Last week I refused to fly an aeroplane. The aeroplane was fine, I was qualified on it, I'd done the flight a couple of times before and it was to be over very flat terrain ... but I still refused. The aircraft was a Piper Arrow, something I hadn't flown for over 11 years. Since then I've clocked nearly 100 hours on Bonanzas, but the Arrow is not a Bonanza; it's harder to fly and certainly harder to land. I checked the regs and noted that I have to be competent on any aeroplane to fly it, and that the ultimate responsibility for making sure I am competent lies with me. Therefore, in a very John Gorton-like way, I voted myself out of the command seat because I didn't feel good about taking the plane. Did I do the right thing? The decision condemned me to a 9.5-hour drive to Narromine and many times on the way my backside reminded me it would have preferred a three-hour flight. However, I am fairly confident my landing at Ausfly would have been embarrassing, even if I had been able to keep the undercart intact.
In nearly every pre-race interview done this year, Matt Hall emphasised the need for him to fly consistently in the Red Bull Air Race season, and that he thought a race win would come. In Austria last week he said it again, but this time he was right! In one of the best finishes ever seen to an RBAR round, our man laid down a blistering time around the Spielberg circuit, one which Paul Bonhomme couldn't match despite being ahead for the first three quarters of the track. The sheer joy on Hall's face was blended with relief. It reminded me so much of Mark Webber's elation after finally winning a Formula One Grand Prix at the Nurburgring in 2009. Mark had been wondering if victory would ever come, and after so many close seconds in his career, Hall must have been starting to question what more he and the team could possibly do to score a win. Webber went on to win eight more races, but never the championship. Let's hope now Matt has broken his duck that he can go one better than Mark.
Narromine scared the hell out of everyone by turning on some bad flying weather in the days leading up to Ausfly, then seemed to forgive us our tresspasses and annointed us with two days of severely pleasing weather for the show. It even had some people rethinking their no-sunscreen strategy. The SAAA was over the moon with how it all went, and reported very good figures for attendance. Most of the exhibitors supported this optimistic position. I was happy to be able to set up my little enclave in the exhibitor's centre and meet readers new and old. I've said it about Avalon and now I'll say it about Ausfly: I love being immersed in such an intense aviation environment. However, the same old disappointment raised its head: where were the big GA players? Cirrus continued their support for the event, and obviously all the LSA manufacturers think it's worth being there, but some traditional GA aircraft builders were sadly absent. This show is for them as much as it is for the punters.
The ADS-B cost debate goes on with CASA not budging on the costs in their original regulator impact statement (RIS). We are now at a complete impasse on this subject. The mandate will go ahead in February 2017 and general aviation will have to pick up the costs of implementing ... for very little gain whatsoever. No matter how you crunch the figures, money will flow out of general aviation for absolutely no further development of the industry. What is needed here is a better way of complying with the regulations that isn't going be such a millstone around the neck of GA. If it's out there, please stick your hand up now and let us all know.
CASA is back on the consulting trail, this time about how to avoid implementation farces such as Part 61. Naturally, it has already drawn criticism from some circles that believe CASA should stop consulting and start changing. However, I believe Part 61 showed us something: CASA's people are out of touch with the way the industry works. That applies not only to how it was implemented, but also to what it actually contained. If we are to get them back in touch with us, we have to show them how we need it to work. It's obvious they don't know and if we leave them to it, I have no doubt they'll come up with something totally new that is different but equally unworkable. At least with all this consulting Mark Skidmore is staying in touch with GA, which is a change already!
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch