February RA-Aus Board Meeting

RA-Aus February Board Meeting

Below is an update for members of the recent meeting. In due course the President will release an official synopsis of the meeting.

Aerosafe Workshop. Those of us that were able went to Canberra two days early to attend Aerosafe training on Risk Management. The workshop was very well done and we all learnt a lot. We saw where our strengths were, and also where we had weaknesses. This is important to know, as we can now direct resources to areas where we are lacking.

Tec. Manager Resignation. Most are aware by now of Steve Bells resignation. I attended his farewell dinner and personally wish Steve well in his new endeavors. One stand out quality of Steve was his willingness to do his best to help our members achieve their goals and not put unnecessary obstacles in their path. At Oshkosh recently, I well remember the “implied” mission statement US aviators had of their Regulator. - “We are not happy until you are not happy”. Steve was the total opposite, he was not happy until our members were happy.

We have a very able temporary acting Tec manager, so things can carry on as normal until we appoint a permanent replacement.

The Board meeting itself. – Some of the more important issues follow.

Junior pilots. – Well what a can of worms this turned out to be after legal advice. CASA and all the other countries in the western world have no minimum age requirements to commence flying training, however they all have a minimum age for the issue of an official student pilot certificate. We didn’t. So it was theoretically possible to have an official student pilot who was only one year old. We did have a couple that were only nine. This had to be fixed and the minimum age for a Student Pilot Certificate is now set at fourteen years. This placed us in line with the requirements of other major recreational aviation countries.

But that was not the end of it. From our legal advice on that matter we came up with another serious problem. Our constitution is apparently at odds with the ACT regulations (where we are incorporated) Under the act members of an Association under 18 must not have voting rights. We have no such membership category in our Constitution and this must be fixed ASAP.

Magazine hold back. Many members have complained to me over the years that our magazine is available in the newsagent before they get their copy in the post. My belief is members are more important than walk-ins at a newsagent and we should hold back delivery of the magazine to the newsagents by one week to allow our members to get their copy first. Again I proposed a motion to this affect, but this time I made the hold back time 5 days instead of 7 days. The motion was again lost.

Pre purchase inspections. Some years ago the Board brought in a requirement for pre purchase inspections to be conducted by a level 2. This created a legal issue with our Level 2 maintenance providers. The inspections were always meant to be a “condition report”, not a statement that the aircraft was fit to fly. There was a lot of uncertainty here. This also was against our policy of not being more onerous than GA. (GA do not require inspections) This requirement is now removed. It now comes back to the GA system of “Buyer beware”. By all means get pre purchase inspections done, but now you can use whomever you choose.

Flight over built up areas. You all must be aware that flight over built up areas in 19 category aircraft is forbidden unless individual written permission is given. This will only be given to aircraft that meet certain requirements, one is having an approved engine. Permission can only given by an approved CASA delegate. This delegation approval ceased with the departure of Steve Bell. For the immediate future there will be no more approvals given.

Of a more serious nature, there is a push by some working for the regulator, (under the new part 61) which will ban all single engine flights over built up areas. GA, commercial, and RA-Aus. We all must be vigilant here.

Remember if you do have approval to fly over built up areas, that is just the start. There are the other requirements that must be followed, such as flight above 1,000 feet AGL, and the ability to glide clear should there be an engine failure.

Recreational Pilot’s License.  This is progressing under Part 61, and is viewed as a threat by many in RA-Aus, however, philosophically; I personally don’t believe we should seek to be a monopoly in Rec Aviation and campaign against an RPL. We should look for opportunities here instead. Sure it will affect us in the short term, but it will make us work harder, and provide more and better benefits to retain current members and gain new members. (As a side note we now have almost 11,000 members and 3,500 registered aircraft on our books.

Web site development. Our last contract to do this turned out to be unsatisfactory. We have now contracted another firm to upgrade our web site, so hopefully in the near future you will see some positive changes.


Accident Investigation. It has been my opinion that we should strive to get our accident investigators back under the wing of ATSB (where we were some years ago before the new regulations) I and another  Board member had some very positive discussion with the director of ATSB on this matter. If certain requirements are met this could become achievable. On going discussions will now be held with ATSB. This won't happen overnight, but we have started the process.

2012 AGM. To enable our members greater opportunity to attend our AGM’s the Board resolved to occasionally hold these outside Canberra. Now I know many of you wish these to be held at Natfly, but currently we have legal issues with this because of our Constitution and financial timeframes. There is also a significant extra cost involved. But in time with enough member support these issues can be overcome. 


The 2012 AGM will be held in Southern Queensland, most probably the Gold coast on Saturday September 22. Please put this date in your diary and attend if at all possible. It is your association.

John McKeown

South Queensland Board Member

Excessive Secrecy

Excessive Secrecy

My personal philosophy as a Board member is one of Honesty, Openness, Transparency, and Accountability. There are some who believe all Board business should, by default, be totally secret. To me excessive secrecy breeds corruption, laziness, nepotism, and many other ills. It also facilitates non accountability.

There has been a real campaign (led by the Secretary) to make all Board members sign a Confidentially Agreement. I am the last holdout. My refusal to sign was based on a members entitlement. In the past any member of this association has had the right to sit in and observe any Board meeting unless it was of a real sensitive nature and the Board went "In Camera". I have no issue with secrecy in "in camera" sessions, and I believe in confidentially in the Board Forum.  But by signing the form I would be giving up my rights as an ordinary member, and I would not be able to inform my constituents of issues of concern.

Rather than promote transparency and accountability, a motion was put forward by the Secretary, and passed, at the February meeting to remove this abnormality. Now all members who wish to sit in as observers at a Board meeting must sign this secrecy form.

Our Association is a Democratic Association. If the majority believe in excessive secrecy, then that is the way it should be and I will sign the form.

However, I get constant complaints about secret Board business. Well here is your opportunity. If you (The members) don't believe in excessive secrecy then do something about it. Get this motion repealed or voided at the Natfly meeting. Ask your local Rep did they vote for the motion and why.

Information and Accountability


One of the best ways for members to know what is going on and to have accountability of their local Rep is to have access to, and read the meeting minutes. By reading the minutes you will be able to see what business was conducted, what your Rep brought to the meeting, and how he/she voted on the various motions. This gives accountability.

My challenge to you.

If you as a member wants to be better informed on the management of your association then demand all meeting minutes be posted (published) no later than 14 days from the date of the meeting. If the minutes can't be ratified in that time then they be published with the watermark "Not Ratified" in them. Many other associations and local authorities have their minutes up on the Web within days of the meetings. The latest minutes have the "Not Ratified" watermark in them. We should be doing the same

To read Board meeting minutes 8 to 10 months later (if you can get them) is way past yesterdays news. If members really want to know what is going on they need to see this information now.   How can members voice disapproval of a decision if they don't know about it, and finding out about it in 10 months is far too late.


It is over to you, the ordinary members. If you don't want excessive secrecy and you want accountability then do something. You, as a group can make it happen


John McKeown

Proposed change to the Constitution - Another opinion

Dear Rag and Tubers,

 

I have asked J ohn Mc if I could write a second opinion on the issue of the constitutional change.   When the Constitution was written, it was by amateurs who

Neglected to put everything IN the constitution to reflect what they actually did in the representative distribution.  They decided that all states should have at least one rep (this is what they didn’t put in the constitution), then

Additional reps were allocated according to member population. 25 years ago when this happened, QLD had the lion’s share of members, so they got the lions share of reps.  25 years later, Vic and NSW and QLD have approx the

Same membership, but QLD has 4, and Vic has 2.  MEMBERS asked the Board why we hadn’t engaged in electoral re-distribution which is a fact of life.  So this proposal was put forward from the committee as a response to members and

As a response to the intent of the original writers of the constitution.  J ohn’s proposal, is  a bit of a red herring, I feel (sorry J M).  That’s not what is on the table.  He is arguing we could keep it unfair and unequal because he  wants something different. Let’s deal with what is on the table.  J ohn can get another committee and try to get up his proposal – (which is a bit mean since Tasmania , WA, NT and SA will never get a rep on the Board in his system- and the reps from those states and a number of others will howl it down).  So I encourage you to Vote in favour of the proposed change.

Cheers, Carol Richards, NSW member  (Thanks J ohn for doing this)

Above is  an opinion by Carol Richards, our hard working Board Member from NSW. If there are other opinions I will also publish them. It is very healthy to have all sorts of different opinions. But as this is my Blog I reserve the right to make comment.

1. Two members only asked the Board why a redistribution was not done. One was Max Brown, who did a lot of work on our Constitution. His original proposal was much closer to our stated aim of "one vote one value" and would include Tasmania into Victoria and NT in with SA. This second proposal surprises me knowing Max's knowledge of the Constitution.

2. I have never proposed any change to the voting. I do not have any future proposal. My only issue is, this change, in my opinion, is NOT Constitutional. It does not aim for a one vote one value representation.

3. If the membership wants a State Based system (and that has merit) then they should vote to repeal the "one vote one value" clause and replace it with a State based clause. All associations live or die by their Constitutions. To bastardize the stated clauses in the Constitution to appease special interests is a recipe for disaster. 

4. My understanding of our Constitution, is it is based on the standard non profit sporting constitution given to us by the ACT Government, and modified by some very knowledgeable members. I would see it as not entirely Amateur.


5. If there are other opinions please email me and I will publish them here.

John McKeown

Proposed Change to Constitution

Hi All.

Coming up in September you will be asked to vote on a change to the Constitution. Please consider how you will vote and the ramifications of your vote. You, the members, are the association, it is you who decide the direction of the association, so whatever you decide please vote.

Now for my view.

The Constitution is very specific on this matter and I quote the relevant section below.

13. Election of Board Members.
(i) The Board shall be elected by the membership on a one Member - one vote system."
 
That statement is very specific yet there are members of the executive and others who are muddying the waters by claiming the vote needs to also be State based and want a gerrymander voting system.

Like Nick Sigley, I am also uncertain as to how the membership numbers were arrived at as were published in the magazine, however the August 2010 figures are approx. Queensland 2444, NSW, 2415, Vic. 2185, SA 1079, WA. 622 , Tas. 277. NT. 148,  ACT 138. The total membership, including international members is approx. 9337. Currently ACT and NSW are combined for representation purposes giving NSW 2553 members.  NQ and SQ are  separated for representation purposes, and these figures can't be obtained, but an upper estimate could be around 300 members in NQ.

I fully agree there needs to be a redistribution. But not this one. How can anyone really claim to be following a "one vote, one value" voting system where the new system will have the member from Tasmania representing only 277 members, NT 148 members, and NQ approx 300. While SQ will be 1200 approx, SA 1079 approx, Vic 728 approx, NSW 800 approx. and WA 622 approx.

My personal view is VOTE NO

Any change must be close to a one vote one value redistribution as per the Constitution. A redistribution needs to be redone on a one vote one value, without some powerful members pushing the "State" based model. NQ should also be abolished and SQ should perhaps include parts of northern NSW. The representation model should be based on a post code model to give as equal voting as possible.

However the members decide. So please vote. A change to the constitution with a 5% to 7%  vote is a farce. I implore you again to vote.I personally witnessed the last change to the Constitution at the AGM 3 years ago with 7 raised hands, and no provision for postal votes.

John McKeown

Vigilance

Hi all,

A couple of points have come up from the February Board Meeting that need Vigilance by our members.

ADSB - This is back on the agenda. The upper air program has been implemented with an operational date of 2013. There is extremely strong pressure from the airlines to the authorities to implement ADSB now into the lower airspace. This will affect ALL of us. We must be very vigilant.


Airport Trigger Points. - Also from the airlines and CASA as a "safety issue". There are moves to have trigger points related to RPT movements into small airports. What this means is that when a certain airport has an RPT movement or volume ratio that reaches the "Trigger" point, that airport and the airspace around it, will be declared Class D airspace. This trigger point is rumored to be very low. This will exclude all our members who do not have a PPL license from the airport and the airspace around it. Once again we need vigilance from the membership.


ELT'S - There has been some concern about the mandatory requirement to carry 406 ELT'S from this March. I questioned Jim Coyne from CASA about this and his reply was that the CAO (Civil Aviation Order) mandating this requirement still has not been issued, and that after it is issued the standard twelve months grace period for compliance will apply. So in simple terms there is no mandatory requirement to carry 406 ELT's this year.
Note. Be aware that it is now illegal to activate the old 121.5 MHz units.


Rego. Stickers. - There is also some confusion about this requirement. Last year the board agreed to the requirement to have registration stickers. The reason for this is it had been found that there were many reported cases of unregistered aircraft flying. In most cases these were unintentional, but placed the owner at great risk not only from the regulator, but also from ligation should there be an accident or incident. In fact in recent years there were cases of aircraft judged to win prizes at Natfly, that were later disqualified because they were found to be unintentionally unregistered. It is hoped that the sticker will be a reminder to those, who for one reason or other, have forgotten to re-register their aircraft, and to provide a peer pressure means to encourage those who want to "free load" on our association to re-register.

There was no intention to have an AN, and this will be removed. The requirement is to have a sticker that is visible from outside the aircraft only. You can put the sticker wherever you choose, but it would be preferable to be on the left hand side of the aircraft. This is intended to be in its flying condition, so if an aircraft has covers at night that is OK.


John McK

Duct Tape

Hi All

I actually bought the video of this incident at Oshkosh.

When I posted this on the blog site the photos became cropped and I don't know how to fix it.

To see the full photo, right click on the photo and select "view image" - sorry.

Best duct tape story ever

During a private "fly-in" fishing excursion in the Alaskan wilderness, the chartered pilot and fishermen left a cooler and bait in the plane. And a bear smelled it. This is what he did to the plane.

The pilot used his radio and had another pilot bring him 2 new tires, 3 cases of duct tape, and a supply of sheet plastic. He patched the plane together and FLEW IT HOME!


Duct Tape? Never Leave Home Without It

RA-Aus AGM

To All RA-Aus members in Southern Queensland,

I am trying to gain support from the membership to hold our AGM at Natfly each year rather than before the the September Board Meeting.

I have only been a Board member for a little over two years but in that short time I am appalled by the poor attendance of members at our AGM. A handful of members (apart from staff and the Board) is a good turnout. The last AGM had only 3 "external" members present.

To me this is totally unacceptable but understandable.

The AGM is held on a Friday afternoon, in Canberra, in September. Who, apart from Canberra residents with flexible working hours could attend?

By having the AGM at Natfly it would allow a far greater member participation.

Far more members would be be present to hear and read the reports that are presented, and more importantly, make comment, and have input into the running of the Association.

The Board Meeting and Executive elections should continue to be in September. This way, if the Executive promises some outcome to the membership at Natfly, it still has at least 5 months or so to deliver. Under the current system, the President or Executive may promise some outcome at the AGM, and a few hours later (after the elections) they are no longer on the Executive.

Please give me your thoughts.

John McKeown

New Executive Director / CEO for RA-Aus

The RA-Aus Executive chose, and the Board, as a whole, approved a new ED/CEO for the Association. Lee Ungerman resigned for family reasons and has moved to Queensland and will have a new position as Northern Ops Manager.

The new CEO is Robbie Costmeyer. Robbie has a Military and Aviation technical background. He has also managed operational aspects of semi-privatization of the Government Aircraft Factory and has been the CEO of MS Society.

Staff Salaries

There has been a lot of reaction (good and bad) over my report on the recent staff salaries increases.

To try and keep members better informed and to try and stop some confusion by the membership, and at the same time not divulge actual salaries, perhaps I could repeat a couple of statements I made to the board re the salaries, before going in camera to discuss the actual amounts. This information was available to any member who wished to be an observer at the meeting (and from memory there were 2 member observers present)

I made a statement to the effect that our staff are our greatest asset and virtually no individual thinks they are paid too much. But we are a non profit association, funded in the main by member subscriptions, and we must live within our means. I tried to explain that the large salary increases sought by the CEO were, in my opinion, excessive. (particularly after the increases just 12 months previously). I stated that from my experience in business employee cost blowouts can destroy a business, and more modest increases should be granted. There is a major problem with a business like ours that grants yearly salary increases. You get the issue of "The compounding of the wages bill" Anyone who understands "compounding" will know what I mean.

We do not pay salary's that one could get in private industry, or in some branches of Government. But all wages are relevant. A well paid person would think our wages are very low, while a lower paid person would think our wages are generous.

However, to try and generalize, I also made the following statement at the Board meeting. "That if you were a department head at one of our senior high schools, (I can only speak for Qld) or a senior university lecturer with 2 degrees and a masters degree and over 30 years service you would find it financially rewarding to come and work for us."

John McK

QUESTION : In the interest of transparency and openness, and to stop wild guessing games, should we publish the salaries of our CEO and managers like is done for all public companies?

I work for you, the South Queensland members. Can I get some feedback please.

RA-Aus AGM 2009

The RA-Aus AGM and a board meeting was held last weekend.

It is concerning to see such a poor turnout of members for the AGM, but I understand the issues of members getting to Canberra on a Friday. Perhaps it would be better to see the AGM held at Natfly. Comments please.

You can see an edited version of the Treasure's report as a previous post on this Blog site.

The Board members spent a very interesting and productive day at a workshop run by AeroSafe on Industry Risk Profile and Corporate Governance. The workshop was funded by CASA, and from my point of view, money well spent.

The Action Group's motion.

"That the RA-Aus Board, where it is practical, first communicate to members, matters which will have a significant and/or adverse affect on the privileges, financial, or operational obligations of the membership" became motion 2009/74. Moved by me, and seconded by Ed Smith from WA. - Passed.

One item of important note to me was the repeal of a previous motion on confidentially. Excessive secrecy is a real "thing" with me, and I have continuously refused to sign the form requiring secrecy of Board Meetings. Until this meeting where the the new Board Member from Victoria (Ian Baker) also refused to sign I was the only member not to sign. I have no issues with secrecy when "In Camera" But to keep secret other issues discussed at a Board meeting leads to all sorts of corruption and moral issues. I am of the view that everything is transparent to the general membership by default, and only the most contentious and "in progress" issues should be kept secret. "At this stage". Not forever.

This requirement, in my opinion, was also against the constitution. Every single member of the RA-Aus has a constitutional right to attend Board Meetings as an observer, and has a right to the the proceedings without secrecy being applied. Vigilance of the general membership is very important and I urge any member who is able to sit in and observe a Board Meeting to make every effort to do so.

John McKeown
RA-Aus Board Member Southern Queensland

Treasurer's Report 2009

Below is an edited version of my Treasurer's Report to the 2009 AGM.


RA-Aus Treasurer’s Report
AGM 2009



Revenue

For the first time our turnover exceeded two million dollars. Our adjusted revenue for F09 was $2,050,681, up from $1,880,088 in F08.

Our expenses for F09 were $1,619,780.

Some of this increase in revenue was due to extra Government funding, which was approx. $130K for last year. (Normally CASA provide us with a grant of $100K to self administer around 4000 aircraft and around 9000 pilots)

The RAA Shop is underperforming. (I have my own views here for the meeting) The shop is well down on budget (around 30%) and down over $22K on last years sales.

Overall we have had a very good year in difficult financial times.


Expenses

Employee expenses were $651,410, up $142,681 on last year. There will be more detailed discussion on this matter in the meeting. I have proposed a realistic increase in employee salaries, and budgeted to cover a Brisbane based Operations Area Manager should this be agreed on.

I would like to give our staff big pay increases, but I know from experience how this can rapidly get out of hand. Remember it is not just the salary increase but the add on costs as well. When comparing wages in other industries we must compare like with like. Many companies now talk of “packaged” salaries. I know from my business experience where a too rapid rate of wage increases (and hence increased add on costs) can, and will, cripple a business. It is the “rate” of increase, not the actual amount of increase that causes the problems.


Our insurance costs are $30K under budget due to our new insurer and new agreement which goes straight onto the bottom line.

One large distorting expense item was an $80K Magazine bill for F09 that actually went into the F10 period, which will distort our surplus above somewhat.
.

One issue which has not happened in the past is keeping a separate bank account for staff entitlements. Currently this is all lumped into our general bank accounts, but this is money that doesn’t belong to us. I have asked Maxine to open up a separate account for this purpose. Almost every week you hear of cases where a business has spent the employee entitlements money. Currently this figure is around $100K

Telephone and postage expenses are up significantly over last year and may need some consideration to keep the rate of increase under control. The Board telecard costs have always been included in the general office phone account. It is not right to put Board phone costs into the office phone expenses, so I have asked Maxine to take this expense out of office expenses and put it into Board expenses.

Balance Sheet

Our balance sheet shows the RAA with a total equity of $2,397,170. This includes our building now valued at $1,100,000.

Carried forward as a liability is our prepaid membership. I have asked Maxine to open up a separate account for this money as well. It is future money and must be allocated forward to the years where it belongs. It is not money to spend now.

(I do not like this 2 year membership thing, as it leads to real accounting issues in the office. This will become a nightmare when we start to get 2 year renewals coming through. There is also the real problem of a human tendency to spend money you have on hand that is not really yours to spend at this time. Many a good business or association has gone broke by going for prepaid money. Once you start to depend on next years receipts to pay this years expenses you are on the road to disaster. My recommendation is we seriously consider canceling this option.)

At this stage it is very hard to track our year on year renewals because of the two year distortion factor.

Holbrook Museum

There needs to be discussion on the Museum. (The museum have asked for a loan.) My personal view is we stay well away from the loan business. If we were to make a significant loan to the Museum, we must protect our members money with collateral. This becomes very messy, and a loan default lumbers us with the fallout.

I propose we offer the Museum a grant. Something like $10K to $15K would seem reasonable at this time.

GYFTS.

The youth are our future. I propose we offer a grant here also. Equal to the Museum grant.


Lee (our CEO) did a great job in sourcing a better bank deal. We changed from St George to Westpac. The CEO and office staff could not get the one dedicated person at St George to look after our accounts, and their fees were going through the roof, up nearly 300% in one year (from $3.5K in F08 to $8.3K in F09)

With Westpac we have a dedicated account manager, and absolutely no account keeping fees on any of our accounts. We are however charged certain transaction fees, and fees like Overdraw and dishonor fees. We are also paid interest on the above accounts of between 3.05% and 3.8%

Of general interest for those with shares in St George. The local branch lost around $1.5M in deposits from us and didn’t even bother to come around or even phone to find out why!!! (Perhaps they consider $1.5M pocket change or nuisance deposits)



Proposed Fiscal 2010 Budget

Enclosed is a draft of the F10 budget. I have budgeted for a surplus of $165K.

However we must also look at restraining the rate of expenses growth
The proposed F10 budget is a Draft only and has yet to be ratified by the board.

Finally I would like to offer thanks to Lee, Maxine (our finance officer), and our office staff for the efficient running of our finances.


John McKeown
RA-Aus Treasurer.






Treasurer’s Special Report to the members at the 2009 AGM

November 2009 special AGM


This is a special update report I would like to bring up to the membership.

I am concerned that the rate of increase in Employee Expenses is unsustainable.

Our mission statement says “Minimum Bureaucracy” yet in the last two years we have allowed a significant increase in bureaucracy to occur, without a similar corresponding increase in our membership. I must state here that some of this increase in bureaucracy has been forced on us by CASA, but the majority appears to be of our making.

In Fiscal 08 our employee expenses were $508,729. In Fiscal 09 these costs jumped to $651,410, and in Fiscal 10 they are estimated to reach $825,000. This is an increase in two years of over $361K. Or an increase of 62%. All this with our membership remaining fairly static.

Of real concern to me as Treasurer, was the large salary increases granted by the Board at the recent September meeting. When most Australians received little or no wage increases in 2009 due to the economic climate, the board, as a whole chose to approve increases of between 8% for junior office staff, and up to 25% for managers. On top of these increases we must now budget for all the “add on” costs. I am the first to agree that our staff are our greatest asset, but we are a non profit association, funded in the main by member fees. It is my personal belief that we must live within our means.

However it can also be argued that we need to pay the right money to gain and keep the right staff. I see it as my duty as your treasurer to bring this matter to your attention. What you choose to do with this information is entirely up to you. You are the membership. You are the association.

To bring this into perspective we really must look at the cost per individual member.

In previous years our employee cost per member was running at around $56 to $57 per member. This jumped to $68 per member in F09 and I now estimated this to hit $90 per member in F10. An increase of over 60% in just two years.

As treasurer I believe we must seriously address the rate of increase in our employee costs. If it can be shown that some of the increase is due to CASA requirements then I believe we need to seek some cost recovery from CASA. But we, as an association need to “own” this issue, and deal with it appropriately.




Graph of employee costs per individual member over time.



Finally, I won’t be seeking re-election as Treasurer, but I would urge the incoming treasurer to be very vigilant to prevent our costs getting out of proportion to our membership levels.

However, we are an association, and you people, our membership, may be quite comfortable with these increases. But I believe, as un popular as it may be for me, it is my duty as your Treasurer to bring this matter to the attention of the membership.



John McKeown
RAA Treasurer.

Nov 2009

Gympie Aero Club Invitation

Subject: Dinner with John McCormick C.E.O CASA

Hi John

It was good to catch up with you today,as promised here are the details re the Gympie Aero Club hosting an evening that features as our keynote speaker John McCormick the C.E.O of CASA which will be held at the Australis Resort at Noosa Heads on Saturday the fifth of December.

A three course meal will be served starting with drinks at 5.30 pm.This will be a wonderful opportunity to not only hear about John's flying career in his speech but to find out what future plans CASA has instore for us over the next five years which will be of interest to both GA and RAA pilots.

The opening speaker for the evening will be Brad Smart the C.E.O.of the Smart Radio Group who is a pilot and ex television and radio journalist who has reported from many of the hotspots around the world plus interviewed celebrities from Australia and overseas.

Affordable accommodation has been arranged at the resort starting at $132 per night for a studio unit and our club will offer free transport to and from YGYM if required.

This will be an exciting evening with excellent speakers,good food and the ideal time to mix with fellow aviators,plus enjoy the delights of Noosa.

Tickets are limited so please do not hesitate to contact myself becky@airnoosa.com or Deb deb@frogshollow.net for further information and bookings.

The cost will be $75 per person and we shall look forward to seeing you on the night,and thank you for your offer of helping us to pass this info on to other RAA pilots and groups.

Regards

Jennifer Beck

President

Gympie Aero Club

0419784715

19 Cat. Aircraft and Built up Areas

There seems to be some confusion with 19 Category Aircraft flying over built up areas.

To clarify matters. 19 Category aircraft are forbidden from flying over any township or any built up area in the first instance.

There are exceptions, but it is on an individual case by case basis.

In the past the requirement was.

1. Your amateur built aircraft must be built from a recognized and approved kit.

2. It must have an "approved" engine and propeller.

3. You must get written permission from CASA or our Technical Manager.

4. Only after complying with the above requirements is it legally permissible to fly over a built up area. (above 1,000 feet AGL and high enough to glide clear in the case of engine failure)




Previously aircraft like the Terrier (above) or a Bushcaddy with a Subaru engine would not be approved. Subaru engines are not approved engines. Aircraft with a Herth engine like a Challanger would not get approval.

This was a negative impact on a number of our aircraft. Those members with affected aircraft can now get approval from the Technical Manager even if you have a non approved engine and propeller. Steve Bell has worked to rectify this problem of the past.

Those people with affected aircraft who have not received written approval, should do so now, and need to be aware of the legal ramifications of flying out of towns like Boonah, or Cabolture where in the process of taking off and landing you can't avoid flying over some built up areas.

Approval can be obtained by emailing the Technical Manager with the relevant data.

ELB Compulsory Requirement

Hi All,

Please read the following and let the RA-Aus know your views ASAP

John McK

Dear Sport & Recreational Aviation Standards Sub-committee Members,

CASA is proposing to remove the formal exemption in the sport/recreational aviation CAOs relating to CAR 252A (carriage of ELTs) as part of its present CAO review. It is proposed that the general exemptions, and the exclusions built into CAR 252A, would continue to apply.

ELT prices continue to fall and the benefits of ELT carriage are gaining acceptance in the sport/recreational aviation community, CASA proposes to continue to monitor developments in this area whilst applying CAR 252A to the recreational aircraft sector without exclusions that go beyond those already beyond those already stated in the CAR.

This means that two seat aircraft operated under CAO 95.55 (RA-Aus aeroplanes), 95.32 (RA-Aus and HGFA trikes) and 95.12.1 (ASRA 2-seat gyroplanes) would be required to carry an ELT for all flights beyond 50 nm from takeoff.

Whilst CAR 252A excludes single-place aircraft, aircraft travelling within 50 nautical miles of their starting point and some other aircraft classes including balloons and gliders from being required to be equipped with an ELT, there have been exemptions extant for aeroplanes and gyroplanes under sport/recreational aviation CAOs.

Exemptions from ELT carriage have existed in sport/recreational CAOs since the time that such aircraft were confined to small areas either by aircraft capability or by restrictions inherent in CAOs as they existed at that time. Aircraft capabilities have increased over time and so have the freedoms allowed by more recent iterations of the CAOs. With these new freedoms comes a responsibility for people who wish to access the freedoms.

Increased cross country capability of sport/recreational aircraft, the breadth of general exemption available in the CAR and radically decreasing costs of ELTs/PLBs means that CASA now has difficulty justify exempting such aircraft from this requirement. Also considered are the risks to search and rescue personnel of conducting a rescue and the costs to society as a whole for a rescue.

CASA proposes the CAOs wording be future proofed by the requirement for an ELT or CASA approved alternative. This would allow CASA to broadly approve alternate technologies for operators of aircraft under an instrument or provide specific approvals to operators to use alternate equipment as circumstances dictate. It is proposed that operators of aircraft covered by this new requirement would have until 31 May 2010 to comply with the new requirements.

CASA has contacted the organisations whose members will be affected and now seeks wider aviation community feedback on this proposal.

The extract below is provided for the purpose of informing this discussion but the regulation should be read in its entirety for operational purposes and is available at this link www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/act_regs/1988.pdf

252A Emergency locator transmitters
(1) The pilot in command of an
Australian aircraft that is not an exempted aircraft may begin a flight
only if the aircraft:
(a) is fitted with an approved ELT:
(i) that is in working order; and……………

(2) Subregulation (1) does not apply in relation to a flight by an Australian
aircraft if:
(a) the flight is to take place wholly within a radius of 50 miles from
the aerodrome reference point of the aerodrome from which the
flight is to begin; ……………

exempted aircraft means:
…
(e) a balloon; or
(f) an airship; or
(g) a glider;

single seat aircraft means an aircraft that is equipped to carry only one
person;

Please provide any comments by cob Friday 1st May by reply to this message or by email to (Removed by blog author)

Regards,


Greg Vaughan

Serious NTSB report on Zodiac CH-601XL

All owners of the CH-601 XL are advised to read this NTSB report released 2 days ago.

Note. 1. The fatalities do not include the 4 deaths from the two inflight incidents in Australia which are still before the Coroner.

2. There appears to be other than just canopy issues with the 601.


http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2009/090414a.html

Famous Trumpet Player gets Drifter Training

Lighthearted Post



After learning that you will never, ever, really make it as an aviator unless you have Drifter training. Famous trumpet player, and accomplished aviator, James M, decided he needed some Drifter training to really make it as one of that select band of pilots with Drifter PIC time.

James came to Greg's school at Boonah to gain those special skills possessed only by Drifter trained pilots.

Ed Note. Australia's first and only, "Red Bull" pilot. Our fast jet military pilot who saw combat flying F18's over Iraq, got his initial flying skills from being Drifter trained.



CFI Greg, and James with the school Drifter. James is the intelligent looking person with the Trumpet.



Now Greg has the trumpet.

There is a very old Chinese proverb.

"Can teach Trumpet player fly Drifter. Not ever possible teach Boonah CFI play Trumpet"

Disgraceful Reporting

Late last year we had another GA aircraft crash which resulted death.


Now enter Paul Bibby from the Sydney Morning Herald. (See link below) He wrote the most disgracefull piece of rubbish about "US". Australian Recreational Aviators. Please remember this man's name, and watch out for more rubbish coming out of his head, and into the newspaper that employs him.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/light-plane-deaths-up-more-than-50-20081229-76ty.html


See below the reply by our CEO, Lee Ungermann.

Mr Paul Bibby,

RE: http://www.theage.com.au/national/light-plane-deaths-up-more-than-50-20081229-76ty.html

I do not believe you tried very hard to verify any of the facts presented in your article. This article was a deliberate attempt to link non-related aircraft deaths with our weight increase proposal and yet another example of non-truth made to fit a good story. Had you have bothered to verify the facts you presented in the article then you would have realised that your article was not only wrong in many respects but also extremely damaging to the SMH and the Ages credibility. Had you taken the time to contact the office, myself or our President on numbers readily available on the newsstand or on our website, we would have been more than happy to present facts for you to use in your article.

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.(RA-Aus) has always tried to build credible relationships with the media, however when first principles of journalism are not adhered to, such as establishing fact, it is difficult for any organisation not to be reactionary.

Here are some facts you may wish to take note of:

1. Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. does not register Glider or Gryo Pilots.

2. The proposed weight increase does not include Gliders or Gyros.

3. Recreational Aviation does not administer Crop Dusters, CASA does.

4. There is not a significant number of Ultralight aircraft represented in the accident statistics.

5. In the past twelve months(2008) only one fatal accident occurred involving an aircraft on our register.

6. 2008 was one of the safest years in the last ten years, despite being the greatest growth area in General Aviation in Australia.

7. Aircraft weighing 600-2250kg are administered by CASA or other self administrating organisations, not Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.

8. The Recreational Aviation Training Syllabus is approved by CASA and is based on the Day VFR Syllabus.

9. A Lake Buccaneer is regulated by CASA and is not the responsibility of RA-Aus.

10. RA-Aus is a member based organisation that receives minimal funding from CASA to administer our aircraft and safety.

a. Our members financially support:

i. Our office structure.

ii. Safety Programs.

iii. Accident Investigation.

iv. Flying School Standards.

v. Our presence at Regulatory Development meetings (CASA)

b. Is a non-profit organisation conducting work on behalf of CASA.

11. Recreational Aviation Maintenance safety outcomes are proportional to General Aviation and no safety case exists that owner maintenance is a significant risk to person or public.

The point is Paul , that RA-Aus is administering the largest growth area of aviation in Australia and is doing it safely in comparison to many other areas of aviation in Australia. Your accident statistics demonstrate that there was an increase in fatalities, so I have no issue with your title or your motivation for the article, but to contact me and falsely claim that the article is about our proposed weight increase is not only deceitful but is a large impact on an area of aviation that is improving its safety record. To report otherwise, without fact, is doing a dies-service to yourself, your readers and also your employers.

The manner in which you sent this email at 8pm the night before(as the article went to print) is also not acceptable and the fact that no contact or indeed a genuine attempt was made with our organisation prior to the articles printing also demonstrates a disregard for the SMH code of ethics. http://www.smh.com.au/ethicscode/index.html . With this in mind, please respect the disclaimer at the bottom of this email.

Right now, 9,000 readers are unhappy with your portrayal of RA-Aus http://www.auf.asn.au/ , the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age. If you are interested in doing what is morally right, I am happy to discuss the facts with you, so that this kind of ambush editorial does not discredit you or your employers in the future.

If the SMH or The Age as your employers are interested in adhering to their code of ethics, I would be pleased to discuss this with them also.

Regards

Lee Ungermann

Chief Executive Officer

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.

0428282870 / 02 62 804700

Short Term Win on ADS-B

We have had a small reprieve on the compulsory introduction of ADS-B into the lower airspaces where it would have a devastating effect on the way we operate Recreational Aircraft. Remember this is only a short term reprieve, and we must continue to fight the compulsory introduction of ADS-B into the lower airspace.

See below the letter to our CEO. Click on image for a larger view.

Justification For Change

Below is part of our submission to CASA for a weight increase. Both new and older members may be interested in this section as it details our history and safety stats.

Sorry, I can't seem to bring over the graphs.

John McK

JUSTIFICATION FOR CHANGE

HISTORY

CAO 95.10 was introduced in 1976. The rules were draconian, because it was all about control in the name of safety. In those early days the participants were not allowed to fly above 300' and they were not allowed to use two seat training aircraft. The engines were single ignition two strokes, (at the very beginning converted mower engines) so it is little wonder that untrained pilots who suffered from a sudden loss of noise, stalled at low altitude or had little option but to land straight ahead regardless of terrain and where only limited by the current days rules and red tape.

The fact that anybody survived those first few years is a credit to man's ability, fortitude and ingenuity. The fact that people insisted on re-inventing the wheel was a price that had to be paid to achieve the innovation in regulations, materials, engines and electronics that the movement enjoys today.

HISTORIC FACT

It is also now a historic fact that those very rules, which were put there to "protect" the public in fact, took a heavy toll on the participants.

Explanation of RA-Aus Membership Vs Fatal Accidents.

The repositioning of weight and performance barriers has had no impact on the general public over the history of RA-Aus but has meant huge safety benefits for the pilot/participants.

Ø 1985 CAO 95.25 "Flight Below 300" was raised to 500' and legalised two seat training approved. MTOW was increased to 400 kg. Within two years there was an improvement in the accident statistics. 1985, Fatality to membership ratio 1: 230, two years later 1: 480.

Ø 1990 CAO 95.55: Height limit was raised to 5000', (Higher with operational justification) MTOW 450 kg. Once again within the two year period we see an improvement in the fatal accident record. 1990 1:480, 1992 1:600.

Ø 1993 CAO 101.55 amended to allow 480 kg MTOW in accordance with energy formulae. The improvement trend continues with an improvement in the safety statistics. 1993 1:825, 1995 1:1800.

Ø 1998 CAO 95.55, Introduction of Amateur Built (Experimental), 544 kg MTOW. This was the start of a membership number increase, which has continued until the present day. There was a spike in the accident rate 2002/2003, (almost parallel to the increase in participant numbers), however a perusal of the accidents does not reveal any obvious pattern. They appear to be random events and since then, the trend is once again showing a continuing improvement in safety. The introduction of 544 kg. has allowed the use of four stroke engines and the legal carriage of both extra fuel and passengers.

Ø 2006 CAO 95.55, Introduction of LSA 600 kg. MTOW.

Ø 2006 Introduction of RA-Aus formalised Accident Investigator Training.

Ø 2007 Introduction of Human Factor Training to RA-Aus Instructors.

Ø 2008 Mandatory introduction of Human Factor Training for all Pilots, Instructors and Students.

In the 25 years that RA-Aus/AUF have been keeping records, no member of the public outside the aircraft has suffered any injury caused by an RA-Aus registered aircraft.

This graph is based on an average of 25,000 Class two medicals for both 2005 and 2006 and 6000 RA-Aus members in 2005 and 7000 in 2006.

2005 Private& Business Fatalities = 13 Source ATSB web

ratio 25000: 6000= 24%

24% of 13 = 3.1

2006 Private & Business Fatalities= 20 Source ATSB web

ratio 25000: 7000= 28%

28% of 20 = 5.6

Note:

The use of fixed wing statistics rather than including weight shift statistics is to use similar types of aircraft to get a fair comparison and is based on CASA 1988 Regulations, which delineate between the two groups for licensing purposes. (Group A and Group B ultralights) 2007 -2008 statistics on class 2 medicals was not available at the time of writing.

It should also be remembered that members of Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. members are informed participants in their chosen activity. Thus meaning that any participation is under taken at their own risk and that they are aware that the operation of aircraft involves and element of danger.

In the opinion of Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. an increase in the MTOW from 600kg to 760kg mitigated by the limitations of 2 occupants only, a stall speed of 45kts in the takeoff configuration and being limited to Day VFR conditions in the opinion of Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. does not constitute an increase in risk to the Australian Public or indeed to RA-Aus members themselves. In fact, the greater useable payload that the aircraft is able to legally carry can in fact increase safety in terms of greater carriage of safety related systems (Ballistic Rocket Systems), emergency rations and safety equipment, not to mention the safety benefits of increased range.

Conclusion

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. supports Option 3a without any changes. RA-Aus believes that this option gives the maximum amount of flexibility, authority and autonomy to an RAAO to administer recreational aircraft up to 760kg MTOW.

Option 3a also enables Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. to carry out administration of aircraft up to 760kg MTOW using its current practices, without altering operational procedure to administer aircraft between 600-760kg MTOW under Part 91.

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. proudly supports the view that past increases in MTOW that have been granted to AUF/RA-Aus over the 25 year history of the organisation have systematically enabled greater safety and personal freedoms to many RA-Aus members. Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. regards the weight increase to 760kg MTOW as a further extension of this safety and personal freedom to our membership, whilst giving a section of traditional General Aviation the choice of administration.

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. has established itself as a capable leader in aviation self administration of aviation in Australia and looks forward to the challenges and safety benefits that administration of aircraft up to 760kg MTOW will bring.

In testament of the anticipated safety benefits of the increase to 760kg MTOW, attached as per CASA’s request, is a listing of members that agree with the position of RA-Aus in relation to the weight increase to 760kg. This listing is supplied to assist CASA in the correlation of the results of the DP from RA-Aus and is in addition to the hundreds of responses already received by CASA.

Lee Ungermann

CEO

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.