Trouble in Paradise (Omarama)

I read through NZ Parts 149 and 115 of their aviation regs to see what this means. Essentially, their operation is going to be held to a higher standard since it is considered a commercial operation rather than a gliding club. Adventure aviation is a special category of commercial operators and covers ballooning, hang gliding, parachuting and microlight commercial operations. The regulators note that the normal time for completing the application process is at least 90 days. It seems that the regs are written from the point to cover new operations without a thought to transitioning existing operations. I’m guessing there has been some foot dragging and negotiations over this and it came to a head with the regulators saying they must comply, thus the temporary shutdown.

Was it clear what sort of operational changes might be required?

In my reading, the CAA states it presently has no jurisdictional control over such operations and therefore Part 115 should be implemented in the interest of safety. So, at least some changes to any such current activities may come only after the CAA establishes their regulatory authority. Interestingly,they note that "A recent CAA study applied the social cost of accidents to the actual level of flying activity, estimating the average social cost for adventure aviation activities (both commercial and recreational) to be approximately $61.00 per person per hour of exposure (significantly above a safety target level of $13.00). In comparison, the average social cost for air transport operations is approximately
$0.10c per person per hour of exposure." They assign a "VOSL" of NZ $2.8M to a single loss of life (social cost = value of a statistical loss of life)!

The Part 115 proposal was issued in 2011. "Objectives: The primary policy objective for government action is to enhance further
improvements to aviation safety and to provide a reasonable level of safety assurance to passengers engaging in commercial adventure aviation activities. This can be
achieved by requiring commercial adventure aviation operators to manage risk-based safety systems, processes and procedures with an appropriate level of monitoring and
regulatory oversight by the CAA." Existing operators will be given time to apply (18mo in the case of glider ops), while new operators in the category must have all docs completed/approved at the time of application.

On Sat, 07 Mar 2020 11:50:28 -0800, Duster wrote:


The Part 115 proposal was issued in 2011. "Objectives: The primary
policy objective for government action is to enhance further
improvements to aviation safety and to provide a reasonable level of
safety assurance to passengers engaging in commercial adventure aviation
activities. This can be achieved by requiring commercial adventure
aviation operators to manage risk-based safety systems, processes and
procedures with an appropriate level of monitoring and regulatory
oversight by the CAA." Existing operators will be given time to apply
(18mo in the case of glider ops), while new operators in the category
must have all docs completed/approved at the time of application.

That sounds quite open-ended. I can understand outfits like Glide Omarama
being affected by it, but does this impact gliding clubs and the trial
flights they provide?

And, out of curiosity, what other sports does it affect? Gokarting,
motorbike racing, point-to-point horse riding and hang gliding, to name
but a few, come to mind.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On Saturday, March 7, 2020 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-6, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sat, 07 Mar 2020 11:50:28 -0800, Duster wrote:


The Part 115 proposal was issued in 2011. "Objectives: The primary
policy objective for government action is to enhance further
improvements to aviation safety and to provide a reasonable level of
safety assurance to passengers engaging in commercial adventure aviation
activities. This can be achieved by requiring commercial adventure
aviation operators to manage risk-based safety systems, processes and
procedures with an appropriate level of monitoring and regulatory
oversight by the CAA." Existing operators will be given time to apply
(18mo in the case of glider ops), while new operators in the category
must have all docs completed/approved at the time of application.

That sounds quite open-ended. I can understand outfits like Glide Omarama
being affected by it, but does this impact gliding clubs and the trial
flights they provide?

And, out of curiosity, what other sports does it affect? Gokarting,
motorbike racing, point-to-point horse riding and hang gliding, to name
but a few, come to mind.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org


The regulators might not enjoy those sports as much as sailplanes.

On Sat, 07 Mar 2020 13:19:35 -0800, Shaun Wheeler wrote:

The regulators might not enjoy those sports as much as sailplanes.

You mean their their favourite song is "You always hurt the one you
love?".


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Adventure “aviation� offers a clue to what it covers. When go-karts can fly ... then they can be concerned.

On Sun, 08 Mar 2020 06:17:47 -0700, Stephen Szikora wrote:

Adventure “aviation� offers a clue to what it covers. When go-karts can
fly ... then they can be concerned.

You may have misunderstood me.

This new NZ regulatory effort seems to be aimed at reducing the cost to
the national health system of sports-related injuries of all types.

If that is its aim, then its very likely that it will affect more than
just aviation-related sports. IOW part 115 is aviation-related, but are
there other parts covering non-aviation sports and adventures?



--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Yes, but won't it increase the cost of government through new agencies,
rules, employees, etc.?

On 3/8/2020 7:37 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2020 06:17:47 -0700, Stephen Szikora wrote:

Adventure “aviation� offers a clue to what it covers. When go-karts can
fly ... then they can be concerned.
You may have misunderstood me.

This new NZ regulatory effort seems to be aimed at reducing the cost to
the national health system of sports-related injuries of all types.

If that is its aim, then its very likely that it will affect more than
just aviation-related sports. IOW part 115 is aviation-related, but are
there other parts covering non-aviation sports and adventures?




--
Dan, 5J

Gliding in NZ operates under CAA Rule Part 149, in which GNZ has delegated authority to conduct its own training and maintain its own gliders, both to agreed standards. Pilot medicals are to the same standard as driver licences, and gliders can be maintained by suitable GNZ-approved engineers.

Under Part 115, instructors have to hold a CPL-G rating, which requires a Class 1 medical, as Phil has said. Part 115 organisations also have to have their gliders maintained by a CAA LAME (licenced aviation mechanical engineer, or some such). Both of these requirements impose extra costs on any Part 115 operation, costs which may in some circumstances make the business model unviable. The Part 115 rules were written some time back but only became law after a particularly bad balloon accident; Part 115 applies to ballooning, skydiving, hang gliding, paragliding and gliding.

For gliding clubs, this has meant that they can no longer offer 'joy rides' (adventure aviation) but can offer 'trial membership flights' (instructional aviation) for the purposes of recruiting club members. Part 149 gliding clubs cannot pay their instructors.

GNZ has recently petitioned CAA for a formal exemption to the Part 115 rules around medicals and maintenance, using EASA requirements as precedent. We're seeking a relaxation to Class 2 medicals and to have maintenance carry on under the same requirements as Part 149; most of the LAMEs will have little experience of maintaining gliders so will have to rely on GNZ engineers anyway. None of this helps Glide Omarama in the short term, unfortunately..

CAA are currently undergoing a major re-shuffle and part of this appears to be manifesting as a much harder line when it comes to gray areas. Some might say that they need to be seen as being active and effective regulators, but I couldn't possibly comment on this. It has also been pointed out that gliding accidents and injuries don't tend to happen on trial flights, so that the only difference between a Part 149 operation and a Part 115 operation is the extra costs and certification imposed on the latter for little apparent gain. Again, I couldn't possibly comment.

DH