Trouble in Paradise (Omarama)

If that’s the sticking point, I have to say that expecting a commercial pilot to meet a more stringent medical standard is appropriate and in fact, the norm in the industry. The sole question is whether this is a commercial operation.

I question why Glide Omarama would shut down completely rather than
simply discontinuing "adventure flights" and demonstrating that any
"trial flights" that they execute are, in fact, just that.

On 3/10/2020 8:17 AM, Stephen Szikora wrote:
If that’s the sticking point, I have to say that expecting a commercial pilot to meet a more stringent medical standard is appropriate and in fact, the norm in the industry. The sole question is whether this is a commercial operation.

--
Dan, 5J

On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 at 7:35:55 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
I question why Glide Omarama would shut down completely rather than
simply discontinuing "adventure flights" and demonstrating that any
"trial flights" that they execute are, in fact, just that.

On 3/10/2020 8:17 AM, Stephen Szikora wrote:
If that’s the sticking point, I have to say that expecting a commercial pilot to meet a more stringent medical standard is appropriate and in fact, the norm in the industry. The sole question is whether this is a commercial operation.

--
Dan, 5J

Or why wouldn't they continue with the governmental gymnastics, emerge on the other side as what they have been, a beacon to those whom want quality mountain flying instruction. Good luck to all

Was there a careful rule making procedure where this was decided and the folks with the working system didn't show up?

Nope. The (Part 115) rules were written as a 'what if' exercise at least two decades ago; "What if we decided to regulate these volunteer operations that took people for joy rides?" The proposed rules were shelved as not being immediately necessary, until a balloon accident in 2006 killed a number of people and the ensuing inquiry found some paperwork problems with the balloon maintenace, and the coroner found traces (just traces) of pot in the pilot's blood.

CAA needed to Do Something quickly and so got the shelved rules enacted as Part 115 under urgency - with very minimal consultation - and the recreational aviation community has been complaining and petitioning ever since. This is not evidence-based policy. You'll note the panacea of "keep the NZ public and tourists safe" used by CAA above. There is no evidence that the new rules do anything of the sort, certainly there is no evidence that safety has improved since their adoption. Invoking "safety" to shut down an argument is, IMHO, at least lazy if not disingenuous.


Or why wouldn't they continue with the governmental gymnastics, emerge on the other side as what they have been, a beacon to those whom want quality mountain flying instruction.

As to why GO has chosen to shut down rather than re-certify, you'll have to ask the people involved (on boths sides). There is a lot of history to consider in the interaction of GO and CAA; the NZ aviation community (including the regulator) is a small family, gliding even smaller, and in any small family argument it's the personalities involved who dictate the outcome. The general feeling is that a (recertified) phoenix of some sort will rise eventually, so watch this space.

DH

David, great synopsis of the issue. Nothing trumps the argument of a cost-effective improvement in public safety as a govt lobbying point. I only note that the initial 2011 Part 115 document appeared not to have captured the 11-fatality 2012 balloon accident, but as you pointed out it must have been a major trigger-point.

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:15:23 -0700, David Hirst wrote:

As to why GO has chosen to shut down rather than re-certify, you'll have
to ask the people involved (on boths sides). There is a lot of history
to consider in the interaction of GO and CAA; the NZ aviation community
(including the regulator) is a small family, gliding even smaller, and
in any small family argument it's the personalities involved who dictate
the outcome. The general feeling is that a (recertified) phoenix of
some sort will rise eventually, so watch this space.

For my own curiosity, how much of GO's business was rides and trial
flights, anyway?

I have flown there, but only for one day, and I had an excellent
introduction to mountain flying (I'm a flatland pilot, usually operating
in the East Midlands of the UK.

The reason I'm asking is just that I don't think there were any non-
pilots at that morning briefing. If that's typical it calls the whole
rationale for applying Part 115 'Adventure Flights for non-pilots' rules
to GO into question.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

David, excellent synopsis of the issue. Nothing trumps the argument of a cost-effective improvement in public safety as a govt lobbying point. I only note that the initial 2011 Part 115 document appeared not to have captured the 11-fatality 2012 balloon accident, but as you pointed out it must have been a major trigger-point.

Additional info and news coverage: https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/north-...-omarama-folds

I just sent the New Zealand Executive Director of Tourism (Stephen England-Hall) a note on the matter. I asked him to contact the Civil Aviation Authority and explain the potential impact on tourism. Please consider doing the same via this direct link:
https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/co...-england-hall/

I visited New Zealand a month ago in order to fly at Omarama, and it was a wonderful experience. It would be a shame if we don't try to get the attention of some government officials. Tourism seems like a good leverage point.

On Friday, 6 March 2020 10:04:00 UTC-5, Duster wrote:
Notice from Gavin Wills: "Please note that all Glide Omarama services will be suspended from 15 April 2020.

After 20 years of flying from the Omarama Airfield without a Trial Flight incident the Civil Aviation Authority of NZ requires GlideOmarama to re-certify its operations from being a Recreational Aviation Organisation under the CA Rules Part 149, to an Organisation Conducting Adventure Aviation Part 115, and to re-license its pilot/instructors accordingly.

This certification process, consisting of negotiations, applications and approvals, is expected to take several months to complete.

Glide Omarama therefore has decided to suspend its operations from 15 April 2020, until the procedure is complete.

However, in anticipation of successful outcomes, the company is happy to receive bookings for the Soaring School and Trial Flights scheduled from 1 September 2020 onward.

Bookings scheduled for dates up to and including April 14 2020 will be honoured. Bookings scheduled between April 15 and August 31 will be refunded or rescheduled as directed by the client.

Glide Omarama regrets any inconvenience this suspension may cause to Club members, glider pilots and visitors. Throughout the period of self-suspension our office, phones, web site and email will remain live.

Thank you all for understanding and for your support to the Glide Omarama team at this difficult time.

Gavin Wills
Glide Omarama
7 March 2020"

I just spent 5 minutes writing about Omarama on the form provided at the link posted. It's easy; please do the same.

This morning, NZ announced that all people arriving into the country must go into isolation for 2 weeks. GO’s foreign business would have been shut down by that alone. Maybe this will give the parties time to reconsider their options. At the end of the virus crisis, countries will be keen to promote tourism.