Scudrunners

[quote] well then the FTUOC requirements well, to be honest again, are just another hurdle in a large series of them, in which case removing the requirement doesn't improve the situation appreciably.[/quote]


I find the above statement to be typical of Canadian's.


They are like radical Islam robots, brainwashed to be blind to the world around them.


Luckily I was not born in Canada and my brain is free to function on a level where I am able to figure out that unnecessary bureaucratic bull shit and a  massive waste of time and money driven by subservience to Government drones who never produced anything of value in their lives is just plain stupid.


But as the saying goes ignorance is bliss, so bend over and make sure you are dry so it feels better to you. :o

The USA is full of mom&pop training outfits ....
Bill Finegan in VA, Steve Wolf in FL, Greg Koontz
in AL, the list goes on and on and on.  I'm sure
that TC would hate all these guys and make their
lives as difficult as possible, if they were stupid
enough to live in the Banana Republic of Canada.

I admire a lot of things about American Aviation that Canada could adopt and I incorporate them at every opportunity every day.


If you think Canada has problematic regulations then you should speak with the private examiners in Australia where CASA created "US Sound Alike Part 61, an attempt to allude that that CASA, (Australia) have similar Air Regulations to FARs - Part 61 which is on the same subject area as the US Federal Regulations regarding certification of pilots and instructors.


The Australian regulations are now almost impossible to comprehend and industry experts complain that their regulations get increasingly complex and that CASA increasingly employs more lawyers whose costs are more than 100% paid for by a shrinking general aviation community. Their training costs are nearly double that of Canada or the USA.

Canada's costs are generally a bit higher than the US Costs but, are often identical after exchange rate.

Its when politicians falsely harp on bringing back the good old days of less regulation and "draining the swamp", that has a better probability of simply changing to an even more dangerous form of government that will be even more destructive to business, especially aviation.


When I look back over the decades, its those who suffered the "anti-authority" attitude who eventually ended up being a fatal aviation statistic. Trump, unfortunately, is a classic example of an anti-authority attitude. I'll go along with the prediction that he will be impeached before the end of his term. His VP who has a much better attitude will probably replace him some time in the next four years.


Now, to run a "mom and pop" operation, or a "one man band", if its going to be "one man" or "one woman", then its going to require someone with a lot of experience and ability to wear all the hats that must be worn.


20 or 30 years ago, a single person could run a one person flight school or charter operation and now, with good software, business practices, its still possible but its a lot easier to run a bigger operation where the "overhead" of man hours required is a lower percentage of each flight hour.


It's now economics. Its a lot cheaper per hour, to have a larger operation than a smaller operation.


It requires becoming very intimate with the present, not past, practical requirements.


It also means that those who learn to fly in the smallest operations are less likely to know the SOP's that exist in larger operations. When they go to obtain employment in Aviation, they have less chance of getting a job because they have not been trained to operate as efficiently or to understand how they will fit into the mandatory requirements of todays aviation.

Who is going to get hired in the future?

It's human nature to believe the cult like ideas of "less government" and go back to "the good old days" when its very obvious that society and regulations cannot now go "backwards". That does raise one difference between the USA and Canada in flight training.


The FAA Aviation Instructor's Handbook has several chapters on psychology that can also be used to explain why its human nature to see what you want to see.  That does not exist in the FIM.


Those who advocate for Trump's ideas, should read up on the definitions of suppression, repression and reaction formation, the hazardous attitudes to aviation, and or habitual pathological false statements that are now becoming perfectly normal 

[font=arial][size=small]At the end of the day, there is very little difference between Canada and the USA with aviation regulations.[/size][/font][size=small]


Canada's "integrated  Flight Training" in the USA is called "Accelerated Flight Training".
If you compare the paperwork and the requirements both need to comply with, you will see at the end of the day there is very little practical difference.

If readers don't like the Canadian Regulations, it's important to watch for proposed changes and to get that feedback in before it becomes law. [/size]

[size=small]I've heard of numerous stories of how Transport changed their ideas on proposed changes as a result of feedback. [/size]

[size=small]One of the problems of any legislation is that those who "frame" the legislation, see what they want to see and not what might actually exist or actually result. That's were we as citizens have an obligation to bring to the public's attention when and where the law has gone stark raving mad. [/size]

[size=small]That's not "anti-authority" but common sense and a duty.[/size]

I can't get this fucking post to copy your post Ramjet, but would like to comment anyhow.


CASA started down the road to regulatory insanity quite a while ago, I hold a CASA license to teach and even back then they were having wet dreams about copying Canada's CARS which are truly an abomination of word salading that no one can comprehend.


As to anti authority and its relation to safety that is pure nonsense that those in the position of authority have pounded into the heads of a lot of pilots.


If anti authority results in accidents and or death how come the Colonel and me are still here with such good records for safety.


As to a one man teaching business the quality of the end product depends on the quality of the person doing the teaching.


To believe that teaching SOP's are necessary that is just plain goofy because almost every company have different SOP's.


Flying a fucking airplane is no more difficult than any other occupation, in fact I would go so far as to say it is easier than most.


I owned a flight school both fixed wing and rotary wing with my own AMO.


It was a nightmare trying to make a profit and even worse was dealing with the paranoia of the flight instructors who couldn't wipe their asses without an approved check list and the approval of some moron in TC flight training so I sold the school and went on my own.


I went from near poverty owning the school to a thousand dollars a day for the last decade or so of my career.


Now don't you take this as a personal attack on you, I am well aware of the culture you were taught in and now work in and feel sad that Aviation has degenerated to such a fucked up career opportunity.


All the best for Xmas and the new year and always think about those two comments at the bottom of my posts...


.... Those are the two best SOP's for staying alive.


:) :) :) :)

Chuck,
No offence taken as its obvious none was intended.
My CASA is no longer current and It will cost a mint to have all the rides done again.


I don't agree with you regarding SOPs. While there are differences between operators
and some check lists are so long and wordy that it rivals reading a short story on downwind.


I can see that many operators are using very similar SOPs.


If you don't teach your students SOP,s they are going to have a difficult time getting used
to Airline SOPs which are now, increasingly similar. That's reality.


There are different levels of "anti-authority" and being an out-spoken critic.
Being an outspoken critic of a dysfunctional and impossible to comprehend system is
positive to aviation safety  not negative.


That being said, I'm sure you will have met a long list of pilots who are now dead
and all them rated higher in their willingness to brake or skate the rules.


I think you can go to any FTU in Canada, Australia or the USA and find a host of people
who would agree that that the bureaucracy has  gone too far.


I have to fill in a host of paperwork that is a fraction of what used to be necessary.
That's not just aviation, its a growing problem.


A while back, I tried to write a translation of CASA to CARS or FARS and realized
that the CASA mumbo jumbo was in the too hard basket. I'll wait till I hear
someone else do a practical interpretation.


Now, back to those fatal accidents we have all seen.
Are there not common denominators?


My other response is that my comments are NOT directed personally at any one person, you the Colonel or anyone else.


When I look back at all the pilots I met who are now dead, many of them were accidents
going to happen and the time period of meeting them to their graduating with a toe tag
can take many decades.


Its not a nice experience meeting someone and having the horrible realization
that you are looking at an accident going to happen.


One that accident happens, you generally can never say anything publicly out of
respect for the families and friends.


Accident investigators have their hands similarly tied. Their results are designed to
keep everyone happy and insurance premiums steady.

I'm not anti-authority.  I'm anti-corruption.

Same here Colonel.


Even after being in aviation for over fifty years I was stunned by how infected the system was when I brought legal action against TC here on the west coast.


The higher I went up their management chain the more they dug in protecting those below them.


Finally when I reached the top guy in TCCA he turned out to be the most corrupt of the long line below him and helping to drive him out of office was far more satisfying to me than the quarter of a million dollar settlement the legal system awarded me.


I am aware that spending over three years of my life fighting that battle seems like a waste of time considering how deep the corruption goes.


But.


I did get rid of a couple of them and that to me made it worth while and I would do it all over again.


Remember when I used to in public call the Director General Civil Aviation[font=verdana] a moral degenerate and it was on aviation sites read world wide and there was nothing he could do to stop me even when I begged him to sue me for liable..[/font]


Delicious..just delicious. :D :D :D 

The weird thing is that I am more "pro-safety" than most
pilots, who think that bending tin is a "learning experience"
and that paperwork is what's really important.

This horrifies me.  The ostensible objective of all that silly
paper is to reduce accidents, but of course, anyone with
half a brain can tell you that the Emperor is bare-ass naked.

Bureaucrats, lathering on more paper, always more paper,
remind me so much of a small child in diapers hammering
away at a nail with a crescent wrench.  That's the charitable
view.  One might just suspect that they want more power
and use any excuse to expand their bureaucratic empires.


I'm not anti-authority in the least.  I have enormous respect
for Lewis B. Puller (Lt Gen USMC, ret'd - a distant cousin),
George S. Patton (Gen USA, ret'd), Douglas MacArthur (Medal
of Honor, General of the Armies, USA, ret'd,  Supreme Commander
Southwest Pacific Area, United Nations Command Korea).

All of these great men are landmark heroes of enormous character
of the 20th century, and I suspect all had the same attitude as I
do towards corruption.  In fact, there are some very interesting
theories as to Patton's early demise in this regard.

Chuck,
I take my hat to you.
Anyone (including the Colonel) who takes on TC and wins in Court is to be commended.


Just recently I've heard several old timers talking over coffee how they went straight
"to the minister" instead of dealing with the normal intermediaries, and got what they were seeking
directly from the Minister who CARS tells us, is where the buck finally stops.


Safety decisions can and do conflict with legislation and that's where common sense comes in.


When those decisions are made, they are based on necessity and reliability,
that is based on principles that can be forgotten with those with robotic brains.


Ramjet