of promises of high returns on investment for the buyer. Not-for-profit doesn't gel with the current paradigm and will need a bulldozer to get it into the heads House of Reps. The great strength in the TAAAF paper lines in the black ink: the projected $0.608 billion windfall for the government might just be the motive Turnbull/Shorten will need to give this serious consideration.
The TAAAF paper also a picture of a future aviation community that is a genuine partnership between the government and the industry; a co-operative that stands to increase safety, lower costs, increase efficiency and bring a lot smiles to business operating in aviation. This paper is a blueprint to aviation Nirvana, but there's a long way for the country to go even if the government accepts and implements the plan. The clock is ticking for most general aviation companies, so if the Federal Government is not going to adopt the TAAAF way of things, they need to come up with something else just as good ... now.
One bloke who's not waiting around is Melbourne Flight Training boss Glen Buckley. His idea for Australian Integrated Pilot Training (AIPT) is born out of frustration at the reams of red tape and astronomical costs attached to getting CASR Part 142 approval. But whereas most other schools under this yoke are taking a strategy of vociferous complaint, Buckley is trying to do something about it himself. Whether or not AIPT works remains to be seen, but the power behind this is that he is doing something different. One of my great mantras of life is that if what you're doing is not working, you need to change what you're doing. CASA should get on board this as well; the AIPT concept is characteristic of the future general aviation needs, and helping rather than hindering will send a message that they are serious about culture change.
Meanwhile, CASA DAS Mark Skidmore is pleading for patience as CASA goes through change. Feedback tells me that the pleas are bouncing straight back without getting through to the intended recipients. The industry wants change now, and there's not a lot of sympathy left for CASA. But, in reality, there has been a lot of change at CASA since the ASRR came out. Some former CASA stonewalls have gone, there's been a complete restructure put in place and Skidmore has been out canvassing the industry for himself, rather than taking filtered feedback from foot soldiers intent on covering their own backs. The problem is that the intended change of culture and new regulatory philosophy hasn't cascaded down to the streets, where the frustration is being felt the most.
To that end, my spies lurking in the shadows of Black Mountain tell me that former Qantas General Manager Graeme Crawford is set to be announced as the new Aviation Group Manager. This completes the triumverate of people to head up the three groups under the new structure. But all things are not necessarily equal. This position is the critical one that will drive change through aviation; it will have a greater impact than the other two groups. Culture change only works if it is believed and driven from the top. If there's no genuine belief at the top of the tower, "culture change" just becomes a buzzword on posters on the walls of the coffee room alongside the signs that say "please clean up your own mess." People take about the same amount of notice of both.
The whole issue of which frequency to use at unmarked ALAs is one of the most perplexing in aviation: perplexing in what is the best solution, and perplexing that is has gone so far as to have a discussion paper in the wind. CASA is becoming very entrenched in its position that the VHF area should be used; industry seems to be similarly fortifying its stance that Multicom 126.7 is the way to go. Dick Smith has even threatened legal action! OK, everyone please go to their corners. We have groups called Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committees (RAPAC) that were created, I believe, to solve issues just like this. It seems pointless to have advisory committees then ignore them. Put them to work, listen to what they say, and take action based on that.
It's been a pretty breathless week in aviation politics, and I for one and overdue for some aviation R&R. I'm off to Wings over Illawarra at Albion Park for the weekend, and expect to replenish my enthusiasm and passion by just watching aeroplanes do aeroplane stuff. WOI is becoming a major fixture on the Australian aviation calendar, and is rapidly qualifying itself to be put into the "unmissable" category. See you down there!
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch