Tonight is aviation journalism's "night of nights": the 2015 National Aviation Press Club (NAPC) awards. There are some very good writers and analysts in the game nowadays, and some of them are in-line for the big one: Aviation Writer of the Year. Whilst that one is probably out of the reach of most general aviation writers, Australian Flying Senior Contributor Philip Smart is in the running for awards for a couple of features he wrote for our sister publications. Mind you, if Phil wins, we'll be claiming him as "Australian Flying's own".
Who's heard of RAPACs? These are the Regional Airspace Procedures and Advisory Committees, and there is one in your state. What they do is advise the Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) on matters of airspace usage in the local areas. RAPACs are a way of getting the users heard in the OAR, but now it seems the OAR no longer wants to listen. What they've done is attempt to redefine the RAPACs to limit them to safety issues. That conveniently silences them over things like radio frequencies ... coincidentally (or not) a current topic being shuttle-cocked between Canberra and the aviation community. Happliy, CASA has announced a review of the OAR and the way it functions. Needless to say, those pesky RAPACs have made an inconvenience of themselves in their submission. If anyone in the aviation community wants to do the same, the details of the review and how to submit are on the CASA website.
CASA has announced a restructure into three client-focused groups. The idea is to improve communication and make the regulator more efficient. This was called for in Recommendation 21 of the Forsyth Report, and should result in major changes within. Here's hoping it works. History has shown that when large organisations restructure, the result can be one of two things: a quantum change that revolutionises the entity and is subsequently copied throughout an industry, or an expensive reshuffle that looks brilliant on the outside, but does either nothing or makes things worse. Over time, the latter tends, through natural process, the morph back into the original structure. In this case, CASA, through our input to the Forsyth Report, is complying with our demands. Putting on my "between-the-lines" glasses, I see a mathematical problem. Each group will probably need an executive or deputy director (or some other title) as its head. Currently, there are nine positions within CASA commensurate with a role of that type. Some are currently vacant, but not six of them, so the carpet to the front door might get some extraordinary wear and tear in the coming months from the feet of those exiting.
And speaking of reforms, the Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association (AMROBA) has again called for the Civil Aviation Act to be reviewed and some of the promised culture changes included. This would, theoretically, make them permanent rather than just current policy. Well, it would make them as permanent as the government anyway. If it's easy to make changes to the Act to include, it has to be just as easy for the next government to change the Act to exclude. Still, it would make a statement to the industry that the minister is at least very serious about keeping the reforms going.
But in the eyes of AMROBA, just what are the reforms won for their membership? Whereas we have seen plenty of action on Parts 61, 141 and 142, the maintenance regs, which have the capacity to do some serious mischief to the health of the industry, don't seem to me to be getting similar attention. Either that or the new leadership just doesn't get the point. I would think the MROs issues would also warrant a task-force approach.
With CASA introducing a new on-line system, it seems our medical system is also in for reform, although this may be a reform CASA wanted, not the aviation community. What we wanted was a system where we walked into a medical examiner, they checked us out and if we were up to the standards, printed us a new licence and away we went. Depsite being promised that by two previous Directors of Aviation Safety (McCormick and Byron) we never got it, and we haven't got it now. The sticking point remains a reluctance by DAMEs to be responsible for declaring you fit; it seems CASA does that even though they've never seen you. What flummoxes me is that most, if not all, DAMEs are GPs, and face the responsibility for people's health every day they are at work. Why are the so fearful to do so just because the person is a pilot? To me that displays better understanding about liability laws than it does about aviation.
Tecnam has opted for the latest technology from Lycoming to power their P2012 Traveller. At the moment, the new iE2 motors are just for the prototype, but if they really deliver the goods the way the Textron blurb says, the Traveller could well sound the death knell for some iconic aeroplanes. Think of it: a high-wing twin that seats 11 people running two turbo-charged 350-hp engines. Its market is very clearly defined as the charter industry, and companies clinging onto old twins due to a lack of an alternative, and others bogged in the mire of Approved Single Engine Turbo Prop Aircraft (ASETPA) certification may just find the Tecnam to be a simple solution. A new airframe in a modern, uncomplicated aeroplane that is IFR-ready with lots of capacity. What's not to love?
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch