Australian Helicopter Industry Association

General stuff that gets thrown about when Helicopter Pilots shoot the Breeze.
User avatar
Eric Hunt
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 914
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Eric Hunt » Sat May 19 2012, 07:23

Rob,

Your enthusiasm is to be applauded but your maths are atrocious.

429 ATPL out of a total of 1359 pilots is 31% not 49%, and the newer figure should be 29%, a slight drop.

Cheers mate
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1825
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby CYHeli » Sat May 19 2012, 08:38

As the min quals for co-pilot spots increase, I'm of the opinion that a lot of co-pilots now hold ATPL(H). That then skews the stats for the number of CPL's vs aircraft to fly.
I was told years ago that there were four times the number of pilots as there are jobs. These stats tell us that there are 1600 odd SE aircraft and an equivalent number of CPLs. I struggle to believe that the stats are now one for one.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Sun May 20 2012, 00:18

Eric,

Thanks for picking up my error. Talk about EXCEL fatigue!! I entered the number of helicopters and not licences in the appropriate column. I was wondering how the number could be so high way back then....Thanks once again, good team work.

If anyone else sees finger trouble on my key board, please tell me. I would rather our guys pick it up and not an adversary of our industry. (A bureaucrat or politician maybe – you know what I mean?)

Further to our previous post – there are four corrections as underlined below. The offending paragraphs are shown with corrections underlined.

At 30 Jun ’04, helicopter commercial licenses were 429 ATPL and 930 CPL(H) = 1,359 for a fleet of 1,150. This represents 1.2 working licences for every additional airframe added to the register. ATPL licences made up 31.5 % of licensed pilots able to work at June 2004. Maybe the highest figure so far in our history?

Four years later, this rate had held well until 30 June 2008 when the increasing multi-engine (ME) numbers began to change the equation. At that time there were 544 ATPL and 1,453 CPL(H) = 1,997 for a fleet of 1,484 helicopters of which 141 (9.5%) were ME. Despite a significant increase in ATPL pilots their share fell to 27% which was the lowest it had been in a decade, maybe ever? The extra licences were 1.3 of new registrations on the register.

Latest complete CASA data to 30 June 2011 showed there are 671 ATPL and 1,621 CPL(H) = 2,292 pilots for a fleet 1,782 helicopters of which 196 are ME. This latter group now makes up 10.5% of fleet. The ATPL licences have increased to 29%, which is expected at rise again as the clients want ATPL and IREX for the bigger machines working on larger contracts. Overall the increase in licenses has grown to 1.3 per extra machine on the register.

Keep up the good work guys ......
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Sun May 20 2012, 00:44

CYHeli,

I cannot see how your friend could make such an observation; for example:

30 June 2011. 1,782 helicopters of which 1,586 are SE (about 800 Robinsons) and 196 are ME. Current licences then were ATPL 671 + CPL 1,621 + PPL 587 = 2,879 non-student people capable of flying a helicopter in Australia.

Most years before show the same proportions, even twenty years ago or more.

Our data is restricted by the lack of information at this stage on commercial versus private helicopter status on each machine. Hopefully, by July we will have this information for you - CASA willing.
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Fri May 25 2012, 10:06

Well - what do we do now?

It is your turn to tell the steering group your thoughts.

To date we have told you of the history of the HAA from 1977 to October 2008. There are many lessons to be learnt; some are still applicable and some have been outdated due to enormous industry and CASA’s changes.

You have been given our best advice on where the helicopters are located by state, their numbers by major groupings and how many AOC there are - and also where they are located. You have been provided with pilot numbers and their major classifications and how jobs numbers can be “guessed” from this data.

Finally, you have been shown that we are in a strong growth phase which started in the eighties and accelerated through the nineties. Today, as we look ahead five years the numbers seem unreal – much the same as an observer would have felt in 1998 when there were only 751 helicopters. Today we will hit 2,000 by about October! What were the predictions then – especially on the heavy fleet expansion?

We have three mains issues to debate so that the new Constitution can be presented during the registrations process, they are:

• The structure of the AHIA; the National HQ and branches or regions across Australia.
• The divisions representing activities, such as mustering, fire fighting, training, aeromedical, SAR, etc, etc.
• What is a reasonable membership fee and should corporations pay more and if so how much?

To keep the posts within a cup of coffee reading time we will produce separate posts an each of the above.

We need your input – no good saying the AHIA overlooked so and so (those dorks eh?) when you did not send us your thoughts.

We are now entering the hard work phase – the steering committee consists of volunteers who want a great future for our industry – many hands make light work.

As an aside please do not assume that “too many cooks spoil the broth” or as one wag said, “too many brothels spoil the cook!” (Current federal politics?)

Helmets on guys and gals ………….. hit the key boards – give Facebook a break!
User avatar
Pegs
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1324
Joined: Dec 2009

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Pegs » Fri May 25 2012, 22:31

Hello Rob,

Firstly I would like to say congratulations to you and the rest of the team at AHIA for trying to get something up and running again after the collapse of HAA. I am fully supportive of the proposal for an Australian Helicopter Association, and will be very happy to lend any support in any way that I am able too.

It is very reassuring to see that despite the GFC the helicopter industry has continued to grow and grow well in the past decade, and if the forecasts are correct will continue to grow and create more jobs and opportunities for business in Australia and hopefully overseas for some of our Australian businesses and the overseas businesses that currently base in Australia.

I will be interested in seeing the private machine vs commercial machine stats, and the stats on Commercial pilots who are flying private machines in cross hire situations, with any growth in a business sector however there is always going to be an increase in jobs at some point, which is good news for all levels of the industry.

I would like to offer some opinions on a few of your dot points for further debate and consideration,

structure:

Australia as we all know is a very big country, however I think to get an idea of where the branches and regions are going to be and how far they will encompass we need to go back to the stats for helicopters in a particular state, then if possible we need to break that down into areas of the state that most these helicopters can be found, I would imagine for instance that the the gold coast/Brisbane area probably absorbs more than 3/4 of the helicopters in QLD.

Now one branch in this area will probably not be enough to handle so many different companies and helicopters, where as a branch in say Mount Isa for instance should easily be able to cater for the helicopter companies and individuals from the gulf region back to Townsville, (but not including), down into the channel country and up-towards the cape. Like wise and office in Darwin or Katherine is most likely going to be able to handle the helicopter industry across most of that state, due to most the work coming under mustering or charter anyway, and majority of machines being owned by just a few companies.

My thoughts are areas like NSW that have large numbers of helicopters and different types of work on a wider scale, will need to be more rigidly structured in order to not overload any particular office and allow the branches to devote the time and resources needed to any future development or addressing any problems that arise.

Divisions
With regards to the divisions I think that having separate divisions to specifically look after the different activities such as mustering, training etc, is essential, that way a team can be in place that handles that specific division, this will allow a much deeper working knowledge specific to the activity that the team represents, allowing them to focus on growth and problems in particular areas. Having people on these teams say for instance in the training sector, that have or are Instructors or school owners and are dealing directly with the ongoing training environment is in my opinion absolutely essential to being able to make calculated and informed decisions. The same goes for the other industries, not much point having an experienced helicopter mustering pilot on the board for EMS rescue, as the things he sees as important issues to address, whilst perhaps relevant in some cases are not going to represent an in depth understanding or view of that particular activity.

Membership Fees.
I think before I can offer any in depth opinion on membership fees and structure there needs to be some idea of what the average joe blow pilot is going to receive as a member. Obviously voting rights, and constant updates on the growth and any other issues relevant to the industry via the publications put out by the assoc. I would suggest that the membership for pilots/engineers etc as an individual be not more than $200 per year, this is a figure that most pilots can afford, much more than that and many will simply not be able to pay it.

In regards to corporations and businesses, these people will be receiving most of the direct benefits from the AHIA, in terms of business opportunities, direct line to CASA and future developments within the industry and its sectors. I do think that a higher membership fee should be applicable, as they are going to reap the rewards of such a membership. However getting back to voting, I think that any such corporation/business membership, should only be allowed 1 vote, this will ensure a fair system for all so no monopolizing goes on. Individuals who work for the company, IE pilots and engineers, would still be able to vote interdependently under their memberships though.

That is my thoughts so far.
cheers
Pegs
A good idea needs landing gear as well as wings to get off the ground.
Torque Turn
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 30
Joined: Feb 2008

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Torque Turn » Fri May 25 2012, 22:35

G'day Rob,
I'm a two-bit single pilot mustering operator so don't usually hold much weight in these sort of things. So thats where I would like to see some representation. In my area, at least, there is a growing number of smaller 1-2 man shows. As you can imagine the range of issues confronting the small operator are quiet different to say, a large IFR, day/night operation with dozens of employees and their own maintenance facility. Yet with a push into systems type management the expectations are the same wether you are QANTAS or the two-bit day VFR single pilot operation.
As a quick example, drug and alcohol management. I have to do a DAMP supervisor course to supervise myself. I have to have an education program that I present on a whiteboard to myself. Ongoing testing, accident/incident testing when the nearest MRO is 600 kilometers away. (So far I haven't caught myself at a random test - but give me time :D ) Just so everyone knows, I'm not having a go at the concept of a DAMP just they cookie-cutter way it applies to all operations, large or small. When you spend 1000-1100 hours a year in the cockpit it gets a bit annoying spending time on things that have little relevance to your operation. There are many other instances that I am not going into now (keep it brief, don't ramble) but hopefully you get the picture of what I am getting at.
I don't know anything about structure of associations but I would definitely like to see some representation for the smaller type operators in rural/remote areas. Once again I don't know much about cost of these things but I guess membership fees need to reflect what it costs to run. As a business I would be happy to pay more than an individual member to have some relevant representation. Relevant being the key word if memberships are to be maintained.
Anyway I hope this helps somewhat and you get the support that this move deserves.

TT
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1615
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby hand in pants » Sat May 26 2012, 00:19

Agree very much with TT. I'm a one man band and have to put up with the DAMP thing as well, and I've managed to miss out on any "random" drug and alcohol tests. I conduct the DAMP meetings in front of a mirror so there is at least two of us there.
Same with the SMS. Bit difficult to have a safety meeting on your own.

Nothing in the system to allow for one person operators at all. Talk to the authority about it and you get nothing. "print out our on line template, add your company name, put it in a floder on the shelf and you have complied". They need to come up with something we can use, not fob us off saying that we should do it.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
User avatar
papillons
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 287
Joined: Jan 2011

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby papillons » Sun May 27 2012, 05:32

Some ideas posted earlier about structure and sector. I also said in passing somewhere that I'd be happy to pay around $200 a year subs as a single member, so - because money is one of those difficult subjects which will be, however, key to getting the HAA off the ground and keeping it aloft in the early phase - let me throw in a few expanded bobs' worth:

1. I'm not flying for a living at the moment: I'm earning what I reckon might be a fairly typical hourly rate ($20-$25 an hour) doing casual shift work in a semi-skilled non-aviation job, to fund the refreshing/updating of my flying qualifications, hoping to get myself back into a driving seat in the next 3-6 months. So while I have a headstart on the new guys starting out in the industry (in terms of past experience and accrued CASA ticks), I suggest that what I reckon I can afford to pay should/would be reasonably within anyone else's budget. Personally, I think that 200 bucks a year in the grand scheme of a professional h/c flying career is not a lot to ask. Just my opinion.

2. If the HAA could bank a start-up pledged subscription of $200 from even just 500 members, that's $100,000. It's something. HAA El Presidente could for example bed down with Craig Thompson's girlfriend for 166.666 nights (EH check my maths...!)

3. I'd be hesitant about getting too tricky in the early days: I'd say keep dues the same for any individual member, whether hangar rat or offshore skygod. KISS. A professional representative association does to a certain degree imply equality of access. If we chose to get fancy and apply a salary percentage (say) to dues, then the inevitable wiould be the creation of resentments, unequal representation, etc.

4. I am not sure of the benefits of corporate or business subscriptions - unless the real 'pro' is simply the potential for harvesting bigger wodges of cash! In which case, I'd be definitely sceptical - that would CERTAINLY create an asymmetry of expectation = cash-for-comment kind of thing. (I think that it's in the project/sector/structural arrangements that the different level of corporate/business representation ought better to be manifest: an AOC holder who - quite rightly and properly - sees the potential for a much more substantial degree of representation of his commercial interests via the HAA, than as a mere individual aviator/engineer should aspire to realizing it not by throwing more money at the HAA than the individual does/can, but rather by getting involved in an project/sector/structural leadership or steering capacity.)

Also, if you start dividing individual and corporate memberships the disparity across the industry rears its head: does the single pilot Musterer-For-Hire Pty Ltd pay the $200 subs or the $2000 subs? I remain open to all ideas on this, but my own experience of membership fees is that in general people are far less likely to quibble about stumping up cash to be part of something that has only yet-to-be-proven benefit to them, IF they know that it's a dead level investment playing field for everyone: King or Pauper, youse all puts the same stake on the table, and youse all takes your chances. Importantly, I think the HAA should make it as 'painless' as possible for the industry's AOC holders & operators in particular to be part of this concern from the start, because these are the guys - the industry's employers, big and small - who will make or break the new HAA: give it credibility and clout by getting on board...or ignore it, to sputter out. Two hundred bucks to an individual is, frankly, not a lot. $2000 to even a fairly well-established going concern is just a big enough lump to have the guy with even a healthy chequebook asking..."Well, why exactly should I?" The 200 bucks is mine alone to spend; the $2000 is the company's, and the company has financial obligations - among other things, due diligance (not to mention to pay their pilots). It's a different kind of financial outlay, demanding a different kind of fiscal appraisal: a commercial hardheadness and unsentimentality that is probably not conducive to this formative phase.

5. Second to finally - and I can only speak for myself - I am quite happy to risk 'blowing' my first $200 dues entirely, if that's the way it turns out. I would rather subscribe ón spec' and in good faith, demanding nothing in advance - no 'return' etc - from the HAA, because that kind of user-pays/what's-in-it-for-me-RIGHT NOW?! mentality is in my view anathema to any fledgling project of this kind.

6. Finally - again, just my two bobs 'worth - no matter what, HAA, there are ALWAYS a few people with a certain worldview who will ALWAYS whinge about money, no matter how big or small, fairly or unfairly calculated, reasonable or outrageous, necessary or frivolous...the amount and purpose under discussion may be. They are the guys to be found peering intently at the restaurant/bar bill at the end of an otherwise convivial evening, calculator in one hand and set of measures in túther, moving their lips softly, frowning, narrowing their eyes at everyone else's emptied plate/glass, and shaking their head.

'The best way to shut 'em up is to offer them...free membership. Very public free membership.

Thanks again for all your work, RR. Be very interested to hear others' thoughts on dough. It's not exactly a fun subject, but it's a crucial one, IMHO, and needs to talked about bluntly and upfront.
¡Librame!
helibird
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 16
Joined: Dec 2009

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby helibird » Mon May 28 2012, 03:40

Hi Rob,
Nice work, as usual.
Let me know if you need any help.
Bec aka Helibird :D
User avatar
Eric Hunt
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 914
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Eric Hunt » Mon May 28 2012, 07:35

In a previous life as treasurer of the old HAA, I was always digging reluctant players with a pointed stick to come up with their annual dues.

For new people, their first question was always "what is the HAA going to do for ME??"

I answered "Bugger all, unless you do something for us, such as turn up at meetings, respond to requests for people to bombard CASA/Sydney City Council/ Portsea council with letters of outrage, volunteer to help out with organisational tasks, take on honorary duties like treasurer (Please!!)" and so on.

The usual response was ".......... err...... I'll get back to you"

And that was when it only cost $50 or so.
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Mon May 28 2012, 19:19

Hi all - keep up the good work on the structure of the AHIA and other issues. Excellent contributions by all. As a reward, will now share May’s CASA Register data.

Register updates – 28 May 2012.

Last month's comparison
All aircraft: April 14,711 – May 14,741 increase of 30.
All helicopters: April 1,950 – May 1,959, an increase of 9.
Piston: April 1,231 – May 1,244, an increase of 13.
Turbine: April 508 – May 503, down 5.
Multi engine: April 211 – May 212, an increase of 1.

FISCAL Year 1 Jul 11 to 30 Jun ’12.
At YTD on 28 May ‘11. All aircraft 14,462 – 14,741 increase 229.
Piston from 1,098 to YTD 1,244 an increase of 146 (13%).
Turbine from 488 to YTD 503 an increase of 15 (3%).
Multi engine from 196 to 212, an increase of 16 (8%).

Total helicopter fleet 1,782 to 1,959 YTD or 10% per year. (Up 1% to new record)

Note the YTD non-helicopter registrations increased from 12,680 to 12,782 an increase of only 102 or 0.8%. Or about one quarter of the GDP, effectively a near recession in the non RW segment. Our growth rate is now around 10% or three times the GDP.

Or if we are nasty we are can boast we are growing at least ten times faster than those without wobbly wings – AOPA and RAA must be worried?

More figures for the fanatics with eleven fingers.

Hi Fives

Piston April to May:
R22 - 517 to 525. +8.
R44 - 457 to 463. +6.
B47 - 90 to 89. (-1)
Rotorway - 58 to 56. (-2)
H/S 269/300 No change at 53.

SE Turbine.
B206 - 225 to 226. +1
AS350 – 136 to 138. +2
EC120 – 26 no change.
UH-IH – 19 no change.
OH-58 – 18 no change.

ME turbine.
B412 – 33 to 36. +3
S76 – 29 no change.
BK117 – 31 to 28. -1
AS332 – 22 to 21. -1
A109 – 11 to 17. +6

Party time coming up? In June we should see the Robinson fleet pass 1,000, the R44 still cannot pass the R22 due good conditions in the mustering industry. Robinson now can say they have over 50% of the Register. Get out the BBQ’s distributors!

And of course we are anxiously watching and taking bets on when we will pass 2,000. We are now almost 20% of the US civilian registrations (10,610) and slowing gaining as they are struggling to make a 2% increase each year due economic worries. (We are around 10%).

Next AOC changes and then back to our AHIA structure, etc.
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Mon May 28 2012, 20:05

As promised – from CASA online data base.

Helicopter Air Operators Certificates (AOC) updated 28 May ’12.

All Australian AOC = 937.
Helicopter AOC numbered 250 in April. May was 259, an increase of nine. 1 new aerial work only and 8 charter. Overall an increase of 3.6% for the month.

Aerial work only AOC in May were 71, last month 70.
Charter AOC in May were 188, an increase of 8 from April.

Congratulations to the nine new Chief Pilots arriving on scene in May.

And for our hand held calculator freaks - plank wing AOC decreased by 29 or 4.3%. Should we take up a collection?
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby AHIA » Sat Jun 2 2012, 00:10

Suggested structure of AHIA.

Introduction

We are getting close to getting our ducks in line to start the registration process commencing in July. Our draft Constitution will need to have a structure as we start out. This can be reviewed at our first AGM; maybe December or earlier. A large AHIA activity will take place at the Avalon Airshow near Melbourne, Vic from 26 Feb to 3 Mar ’13 during which the AHIA can further refine our organisation as needed by our sponsors, members (both corporate and individual) and other government regulatory agencies which can either hinder or help the growth of our industry.

Due to length of this post (again thanks to the Bladeslapper team) we will hold over the nomination of technology or role based divisions for a week or so – thanks to those who have sent in their ideas. They have been listed for consideration.

History

Branches based on (now) CASA regions. By 1984, the Association was registered as a company limited by guarantee. The HAA was structured with a National Committee comprising officers and members elected at large plus an advisory panel consisting of the President and the Branch Chairman of the various branches. Branches were created to coincide with the six regional offices of the Department of Aviation that then existed.

National Headquarters. It was intended that the National Committee would deal with federal or Australia-wide issues, while the respective branches would deal with regional offices of the DoA and with the state and local governments within their area. This arrangement worked well; however, it created irksome administrative accounting problems for the HAA, especially at the AGM when some branches were late with their financials. All not-for-profit organisations must be audited – ASIC/ATO requirement.

Branches abolished. At the 2000 AGM, amendments to the HAA constitution were approved which abolished the “branch committees” and replaced them with a “branch representative” for each respective branch. At the same time, provision was made for the creation of branches in New Zealand and Papua New Guinea; and for a change of name to “Helicopter Association of Australasia”. The entire constitution was re-written to comply with new companies’ legislation, although the principal objects of the HAA remain unchanged from 1984.

Sydney CBD setback. By 2002 the HAA was heavily involved in seeking compensation from the NSW Government for the eleventh hour cancellation of the Sydney CBD Heliport. This had dragged on for many years and exhausted much of the emotional energy of HAA members.

New technology arrives. From 2004 the HAA was committed to working closely with CASA on many issues involving new technologies, being released on the market; for example the Night Vision Goggles debate became more than emotional and at times divided the membership. Also the mustering industry (50% of fleet) had little interest in NVG, IFR and SAR/HEMS operations. Another example, off shore people had unique issues to resolve as rigs moved further away from the coast. This led to the conclusion that “divisions” were necessary to gather together people within industry segments, often with the CASA project officer involved, if it was a regulatory matter.

Industry moves north and grows. The past decade has seen a substantial growth rate, (probably best in the world) and a shift north as the beef industry grew in size and the resources boom, mainly in the north and west of the country developed. Queensland is now the largest operator of helicopters. Another example is the shift in assets of the HEMS industry. In 2008 our fleet was 1,492, in October it will be 2,000 and by 2016 should be 3,000. Growing pains are just starting.

Need to have fun and tell tall stories. An odd casualty of doing away with the branch structure was the decline in social activities which were considered the fun part of the HAA activities – and under estimated at that time. As a result membership slipped, partly due to the various recessions “we had to have” along the way.

Lessons Learnt

A National Headquarters is required to administer regional branches and deal with Australia wide and now international opportunities. It needs to be relatively mobile as incoming Presidents may be from any region. (Maybe in the future, a National Headquarters will have an office – an expensive option at this stage?)

Proposed interim structure

The CASA regions reflect the distribution of aviation resources in Australia. (Helicopters tend to follow this model and would be located within a CASA region. So the proposal structure is as follows:

National Headquarters. Generally mobile. Re-located as required after annual AGM, usually with the incoming President. Initially AHIA is trying to avoid the expense of a National Office. The past HAA office at Coolangatta probably cost $20,000 to $25,000 pa from 2006 to 2008. First National Headquarters will be located with Steering Committee in Brisbane. This may change in late 2012 when the first AGM is held before official launch that the Avalon Airshow 26 Feb to 3 Mar ’13, at Geelong (Avalon Airport). (This will be an enormous opportunity for the AHIA to promote ourselves to the Australian and International aviation community). More later.

Eastern Region Branch. CASA offices in Brisbane and Tamworth. Covers Queensland excluding the half north of Rockhampton and Longreach. New South Wales north east corner including Tamworth, Armidale and Bourke, and the coast from Forster north.

Central Region Branch. CASA offices in Darwin and Adelaide. Includes South Australia, Northern Territory, New South Wales east to 143°E around Broken Hill, Victoria north west corner including Nhill and Mildura and Kimberley region of Western Australia.

North Queensland Region Branch. CASA offices in Townsville and Cairns. Covers Queensland, excluding the half south of Mackay and Winton.

Southern Region Branch. CASA office in Melbourne. Covers Victoria excluding the north west corner around the towns of Nhill and Mildura. New South Wales north of the Murray around Deniliquin and Albury. Tasmania.

Sydney Region Branch. CASA offices in Canberra and Sydney. Covers West of 143°E around Broken Hill. North east corner around Tamworth, Armidale and Bourke, and the coast from Forster north. South of the Murray around Deniliquin and Albury.

Western Region Branch. CASA office in Perth. Covers Western Australia but excluding the north eastern corner of the Kimberley.

Your thoughts are most welcome and pending support appreciated!

Rob Rich
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1825
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby CYHeli » Sat Jun 2 2012, 03:44

At face value, looks good!
Is there a proposal as to how different interest groups get recognised at each regional level, eg the musters in the Kimberley and an EMS operator in Darwin?
I am still a vocal campaigner for decent wages, but I have always recognised that the only way to pay decent money is to have a strong and vibrant business. In that light is it worth considering a recommended retail cost for various aircraft types or is that too hard given some own aircraft outright whilst others are paying off a loan and therefore have higher costs to meet?
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
choppermech1986
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 285
Joined: Sep 2007

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby choppermech1986 » Sat Jun 2 2012, 07:26

Looks good Rob.

Keep the membership at a flat rate ($200 sounds good) and exclude corporate memberships. By all means, consult openly and often with the operators, but I believe that an industry representative body would just get walked over by the CHC's and Bristows of the AHI.

If it is done with the members interest in mind, members will benefit and subsequently, the industry. A focus on public education would be up there for me, people shouldn't look at helicopters as though they are some kind of dark art specialising in widowmaking, instead, they should think of helicopters when they think "What's the best way to do this?".

Also, perhaps lobby insurance companies to give discounts to AHIA members through a continued education program (one each for charter, airwork, training, mustering, etc).
User avatar
twinrotor
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 86
Joined: Sep 2011

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby twinrotor » Sat Jun 2 2012, 23:32

Hi Rob, and Team
First Up Great work !.

I’ve been following this thread with great interest, and have been holding off on making any comments, till now..

Being new on the Scene but a follower of things rotary for a long time, and post the HAA period, I was amused to find there was no supporting body for the Helicopter fraternity,
whether that be for the holder of the AOC , PPL, CPL the LAME or the lowly late starting CPL in training, I fit the later,
So it’s good to see it gaining some steam and I feel it can only be a benefit for all.

Yearly subscription of $200 for every one, okay I’m certainly not earning any money from this YET, but I plan too, so I’m happy with that figure , call it investment in long term.
As expressed in other posts, the same amount for all, keep everyone on a level playing field, at least for the start.

Also expressed in other posts, public education is key, I can’t count the times when I say I’m involved in Helicopters people say
“ Why would you want to fly them , when the engine stops they just crash don’t they… “

I have life (read that I’m not as young as I used to be) assoc and small business experiences so If I can help in any way please let me know..

Once again Great work..
Cheers
TR.

Happy to provide contact details via PM.
Ensure brain is engaged before the rotor.
Robinsondog
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 471
Joined: Feb 2003

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Robinsondog » Sun Jun 3 2012, 04:28

Ho Rob,

All looking good so far, weathered a bit of flak, came up with good ideas. I too would embrace a one on one type membership. Most industries have the big end of town, 90% represented by 10% of the entities. Possibly it's not quite the same here with the expanse of smaller companies and certainly a sliding scale of representative voting can be worked out but that takes a lot of time to calculate and sure as eggs someone will feel aggrieved. Certainly if the big guys have serious issues they wish to push, then it might follow so would their staff, meaning they can join and vote like everyone else. But if every-one member has a burning issue and democracy is organised correctly then any one can push that issue right through to be presented where it is required for change.
The most important person in any organisation is each and every member, remember that and it will be off to a flying start.

I wouldn't put a membership price on it but if there's a total polutaion of 2500 pilots or wanna be pilots, a few hundred engineers and other interested parties such as aviation companies or mining companies, Govt agencies etc., and don't exclude better halves. That would give a fair % of that total number say 20% or more of say 3000 or more people to draw operating funds from.

10% of Industry will be required to get recognised at any government level, look at Qld Labor poor blighters, out in the broom closet. Within that of course specific disciplines need to be accomodated. As with many other groups as long as the corporates aren't thrown out but are entertained with say a one on one membership per entity then you may find that their generosity toward assisting in either start up funding or facilities use may be very helpful. They may even sponsor a few of their staff?

The farmers have a structure where the National Farmers Federation, handle arbitration and proprietary rights, rights of ownership, land title issues etc and then the specific commodity councils operate as affiliated under that. I think that works well but many would agree some of the operators in those structures have plenty to answer for in various different issues, dare I mention the Live Ex debate? In fact many state farming organisations, such as Agforce Qld, NSW farmers and Voctorian farmers have subs which are split in that manner. I.E. $X for the basic "arbitration" sub, then more, usually as a % of your production of your commodity to pay directly for that representation.

I would say keep the objects and articles of the association as simple as possible, constitutions are pretty much standard nowadays since the last revision of corporations and associations acts.

I think we can all see the central district will be where convenience of meetings ets will be quite difficult but with the advent of tele conferencing and other social type interfaces much of that can be overcome. I can't think of a better way to organise it though and the national secretariat need only have the address of the registered accountant and after that an email and phone number for contatcts.

I agree very much with the social side of it though, that is where a lot of mentoring takes place and if there is anything that is missing these days it is that, which is one reason I mention the better halves.

It has to remain apolitical in every sense.
I'll send you a PM.
RD
User avatar
havick
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1300
Joined: Jun 2007

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby havick » Mon Jun 4 2012, 03:55

I think the whole idea is good in theory. In practice though I think that it's just another fee to shell out every year.

Apart from the guys that just do standard awk/chtr type operations, there's a host of other fees that cost you every year eg.

- AFAP (1% of you wage - a fair chunk every year) just to access the loss of medical benefit scheme.
- CASA (medical + misc)
- ASIC (if you're work doesn't provide it)
- DAME
- Maps + charts + daps (depending on who you work for)
- AG federation (or whatever they call themselves) if you're an ag pilot
- Cinematography or screen actors guild membership (to get you on the list for the high end cinematography work from overseas producers).

The list just keeps going on and on based on the different niche's there are with rotary wing work.

To be perfectly honest, and I think there would be some that would agree with me that unless you can gain some sort of recognition for membership with other organisations it's really not worth another $200 / year on top of all the other crap you have to shell out for.

Once again I think the idea is a good one, but it's membership base may be a lot smaller than anticipated unless you can cross pollinate with other organisations. Someone mentioned earlier merging it with AFAP, perhaps that isn't such a bad idea.
"You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel."
User avatar
Pegs
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1324
Joined: Dec 2009

Re: Australian Helicopter Industry Association

Postby Pegs » Mon Jun 4 2012, 07:17

agree with Havic,

which was the point I was trying to make earlier, when I suggested $200 as a membership fee, and then asked what "Do I get for my $200?".

Sure its a new concept, and one I'd like to back, however on the other foot, like any other membership, or union, or business, if we pay a fee then we have a clear idea of what we get for that fee, most people would like to know how it applies to them, if they are just a charter or mustering pilot, what is the $200 a year spent going to get them? Not being smart at all, I think its a valid question, most people will back an idea if there is some benefit to them, as well as the industry on a whole. I wouldn't shell out $200 if all it meant was a monthly newsletter with some stats (not saying that's how its going to be just an example) of how many aircraft/vs pilots Vs AOC in the country, interesting though that info is, it doesn't in my opinion improve my chances of getting a job, it doesn't mean I'll get paid better, it doesn't mean I'll be able to become an offshore pilot. In fact it really doesn't change anything for me, other than allowing me to see that perhaps there aren't 4 pilots for every job as first thought.

I understand the concept that its a new business, and needs support, but I also need to know what exactly it is (as much as possible) I'm meant to get for the $200. For instance as a pilot, do I come to the Assoc when I have a problem with Wages? I'd guess not, that's a wageline issue right? Do I come to the Assoc when I'm seeking help getting an AOC approved through CASA? Do I come to the Assoc when I need someone to go between CASA and myself as a mediator? I'm not exactly sure what it is the Assoc is going to do, there have been a few ideas put on the table, and I realize that industry representation is one of the majors, and growing the helicopter business here and overseas, however I'm not sure I understand what else the industry Assoc is going to offer, and I'm not clear on the benefits for being a member as a pilot, who isn't in business or even those small businesses who have their niche and aren't likely to be growing their business much bigger than where they are currently at. Perhaps you could clarify some of this Rob? Sorry if I have missed some of the points somewhere in all the discussion.
A good idea needs landing gear as well as wings to get off the ground.

Return to “On the Job”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests