Part 115...the story so far...
6 months since the introduction of the regulation (which CAA and the Gov't assured us would make Adventure Aviation safer and wouldn't add significant costs) we can see some earlier signs of what a total "balls-up" this will prove to be.
The parachute fraternity are in disarray. Many haven't been able to complete all the paperwork required by the cut-off date and some are finding the costs significantly more than "significant".
Since the introduction of 115 CAA have changed their stance over the cost issue...we have a letter from the Minister (using data provided by the Department) claiming it would $300 per entity...now we read from a CAA spokesperson arguing that cost is irrelevant and safety is the prime issue. If clubs/organisations can't move from a hobbyist approach to a professional approach they shouldn't participate...which in other-words means it'll cost heaps to register and CAA don't care...cost is irrelervant.
I know of one Gliding Organisation that has so far invested (if thats the right term) 102 hours of some-ones time to try to get the paperwork together...which at CAA's charge-out rate (it was $115 per hour but I think it has increased) is $12k...a far cry from $300.
Alongside all this we have some interesting commentary from Mai Chen (constitutional Lawyer)
who puts the cost of introducing new regulations at over $500,000 (CAA claimed less than this last year) but given the time its taken we can safely assume the total taxpayer cost of Part 115 will be well north of $1mill.
She also points out that the new reg's may result in the dismise of significant parts of NZ's Adventure Tourism market due to the added costs making NZ uncompetitive. I tend to agree.
And as for safety...the aviation sector has a very long history of using "Safety" as the blunt instrument...whether it be for Airspace, Training, Maintenance, or Regulation. Part 115 is no different.
I can not prediction 115's influence on other sectors in adventure aviation but I can suggest it will have no impact whatsoever on passenger safety in the gliding sector. We don't have a trial flight safety problem to start with (using both our and CAA's figures) and the regulation has no impact of maintenance, instructor training and/or competence, and flight requirements.
So whats been achieved???...well you judge yourself...but I for one have been dismayed at the total lack of common-sense that has been displayed through this process...you'd think heads would roll...but they won't
"If clubs/organisations can't move from a hobbyist approach to a professional approach they shouldn't participate" ...so what is so wrong with this statement. Actually I agree. Having been involved in this sport for just over 30 yrs I have witnesses all manner of completely unprofesional activities with clubs.
ReplyDeleteThe days of trial flight revenue gathering by sloppy unprofessional and unskilled or trained Sunday pilots should and will be over. It is only good luck that there havent been more serious accidents and deaths in the club culture of this sport in NZ. I recall the incident at Waharoa when and elderly instructor almost took the life of young guy in dubious circumstances - not good.
It is time for reason and professionalism to prevail - replacing the old boys mates networks which is more based on ego and pathetic politics.
Bring it on I say -- no amount for bitching about costs is going to change anything.
Leave the Trail Flight culture to the Scholes area locally - this is long gone thankfully
This isn't a view I subscribe to. The added cost and lost revenue for no tangible gains in safety make 115 a pointless exercise for gliding. It'll will threat the currency of instructors throu less trial flight flying, it will result in less members of the public having a chance to glide and overall I suspect will see the further decline in membership.
ReplyDelete